Did U2 Jump The Shark?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Creative means going out on a Limb...

And takes a lot of energy.

Do the boys want to do that in their mid 40s.

It is a long way back if the Limb starts to shake.
 
Quick question for Bottle Bono: What do you think of Rush and Alannis Morisette? And how about Bon Jovi?

Just wondering.....
 
Creative means going out on a Limb...

And takes a lot of energy.

Do the boys want to do that in their mid 40s.

It is a long way back if the Limb starts to shake.

I would argue that while U2 did make some "safe" songs on their last two albums, HTDAAB shows a fare more creative burst than ATYCLB.

I would also argue that for the most part, people in their youth do not have the overall skills or life experiences to truly be that wildly creative. They are still learning so much - so what they might think is creative, isn't. But as one is older, while it may be more challenging to be creative due to other life commitments, when that creative energy comes, it is far more wonderful and brilliant. There's a reason why people from 30-55 or so are so heavily targeted by many demographics. These are peak earning years. Why? Because now people have the necessary education and life experiences to truly be inspirational, motivational and creative.

Lastly, given that U2 proved that they could come back from the "dismal failure" of "Pop" (an album that sold 1.5 million copies in the U.S. and 7 million worldwide and a monstrous selling tour - most artists dream of that type of "failure"), and have accomplished oceans of accolades along the way (back-to-back Record of the Year Grammy Award, a true rarity, and a second Album of the Year Grammy, another true rarity), now is the time for them to be as wild as they want. Even if this new album doesn't sell 10 million copies and is U2's true first flop, what a way to go out! They go out on this wonderful experimental limb.

Lastly, keep in mind that U2's "experimental" branches always have a connection with the mainstream. JT was "experimental" in that no big artist in '87 was making that type of music. Yet with songs like "With or Without You", U2 still connected with the main stream (as slow love songs always are big hits). Analogously, with a great pop song like "Pride", U2 was able to connect a song about martyrs and MLK with the mainstream. AB hit with the mainstream with another slow love song ("One") and another great pop song ("Mysterious Ways"). Heck, U2 made a song about dizziness and about seeing the world from space monster hits! My point is that U2 will still have songs that connect, even if they are experimental. This album will most likely not be "OS2".

So yeah, maybe the limb might break. But U2 have the $$, the experiences, and the skills to really make some great music. I will argue they can be - if they so choose - be more creative now than they ever were at 18 or 28.
 
Right, it is Celine Dion for all of you.

This is the biggest shark jump in history!!!!!!

I'm failing to see how this is a shark jump at all, let alone the "biggest in history".

This was a monstrous hit song in 1997/8. Dion recorded it for her album "Let's Talk about Love" and it also appeared, obviously, on the "Titanic" soundtrack (although James Cameron was originally very hesitant to have a commercial song at the end). The song was #1 around the world, winning Academy awards, Grammies and Golden Globes. It is Dion's biggest hit to date. The song saw some limited sales due to the changing market (where CD singles were becoming less dominant in the U.S.). That said, enough CD singles were released (all were sold) for the song to be certified as Gold in the U.S. In Germany, the song sold over 2 million copies! It sold over a million in both the U.K. and France. Because of its immense popularity, it is considered Dion's signature song.

To say that she "jumped the shark" performing her biggest and best known hit is ridiculous. One might as well say of U2 when they perform any of their 80's classics. The same is true when we hear an old song by the Stones, Eagles, Billy Joel, Green Day, Bon Jovi, Springsteen, Madonna, etc. But we don't accuse any of them of "jumping the shark" because we love those songs and it's the artist's choice to perform them. This is Dion's song and it's her choice to sing it when she chooses.

You may strongly dislike Dion and that's fine. But your usage of the term "jump the shark" here is highly erroneous. You may feel that Dion herself is past her prime and that using her in a concert is "jumping the shark", but you'd also be wrong there. Dion just ended a wildly successful string of performances in Vegas. Again, don't let your personal bias dictate when something or someone is "past their prime".

It's my belief that most people always cherish the old, while over-analyzing the new. That's highly evident on this board, where 80's and early 90's U2 is adored, at the expense of more recent work. Old "Simpsons" is adored, even though the new is often far more witty and intelligent (and as a result, funnier). The same is true for anything that has a shelf life of longer than 5 years. But as evidenced in "Happy Days", where the term originated, the show remained highly popular for years after that shark episode. Yes, it was a corny episode, as were many of "Happy Days" episodes. But that was the point - light-hearted fun TV that was slighly nostalgic.

I think the best use of "jumping the shark" was pointed out very early in this thread, when a person wrote that using that very term is indeed, "jumping the shark". :yes:
 
Back
Top Bottom