Has Bono Ever Publicly Apologized For Anything? - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-16-2012, 10:29 AM   #151
Blue Crack Addict
 
Vlad n U 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 28,065
Local Time: 11:32 AM
Amusing thread. Would read again.
__________________

__________________
Vlad n U 2 is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 11:17 AM   #152
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,890
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill View Post
That was nowhere close to the question that I put forth in that thread but good job BVS for buying into the ignorant and distorted perceptions cobbler is trying to pass off as gospel.

Do you beLIEve everything people tell you without doing any research and forming your own opinion?
I'm not sure what any of this even means.

What I do know is that you and I come from different worlds. You think that throwing some numbers up of how many songs were played where proves your point. Yet you don't bother with the context. You don't bother with the fact that the 90's only comprises a certain, smaller percentage of their entire catalog. Furthermore you still think that somehow that makes for an apology. In my world cheating on your girlfriend less, does not an apology make, just like playing a cover of a song that another artist covered and then mentioning the headliner of the festival make for a secret coded tribute to a band.

I mean did anyone accuse U2 of apologizing for the 80’s when they opened with 8 new songs during ZooTV? No, they were labeled bold. All of this really comes down to YOUR liking. You would like them to play more of the songs that YOU like therefore it's U2 being apologetic.

So don't pretend like you have proven points or some irrefutable evidence of your wild theories. And for sanity’s sake quit playing the victim it makes you look pathetic.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 11:32 AM   #153
War Child
 
DevilsShoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 760
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill View Post
In fact, if they blow their own minds people will follow them instead of the other way around. Achtung (and the Zoo tour concept) was so strong that they opened the show with half the damn album and people loved it.
To a certain extent NLOTH was kind of marketed as another AB, a real game-changer to breathe new life into both the band and the industry, I mean just look at the amount of effort that went into the packaging alone, you don't do all that if you don't think you're serving up a landmark album.

So, at least from their POV, I think the band felt as though they had blown their own minds with the content on NLOTH, I think they thought it was up there with AB and JT. The problem is, the casual listener didn't agree.

In this instance, I have to agree with the casual listener, and for me personally, it's kind of worrying that U2 put so much stock in what they'd produced for NLOTH. It's light-years better than Bomb, but it's clearly not, nor would it ever have been, an iconic album, nevermind about it not being innovative enough, it's just not good enough.

As much as I love this band, I just don't think their instincts are as sharp anymore. Nowadays, what the band deem to be a truly great tune is, in some cases, radically different to what they would have believed back in the 90's, in fact I think it's good few notches lower.

There's something else to consider too.

I agree with you in that the band should try and tear up everything that went before and really do something different. Maybe it'd work and give the band the fresh injection they're looking for (if the past proves anything it's that U2 always respond well to apparent failure), but whether the casual listener would allow a bunch of 50+ year old men to undergo yet another subversive permutation is debatable. What worked for a group of guys just into their early thirties might have the exact opposite effect for the same guys who are now well into middle age.

Whether we like it or not, people seldom allow their heroes to ever develop beyond their most iconic phase, for Dylan it's the 60's and 70's, for Bowie it's the 70's, no matter what they do past a certain point, no matter how good, it just wont have the same kind of cultural impact.
__________________
DevilsShoes is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:01 PM   #154
Refugee
 
redhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lehigh, FL, USA
Posts: 2,295
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I'm not sure what any of this even means.

What I do know is that you and I come from different worlds. You think that throwing some numbers up of how many songs were played where proves your point. Yet you don't bother with the context. You don't bother with the fact that the 90's only comprises a certain, smaller percentage of their entire catalog. Furthermore you still think that somehow that makes for an apology. In my world cheating on your girlfriend less, does not an apology make, just like playing a cover of a song that another artist covered and then mentioning the headliner of the festival make for a secret coded tribute to a band.

I mean did anyone accuse U2 of apologizing for the 80’s when they opened with 8 new songs during ZooTV? No, they were labeled bold. All of this really comes down to YOUR liking. You would like them to play more of the songs that YOU like therefore it's U2 being apologetic.

So don't pretend like you have proven points or some irrefutable evidence of your wild theories. And for sanity’s sake quit playing the victim it makes you look pathetic.
Man, you make it too easy. Let's begin blowing your BS out of the F'ing water.

First of all, I did not put the numbers up. Someone else did (first incorrect statement.) Luckily, there are some reasonable people here who don't like to make shit up and throw stones for no reason.

Secondly, I included a lot of context (second incorrect statement)...and I'm not going to repeat myself because you obviously don't care about facts. Since it was consistent and made sense in proving my point, it was glossed over by those who could not handle it (including you as you actively ignore the context I provided.)

U2DMFAN brought up a good point - that is primarily the Zooropa / OS1 (I know this is debatable as an actual U2 album) / and Pop that has gotten a statistically small showing over the 00 tours. Perhaps stating that U2 was too interested in catering to the masses live would have been a better argument. Relatively speaking, it is undeniable that those albums have gotten very little live play overall during the last 3 tours.

It is also undeniable that U2 significantly changed their approach / mindset to their musical output from the 90's into the 2000's. As mentioned, I provided context and this would be difficult to disprove.

Due to his, it also undeniable that U2 has done a lot less experimental work in the 00's and yes, I prefer U2 to be daring. Bland does not suit them and it never has.

Call it an apology, call it backtracking, call it less daring. However you want to say it, the facts are the facts and I have seen -0- facts to back up any other argument because it cannot be done. No wild theories here, kid.

In regards to the whole Moz thread (which is more than pathetic of you guys to bring up in this thread), Cobbler stated "I think it's pertinent to remember redhill also thought Morrissey was hinting U2 would play more 90s songs in the last leg of 360 because he played a Lou Reed song at one of his shows."

You agreed to that (and said it made sense) and then are now stating that I thought "just like playing a cover of a song that another artist covered and then mentioning the headliner of the festival make for a secret coded tribute to a band."

Which is it? Those are two very different things. You guys can't even keep your BS consistent!

What a joke.

Are you trying to set a record for how many incorrect statements you can make in one post?

I'm not playing the victim in any way. Just fighting off idiocy like yours.

Yea, I am glad we come from two different worlds. Yours and cobblers seem sad and pathetic. Throw stones, make fun, make no valid points. Some planet to live on. Is it even inhabitable by decent humans there?

P.S. Maybe you shouldn't cheat on your girlfriend at all...
__________________
redhill is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:16 PM   #155
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,890
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill



U2DMFAN brought up a good point - that is primarily the Zooropa / OS1 (I know this is debatable as an actual U2 album) / and Pop that has gotten a statistically small showing over the 00 tours. Perhaps stating that U2 was too interested in catering to the masses live would have been a better argument. It is undeniable that those albums have gotten very little live play overall during the last 3 tours.

It is also undeniable that U2 has done a lot less experimental work in the 00's and yes, I prefer U2 to be daring. Bland does not suit them and it never has.

Call it an apology, call it backtracking, call it less daring. However you want to paint it, the facts are the facts and I have seen -0- facts to back up any other argument because it cannot be done.



This is the only part I'm going to address, all the other is childish bullshit that you seem to revel in.

It is not an apology. Plain and simple. Even you are now changing your story on this. No one agrees with you that it's an apology, so let's just drop it.

I will have a civil debate about "experimenting" but this is not the thread and frankly most times when we do it comes down to your preference defining what it means to experiment.

If I'm not mistaken U2 has played more Passengers on the last two tours than any other tour. There was hardly any zooropa played during popmart and pop has had at least some representation on every tour since.

You try way too hard with these types of arguments. You should just stick to saying I wish they played more of the songs I like and be done with it.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:27 PM   #156
Refugee
 
redhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lehigh, FL, USA
Posts: 2,295
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
But it's irrefutable!!!

Do not waste our time with facts.
This was your response to my assertion that "It is irrefutable that the 90's era has not been represented very strongly (to put it mildly) during the 3 tours in the 00's excluding the 360 tour after and around the time the Achtung Baby deluxe / remaster was being released."

This assertion was then proven factually. You asked for facts and were then too childish to admit you were wrong once presented with them.

Do you want to admit you were wrong about this? Do you have any dignity as a man?
__________________
redhill is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:30 PM   #157
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,951
Local Time: 05:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill View Post
This is getting old.
You don't have to keep it going, you know.

I know you really, really want to be right, but there is also no shame in just walking away.

Because this is an argument about a rock band on the internet, and none of this shit matters one bit.

Unless you enjoy this kind of thing, in which case, enjoy yourself!
__________________
corianderstem is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:38 PM   #158
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,890
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill

This was your response to my assertion that "It is irrefutable that the 90's era has not been represented very strongly (to put it mildly) during the 3 tours in the 00's excluding the 360 tour after and around the time the Achtung Baby deluxe / remaster was being released."

This assertion was then proven factually. You asked for facts and were then too childish to admit you were wrong once presented with them.

Do you want to admit you were wrong about this? Do you have any dignity as a man?
Seriously stop. Do you know how you look?

This is your problem, you don't even know what your arguing. I've never once tried to assert that the 90's were being represented as much as the 80's or 00's. I guess we could calculate percentages compared to the entire catalog, but honestly I could care less.

I was scoffing at(like everyone else in here) that this was somehow an apology. That has always been my stance, nothing more, nothing less. So it might be you that needs to swallow his pride and admit something.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:39 PM   #159
Refugee
 
redhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lehigh, FL, USA
Posts: 2,295
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
This is the only part I'm going to address, all the other is childish bullshit that you seem to revel in.

It is not an apology. Plain and simple. Even you are now changing your story on this. No one agrees with you that it's an apology, so let's just drop it.

I will have a civil debate about "experimenting" but this is not the thread and frankly most times when we do it comes down to your preference defining what it means to experiment.

If I'm not mistaken U2 has played more Passengers on the last two tours than any other tour. There was hardly any zooropa played during popmart and pop has had at least some representation on every tour since.

You try way too hard with these types of arguments. You should just stick to saying I wish they played more of the songs I like and be done with it.
You have been childish the entire thread and now suddenly it's me? Nice attempt at a (failed) blame-shift. Man, you keep on losing.

You can take these things out of context all you want but my point was never how much OS1 was played on the last two tours or some vague notion that Pop has at least been represented.

And, yes, I would call it being (at the very least, inherently) apologetic (although, yes, I am sure I could have chosen a better word) to backtrack on all of their experimentation in the 90's by:

1. Completely shifting their mindset in the 00's to compete with Brittney Spears instead of subverting the mainstream.
2. Remix some of the Pop album (and play some if it live) in more of a rock format.
3. Play that much smaller of a portion of songs from the 90's live (by a margin of over 2-1) than the 80's.

The reason I ever came across the word is because that is what the thread was initially about (had Bono ever publicly apologized for anything?)

I had remembered that Bono made some comments before "Stay" to that effect and then did state that it was not as apologetic as I had remembered. At least I am man enough to admit that I was not completely accurate.

That said, I still do feel that U2 are not as publicly supportive (both in word and deed) as much of the 90's work as they should be and a big part of that is due to their obsession with the masses approval. Which is sad.
__________________
redhill is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:41 PM   #160
Refugee
 
redhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lehigh, FL, USA
Posts: 2,295
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Seriously stop. Do you know how you look?

This is your problem, you don't even know what your arguing. I've never once tried to assert that the 90's were being represented as much as the 80's or 00's. I guess we could calculate percentages compared to the entire catalog, but honestly I could care less.

I was scoffing at(like everyone else in here) that this was somehow an apology. That has always been my stance, nothing more, nothing less. So it might be you that needs to swallow his pride and admit something.
Not quite bucko. You specifically scoffed at that statement and were proven wrong. Deal with it. Be a man and admit when you are wrong.

P.S. Like everyone else? Prone to exaggeration are we?
__________________
redhill is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:48 PM   #161
Refugee
 
redhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lehigh, FL, USA
Posts: 2,295
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
You don't have to keep it going, you know.

I know you really, really want to be right, but there is also no shame in just walking away.

Because this is an argument about a rock band on the internet, and none of this shit matters one bit.

Unless you enjoy this kind of thing, in which case, enjoy yourself!
I know but at least I'm getting a better idea of who the clowns are on here and who might actually contribute to a discussion.

I also want the brave and bold U2 back. I can't take another bland album or they are gonna lose me for the first time in almost 3 decades (and IMO, significantly tarnish their legacy.) U2 is coming from a place of fear instead of faith and I want them to find their way back. My friends (who I sold on U2 in the 80's and 90's) have all but completely given up on their studio work as well due to the overall lack of urgency and chutzpah. This can't be how they continue.

I don't want shades of greatness anymore. I want another masterpiece and so do they.
__________________
redhill is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 01:32 PM   #162
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,228
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill View Post
I never said they were actually sorry. I said that they had been apologetic about it (towards American audiences) by catering the setlists towards popular opinion.

It is clear statistically that they have done just that (and favored the 80's material by over 2-1.) If the numbers were to be run for just those 3 albums it would be a statistical landslide.

U2 need to (re)grow a pair and blow peoples minds again (including their own) and you need to learn simple arithmetic.
Cut your losses, seriously.

You are absolutely ridiculous.

You're now left with saying "I didn't claim 'sorry' passed their lips, just that their somewhat apologetic."

I acknowledged the simple arithmetic 100 times over, regarding 80s versus 90s.

So you still don't get it or you're being dishonest intentionally or both.

It becomes clear that, as BVS said, you have no argument, just a wish for more of your personal favorites in set lists.

Show me one place where anyone argued that 90s and 80s work had equal representation on 00's tours.

If you had anything of substance to say, you wouldn't be ignoring what other people have already acknowledged and being a condescending little baby to everyone.

Take the advice from someone who's been down the negative poster road in the past(just ask Gvox or BVS or people over in FYM) THIS PLACE DOES NOT MATTER THAT MUCH. TAKE CORIANDERSTEM'S ADVICE!!

I've been the forum asshole before. I didn't like that-I know most people here didn't like that, and I understand why. I took a long break and I'm now back.

You being a condescending bully on an internet forum does not change one thing about yours or anyone's life in this world. Nothing you do here makes you look any better or worse to the rest of the world, so what's the point in bending and bending and bending something that just can't go the way you want it to??

Just admit it, repeat it right after me and everyone else join in: "Redhill wants more 90s songs played on the next tour, that for him, would be all that is great and bold and ballsy about U2!"

It's very simple.

You have nothing more than that.
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 01:39 PM   #163
Refugee
 
redhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lehigh, FL, USA
Posts: 2,295
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Cut your losses, seriously.

You are absolutely ridiculous.

You're now left with saying "I didn't claim 'sorry' passed their lips, just that their somewhat apologetic."

I acknowledged the simple arithmetic 100 times over, regarding 80s versus 90s.

So you still don't get it or you're being dishonest intentionally or both.

It becomes clear that, as BVS said, you have no argument, just a wish for more of your personal favorites in set lists.

Show me one place where anyone argued that 90s and 80s work had equal representation on 00's tours.

If you had anything of substance to say, you wouldn't be ignoring what other people have already acknowledged and being a condescending little baby to everyone.

Take the advice from someone who's been down the negative poster road in the past(just ask Gvox or BVS or people over in FYM) THIS PLACE DOES NOT MATTER THAT MUCH. TAKE CORIANDERSTEM'S ADVICE!!

I've been the forum asshole before. I didn't like that-I know most people here didn't like that, and I understand why. I took a long break and I'm now back.

You being a condescending bully on an internet forum does not change one thing about yours or anyone's life in this world. Nothing you do here makes you look any better or worse to the rest of the world, so what's the point in bending and bending and bending something that just can't go the way you want it to??

Just admit it, repeat it right after me and everyone else join in: "Redhill wants more 90s songs played on the next tour, that for him, would be all that is great and bold and ballsy about U2!"

It's very simple.

You have nothing more than that.
This post is absolute rubbish. I'll blow it completely out of the water when I have some time to waste later (seriously.)
__________________
redhill is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 01:40 PM   #164
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,776
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post

Unless you enjoy this kind of thing, in which case, enjoy yourself!
Apparently he does. I can see no other reason why he'd continue digging deeper like this. And to think this isn't the first time this happens, too. Funny how it's all our fault because we're immature jerks...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline  
Old 06-16-2012, 02:10 PM   #165
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,890
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhill

Not quite bucko. You specifically scoffed at that statement and were proven wrong. Deal with it. Be a man and admit when you are wrong.

P.S. Like everyone else? Prone to exaggeration are we?
Bucko?

Redhill I'm going to make one more post then walk away for even I feel embarrassed for you now.

You keep saying "proven wrong" but there isn't anything to prove wrong. That's what you don't seem to get. You said bono apologizes for the 90's I asked for clarification. You backed away from saying you had quotes, good for you, so all you have is that they don't play enough zooropa or pop. And even now you're backing away from declaring that an apology. So I'd really like to know what you think you've proven wrong?
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com