U2 packing it in? - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Where The Album Has A Name - Songs of Experience
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-06-2014, 10:39 AM   #91
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 59,952
Local Time: 10:14 AM
The Rolling Stones have in no way diminished anything they've done.
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 11:19 AM   #92
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,381
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPU2 View Post
Yes, contracts are meaningless. As much as I love hearing new material and seeing them live, I think it may be time for U2 to pack it in and earn their place in history as the greatest rock and roll band of all time. The Stones, I think, have diminished their role in history by continuing so long. Don't be the Stones.

Bono's voice is better than ever. He couldn't sing a song like Magnificent or Ordinary Love 25 years ago. Invisible was a fantastic song. My 7 year old twins sing it constantly, but it had zero impact on the pop charts. There's only one reason for that: they're too old. And they've become everything they've always railed against. They've become too precious with their music and their image. Everything has to be JUUUUUUUST right or it doesn't see the light of day. Is that how Elvis recorded? Or Buddy Holly, Dylan, the Velvets, the Ramones, the Clash, or anyone they've ever respected?

They only way U2 will make it back is by letting their balls hang out in their music. I just don't think they're capable anymore.

I'm afraid U2 of 2014 has become—or is very close to becoming—the Rolling Stones of the 90s, a band who would release an album of mostly solid material, no one would even notice, and then they'd go on a long, well attended, mostly nostalgia-themed stadium tour.

OK, thank you very much; I'll go every time. I've been a fan since I saw you guys singing on a barge in Dublin on MTV 32 years ago. If yer 65, I'm buying a ticket. But is this what YOU had in mind?
The Stones get unfairly maligned. They are still one of the very best live acts you could possibly see, they release the odd new tune, and most importantly they seem to be enjoying themselves. They aren't continually tying themselves into knots of anxiety over what they should or shouldn't do, nor are they under any illusions (delusions?) they can conquer the pop charts which are dominated by artists who are younger than their own children. U2 have become far, far too concerned with protecting their precious legacy and whether they are still "relevant", to the extent that it's suffocating practically anything and everything that they do. Frankly, being a U2 fan these days is exhausting when you know that they will scupper plans in the blink of an eye if they feel that everything isn't "just right" as you said. At least the Stones don't spend every waking hour worrying about market trends and what the "kids" are listening to these days.
__________________

lemonfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 11:32 AM   #93
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,091
Local Time: 09:14 AM
But what you are glossing over is that The Stones went through a phase very similar to this in the 80s.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 11:37 AM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
trevgreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 3,591
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPU2 View Post
Is that how Elvis recorded? Or Buddy Holly, Dylan, the Velvets, the Ramones, the Clash, or anyone they've ever respected?
To be fair, Elvis and Holly were both dead by the time they reached the age U2 is at now. And they recorded in different eras altogether.
trevgreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 04:06 PM   #95
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 20,992
Local Time: 04:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPU2 View Post
Yes, contracts are meaningless. As much as I love hearing new material and seeing them live, I think it may be time for U2 to pack it in and earn their place in history as the greatest rock and roll band of all time. The Stones, I think, have diminished their role in history by continuing so long. Don't be the Stones.

Bono's voice is better than ever. He couldn't sing a song like Magnificent or Ordinary Love 25 years ago. Invisible was a fantastic song. My 7 year old twins sing it constantly, but it had zero impact on the pop charts. There's only one reason for that: they're too old. And they've become everything they've always railed against. They've become too precious with their music and their image. Everything has to be JUUUUUUUST right or it doesn't see the light of day. Is that how Elvis recorded? Or Buddy Holly, Dylan, the Velvets, the Ramones, the Clash, or anyone they've ever respected?

They only way U2 will make it back is by letting their balls hang out in their music. I just don't think they're capable anymore.

I'm afraid U2 of 2014 has become—or is very close to becoming—the Rolling Stones of the 90s, a band who would release an album of mostly solid material, no one would even notice, and then they'd go on a long, well attended, mostly nostalgia-themed stadium tour.

OK, thank you very much; I'll go every time. I've been a fan since I saw you guys singing on a barge in Dublin on MTV 32 years ago. If yer 65, I'm buying a ticket. But is this what YOU had in mind?
U2 will never be the greatest rock band of all time.

The fact is people won't care even if U2 lets it hang out. NLOTH was just the beginning of general audience not caring about ageing band's new output. It's a miracle they nailed a hit late in the game with BD/Vertigo as it is.

That said, I consider everything after ATYCLB/Elevation comeback as icing on the cake. They could stop making new music and release compilations with odd new song and tour a la Stones (they are a good live show, mostly thanks to Jagger's energy). This isn't the route they chose.
Another alternative is shorter tours/no touring at all and thus a faster output of music. Barring medical issues or one of them quitting, this isn't happening either.
Their legacy is already there; they're onto uncharted teritorry. What's the rulebook for a 50 year old band with original lineup and their popularity ?
U2girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 06:53 PM   #96
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Well, that's probably their objective: to them, they now have the chance of being the greatest rock band of all time.

As ridiculous as an objective as that may be.
JOFO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2014, 01:53 PM   #97
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 20,992
Local Time: 04:14 PM
No. In what capacity can they get ahead of Stones, Beatles, Led Zeppelin, The Who and Pink Floyd ?

Sales ? Influence ? Songwriting ?
U2girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2014, 02:00 PM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Well, yeah. If they actually produced quality albums more than once every 5 years or whatever, sure, they could get up there as far as songwriting, sales, etc.
Would it be in the panthenon of "top 5 greatest rock bands of all time"? No.
No one will ever top the Beatles or Zeppelin.
The Who and Stones are nothing now but their past was immense.
Do I see U2 doing this? No.

But it COULD be their objective at this point.
JOFO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 05:39 PM   #99
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Niceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The Apartment of Surrender...
Posts: 5,629
Local Time: 10:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOFO View Post
Well, that's probably their objective: to them, they now have the chance of being the greatest rock band of all time.

As ridiculous as an objective as that may be.
They accomplished the goal in 1987.
Niceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 05:40 PM   #100
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 03:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niceman View Post
They accomplished the goal in 1987.
Um, no.
Nick66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 08:07 PM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niceman View Post
They accomplished the goal in 1987.

Gimmee doze drugs u smokin.....
JOFO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 10:41 PM   #102
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,420
Local Time: 02:14 PM
U2 aren't respected enough by their peers or by "cool" people to be considered one of the greatest bands ever. But they're definitely one of the most popular and successful bands of all time.
ozeeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 10:53 PM   #103
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,091
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
U2 aren't respected enough by their peers or by "cool" people to be considered one of the greatest bands ever.

How are you defining this?



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 10:58 PM   #104
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 31,144
Local Time: 10:14 AM
U2 packing it in?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
U2 aren't respected enough by their peers or by "cool" people to be considered one of the greatest bands ever. But they're definitely one of the most popular and successful bands of all time.


Deep down, everyone loves them and wants to be them. Everyone.

The issue is irritation with Bono, their professed desire to be the biggest/best, and their ability to consistently pull it off since 1985.

So people slag them off. But they shed a tear when "one" comes on, and again when they get a glimpse of humanity's potential during "streets."

Everyone loves some U2.


Sent from
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 11:10 PM   #105
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,091
Local Time: 09:14 AM
No, he's right; Dylan, Stones, REM, Radiohead, Patti Smith, Bruce and everyone else hated U2.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________

BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com