When should U2 have quit?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers

A gun is to your head. You must choose. When should U2 have quit?

  • Total voters
    139
I just get so perplexed with these threads.

Does the vast majority of folks here really despise the last 8-9 years of U2? 10 if you include Pop? I mean that is a LONG time, spanning two #1 albums and two global tours and possibly the coolest 3-D experience of all time, except for maybe Jaws 3. I personally have had tremendously positive experiences with ATYCLB and HTDAAB and their respective tours. Some of the greatest nights and music of my life. Of course Bono is intolerable at times, but he is what he is. The strongest words are used on this forum to disparage the last two albums. No need to get into a debate here, I understand all the different viewpoints. I don't want this thread to become an album/era debate. I just am always astounded by the level of hatred for post-Pop.
 
dal975 said:
I just get so perplexed with these threads.

Does the vast majority of folks here really despise the last 8-9 years of U2? 10 if you include Pop? I mean that is a LONG time, spanning two #1 albums and two global tours and possibly the coolest 3-D experience of all time, except for maybe Jaws 3. I personally have had tremendously positive experiences with ATYCLB and HTDAAB and their respective tours. Some of the greatest nights and music of my life. Of course Bono is intolerable at times, but he is what he is. The strongest words are used on this forum to disparage the last two albums. No need to get into a debate here, I understand all the different viewpoints. I don't want this thread to become an album/era debate. I just am always astounded by the level of hatred for post-Pop.
Click to expand...

I second that emotion. :up:



Hey, Punky, don't you know that U2 are never gonna quit. Just to piss you off. :wink:
 
dal975 I agree with you. But you better take topics like these with humour, otherwise the bashing of the band's more recent work will begin for real. :)
 
Axver you have gone too far this time! :angry:

And btw U2 should never ever quit. :D
 
Axver said:
Consider:

1986: U2 scrap the Joshua Tree sessions and go out on the hype of the TV Gaga appearance. The band is forever remembered as inthistowntastic and drunk. We never have to endure Love Rescue Me, Larry Mullen singing Tequila Sunrise, or this. However, the world never gets to experience Heartland, Lovetown, One Tree Hill and its partners in Joshua Tree crime ... on second thoughts, this is a horrible idea that has no business being in a poll with the four following good ideas. Even if it would have spared us Bogan Bono invading David Bowie's stage.

1990: U2's eighties canon stands sound and untarnished, and the band go out after their best tour ever, Lovetown. We never have to endure Bono trying to orgasm during a Cole Porter cover, the contrived nature and predictability of ZooTV, Bono shoving a camera in his crotch, or TTTYAATW. However, the world never gets to experience The Fly, Acrobat, Love Is Blindness, or prank calls to the White House.

1993: U2 tarnish their legacy a little with desperate trend-hopping and too much leather, but at least we get the creative brilliance of Zooropa. We never have to endure Adam's best impression of anorexia, or the nausea of Elvis Ate America. However, the world never gets to experience Slug, Your Blue Room, Beach Sequence, or Bono trying and failing to look bohemian.

1995: U2 atone for their early nineties sins with Passengers and go out as creative geniuses, even if half their fanbase is too closed-minded to accept anything that they can't scream "IN THAAA NAAAAYYYYM OOOOVVV LUUUUUVVV" to while drunk. We never have to endure Miami, ten thousand different mixes of Discotheque, or Pride hitting previously unimaginable live lows. However, the world never gets to experience Gone, Please, or the hilarious thought of U2 trapped inside a forty foot lemon in Oslo.

1998: U2 consider re-recording Sweetest Thing but instead realise a much smarter option is to quit. Sure, their eighties legacy has been tarnished a bit and Bono's vocals declined to the point of unlistenability, but we got some diamonds in the rough for our troubles and U2 got their lazy arses to South America, South Africa, Israel, and one hell of a show in Sarajevo.

Under all four options, the world never gets to experience the unmitigated horror of ATYCLB, HTDAAB, and Bono's messianic complex growing even larger than Jesus's. Losing TGBHF and Electrical Storm is a small price to pay for U2 leaving a legacy in which they don't look like total boobs.
Click to expand...


Jeez, what happened to you? I thought you were one of the 'U2 can do no wrong' brigade.

I'm glad you came aboard.
 
Irishteen said:
Where have you been the last four years? He's one of the biggest haters :lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not sure he likes anything U2 has done since Passengers.

I'm convinced that the turning point was seeing the Vertigo One speech for the first time, live and in person.
 
Axver said:
And the Twilight demo brings the lulz. But won't someone PLEASE think of the children!
Click to expand...
TWILIGHT. TWILIGHT. TWILIGHT. TWILIGHT.

27110656620048945d01ord6.jpg


~Sparkly Vampires~
 
I voted 1990, after Lovetown, because up to that point I liked 'em a lot. After then, not so much. :)
 
I voted for after Passengers, but then remembered how much I love Wake Up Dead Man and Mofo!
5 star thread Ax!
 
LemonMelon said:
Yeah, I'm not sure he likes anything U2 has done since Passengers.

I'm convinced that the turning point was seeing the Vertigo One speech for the first time, live and in person.
Click to expand...

*since 1989.


:wink:

Ax and me should start a support group named We're One against One To get rid of that song!


and shite, you gotta love everything about U2 to post here? Damn, that means I'll never make the 25K!~

:sad: I was so close!
 
Galeongirl said:
Well I am not sure I do, care to elaborate? :scratch:
Click to expand...

There's a difference between "not liking everything the band has ever done" and "basically hating everything they've done since the late 90s".

If the first thing was true, there would be no one left on this board, because we all have something we don't like about U2 in some way or the other, still we come here to post.

If I feel so completely negative about a band and their music as a whole, I don't spend so much time on a fan board and gather a gazillion posts.
 
The correct answer is:
1985, after Unforgettable Fire
you would have the holy trilogy (boy, war, uf), red rocks, and live aid (the actual peak).
you wouldn't have jt and the rest but you wouldn't have known that you would've gotten that, so you'd never miss it.


But, seeing as that didn't happen, the real question is:

When should U2 quit? The answers are:

1) When they start to look like this:

fatu2conan.jpg


<or>

2) When you can buy tickets for their concerts here:

u2vegas.jpg


<or, sadly>

3) When one of them becomes seriously ill, becomes disabled, or dies.

whichever comes first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Reggie Thee Dog
Are we NOT discussing the Dolby Atmos Mix of Achtung Baby?
Replies
13
Views
1K
count rushmore
count rushmore
cobl04
Kiss the Future documentary
Replies
11
Views
3K
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
W
A Boy Falls From the Sky is some U2's best work
Replies
3
Views
2K
zoocarolina
Z
U
Hello, From Dallas, Texas
Replies
3
Views
542
TheFlyZooTV
T
Z
Hello!
Replies
3
Views
825
zoo skis
Z

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom