How would you reply to this comment?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gareth

Gareth

Babyface
Joined
Sep 9, 2000
Messages
29
Location
Leicester, UK
After I had posted a glowing review (on a non-U2 messageboard) of the Manchester show on the 11th which I attended, someone replied this to me:

"Funny, how somebody else can be so enthusiastic about a band who I now utterly despise for going completely commercial after The Joshua Tree. I loved those guys, raw power and sharp lyrics. They really did a Sol Campbell* on me. Making house and shallow top 40 stuff.
'Hooooooow loooooooooong
must we hear this song?'

(* Sol Campbell = Turncoat footballer)

How would you word a reply to this? (a detailed one please)
 
Don't bother.

The synergy Pearl Jam board can be particularly brutal as well. There's no point in arguing.

One guy was telling everybody that U2 are sellouts because tickets to the heart were $180. And he wouldn't hear of it when others said he was wrong.

Some people never see anybody's point but their own.
 
I would reply:

And which music do you listen to, deary?
smile.gif
 
When he says that U2 went commercial ask him:
  • What album in 1991 sounded anything like "Achtung Baby?"
  • What album in 1993 sounded anything like "Zooropa?"
  • What album in 1995 sounded anything like OS1?
  • What album in 2000 sounded anything like AYTYCLB?

The only time U2 came close to "commercial" was with "POP" as there were other albums that year with a techno influence (notable big acts that year were Prodigy and Chemical Bros.). And note that "POP" is also one of U2's least successful albums. In fact, the only time U2 succeeds is when they are anti-mainstream or anti-commercial.

More importantly though, I would stress that this is YOUR opinion of the concert and that's that. Rudely point out to him that his comments have NOTHING to do with the concert and that if he can't contribute to the topic at hand, he shouldn't contribute at all. Sorry - but I'm tired of people spitting forth their 2 cents on something only partially related to the topic at hand and acting as if others should be impressed.
mad.gif


[This message has been edited by doctorwho (edited 08-14-2001).]
 
It's clear that no-one's able to change the fella's opinion, but it's always worthwhile to know that while U2 changed their style, it was pretty damn far away from going commercial. "Achtung Baby" was, besides of being U2's best, also one of rock's most innovative and influential albums.
"Zooropa" with its bolder innovations came out during a time when commercialism meant ripping off Nirvana (and "Zooropa" wasn't exactly doing that either).
"POP" and particularly "Discoth?que" may have sound to non-fans as selling out, but the truth is that U2 tried to make fun of the whole business with that song. Just tell that guy to look at the lyrics of "Achtung Baby", "Zooropa", "POP" and ATYCLB, and if he doesn't realize by then that Bono's lyrics have more depth, are more poetic, etc. etc. now than then...well, I'd just feel sorry for him :/
 
doctorwho said:
When he says that U2 went commercial ask him:
  • What album in 1991 sounded anything like "Achtung Baby?"
  • What album in 1993 sounded anything like "Zooropa?"
  • What album in 1995 sounded anything like OS1?
  • What album in 2000 sounded anything like AYTYCLB?

The only time U2 came close to "commercial" was with "POP" as there were other albums that year with a techno influence (notable big acts that year were Prodigy and Chemical Bros.). And note that "POP" is also one of U2's least successful albums. In fact, the only time U2 succeeds is when they are anti-mainstream or anti-commercial.

More importantly though, I would stress that this is YOUR opinion of the concert and that's that. Rudely point out to him that his comments have NOTHING to do with the concert and that if he can't contribute to the topic at hand, he shouldn't contribute at all. Sorry - but I'm tired of people spitting forth their 2 cents on something only partially related to the topic at hand and acting as if others should be impressed.
mad.gif


[This message has been edited by doctorwho (edited 08-14-2001).]
Click to expand...


So you think ATYCLB isn't a commercial album? It is possibly their most commercial album (well along with HTDAAB). What do you mean "what other albums sounded like it". It was pretty much a straight up pop/rock album so I'd imagine it sounded similar to alot of albums out there. You're telling me songs like Beautiful Day and Elevation aren't commercial?
 
Gareth, huh?... :hmm: :wink:

Anyway..... As some others have said here, I would not even respond to this guy cos he's clearly stuck in 1987! But I disagree with doctorwho about ATYCLB not being commercial.
 
doctorwho said:
When he says that U2 went commercial ask him:
  • What album in 1991 sounded anything like "Achtung Baby?"
  • What album in 1993 sounded anything like "Zooropa?"
  • What album in 1995 sounded anything like OS1?
  • What album in 2000 sounded anything like AYTYCLB?

The only time U2 came close to "commercial" was with "POP" as there were other albums that year with a techno influence (notable big acts that year were Prodigy and Chemical Bros.). And note that "POP" is also one of U2's least successful albums. In fact, the only time U2 succeeds is when they are anti-mainstream or anti-commercial.

More importantly though, I would stress that this is YOUR opinion of the concert and that's that. Rudely point out to him that his comments have NOTHING to do with the concert and that if he can't contribute to the topic at hand, he shouldn't contribute at all. Sorry - but I'm tired of people spitting forth their 2 cents on something only partially related to the topic at hand and acting as if others should be impressed.
mad.gif


[This message has been edited by doctorwho (edited 08-14-2001).]
Click to expand...

I agree about ATYCLB and Pop, ATYCLB was different from most albums, It had the no matter how bad life is, walk on theme. Most other albums were Life is brillant, life sucks theme, there was few Walk on type albums IMO.
 
HOLY FUCK!!!

How many times can people call ATYCLB commercial. Just cuz the song structures are more formal, and they are a 4 paice band without the phazers, lasers, dance loops etc...????

wtf.....is songs like Stuck, In a little While, Walk on and kite, are shallow, frivolous, commercial, bubble-gum pop, then FUCK, bring on all the bubble-gum I can chew mother fuckers!!!!!!!!
 
I have news for people:

U2 have always used verse, bridge, and chorus song structure. So have every other band ever mention on this board.

Even Radiohead, Fugazi, and Frank Zappa.

Find a new arguement.

This is getting stale.
 
Goodnight vienna,this reptile must be a totenham supporter,because sol campbell left spurs for arsenal and now he's trying to make out that U2 did the same,basically he's saying U2 left their principles behind them and would sell their granny for success
 
MrBrau1 said:
I have news for people:

U2 have always used verse, bridge, and chorus song structure. So have every other band ever mention on this board.

Even Radiohead, Fugazi, and Frank Zappa.

Find a new arguement.

This is getting stale.
Click to expand...

Very true. The U2 sound is only commercial because U2 MADE it commercial. They sounded completely original when they first broke in 1980, and they still sound original today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
The little stranger chapter 18
Replies
0
Views
492
annj
A
A
The little stranger chapter 8
Replies
0
Views
515
annj
A
A
The little Stranger chapter 11
Replies
0
Views
744
annj
A
A
the little stranger chapter 4
Replies
0
Views
575
annj
A
A
The Little Stranger chapter 14
Replies
0
Views
518
annj
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom