A good first impression

[RocknRollKitty]

This has grown out of the other discussion which has gotten so far off track Shaun is sore So here's the question: it has been said before and I agree that Discotheque was not the best choice for a first single, first video and first impression of the Pop album and it may have hurt it in the long run. If they had released, say, SATS and the non Miami SATS video first, would it have made a difference?

Now how about this: what if Elevation or the football Stuck would have been the first video for ATYCLB, would it have hurt the image of the album the same way? BD was a great opener and by the time it got to those U2 was firmly in place. But what if it had not been first? If Zooropa had not been riding on the successful immediate coattails of AB, would Lemon and Numb have scared off more people?


Of course all this is in the past and doesn't matter but it seems like a lot of you like discussing stuff like this so I'd be interested to hear your opinions.

 

[Numb1075]

I'll agree that Discoteche was a poor choice for first single off of POP. A more mainstream rock U2ish choice would have been Gone or Last Night on Earth. BD was perfect for ATYCLB. Personally, I think Numb was terrible as a first single from Zooropa. It happens to be a favorite in my book, but too spooky. How do you release a first single w/o the lead singer having lead vocals?!?! They make me scratch my head sometimes.

 

[thrillme]

Hard to say, because Beautiful Day was my first impression of U2, as I'm still a newbie I think. I started getting into U2 a couple months after ATYCLB came out.

On the other hand, "Hold me, thrill me, kiss me, kill me," was a song I really liked, back when it came out, I liked the video, but I didn't find out more about who did the song, just that I liked it, moved on to other things. Music wasn't really something I'd listen to, just because, back then. I'd like a song, listen to it whenever it came on the radio, but I wouldn't seek out and buy an album that song came from. I was 12-13 yrs. old.

If Elevation was the first video, the changed version, the "edgier" version , hmm, maybe it's a generational thing, I liked that video too. Releasing it first, maybe it would have brought more "video game" geeks on board, I dunno.

I was a video game geek for awhile.

 

[bedouin fire]

what was great with the fly, numb and discoth?que was that u2 were breaking all the rules of the typical 1st single, which apparently everybody is still expecting to be an easy-listening mainstream rock song with a nice and singable chorus and so on... I mean, I love BD because it is indeed a great rock song, but when i heard it for the first time the feeling was nothing comparing to the impact that the fly, numb and discoth?que created on me, and that was something like "uau... this is really something new, it looks like that all the previous works were done at least two centuries ago..."

 

[U2Kitten]

But when you're selling to the mainstream, is that really the best thing? You should go with something more public friendly first then stick in something else later.

and WTF centuries ago??

 

[U2zoogirl]

This has grown out of the other discussion which has gotten so far off track Shaun is sore So here's the question: it has been said before and I agree that Discotheque was not the best choice for a first single, first video and first impression of the Pop album
.

I don't know,,, when I saw the Discotheque video for the first time i said "wow!! they are the coolest guys in this f**in' world" but I was 14 in that time and I love bright lights jaja

 

[ylimeU2]

I think Discotheque was a good first choice. The first single off of Actung Baby was "The Fly", right? That, IMO isn't the greatest or most typically U2 song on AB. I think going with the different song is a way of shaking things up, even though it may not get them any new fans. I have always admired the guys for taking chances like that. If the want to take chances, then I wouldn't consider it a poor choice. I believe U2 knows what they are doing.

And I agree with U2zoogirl on the Discotheque video. I thought, and still think it's great. One of my favorite videos.

Last thing, you make a good point with "Beautiful Day" being the first single off of ATYCLB. It is a strong, wonderful song. Maybe a bit on the safe side. Of course, can you really blame them when they are up against boy bands and Britany Spears?

 

[RocknRollKitty]

I know there are a lot of you here who love it. There are some people here who love everything they do (Shaun and I are not among them, but most of you probably are) I know not everyone hated it, but obviously enough people did that it kind of 'scared' them away from it. I have seen lots of people here, even fans of it, who admit that (and I wish they'd post now!) I'm talking about a marketing thing here, sellable to the masses or giving people an idea of what to expect. So while some of you love them for taking chances, millions more saw them as buffoons and it hurt their image. Also consider that a lot of U2's fan base was older and had been with the band for many years and that really turned them off and made them run. Then you'll have your older person posting here to say how much they liked it and how stupid everyone was, but what I'm talking about here is, not your personal opinion but what was best for the band in selling their product.

If Stuck football had come out first instead of BD it might have done the same thing. It's all about the IMAGE

 

[RocknRollKitty]

It will also be interesting to see what first impression we get from this new album by its promotion and its first video.

 

[ylimeU2]

From a marketing standpoint, no, their choices (with the exception of "Beautiful Day") are not the best introduction to a new album. But part of the band's longevity is the fact that they haven't done what their "older" fans expected. If they had, chances are they would have stalled out with the Joshua Tree, a distant memory of a great 80's band on the classic rock station. I think the marketing moves have been smart.

I think the first single choices don't represent the album on the whole, but does it really need to? Those who love U2 would probably get it, unheard, and a new sound might hook those who don?t. U2 have shown their ability to be flexible, and that is why I think it is a smart move. Just out of curiosity, how many who don't like Discotheque or the Pop album own it?

Even when I haven't liked a U2 album at first listen, it has grown on me. I hated ?October? for years, but I still have it, and over the years, have learned to enjoy it, if not love it. And I can't wait to see what direction the new album will be. And yes, I would get it without having heard a thing-or after hearing a song I thought sounded like crap.

 

[Chizip]

u2 likes to take chances, thats whats great about them and keeps them fresh, and what i most respect about them.

i mean, the fly must have been a shocker first single for older u2 fans who loved their 80's stuff. I think it's probably more of a shocker than with discotheque, because u2 had at least shown to change thigs up before that.

for the entire 80's U2 was black and white, heart felt anthems, mullets galore, then all of a sudden the fly video, weird sounds, lots of color, leather pants, short hair, im sure it turned lots of older fans away. but it also brought in a whole bunch of new ones.

im sure discotheque did the same thing, but not quite as successfully ill admit.

 

[Chizip]

id like to add, the minute you start playing it safe in the music world and try to cater to the public is when you turn into another creed and become irrelevant.

so with this in mind i hope u2 continues to try to shock us all.

 

[Swan269]

U2 loves to throw out the unpredictable so I would expect no less from them now.

 

[thrillme]

"It's taken us fifteen years to get an image together,
or indeed to realize that image is important.
And not important."--Guess which U2 member said that.

 

[thrillme]

The one who shocked most people the day he set foot at Mount Temple, hehe.

 

[The Sage]

The discotheque video is great...I don't know what I would have thought of it though if I didn't already love U2 and know the background and humor to it, however. I first decided I was a U2 fan when I was 10 and heard SATS though I didn't start buying albums of any type until the last couple of years, and I've collected anything I could from then...the first time I saw the video was on the best of 1990-200 DVD.

Also the Elevation Single Mix is as good if not better than Beautiful Day IMO and would have done well as a first single, though I know the vast majority of people prefer BD to Elevation.

 

[thrillme]

I just remember some people from the former zootopia site, especially those that frequented the band member areas, would say how funny/great/ you've gotta see this video, Discotheque was, so maybe if I hadn't had that, "hype" before actually seeing the video, maybe I'd feel differently.

 

[RocknRollKitty]

Yeah the 80's were sooo black and white

Streets
ISHFWILF
UF
Gloria
I Will Follow
Pride version 2
Desire
SBS
NYD
Fire
October

 

[RocknRollKitty]

Let me put it another way:

What video other than Discotheque would have made a better impression that would have helped Pop be more successful among more fans?

What video other than BD would have given a worse impression that may have hurt ATYCLB's success? The Elevation video, with the fake feet, was cheesy to a lot of fans, and the Stuck football was joked on too. So what I'm saying is, the first impression can help or hurt a record's chances according to how it's marketed and presented to fans.

 

[Chizip]

the first video does have some influence, but it wont make or break an album

i mean the fly wasn't a huge hit or something, it got a rather lukewarm response. but they were able to follow that song up with one of the greatest songs of all time in one, and radio friendly songs such as mysterious ways, wild horses, and ebttrt.

the singles that followed discotheque just really werent radio hit type of songs, and as a result the album didnt do as well commercially.

so i really dont think the first video is make or break for an album, the following videos are just as important.

 

[Saracene]

I think that with Discotheque it wasn't as much the song itself that brought the damage, but the video and the whole visual styling of the band at that time. During the Achtung era they looked effortlessly cool, but with POP I just get this feeling of an ageing band trying too hard (except The Edge, who looks cool whatever he wears, ). And IMO U2 is really not a band who can pull off campiness very well.

Also I think that the thing with "Discotheque" is that, post their Achtung Baby reinvention and all Zooropa weirdness, it's just not really as shocking as "The Fly" or "Numb" were, and POP wasn't as a huge departure as Achtung baby was either.

 

[follower]

u2 likes to take chances, thats whats great about them and keeps them fresh, and what i most respect about them.


id like to add, the minute you start playing it safe in the music world and try to cater to the public is when you turn into another creed and become irrelevant.

so with this in mind i hope u2 continues to try to shock us all.

Exactly, I agree with the above said. I would say I hope U2 continues to challenge us though, instead of shock us. The last thing I want is another boring, repetitive, playing-safe rock band, like so many around, but history and my heart tell me they won?t turn into that style. Good impression? That?s what they have always presented/left/showed IMO (sorry, don?t know which verb is correct).

Cheers
MT

 

[Wild Angel]

I think that with Discotheque it wasn't as much the song itself that brought the damage, but the video and the whole visual styling of the band at that time. During the Achtung era they looked effortlessly cool, but with POP I just get this feeling of an ageing band trying too hard. And IMO U2 is really not a band who can pull off campiness very well.

This is true, if they were meant for campiness they'd have gone hair metal in the 80's. It does not suit them and it did not serve them well.

In Achtung they were COOL but with POP it was more dorkiness than cool, Villiage People and such.

 

[bedouin fire]

I would say I hope U2 continues to challenge us though, instead of shock us.

Cheers
MT

Exactly! Just like they did with the fly, numb and discoth?que as 1st singles. And also a little of shock is good.
With this next album, I would like to feel that u2 are not just doing great music, because that I know that will do as they always did. I want to feel that they are again ahead of everybody else in terms of musical creativity and artistic impact.

 

[Seabird]

While some of you seem to enjoy being "shocked" and "surprised" and "challenged' you should realize that those are not always good things for the band and their career, or from a business standpoint. Shocks can also be negative things. Sometimes even surprises and challenges don't work out as planned. Discotheque was not good for them. I don't know what they were trying to prove. If they were trying to destroy their old image, it worked, but not in a postive way.

As an "older" fan, I can honestly testify that no one I know was scared off by Achtung Baby or The Fly. It was Lemon and Discotheque that did it. I am willing to bet it lost them more fans that it ever gained them. The difference in the sales of the albums, and the ways they were accepted are evidence of that.

Beautiful Day was the right move for U2 and they knew that from experience. I'm sure they'll do the right thing in promoting this next album too.

 

[U2girl]

I think U2's first singles (NYD, Pride* the rest of the album isn't as song oriented*, WOWY, Desire, The fly, Numb, Discotheque and BD) are usually a fairly good representation of the album and the new musical direction.

Maybe even more than the video/chart success, especially in US I think radio airplay is very important because the video/charts cath your MTV-teen younger generations while radio stations can cover wider audiences.

 

[RocknRollKitty]

Maybe even more than the video/chart success, especially in US I think radio airplay is very important because the video/charts cath your MTV-teen younger generations while radio stations can cover wider audiences.

Radio airplay has always been the most important and still will be.

While it's true now that MTV doesn't matter now because it's mostly teens and the kind of people who won't like U2 anyway, this was not always the case. In the 80's and 90's MTV was still being watched by all types and all ages, and U2 wasn't an 'old' band in the past, so it WAS important then. MTV was a BIG part of 'making' U2 in the '80's. It was a different time the circumstances were not the same as today. Now MTV has sunk so far it's not a factor, and I hope they don't try too hard to market to that audience regardless of their first single or video.

 

[U2zoogirl]

While some of you seem to enjoy being "shocked" and "surprised" and "challenged' you should realize that those are not always good things for the band and their career, or from a business standpoint. Shocks can also be negative things. Sometimes even surprises and challenges don't work out as planned. Discotheque was not good for them. I don't know what they were trying to prove. If they were trying to destroy their old image, it worked, but not in a postive way.

As an "older" fan, I can honestly testify that no one I know was scared off by Achtung Baby or The Fly. It was Lemon and Discotheque that did it. I am willing to bet it lost them more fans that it ever gained them. The difference in the sales of the albums, and the ways they were accepted are evidence of that.

Beautiful Day was the right move for U2 and they knew that from experience. I'm sure they'll do the right thing in promoting this next album too.

I started to be a fan of U2 when I saw the discotheque video and I drop it when I saw the beautiful day video...

When I saw all the Achtung baby and the Zooropa stuff I was so impressed!! they weren't affraid of experiment with the sounds and their image , they didn't have problems inviting people like Muggs and Public enemy to join them in the stadiums and the studios... the videos are great, that lemon video is so interesting, taking all the imaginary from the XIX century's photography, Bono performing like an opera singer... the covers are amazing, they understood all the stuff about the new media, the digital image....

I am not with a U2 "traditional" sound... I don't like them to stay with a "sweet" and "soft" sound, cuz i know they can rock hard (what about the batman forever soundtrack??)

I give a F about the grammys, I give a f*** about the sale rates I just want to be challenged... if the new album doesnt mean anything new for me I won't buy it...

 

[thrillme]

Hmm, now what if U2 had released "Discotheque" on the radio, but did no video, how would that have altered things? I know

Pearljam refused to do videos, and still managed to sell albums.

Was it the sound of "Pop", or the "image"/ the visual aspects of how the album was released, the Kmart thing, that caused the album to "flop" early on.

Say U2, really went retro, just released the album. Cos, I heard Discotheque, long before I saw the video, and liked the song because of the song, the video, *for me* was just crack. <--the Irish term meaning, for a laugh, good times)

hehe, drop videos altogether, and really make people focus on the songs. Adam would be happy, he doesn't care for making videos. (doesn't show it though).

 

[BluberryPoptart]

Pearljam refused to do videos, and still managed to sell albums.

Umm, seems to me I remember some very popular videos called "Jeremy" and "Evenflo" and "Alive" which helped Pearl Jam's fame and popularity in the early 90's. Later on, they refused to do videos, but later on their albums were not as successful. They have now become more of a cult classic band with very devoted fans, but without the big time popularity.