nah the times review isnt bad. but it has nothing to do with the CD anyhow. The music is great. Some tracks i like better than other. Moment of Surrender is surely going to get song of the year. Magnificient is right up there. My favorite U2 song of all time in Original of the species (been listening to U2 since BOY was released). I didnt take that song seriously for almost a year after the HTDAAB was released. So U2's music is consumed in one listen, it lasts with yu and grows with you over a lifetime. Too bad Adam Clayton is the anti-christ huh?
In My Personal Opinion, This Times Review is Bullshit!!!
- Thread starter asr
- 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.
Bean Skidds
The Fly
I actually prefer to read reviews that are critical of the album. The 5/5 "best thing since sliced bread" reviews are of no use to me. Theyre good marketing tools, but thats about it. I personally rate the new album as about a 4/5, its got its flaws. So I like to read about the things that just dont click for other people. Having said that, the Times Review is definitely wrong about MOS, its the high point of the album for me. Plus I like Stand Up Comedy quite a bit.
rjhbonovox
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,139
Is that a confirmed 5 stars. Would be the first Q 5 star review for a U2 album since Achtung Baby. Unknown Caller is the best thing since sliced bread in my opinion!!!!
last unicorn
Blue Crack Addict
There's a difference between "being critical" and simply hating on U2 and/or their music and new album.
Somehow reviewers cannot find their balance. Either they praise it and give it 5/5 or they hate it and rip it apart. U2 is polarising and it's a shame that there is so much hate out there, so much bashing. I don't care about reviews, but it's annoying to read some random people's comments who use this opportunity to bash the band to pieces.
Salome
you are what you is
don't mean to pick you out here, but I've read the 'grower' comment a couple of times and to be honest it baffles meProves to me that its a big grower
the album sounds like a mix of U2 through the ages, the melodies and hooks are enormous and the production is beautiful
what is there to grow?
I guess I don't really think of any U2 album as a grower anyway
there are a few songs I have somewhat changed my opinion on, but so far within 3 listens I can tell whether I will love or like a U2 album
love NLOTH
Bean Skidds
The Fly
There's a difference between "being critical" and simply hating on U2 and/or their music and new album.
Somehow reviewers cannot find their balance. Either they praise it and give it 5/5 or they hate it and rip it apart. U2 is polarising and it's a shame that there is so much hate out there, so much bashing. I don't care about reviews, but it's annoying to read some random people's comments who use this opportunity to bash the band to pieces.
But the Times Review doesnt come off to me as "hating on U2". Pete does after all say Magnificent is "stunning", Cedars is "potent", and there are enough moments where the group clicks that "you write off U2 at your own peril". He also likes the title track and White As Snow. So the reviewer likes some songs, and doesnt like others, how is that hating on U2?
It is worth remembering that U2 are not a cool band and never have been. London-based folk have a tendency to be extremely cynical and uncomfortable with anything displayign much emotion (not surprising if you spend too long there) and U2 have broken too many of the cool clique rules to be allowed much room. Take a journey on a tube train in London and I challenge you to find a more miserable looking bunch of people in a black hole in Calcutta, or an Aids orphange in Malawi... This type of Londoner is not the type to run out into the street and shout for joy - they take themselves way too seriously and unless they break away from their miserable little parochial lives will not appreciate all that an album which breaks convention has too offer. Something Bono has expressed (in a different way to me) back in the 80s which holds true now.
nirniva
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
last unicorn
Blue Crack Addict
I wasn't really refering to this particular review, even though I have the impression that the guy had a really hard time even trying to say something positive about the album. I've read some reviews that were so much worse and mostly consisted of blind U2 bashing. Some journalists use pseudo-intellectual language to make their point sound more plausible or better thought through, but in the end they just can't be bothered to even consider liking a U2 record. That's sad, and makes me angry.
