Your unpopular U2 opinions here!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Shit, at least he sounds good. Great, in fact. His voice is a reedy whisper today compared to that powerhouse delivery on Pride. His low range was terrific back then.

And lyrically, he was very nearly at his peak, channeling Robert Frost and exorcising the demons of addiction plaguing his hometown. Some of his most playful and impressionistic writing can be heard on Promenade and Indian Summer Sky.

Hate away, TUF Bono ruled.



I am glad his hemmerhoids got better around 1987. They were totally on fire during that album, all the gaspy and breathy delivery. Lots of "heart/soul" (so wind go) and "sky/fire/dust/rust/rain" imagery.

What his voice has lost in power it has gained in control and focus and nuance. Instead of prancing on tabletops he's now able to deliver the drama and ache in a way that isn't embarrassing.

Lyrically, not so much. There's a lot of reaching and searching, but it never gets anywhere. That's another unpopular opinion of mine. 80s U2 lyrics are way overrated, the best ones appearing on R&H followed by the genius naïveté of Boy.

That said, it's an album with distinct strengths and much of the production still sounds smashing (though it sounds much more dated than War). It's a critical album for U2, I get that, and it's nice to visit once in a while. But I'm so glad they got better. Especially Bono.
 
he's now able to deliver the drama and ache in a way that isn't embarrassing.

I would argue the vocal for Unforgettable Fire on 360 was pretty embarrassing. I'll never understand how someone could legitimately prefer it or, say, Ultraviolet on 360 over previous live counterparts, but they have their advocates. Last tour's vocals had "control" and "focus" because his new range doesn't give him as much to work with. :wink:

And personally, I find soul searching and a grasp for truth far more interesting than broad declarative statements about relationships and current events (yeah, Bomb is an easy target, so what), making TUF the album for me. It's more about the journey than the destination, somewhat like the 90s records. I like Bono more when he doesn't present himself as if he has the answers, certainly it makes him sound more approachable.

But I will agree with you that Boy contains some of his finest lyricism. What a great record.
 
Last edited:
And personally, I find soul searching and a grasp for truth far more interesting than broad declarative statements about relationships and current events (yeah, Bomb is an easy target, so what), making TUF the album for me. It's more about the journey than the destination, somewhat like the 90s records. I like Bono more when he doesn't present himself as if he has the answers, certainly it makes him sound more approachable.

:up:
 
Lyrically, it goes like this for me: 90s > 00s > 80s. So this isn't a winner/loser thing, I find his lyrics more substantive since 1988, and I admire the clarity and focus of, say, a direct examination of parent/child relationships in "Kite" than the vague, thesaurus-heavy description of his house in "promenade." That said, the "isolation, desolation," part of bad is pretty perfect, and that's certainly vague. But, I smell some BS in TUF-era lyrics that sound like a young man trying to be "poetic" in the English teacher sense. It was an important step for Bono, but I think grasping at, say, the complexity of a massacre on Easter juxtaposed with the resurrection on SBS is more powerful than any "Bomb blast lighting waltz" on TUF. And I love ASOH. I also find the more "poetic" flourishes in "So Cruel" better than anything on TUF because it's an exploration of a specific thing -- sexual longing, the need for sexual adventure conflicting with the higher calling of fidelity "head of heaven / fingers in the mire" -- simply more compelling.

The one thing you can say about U2 is that they have a lot to offer all sorts of tastes.

Lyrically, I think R&H and Pop are pretty much his best albums lyrically, even if they both fall short on the music end of things.
 
Disagree completely. I find the "literalness" of Bono's latter lyrical output to be clunky and forced. I frankly find much more "truth" in his poetic stream of conscious, even on songs like Elvis Presley and America (to cite about the most extreme example), than I do in the ham fisted prose that makes up his his more recent work.

If he were a painter, I'd say in the 80's he was an impressionist and more recently he's a realist. It's all a matter of opinion, of course, but even a line that's can at first glance be written off as gibberish like "True colours fly in blue and black, blue silken sky and burning flag" is a lot more moving, to me, than awkward musings about Chinese stocks. The relative vagueness of his lyrics back then, on songs like TUF and ASOH and even on song like Streets, allowed the listener to go anywhere they wanted with it. But there's only so much you can do with forced verse that makes up the worst of Bomb, NLOTH and SOI (though the latter definitely represented an uptick in the lyrics....perhaps because of The Edge?).

I do agree that it's easy to dismiss at lot of the TUF/JT era lyrics as High School English class angst, but at least it was honest, came from a real place, and was bourn of inspiration, whereas I think at some point the muse left him, hence the prosaic style he eventually adopted. I also agree that R&H is solid lyrically (though I think it's quite solid musically as well).

As you point out, the 90's may have given us the best of both worlds.
 
If he were a painter, I'd say in the 80's he was an impressionist and more recently he's a realist. It's all a matter of opinion, of course, but even a line that's can at first glance be written off as gibberish like "True colours fly in blue and black, blue silken sky and burning flag" is a lot more moving, to me, than awkward musings about Chinese stocks. The relative vagueness of his lyrics back then, on songs like TUF and ASOH and even on song like Streets, allowed the listener to go anywhere they wanted with it. But there's only so much you can do with forced verse that makes up the worst of Bomb, NLOTH and SOI (though the latter definitely represented an uptick in the lyrics....perhaps because of The Edge?).


i dunno ... i agree that Bomb is something of a low point, but i think "love and faith and sex and fear / and all the things that keep us here" says a whole lot more about the human condition than "silken sky and burning flag," or anything else on TUF. yes, you can take vague lyrics and make them meaningful, and "streets" is perhaps the best example of that, every time i see them live that song means something different, and equally profound, to me. but i am interested in what Bono has to actually say and think about things. i also find "breathe" one of the more interesting songs, lyrically, on NLOTH, and i know i'm in the minority here, but there's a lot of playful, interesting lyrical ideas that bounce around like a rubber ball in a squash court going on in SUC (though the music is horrid) -- there's some vivid stuff in there:

"The wire is stretched in between our two towers / Stand up in this dizzy world / Where a lovesick eye can steal the view."

It recalls 9/11 and the gaping hole in lower Manhattan, views terrorism as a sick form of love, and references the documentary "Man on Wire" where a man walked a tightrope between the Twin Towers, thusly suggesting that opposing points of view -- the West and Islam, perhaps -- can be crossed, like the space between the Twin Towers, if we have the courage to try. the wire is already there, we just have to stand up -- as if on a tightrope, it is a tightrope -- and defy the vertigo, and cross.

there's actually a lot to unpack there, and all that in 3 lines.

what i think happens is that people look at the flowery 80s lyrics and think there's more meaning than there actually is, and they look at the more concrete 00s lyrics and think there's less meaning than there actually is. that's my opinion. people get bogged down in "mole / hole / soul" in elevation, but what the song is actually about is orgasm as epiphany, witnessing the divine via flesh. it's totally a sex song about the cosmic unity -- physical and mental -- that can be achieved via intercourse.

it's cool stuff.

again, as always, taste is individual. i appreciate how beautiful the tumble of words in EPAA can be to some, and that's fine. i just think the 00s gets undersold in here, so i'm taking a moment to stand up for the qualities i find most compelling about 21st century Bono.
 
Just because one has a lot to unpack there, doesn't mean it is not painfully obvious. I read that line and those things you got from it immediately came to mind. But I don't find them nearly as interesting as you do.

Something like "burning flag and silken sky" can bring many images in many different contexts. Its impressionistic value makes it fresh every time I hear it. Most of Bono's sloganeering of the kind you mention is for me eyeroll-worthy and it just reeks of phrases that seem to the author far smarter than they're actually are.
 
Just because one has a lot to unpack there, doesn't mean it is not painfully obvious. I read that line and those things you got from it immediately came to mind. But I don't find them nearly as interesting as you do.

Something like "burning flag and silken sky" can bring many images in many different contexts. Its impressionistic value makes it fresh every time I hear it. Most of Bono's sloganeering of the kind you mention is for me eyeroll-worthy and it just reeks of phrases that seem to the author far smarter than they're actually are.



the lyrics i pointed out and examined strike you as "sloganeering"?

"oh! you! look! so! BEAUTIFUL!" yes, but that?

i also think that, if there is a lot to unpack, then by definition it cannot be painfully obvious.
 
"A lovesick eye can steal the view" sounds to me like a catchphrase from an airline commercial. I just don't find it interesting or compelling or intriguing. I respect that you enjoy it... I on the other hand find it woefully boring.

If you can derive three conclusions from a lyric - and all are pretty much obvious and come from imagery that I find to be very much on-the-nose (9/11, Man on Wire)... yeah, I'd call it very much obvious.

But we can agree to disagree. If you find enjoyment in those lyrics, that's cool by me.
 
i think "love and faith and sex and fear / and all the things that keep us here" says a whole lot more about the human condition than "silken sky and burning flag," or anything else on TUF.

And that's surely what Bono was reaching for with that line. What I find troubling is that I'm instantly aware of it on first glance. It's a statement of purpose for the themes contained within the track...and little else. The line is an encapsulation with little aesthetic value. I can read it and move on with my life, which is part of the plan, I'm guessing. It's more accessible that way, like everything else on Bomb.

I guess where we differ is that I don't find TUF as thematically empty as you do. In fact, I think every track is lyrically inspired; by wonder, admiration, romance, concern, etc. I'm in a graduate poetry class right now and I can spot empty musings a mile away; I write them all the time. :) Bono had a lot to say during that period. Even though the lyrics require a bit more from the listener, there is still a there there.
 
Last edited:
i find the thread of connection between the things and the metaphor he's constructed to be very interesting, not least because of how it's accomplished in so little time. it's also an overtly political song, so concrete lyrics lend itself to the subject at hand.
 
This is legitimately one of the most insane things I've ever seen posted on Interference.

This is even worse than Snowlock's loose wet turd from the other day.

:lock::lock::lock:

Yeah that's why it's called the unpopular opinions thread. Those songs just never did anything for me whatsoever. I am honored to be mentioned alongside that epic rant from the other day though. That was essentially watching a modern Interference classic/legend being born.

Sent from my HTC One using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Daniel Lanois is an excellent producer and has been critical to the success of U2. While he could never live up to his early success in producing More Singable Songs by Raff, he did a great job for U2, Peter Gabriel, Neil Young and many more.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I don't agree with you Irvine but my god is it refreshing to have someone argue an unpopular point of view and actually express themselves really well :up:
 
Don't know what's controversial around here, so I'll just say what I think

Pop, as an album, beats Joshua Tree as an album any day.
Streets is a fabulous song and should never be taken out of lineup.
People give Acrobat more credit than it deserves.
The Fish out of Water remix for EBTTRT was better than the original.
The back half of All That You Can't Leave Behind is almost as underrated as Pop.
Half of Boy sucks.
October, the album, sucks.
Atomic Bomb is full of "good" songs, but is so dad-rock.
Invisible gets way more credit than it deserves.
Trip Through Your Wires is an awesome song.
Red Hill Mining Town should have been replaced by Silver And Gold.
NLOTH is better than October.
Studio version of Bullet sucks.
Studio version of Staring At The Sun sucks.
Miami gets wayyyy less credit than it deserves. Same with Wake Up Dead Man.
SOI feels like a less-heavy Atomic Bomb. "Good", but boring.
Lucifer's Hands beats Crystal Ballroom.
Yahweh Live is really good.
Elvis Presley and America is awesome.
Zooropa beats War.
R&H was mostly boring and annoying, except for some cool parts like Love Comes To Town, and some of the other b-sides that made it onto Best of 1980-1990
 
Back
Top Bottom