I hope U2 doesn't win any Grammys

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.
twochordcool said:


And that's cool.

But I am not going to let the guy come to a U2 fan message board, talk badly about U2, a relevant band with substance, and at the same time announcing how great a crappy, druggy, pop-metal hair band's guitarist is!

Absurd.

GNR were NOT a pop-metal band. I was never their biggest fan (although I do like a few of their songs) but they were definitely a hard-rock band. No crappy pop metal band could have done "Welcome to the Jungle."

And Slash is a great guitarist.
 
HelloAngel said:
Why do you feel the need to relentlessly insult people and judge? There is nothing wrong with being a U2 fan and a GNR fan. Just like there is nothing wrong with being a U2 fan and a hiphop fan. You have a right to your opinion, but you do not have a right to be rude around here.

And further more, I don't like HTDAAB much and I love GNR. Are you going to tell me nasty things too?

And also, the Grammys do not just award the album with the highest volume sold. The Grammys are a farce, and often the winner is really random. Just look at "Oh Brother" and John Mayer winning awards.

1) I'm sorry. You're right. I should let people like Guns and Roses and U2 or Cannibal Corpse and Tchaikovsky if they want to.

:rolleyes:

2) We're not disagreeing that the Grammys are nonsense, so don't YOU pick a fight with me about that!
 
Bono's shades said:
In a way I wish U2 would get shut out at the Grammys because it might be a wake-up call for them to start writing more creative material and stop coasting like they have on the last two albums. Not that I think Grammy wins are any indicator whatsoever of quality, but U2 seems to take those kinds of things fairly seriously - God knows why.

Not winning a Grammy WOULD NOT be a wakeup call for U2. The album sold 11 million or so worldwide, to them that is success, and their shows have sold out in record numbers.

To U2 that means people are buying their product and if people are buying their product than that means U2 are putting out a good product.

The only wakeup call would be for U2 albums to not sell, and shows to not sellout.
 
jeffschmid said:
Their new album sucks. They are a terrible studio band, and have an unbelievable history of mediocore records produced by no talent ass clowns. If their producers were half as good as their live crew than they might have a chance at putting out a decent record... they sound twice as good live as they do on HTDAAB. the grammys can go fuck a whore either way though.

The new album is great ... Brian Eno and Daniel Lanios are not no talent ass clowns ... I agree that they're a better live band but a huge part of that comes from the emotion of the band on stage and a live audience ... it really brings out the best in them
 
Oooohhh!! what a fun thread. :happy:


Where is that darn popcorn eating smilie when you need it?

:wink:
 
indra said:
Oooohhh!! what a fun thread. :happy:


Where is that darn popcorn eating smilie when you need it?

:wink:

16.gif




Oh the drama:love:

great thread!:lock:
 
Did anybody see The Daily Show last night with that TrendSpotter guy/reporter???? That was the most hilarious thing on the Daily Show I've seen in a while! :lol: :lol:


[i know... totally unrelated... but better :huh: ]
 
twochordcool said:


1) I'm sorry. You're right. I should let people like Guns and Roses and U2 or Cannibal Corpse and Tchaikovsky if they want to.

:rolleyes:


What do you care what people like? You don't know any of us. How can you possibly judge us by what little you know? Wow. That suit of armor you wear with your keyboard must be really be something. You're so brave.

Listen, if you want to get along here, perhaps you should be less abrasive. There's plenty of good people here, despite what and who you are choosing to criticize.
 
twochordcool said:


HOW, on God's green earth, can you claim to be a U2 fan AND a Guns and Roses fan?!

If that isn't like an oxymoron then I don't know what is.

God, I hate, hate, hate, hate, HATE myself for posting in this thread but c'mon. U2 and GNR have A LOT of overlapping fans, probably more than U2 has with most other bands! This is kind of like saying you can't be a fan of the Who AND Pink Floyd. Makes as much sense as a vest with sleeves.

Both U2 and GNR came out in the 80's, both were much better than most rock out there at the time, both were generally applauded by fans and critics alike. God, didn't Bono and Axl do some duet together in the early 90's?

And obviously, there are many, many more things wrong with this thread, but I won't go down that road. (Although I will say that I could care less if U2 wins any Grammies and may be leaning towards hoping they don't....)
 
twochordcool said:


HOW, on God's green earth, can you claim to be a U2 fan AND a Guns and Roses fan?!

If that isn't like an oxymoron then I don't know what is.

U2 are FAR MORE respected, as artists and as a rock and roll band, from MOST people that have not been shooting up heroin, than Guns and Roses are!!!

I'm a Guns N' Roses fan, and I think there "decent." Not great, just good. I mean I like Welcome to the Jungle and other songs, but U2 will always be the band I love first.

And yes, you are right - U2 are FAR more respected as artists and I'd like to add - as good human beings.
 
bonosgirl84 said:


is it their fifteenth LP?

Umm...fifteen sounds high, but just how many official studio albums do they have anyway? I'm too lazy to check.... :uhoh:
 
I was actually a huge GNR fan in 1992 and a huge U2 fan at the same time. I stopped liking GNR because they faded away while U2 prevailed. I still admire Appetite for Destruction, it's one of the best rock albums ever made. I don't care much for the Use Your Illusion albums, they're a bit bloated... but they have a few gems on them. Coma for example and Civil War.
 
indra said:


Umm...fifteen sounds high, but just how many official studio albums do they have anyway? I'm too lazy to check.... :uhoh:
I'm pretty sure it's 14.

I'll count.
Boy (1)
October (2)
War (3)
Under a Blood Red Sky (4)
The Unforgettable Fire (5)
The Joshua Tree (6)
Rattle And Hum (7)
Achtung Baby (8)
Zooropa (9)
Pop (10)
Best Of 1980-1990 (11)
All That You Can't Leave Behind (12)
Best Of 1990-2000 (13)
How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb (14)

There, 14. I was right.

Unless if you wanna count Passengers (which I don't) then it goes to 15.


I can't believe I bothered to do that. I need a life. :|
 
Meghan, UABRS and the Best Ofs aren't official studio albums! Esp. not UABRS, I don't think! I see it as 11 albums so far.
 
i think zootlesque is correct.

and i think the guy shouting all over the place about U2 being the greatest thing since air is wrong.
 
why do we bash this album so much? City is fantastic, Somtimes is such a great song, Miracle Drug gives me shivers, Vertigo is a blast, and Love and Peace is such a great creative moment for this band. So half of the songs are great and half are a little above good. Can't you say the same about Joshua Tree? Edge has said he feels that way.
True, U2 albums suck compared to their live shows. And, since there lives shows are out of this world that means their albums are really good, sometimes better than great.
 
anybody believe G'NR is a crappy band try "locomotive" off the use your illusions disc set (ensure you read the lyrics). It's brilliant, hell of a masterpiece and the music absolutely fits. I'm not a big fan of G'NR genre of music in general but I cannot deny that they were sometimes fantastic.

Anybody who likes "So Cruel" from Achtung, would likely be drawn to "Locomotive" - they are two sides of the same coin.

nobody should make the mistake of firmly evaluating bands like U2 & G'NR without pouring through lyrics - you'd be missing the secret 11'th ingredient.

U2's personalities pace & style require a 30+ year tenure and an epic story. U2 is about balance and spirituality.

G'NR's manner required an implosion. No more or less than Hendrix, Morrision and Cobain. Axl Rose is like the Elvis of our times (hung around too long) - fat, uninspired, cult figurine and heading towards having a "spaghetti incident" on the potty.

I like U2, and G'NR...and Pink Floyd, Greenday, Pearl Jam, Keane, Simon/Garfunkle, early Michael Jackson, Nick Cave, Beethoven, ABBA, George Michael, even have a tiny spot for NWA.

6+ Billion people and counting...you'd require a much larger box if you want to fit everybody inside. It's good to generalize, but as somebody once remarked: "get your facts straight...then play around with them all you want" (Einstein)

regards/adieu
 
Last edited:
bonosgirl84 said:
i think zootlesque is correct.

and i think the guy shouting all over the place about U2 being the greatest thing since air is wrong.

You are absolutely correct.

Everyone knows chocolate is the greatest thing since air. :yes:
 
good god, I have yet to tabulate the results of this thread! I'm a relative newbie around these hallways - I don't know how to upload my pie chart! Wah!
 
Zootlesque said:
Meghan, UABRS and the Best Ofs aren't official studio albums! Esp. not UABRS, I don't think! I see it as 11 albums so far.
:reject: That'll teach me for skip-reading over important details.
 
1.Beer is the greatest thing since air
2.Civil war,Estranged,welcome to the jungle,Sweet child of mine,Paradise city,Novembar rain, You could be mine ,14 years ,and many many more.After you listen to this I dont know how can you say it is pop metal or boring or bad. I love U2 more then GNR ,but GNR IS BRILLIANT.
 
to me this thread seems to have been started with the intention of trying to stir up trouble.

and indeed, people started arguing. now it's degraded into a U2 vs. guns and roses thread :huh:

i really see no point in keeping this open.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom