Coldplay - Viva La Vida - ongoing discussion

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's where I think you're wrong.

Creating 12 songs that compliment each other well onto an album means something. It's music. If it takes you from Feeling A to Feeling B, in a good way, not X&Y making me want to headbutt the nearest child, then it succeeds. Music is creative expression, in any form. I like concept albums when they're done well and don't come off as airy and pretentious. Coldplay doesn't have a firm identity as a band other than the "band that sounds like everyone else." That's not saying I don't like their music or I feel that any band with obvious influences is terrible, but they can't reconcile those influences with an original enough sound to make them their own, you know? Having a "concept" doesn't negate the fact that they're still grasping for their own footing in the realm of rock music - as pompous as that may sound.

You can make the argument that "U2 doesn't care anymore," but I will wholly disagree. All That You Can't Leave Behind is a great album, with songs unique to them at that period of time that still hold up today. Bomb, however, is an overproduced collection of singles with no staying power, and it's one of the band's biggest missteps, in my opinion.

Again, this is all subjective.

Everyone asumes they don't have their footing in the rock world but they do whether even they realize it. They don't sound like other bands. They have their own sound like I described.

You can think ATYCLB is good like you said it is all subjective but you can't deny they were going for hits and radio friendly stuff. They started to care more about selling records then anything else.
 
What other mainstream rock band has songs like Warning Sign or Gravity? Seems to me like Coldplay has already established their own brand of heartfelt piano pop-rock.
 
Creating 12 songs that compliment each other well onto an album means something. It's music. If it takes you from Feeling A to Feeling B, in a good way, not X&Y making me want to headbutt the nearest child, then it succeeds. Music is creative expression, in any form. I like concept albums when they're done well and don't come off as airy and pretentious. Coldplay doesn't have a firm identity as a band other than the "band that sounds like everyone else." That's not saying I don't like their music or I feel that any band with obvious influences is terrible, but they can't reconcile those influences with an original enough sound to make them their own, you know? Having a "concept" doesn't negate the fact that they're still grasping for their own footing in the realm of rock music - as pompous as that may sound.

You are a much wiser and braver Jedi than I.

tpm_1029.jpg
 
That's what EYKIW is for.

:hmm:

Then again, you're probably safer in here.

No, I know.

I's jus' playin.

But there were like 30 people viewing this thread so I wanted to say something. I'm starved for attention I guess...kinda like Chrissy Martin.
 
Everyone asumes they don't have their footing in the rock world but they do whether even they realize it. They don't sound like other bands. They have their own sound like I described.

BULLSHIT.

Show me one review that doesn't mention U2. I dare you.

They are derivative. Everyone else sees it, why can't you?

Wait, now I'm saying Obi-Wan's lines.
 
You can think ATYCLB is good like you said it is all subjective but you can't deny they were going for hits and radio friendly stuff. They started to care more about selling records then anything else.

00's U2 isn't gunning for hits. 00's U2 has been trying to craft THE ETERNAL SONG. Just look at Bono's review of Window In The Skies back in '06. They feel that they can best achieve this and create their grandest statement by distilling their sound to its most beloved qualities. They want to be remembered, and they do want to make something truly special.

Kind of like our good buddies in Coldplay. Except they have a different means of going about it.
 
They wanted accessibility; Grammys, hits, and money are the benefits of that.

But I agree with you to a certain extent; you're forgetting The Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack though, and I think your position will be invalid in about 5 months.

Unless you think U2's next album won't top VLV.

MDH sounds like making a pop soundtrack to me. It is the prelude to ATYCLB. The only thing that sounds like it was an attempt at art was Ground Beneath Her Feet and they needed a little help on that one.

I think VLV is one of the best of this decade. None of us know what this next U2 album is going to be like. I will admit to not being that excited for it with how bad the last two were and the band's attitude. So I don't know but I will say it will be hard to top VLV.
 
BULLSHIT.

Show me one review that doesn't mention U2. I dare you.

They are derivative. Everyone else sees it, why can't you?

Wait, now I'm saying Obi-Wan's lines.

You know the point of a review is to make the reader have a sense of the music. That means you compare an artist to other bands. Everyone gets compared to U2 and often times Radiohead. These are labels that don't fit.
 
MDH sounds like making a pop soundtrack to me. It is the prelude to ATYCLB. The only thing that sounds like it was an attempt at art was Ground Beneath Her Feet and they needed a little help on that one.

