TIME Takes a shot at U2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
128692641903492472.jpg


bono.jpg


bono-robin-williams-400w.jpg

I like the bottom pic of Robin Williams. I think he is a great comedic actor! Plus, in all fairness, Robin is older than Bono. Both, men are attractive in their own right.
 
U2 were good whether they were on the cover or not. The band is old and they are going to get slammed because of their consistent success. I could see it coming from a mile away. U2 has a big target sign on their backs this time around. People have been talking about a long wait but U2 have been touring for half that time and received a boatload of Grammys during the years. Then add Bono's work with DATA and you get overexposure. Remember how R&H got slammed despite having lots of great songs? As U2 get "long in the tooth" for critics they will...well....criticize. :D

I actually hope that their follow up album will be more experimental and added during the tour so they don't get too scared and ignore interesting material due to worries and criticism.


These reporters are so pathetic however. They really can't report on U2 for any kind of cheating with prostitutes or fathering children out of wedlock.
no drugs or drunk driving charges, so they just make fun of Bono and dis the music. It never changes. I still don't care either. :wink:
(I do hope the album blows everybody's mind just so U2 can feel proud of what they do and so they can rub it in.:up:)
 
It's not a 'big deal', I just think it looks silly and doesn't suit him. Bono isn't other rock stars and he already has his own style, he doesn't need to look like anyone else (ie Billy Joe from Green Day). I think it makes him look silly and I don't buy the 'accentuates the eyes' (his eyes are already striking enough) and the 'hides crows feet' bits. When he used eye makeup in the past it was part of an entire 'look' that made an overt statement that was recognizable and added to the performance. I don't get that same feeling here, just my opinion.


If you look at photos you can see that with the eyeliner his eyes are more visible from behind the shades and if you look at some of the more recent bare eyes photos the crows feet have been looking rather bad especially when he hasn't had much sleep which is almost always. The eyeliner doesn't really hide it per se but does make it less noticable. As for what kind of look he needs, Bono usually plays around with different looks to help him get into the songs. I don't think he gives a fuck what we think he looks like if it helps him connect with the characters in his head. I don't think he has necessarily settled on a look yet but only time will tell. Actually the more people say he's too old to wear eyeliner the more he is likely to do it just to piss people off. If you haven't noticed he's kind of contrary that way. :wink:

Dana
 
These reporters are so pathetic however. They really can't report on U2 for any kind of cheating with prostitutes or fathering children out of wedlock.
no drugs or drunk driving charges, so they just make fun of Bono and dis the music. It never changes. I still don't care either. :wink:
(I do hope the album blows everybody's mind just so U2 can feel proud of what they do and so they can rub it in.:up:)
Clayton's been nicked for possessing weed and drink driving in the past...
 
I don't understand why it is such a big deal to people that Bono is wearing guyliner. Plenty of male rock stars have and are doing it. He's worn various types of eyemakeup before so what's the big deal? Personally I think that the liner accentuates his eyes and makes them more visible from behind the shades and when he takes off the shades it draws your attention to his eyes. I think it also minimizes the crows feet somewhat as I find he doesn't look as old with the liner on. I'd rather him do that than plastic surgery.

Dana

Bono probably has had some sort of cosmetic surgery. Just about all entertainers do. And I am not knocking him for it, at all. I would do the same, if in the entertainment profession and it was affordable to me. Though, I do think Bono looks very natural, refreshed, not freakish, like some others.

Rule of thumb here, just about all of us, over forty will get bags under our eyes. It has nothing to do with a good nights sleep. More of a thinning of the skin.

The next I see my doctor. I am going to see if my health insurance will cover a laser light treatment for my roseaca and also, crows feet. Nothing wrong with wanting to look your best. :wave:
 
U2 has more Grammys than any other act in history. This year they were nominated for... what again? The band has a record coming out for the first time in five years in March, so the producers decided to get everyone excited for a night of celebrating last year's music by opening the host-less show with music no one has heard yet. Interesting. U2 sounded fine, and Bono's gradual transformation into Robin Williams appears to be coming along apace, but it was hardly the rocket-fueled kick-off to the show, or to U2's promotional tour, that either party was hoping for.
Grade: B-

  1. Points for calling it - U2 weren't nominated. So their presence there was purely promotional. Not that this is so bad, but it's good to call it for what it is.
  2. As the years have passed, Bono has looked more and more like Williams. Odd that. Fortunately, Bono can lose weight (as he has - looks great now), while Williams still seems rather portly. And I think Bono has more hair. But keep the glasses Bono, or grow that stubble you had circa late ZOO TV. It works and without either, the Williams' look flourishes.
  3. I disagree with the review - I felt it was a rocket-feuled kick-off. Not sure what else this reviewer was expecting. Marching bands? Oh wait, already being done that night. Guest artists? Wait, being done that night. Tearful songs? Wait, being done that night. I wonder if people criticized Green Day when they did a similar rockin' performance of "American Idiot"? Probably not - Green Day is not U2 where the current zeitgeist is to mock them whenever possible.
 
