U2 packing it in? - Page 9 - 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 07-20-2014, 12:22 AM   #121
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,402
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
In don't think we can underestimate how much Bono irritates people. And I love the guy.

He was cool in '85. Annoying in '88. Cool in '92. Annoying in '97. Cool in '01. He crossed over back to annoying sometime in '06 and hasn't come back yet. The tax issue really is kind of a thing.

Still, he is their creative life force and I think his singing continues to get better. Even some of his lyrics too. He's just gotten too Princess Di for the rock world.


Sent from
Bono is definitely polarizing. In a Rock Music class in college (yes I took a Rock Music class, easiest 3 credits I ever earned), we watched The History of Rock n Roll 6-part documentary. Every time Bono came on the screen (and he did a lot) there was a collective groan all around the classroom, except from me and one other kid who had similar taste, and the teacher at the end of one of classes said "I noticed you all really seem to hate Bono." You should have heard the uproar, it was hateful. Of course I, not giving a shit, said "They have a lot of great stuff if you give it the time of day." This comment did not move mountains.

Anyway, while that's just one example, it's pretty much symbolic of my experience being a U2 fan.

I think rock is too tied up in the blues, and since U2 don't necessarily stem from that background, there's a kind of softness that's associated with them, like they're just pop fluff. There's not enough blood on the tracks. But at the same time, they're not dark enough or cynical enough or hard enough or innovative enough or just plain cool enough to make up for that lack.

Maybe if they retired or if they died tragically in a plane crash after AB we'd be singing a different tune, but I dunno, the damage seems almost irreparable at this point. Maybe in 20 or 30 years their early output will be recognized for the brilliant weirdness it is. But not anytime soon.

That said, they are an enormously successful and popular band. Sure, they've been together for a long time, longer than most, but they haven't released anything really in 5 to 6 years. Any band can say "hey we're still together" and go on not releasing anything. I don't think points should be given for the amount of years U2 has remained intact. Especially considering the gaps between albums.
__________________

__________________
ozeeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 12:40 AM   #122
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,629
Local Time: 02:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
The Beatles, Stones, The Who, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Dylan, The Clash...these are acts people scream their love from the rooftops for.
There is only one of those bands that was a manufactured band. For all the hipster douche revisionist history about The Clash, that's often left out.

But there is little doubt that U2 will never be considered 'greater' than those other five bands by adept fans, critics or even their peers. Nor should they.

But who fucking cares?

Non-thinking people tend to hate U2. That's always been true.
__________________

__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 12:51 AM   #123
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,402
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
There is only one of those bands that was a manufactured band. For all the hipster douche revisionist history about The Clash, that's often left out.

But there is little doubt that U2 will never be considered 'greater' than those other five bands by adept fans, critics or even their peers. Nor should they.

But who fucking cares?

Non-thinking people tend to hate U2. That's always been true.
I don't fucking care at all. Whether they become "greater" than those bands is a matter which means nothing to me. But the subject of closet U2 Fandom I find to be kind of interesting. I'm not going to write a book about it, but it was a funny thing to discuss for a post or two.
__________________
ozeeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 02:02 AM   #124
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
popacrobat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: this house
Posts: 9,661
Local Time: 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
There is only one of those bands that was a manufactured band. For all the hipster douche revisionist history about The Clash, that's often left out.

But there is little doubt that U2 will never be considered 'greater' than those other five bands by adept fans, critics or even their peers. Nor should they.

But who fucking cares?

Non-thinking people tend to hate U2. That's always been true.
Word. U2 are my favorite. I don't really care what anybody else thinks about that. A lot of people like them, some people loathe them. Whatevs.
__________________
popacrobat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 03:53 AM   #125
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
mama cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,807
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2 View Post
The sort of thing that will eventually seriously affect the Arctic Monkeys' image, because of their tax issues too.
__________________
mama cass is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 05:17 AM   #126
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 55,095
Local Time: 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
Bono is definitely polarizing. In a Rock Music class in college (yes I took a Rock Music class, easiest 3 credits I ever earned), we watched The History of Rock n Roll 6-part documentary. Every time Bono came on the screen (and he did a lot) there was a collective groan all around the classroom, except from me and one other kid who had similar taste, and the teacher at the end of one of classes said "I noticed you all really seem to hate Bono." You should have heard the uproar, it was hateful. Of course I, not giving a shit, said "They have a lot of great stuff if you give it the time of day." This comment did not move mountains.

Anyway, while that's just one example, it's pretty much symbolic of my experience being a U2 fan.

I think rock is too tied up in the blues, and since U2 don't necessarily stem from that background, there's a kind of softness that's associated with them, like they're just pop fluff. There's not enough blood on the tracks. But at the same time, they're not dark enough or cynical enough or hard enough or innovative enough or just plain cool enough to make up for that lack.

Maybe if they retired or if they died tragically in a plane crash after AB we'd be singing a different tune, but I dunno, the damage seems almost irreparable at this point. Maybe in 20 or 30 years their early output will be recognized for the brilliant weirdness it is. But not anytime soon.
I mean...
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 07:59 AM   #127
War Child
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 555
Local Time: 09:54 AM
U2 are the greatest band on earth. But...... then they have to release. If the new album isn't done, then so be it. But there is a lot of stuff to release (pop documentary 'a year in pop' , the rattle and hum remaster with a lot of outtakes and the Love Town concert on blu-ray/dvd, U2 3d in 3d on blu-ray, the sessions with Rick Rubin etc. etc..) Ordinary love and Invisible aren't enough for another 2 or 3 years of nothing. At least they could have released both songs on cd with a few remixes on it, so than a lot of fans the songs can put in their record/cd collection (I mean no limited releases, where you have to pay more than 100 euros for one song).

In the meantime, we're ready for almost another u2.com gift. U2.com is the only U2-related organisation that have improved over the last years (the cd's and the books are brilliant).
__________________
wolbersu2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 08:39 AM   #128
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,339
Local Time: 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
Bono is definitely polarizing. In a Rock Music class in college (yes I took a Rock Music class, easiest 3 credits I ever earned), we watched The History of Rock n Roll 6-part documentary. Every time Bono came on the screen (and he did a lot) there was a collective groan all around the classroom, except from me and one other kid who had similar taste, and the teacher at the end of one of classes said "I noticed you all really seem to hate Bono." You should have heard the uproar, it was hateful. Of course I, not giving a shit, said "They have a lot of great stuff if you give it the time of day." This comment did not move mountains.

Anyway, while that's just one example, it's pretty much symbolic of my experience being a U2 fan.

I think rock is too tied up in the blues, and since U2 don't necessarily stem from that background, there's a kind of softness that's associated with them, like they're just pop fluff. There's not enough blood on the tracks. But at the same time, they're not dark enough or cynical enough or hard enough or innovative enough or just plain cool enough to make up for that lack.

Maybe if they retired or if they died tragically in a plane crash after AB we'd be singing a different tune, but I dunno, the damage seems almost irreparable at this point. Maybe in 20 or 30 years their early output will be recognized for the brilliant weirdness it is. But not anytime soon.

That said, they are an enormously successful and popular band. Sure, they've been together for a long time, longer than most, but they haven't released anything really in 5 to 6 years. Any band can say "hey we're still together" and go on not releasing anything. I don't think points should be given for the amount of years U2 has remained intact. Especially considering the gaps between albums.


and then we wonder why it takes them so long to make albums.

there's a lot to consider, and to get right, and 30 years to try not to ruin.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 08:51 AM   #129
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,402
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
and then we wonder why it takes them so long to make albums.

there's a lot to consider, and to get right, and 30 years to try not to ruin.
I think they're going to ruin it if they keep trying to be the U2 of the past. They're perpetuating the problem by being so concerned with their legacy and popularity. I mean, they're U2. They can release a crap album and still fill every arena around the world. Getting really deep into their art would be a really good move, in my opinion. Would maybe improve matters on the U2 hate. But when they're always campaigning to be the biggest, again and again and again, it's off-putting. It's like, you've proved it already, go away!
__________________
ozeeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 09:33 AM   #130
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,339
Local Time: 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
I think they're going to ruin it if they keep trying to be the U2 of the past. They're perpetuating the problem by being so concerned with their legacy and popularity. I mean, they're U2. They can release a crap album and still fill every arena around the world. Getting really deep into their art would be a really good move, in my opinion. Would maybe improve matters on the U2 hate. But when they're always campaigning to be the biggest, again and again and again, it's off-putting. It's like, you've proved it already, go away!



Which is easy for someone who isn't in U2 to say.


Sent from
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 09:47 AM   #131
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,402
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Which is easy for someone who isn't in U2 to say.


Sent from
Well, you implied that their legacy will be fine anyway after they retire, when all the closet fans emerge. So then how are they anyway in a position to ruin it?
__________________
ozeeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 09:53 AM   #132
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,339
Local Time: 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
Well, you implied that their legacy will be fine anyway after they retire, when all the closet fans emerge. So then how are they anyway in a position to ruin it?

Maybe they agree with all your friends about being embarrassing.


Sent from
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 09:56 AM   #133
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,402
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Maybe they agree with all your friends about being embarrassing.


Sent from
If they did they wouldn't have released all that embarrassing music of the past 10 years.
__________________
ozeeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 10:00 AM   #134
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,339
Local Time: 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozeeko View Post
If they did they wouldn't have released all that embarrassing music of the past 10 years.


Maybe they're trying to make up for that with this next album.

Though 80s cowboy Bono is pretty embarrassing as well.


Sent from
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 10:08 AM   #135
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,402
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Maybe they're trying to make up for that with this next album.

Though 80s cowboy Bono is pretty embarrassing as well.


Sent from
Lol, look I have never been embarrassed to be a U2 fan. I'll defend them til the day I croak, even though they're the band who wrote Stand Up Comedy. I thought I was just stating an obvious earlier. Sure they're one of the biggest best bands of all time. To answer what BVS jumped on last night, I didn't mean that U2's peers "hate" them, I said they don't respect them "enough" to be seen in that upper echelon of classic rock music. They aren't seen as re-inventing the wheel musically, or as a band born out of rock's roots. They're a standalone act. No one will argue as to their level of success, but that they're so big to the point of being irritating gets in the way of recognizing their contribution. That's all I was saying.
__________________

__________________
ozeeko 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 02:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com