I think the analogy is apt. By U2 standards, Boy & October were very much alike when compared to most of the rest of their catalogue. War fits in pretty close and is still the third in a trilogy even though it’s a bit more experimental with some songs (Red Light / Surrender), a little bit more hard rocking, & uses some different instruments and sounds (electric violin, lap steal).
This is pretty much what you have with this decade. ATLYB & Bomb may be the 2 most similar sounding albums since the 1st two. Then we have NLOTH. Better, IMHO, than the last 2 and an album that after 7 months I still really like and listen to frequently. But its style is pretty much the same with a few exceptions just like war was. MOS, FEZ, and UC shake things up a bit but are the only songs I see as having more significant differences.
Despite my comments so far, however, I don’t completely buy the trilogy theory. The albums so far have a 3-1-2-2-1-3 pattern as I see it. What does that mean? The initial 3 were a trilogy. But then I see UF as more of a ‘bridge’ album between 2 periods. It has it’s own sound and can’t be lumped in with late 80s U2. It’s about as much like War ( especially songs like Wire, or even Pride) as it is to JT; but is also pretty different to both as well.
JT & RH are sister albums pretty much the way AB & Zooropa were. R.H draws upon the ideas & styles of JT but takes them a step further just like Zooropa did following AB.
I see Pop as a bridge album much the way UF was. Thematically & visually with the Popmart tour it fits in with the Zoo area. But sonically the album is in a category of its own. It does draw heavily on the electronic influences of AB & Zooropa but also hints at the return to more classic type U2 that would follow with ATLYB. Gone, LNOE, SATS, IYWTVD, WUDM are all at least as much like 2000s era U2 as they are to Zooropa. But more to the point, the album is pretty different than both.
So there you have it. Just my take. (3) the beginning trilogy; (1) bridge album; (2x2) 2 pairs of sister albums (1) another bridge album (3) 2000s trilogy. (3-1-2 2-1-3) It neatly makes a palendrome when you put in the natural split midway. Right when they went to dream it all up again!
And Yes. I know SOA will ruin this pattern since its going to probably add to the current trilogy; thus making it not a trilogy.
This is pretty much what you have with this decade. ATLYB & Bomb may be the 2 most similar sounding albums since the 1st two. Then we have NLOTH. Better, IMHO, than the last 2 and an album that after 7 months I still really like and listen to frequently. But its style is pretty much the same with a few exceptions just like war was. MOS, FEZ, and UC shake things up a bit but are the only songs I see as having more significant differences.
Despite my comments so far, however, I don’t completely buy the trilogy theory. The albums so far have a 3-1-2-2-1-3 pattern as I see it. What does that mean? The initial 3 were a trilogy. But then I see UF as more of a ‘bridge’ album between 2 periods. It has it’s own sound and can’t be lumped in with late 80s U2. It’s about as much like War ( especially songs like Wire, or even Pride) as it is to JT; but is also pretty different to both as well.
JT & RH are sister albums pretty much the way AB & Zooropa were. R.H draws upon the ideas & styles of JT but takes them a step further just like Zooropa did following AB.
I see Pop as a bridge album much the way UF was. Thematically & visually with the Popmart tour it fits in with the Zoo area. But sonically the album is in a category of its own. It does draw heavily on the electronic influences of AB & Zooropa but also hints at the return to more classic type U2 that would follow with ATLYB. Gone, LNOE, SATS, IYWTVD, WUDM are all at least as much like 2000s era U2 as they are to Zooropa. But more to the point, the album is pretty different than both.
So there you have it. Just my take. (3) the beginning trilogy; (1) bridge album; (2x2) 2 pairs of sister albums (1) another bridge album (3) 2000s trilogy. (3-1-2 2-1-3) It neatly makes a palendrome when you put in the natural split midway. Right when they went to dream it all up again!
And Yes. I know SOA will ruin this pattern since its going to probably add to the current trilogy; thus making it not a trilogy.
It's gaining traction thanks to movies and other works that are grouped together as a package of four.
