Mrs. Garrison
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
were you there?
rose bowl dvd....
- Thread starter NYRangers78
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
were you there?
Well if you don't like, don't buy it.
Well I will buy it because I saw 3 great shows and it stands as the souvenir of the tour. Its just a pity that cameras weren't present at several other amazing performances that people say they saw during the tour. However, that's only judging it on the Youtube footage, I'm sure it will be fine once its sorted out for dvd.
powerhour24
ONE love, blood, life
Agreed, I'm sure what we saw on YT will not be how it will look on DVD, there were likely better angles/other cameras they weren't switching too. I hope the lighting looks better and there are more wide shots.
VintagePunk
Blue Crack Distributor
I hope so too. The dvd I burned is so dark for 75% of it, you can barely make out the band members (maybe a slight exaggeration, but not much). Not sure how much can be done in post-production to fix that, but hopefully the technical wizardry is available to make improvements.
The claw was really underutilized, too.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
You don't have to experience Dawn Of The Dead yourself to know that its antagonists were lifeless.
corianderstem
Blue Crack Distributor
Ditto to all of this.
My feeling on the "well, you weren't there!" comments is that it may have been amazing in person, but the people seeing this concert going forward will be seeing it through their TV, so it's not going to matter if it was amazing in person - it's going to matter how it comes across on the recorded version.
We shall see!
theedgeu2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
My brain is telling me it will look much better on DVD than it did on YT. YT screws up the quality of the videos so I mean that might be the reasoning for why it looked so bad. I admit I was not too excited with the way it looked. Hopefully my brain is right and I expect they will get it to look so much better once they release it.
Mrs. Garrison
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
it is still a valid question. I wasn't at the Rose Bowl so i don't know, and i didn't watch much of the youtube because it seemed like a poor quality video.
I'm sure (at least i hope) the DVD will be much improved, otherwise why release it?
But its presumptuous to judge something you haven't seen or heard yet. And since this DVD isn't out yet, none of us have heard or seen the finished product yet. To some extent that includes the people who attended the show itself, because they have only their memory and the DVD might be different.
Zoo360
War Child
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 556
If the DVD is half as good as the concert I'll be happy. People who went to the show know it was good.
You can't deny Bono was alive that night. He was playing to the cameras and it was fun.
You can't deny Bono was alive that night. He was playing to the cameras and it was fun.
An Cat Gav
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I agree with you RE: Wembley 2. It will still be a decent DVD for the collection, just it would have seen to get to see something different. Just glad it;s finally coming out.
Youtube unedited version probably won't even compare to the finished DVD.
Though this news luckily buries any of the "2 DVDs for 360 tour" talk.
thelaj
Refugee
Even though I don't think this is the ideal show to release, that is what we are getting.
Just give it to me on Blu Ray.
Just give it to me on Blu Ray.
Mrs. Garrison
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Youtube unedited version probably won't even compare to the finished DVD.
Though this news luckily buries any of the "2 DVDs for 360 tour" talk.
how so? im personally hoping for a 4th leg release somewhere with new songs kind of like Slane was to Boston and Milan could have been to Chicago.
gvox
Ghost of Love
Every single last non-Rose bowl show was filmed, well enough to be broadcast.
theedgeu2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I think there was something from Berlin on YouTube and it looked like it was really well filmed. I think it was Boots?
I can't remember and even if it looked really good doesn't mean it was filmed. I have to find it first.
theedgeu2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Yeah was Boots. Here ya go
YouTube - Edge Flubs Get On Your Boots Berlin - Cracks Up - U2
Edge's flubs it up on the little part between the Chorus and Verse. Anyway I think it looks pretty good considering it's on YT. Don't know what this from though and if the whole thing was shot.
YouTube - Edge Flubs Get On Your Boots Berlin - Cracks Up - U2
Edge's flubs it up on the little part between the Chorus and Verse. Anyway I think it looks pretty good considering it's on YT. Don't know what this from though and if the whole thing was shot.
indigo tree
War Child
I was there. AND I WANT THE DVD!!!
bonocomet
Blue Crack Distributor
There's also the Sweden 7-31 show that looks filmed the same way. There are excerpts up of Boots, NLOTH and Breathe from Sweden. I actually put all these videos up on you tube and I got the Sweden pieces from a TV website, they were part of some sort of documentary program. Sorry I don't remember now where I got the Edge flubs Boots video. But yeah both shows seem to be filmed in this way.
theedgeu2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I figured that's what that must have been from and I like the way it's shot actually. I'm sure the Rose Bowl might be shot much differently though. We'll have to wait and see.
LyricalDrug
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Any guesses as to what "exclusive format" means? Blu-Ray?
Jmath
The Fly
I don't know where all the hating for this show is coming from. I was there and also watched the YT rebroadcast when I got home. YT did not do the show justice. Just like if you were at Slane for those shows the DVD is good but doesn't hold a candle to being there. Everyone has strong opinions to the shows they were at. I understand that but don't hate the DVD before you've even see it.
The Rose Bowl was a historic show in a huge historic stadium. The crowd was HUGE and totally into it. Both of those things didn't come across on YT. I’m just saying we should wait to see it before we slam it.
The Rose Bowl was a historic show in a huge historic stadium. The crowd was HUGE and totally into it. Both of those things didn't come across on YT. I’m just saying we should wait to see it before we slam it.
RedRocksU2
Blue Crack Addict
Exactly.
Bunch of haters.
Bunch of haters.
dsmith2904
ONE love, blood, life
The whole "being there" argument seems silly to me. I've been to concerts I thought were absolute shit, but the person I was standing next to thought was fantastic. It's all entirely relative. Not everyone likes the same things. Some thought the Youtube performance was absolutely atrocious, and it made them embarrassed to tell people they were U2 fans. Some didn't. Life goes on.
No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
If people took this to heart, Scumbo, 95% of the forums on this thread would cease to exist.
"I thought EVERYONE loved Electrical Storm!?!?!"
"I thought EVERYONE hated Electrical Storm!!??"
"Your opinion fails"
"Your opinion is wrong"
The only thing I can never understand is how people can never understand that taste is subjective. Yeah, sure, it's fun to debate the merits of an album or book or film, but to literally state that "I don't understand how someone can dislike this thing I like so very much" cracks me up every time. Wake the fuck up, opinions vary. Thankfully.
That all being said, The Wire is the best show in the history of American television.
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
Well the strange thing is, I'm usually the first to bitch about how the US crowds on the past U2 dvds are dead. But I don't mind Rose Bowl at all! It looked pretty good but I'm not making decisions by just a crappy youtube feed.
FitzChivalry
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
CosmoKramer
Rock n' Roll Doggie
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 3,325
While I agree with you, if you go and say that its all subjective and everyone is right and no one is wrong, then you leave the door open for ridiculous statements. Statements like: The Jonas Brothers are a better band that U2. Would you really tell someone who made that statement that they are entitled to their opinion and that you like U2 more? No, you tell them to clean their F'in ears out and that the Jonas Brothers are a "flavor of the month" like so many before them and U2 have for over 30 years maintained an unbelievable hight of popularity. Or if someone says Miley Cirus is better than Madonna. Now again, it is subjective but if Madonna can sell out a stadium of 75,000 in most countries and Miley Cirus can hardly fill arenas, then Madonna is the better act because more people are willing to see her (its just an example).
I think that if you are able to quantify an opinion or view, then you can say if it is better or not (considering all factors). If you pay to see Avatar 10 times but paid to see Titanic 2 times that would indicate that you feel Avatar is a better movie(all factors considered). If you played the Playboy Mansion 100 times and With or Without you 20 times on your iPod, then you think Playboy Mansion is a better song. Again, it is all subjective but you can't have someone come up to you and say Jason Beiber is such a better artist than John Lennon ever was and you smile and say "I respect your opinion but I disagree". It might be the "PC" thing to say/believe but that doesn't make it right.
No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
I think you're missing my point. If I pay to see Avatar 10 times, and Titanic twice, that means I prefer one film to the other. It means I think one film is better than the other. It does not mean, though, that one film is definitively better than the other. It just represents my opinion.
And, honestly, if some 15 year old kid told me that the Jonas Brothers were better than U2, I wouldn't waste too much time worrying about it or tell them to clean their ears out because, as I said, it's all subjective to me, always. My opinion, while I believe strongly in it, is not any more correct than anyone else's, simple as that.
So, if you are the type that wants to make sure people understand that because you like John Lennon's music more than Jason Beiber's that makes it so, then more power to you. That's simply not how I approach matters of taste or opinion.
And, honestly, if some 15 year old kid told me that the Jonas Brothers were better than U2, I wouldn't waste too much time worrying about it or tell them to clean their ears out because, as I said, it's all subjective to me, always. My opinion, while I believe strongly in it, is not any more correct than anyone else's, simple as that.
So, if you are the type that wants to make sure people understand that because you like John Lennon's music more than Jason Beiber's that makes it so, then more power to you. That's simply not how I approach matters of taste or opinion.
- Status
Similar threads