I love how people seem to think that Time magazine rating Grammy performances is somehow a major news story.

They have columns that make flippant comments about pop culture stuff in the magazine - if you are putting a lot of stock in those types of columns or think Time is the end-all be-all arbiter of taste, get help.
 
I would see an argument if he had tons of it like Stipe or KISS members.

I think he's just trying a new image. I hope he doesn't tour with the 'liner because after 2 + hours, it will start melting...

I also would see an argument if this was new....as it stands its old news. The topic has been beaten to death weeks ago.

BTW, good point on the melting thing. Bono will start to look like Alice Cooper :lol: What a site that would be.
 
Bono probably has had some sort of cosmetic surgery. Just about all entertainers do. And I am not knocking him for it, at all. I would do the same, if in the entertainment profession and it was affordable to me. Though, I do think Bono looks very natural, refreshed, not freakish, like some others.

Rule of thumb here, just about all of us, over forty will get bags under our eyes. It has nothing to do with a good nights sleep. More of a thinning of the skin.

The next I see my doctor. I am going to see if my health insurance will cover a laser light treatment for my roseaca and also, crows feet. Nothing wrong with wanting to look your best. :wave:


If he's ever had cosmetic surgury then his surgeon should be shot. The only time any difference shows in his face is when he's had more rest. He's been photographed so consistantly that he hasn't been out of sight long enough to have had work done. You are also talking about the same guy who has a history of avoiding doctors and letting things go for way to long. He's never had the scar on his chin fixed and didn't even want to wait for the plastic surgeon they wanted to bring in to do the stitching when he got that injury. I just don't see him having that done. He's had a problem with swelling in his right eye for years and years that he has avoided doing anything about except wearing shades to hide it. He almost lost his voice completely before he allowed the doctor to put him under and do something about the problems he was having. This is not the guy who's just going to up and have his eyes done.

Dana
 
Chris Martin is so out of breath all the time. Maybe he should move less and sing more.

Agreed. Chris Martin runs around like some kind of lanky chimp. Bollocks to them having more energy than U2. At the very least you'd expect it, what with them being 15+ years older than them.

Actually, I'm not surprised Martin was running around so much, he was probably trying to avoid Joe Satriani's lawyers who apparentely were trying to serve the band a writ for plagiarism actually at the event. :lol:
 
Agreed. Chris Martin runs around like some kind of lanky chimp. Bollocks to them having more energy than U2. At the very least you'd expect it, what with them being 15+ years older than them.

Actually, I'm not surprised Martin was running around so much, he was probably trying to avoid Joe Satriani's lawyers who apparentely were trying to serve the band a writ for plagiarism actually at the event. :lol:

:lol:



and



double :lol:
 
This is the first time I'm reading reviews of an album in my whole life, I'm doing it just because it seemed the right thing to do to keep up with what is said in this forum, but, seriously, I don't need anyone to tell me if an album is good or not or if a performance is good or not, I know if I like something, I just want the album and the concert tickets to sell well because it makes more likely that the band stay in the business and I don't want them to quit. I don't mind if Bono looks like Robin William (maybe Robin has something I didn't see before) and I don't mind if he wears eyeliner or a Japanese Kimono.
I'm not sure, it's the first time I read reviews as I have said, but maybe some critics have started thinking it's time to take the crown off U2 heads and they are going for it even before the album is out, well, U2 know they have a toll to pay for being 30 years in this business, but it's the audience who eventually decides.
 
This is the first time I'm reading reviews of an album in my whole life, I'm doing it just because it seemed the right thing to do to keep up with what is said in this forum, but, seriously, I don't need anyone to tell me if an album is good or not or if a performance is good or not, I know if I like something, I just want the album and the concert tickets to sell well because it makes more likely that the band stay in the business and I don't want them to quit. I don't mind if Bono looks like Robin William (maybe Robin has something I didn't see before) and I don't mind if he wears eyeliner or a Japanese Kimono.
I'm not sure, it's the first time I read reviews as I have said, but maybe some critics have started thinking it's time to take the crown off U2 heads and they are going for it even before the album is out, well, U2 know they have a toll to pay for being 30 years in this business, but it's the audience who eventually decides.

:wave:

:up::up:
As usual, well said Marien. :applaud:
 
I'm not sure, it's the first time I read reviews as I have said, but maybe some critics have started thinking it's time to take the crown off U2 heads and they are going for it even before the album is out, well, U2 know they have a toll to pay for being 30 years in this business, but it's the audience who eventually decides.


I've thought about tuning out this forum and reviews until the album comes for some of the same reasons you wrote.

The negativity is very high here. I can understand some people in the press being negative. As I wrote previously, mocking U2 seems to be the fashionable thing to do. Trouble is, mocking started shortly after JT became a big success. Periodically a break happens where U2 gets some love, but it appears that only so much love is allowed, and U2 are once again targets. The price one pays for trying to be the biggest, I guess.

In some ways, though, while U2 have done some promotion, I'm kind of hoping they slow down and let the music do the work. Even if it sells "poorly" (for U2), so be it. Let people discover this album.

The trouble I'm having is what do U2 fans want? U2 promote - that's bad. U2 don't promote - that's bad. U2 change styles - that's bad. U2 don't chage or change enough - that's bad. U2 is sincere - that's bad. U2 is goofy - that's bad. But whatever.

Ultimately, it's what we like. :yes:

And I know for a fact that those bitching the most here will be buying multiple copies of the album and going to numerous shows. :sexywink:
 
Eh. It was a painfully obvious song. And that album sounded exactly like "Dookie", which was released over a decade earlier. Wonder if Green Day fans complained about Green Day sounding the same.

:hmm:


not the kind of post I would have expected from you.


I totally disagree with you on all counts here. Kind of odd. :scratch:

I found the single American Idiot to be fresh and to the point, and their last album to be brilliant. I didn't think that as a whole it sounded like any album they put out before. Many of the same sounds were present in prior albums, but not in the same fashion on this last one. It just all seemed to click.

Just my opinion. I'm looking forward to "21st Century Breakdown" It actually comes out two months after NLOTH. So after I listen to NLOTH ad nauseum for two months I can take a break and listen to Green Day.
 
I'm not sure, it's the first time I read reviews as I have said, but maybe some critics have started thinking it's time to take the crown off U2 heads and they are going for it even before the album is out, well, U2 know they have a toll to pay for being 30 years in this business, but it's the audience who eventually decides.

It's the usual cycle with U2 in the States...maybe we're due for another "US dislikes U2" phase.

1987 U2 is loved. Fast foward to Rattle and Hum and everyone rips into them.

1992 U2 is loved again.

1997 backlash.

2001 and 2004 still positive reaction.

2009 ?
 
The trouble I'm having is what do U2 fans want? U2 promote - that's bad. U2 don't promote - that's bad. U2 change styles - that's bad. U2 don't chage or change enough - that's bad. U2 is sincere - that's bad. U2 is goofy - that's bad. But whatever.

Ultimately, it's what we like. :yes:

And I know for a fact that those bitching the most here will be buying multiple copies of the album and going to numerous shows. :sexywink:

I have just commented in another thread that I sometimes feel that we, U2 fans, try too hard to be intellectuals, we find we have to say very important, interesting things, and a fan saying he loves u2 is not that interesting, so we criticise and overcriticise the band, and sometimes we know what we are talking about and sometimes we don't, and worst of all, we are not completely sincere, because after all the whinning and moaning, etc... we stay here and buy the music, I think some of us are just carried away in an attempt to get to be more interesting.
At the moment, even if it is very entertaining, I'm considering quitting the forum for a while, so I can enjoy the new album without anybody's whinning interfering on it.
 
If you look at photos you can see that with the eyeliner his eyes are more visible from behind the shades and if you look at some of the more recent bare eyes photos the crows feet have been looking rather bad especially when he hasn't had much sleep which is almost always. The eyeliner doesn't really hide it per se but does make it less noticable. As for what kind of look he needs, Bono usually plays around with different looks to help him get into the songs. I don't think he gives a fuck what we think he looks like if it helps him connect with the characters in his head. I don't think he has necessarily settled on a look yet but only time will tell. Actually the more people say he's too old to wear eyeliner the more he is likely to do it just to piss people off. If you haven't noticed he's kind of contrary that way. :wink:

Dana

This is PLEBA-scary, I'm sorry. :wink:
 
Back
Top Bottom