I disagree here. The songs on MDH should have been the direction they took instead of what ultimately became ATYCLB. The Ground Beneath Her Feet is their best song from this decade.

And you can't use an argument like they needed a little help for it, because Coldplay got plenty of help from Eno on Viva La Vida. I don't care who helps as long as it's good.
 
00's U2 isn't gunning for hits. 00's U2 has been trying to craft THE ETERNAL SONG. Just look at Bono's review of Window In The Skies back in '06. They feel that they can best achieve this and create their grandest statement by distilling their sound to its most beloved qualities. They want to be remembered, and they do want to make something truly special.

Kind of like our good buddies in Coldplay. Except they have a different means of going about it.

I agree with Phanan. They are clearly gunning for hits not the eternal song. Bono can claim they are trying to do that but it is clear to the world they just want hits.
 
Everyone asumes they don't have their footing in the rock world but they do whether even they realize it. They don't sound like other bands. They have their own sound like I described.

You can think ATYCLB is good like you said it is all subjective but you can't deny they were going for hits and radio friendly stuff. They started to care more about selling records then anything else.

To me, Coldplay sounds like a watered down mix of U2, Radiohead, R.E.M., George Harrison/latter Beatles, and now Brian Eno and Bowie/Eno stuff. The problem is, they can't make the pieces fit together well enough. Let's step into a film comparison here: P.T. Anderson's style is derivative of Martin Scorsese and Robert Altman, specifically, but you can still tell he injects enough of his own essence into his work, otherwise he's just a pure copycat. Like I said above, I'm glad you feel this way, Screwy, but don't expect everyone to agree with you. Enjoy them on your own terms.

I think ATYCLB is a response to their '90s period, and yes, it is more hits-oriented, but it marks a specific time in their lives. They're not the same guys they were in the '80s or '90s, trying to find their places in the world. They are where they are now. The band itself is a family. That album is about finally finding your place in the world and having to deal with that. Plus, it's ties to 9/11 give it an extra layer of pathos on top of the previous areas of awesome. Is it a perfect album? No. But to say it's just the band on autopilot is ill-informed. You can subjectively dislike it, but there are enough qualities on that album that make it stand apart from the rest of their discography, in a good way.

Every band wants to make a connection with people, that's why they fucking make music. And U2 in particular wanted to let everyone know that they're back and ready to take the world by storm again.
 
I disagree here. The songs on MDH should have been the direction they took instead of what ultimately became ATYCLB. The Ground Beneath Her Feet is their best song from this decade.

And you can't use an argument like they needed a little help for it, because Coldplay got plenty of help from Eno on Viva La Vida. I don't care who helps as long as it's good.

Having a producer help you and having one of the greatest authors of our time help you write a song is a very different thing. Very different.
 
They are derivative. Everyone else sees it, why can't you?

Coldplay were crafted by the hands of God to bestow upon us euphoric soundscapes that ignite the flames of our soul and propel us towards the revelatory epiphanies that will ultimately incite the glorious Revolution.

U2 have been bullshit since 1976.
 
I'll concede this to you... IGN didn't mention U2 once but then they are not exactly the height of the musical critique set...

IGN: Viva La Vida Review


Show me TWO reviews...

:wink:

And Screwtape, Stateless wasn't a commercial song at all. In fact, it sounds even more unlike U2 than TGBHF does.

The last thing we have to go on is Fast Cars, and I'm very optimistic. All talk has been about moving in a different direction. So how can it sound like the last two?

Also, I think ATYCLB is the more cohesive collection, but the songs, to me, aren't as good as The Bomb.
 
If U2: The Band didn't want that, they wouldn't do it. Period. I don't buy that at all.

That's cool. Of course it's up to interpretation, since none of us know for sure, so that makes perfect sense, too.

I think LM's right about that "eternal song" idea. They want to be like the Abbey Road/Let It Be-era Beatles and have that one song that will transcend everything to the same degree as "Hey Jude" or "Let It Be."

But if you were in a band, would you rather focus on making the songs, or marketing it yourselves when you know there's a solid team that's been working with you for years and a label that would promote the hell out of it anyway?
 
Wragging on a band for being derivative of another is kind of silly when you think about it. I can't think of a single band today that doesn't take some (or all) of it's sound from a band that came before...

Definitely, it's just how it's all put together that makes it a big issue, you know. That and Coldplay's massive popularity may have something to do with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom