Please tell me its going to be ok

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I can imagine the Zoo Station line.... "I'm ready.... Ready for retirement...." :wink:
 
beau2ifulday said:
It ain't so.
Don't waste your time worrying about it.

Are you sure about this?
1976-2006 would make a nice round number...
OMG, someone please shut me up... I don't want them to retire :(
 
Of course U2 won't retire. They're talking HTDAAB up as their "first" album. You don't retire after your first album.

I can't imagine U2 doing the traditional "we're retiring" or break-up anyway.
 
I have a feeling maybe U2 will retire at the end of a decade so they can still make the 2010-2020 best ofs. :wink:
 
I don't believe they'll retire yet at all ....
What is U2's motto ??
Oh yes, now I remember ... " 2 crap albums ... and you're out !!"
So, don't even give this a second thought ...
Those 2 crap albums have NOT happened yet, either !!
and that's the .... "GREAT NEWS" !! ... :applaud:
 
I hope this is not gonna happen yet. I haven't watched U2 in concert yet!!! I'm planning to watch their shows 5-10 years from now. I can't watch them this tour unless they come here in the Philippines. By the time i'll be able to afford to travel that far to watch them( which is 5-10 yrs from now), maybe they are all retired. :(
 
One/Two more albums followed by another tour, and thats it. Thats what i think will happen.
 
2020 is when they'll end. Last album will be out in early 2019, their 16th. Two weeks, 9 shows to end it off in Dublin on New Year's Eve.
 
I think they should retire now although, unfortunately, I don't see that happening.
 
Personally, I'd like to see U2 retire sooner rather than later. I'd hate to see them turn into some type of Rolling Stones-nostalga act. I've been a fan since the late-80's, but I think it's getting close for them to retire.
 
what always boggles my mind is the sheer amount of time the band spends away from their small growing children. I know I know, airplanes help alot...but still. I mean bono has 4 kids edge about 5...how well can they really know them...if anything this mitigates in favor of the band at least slowing down, at least a little bit.

at the very least, there is no need for Bono to morph into a Mick Jagger type character, prancing around in his early 60s. what was that about aging hipsters? The one quote that struck me from some guy in the ellipse on opening night in San Diego was how struck he was that this was the first time he had noticed Bono truly aging.
 
now here's a conversation that wouldn't even be allowed to happen on U2.com!

I also want to see them retire. You know it's time to go when Larry is ageing too. Love the band, have followed them for 18 years, but I think they should go while they have just put out a decent album.
 
They have no one right now to pass the torch too! IMO

I immediately think of reading the Flanagan book and when they played w/ the Police on the Conspiracy of Hope tour. They said it was like the passing of the torch from one band to the other.

Closest group they can pass to? Coldplay? Franz Ferdinand? Green Day? The Killers? sorry don't see it happening
 
They should retire in 2010, at the latest. One more album, one more tour, and that's all.

I don't want them to keep going like The Rolling Stones either. It's pathetic.

-Miggy
 
reply

Hi!

They may be retiring in 2006 because I heard a giant tsunami was to devour the entire United States in 2007 .......so that would eliminate the need for that leg of the tour.



:slant:

carol
wizard2c
:|
 
East Bay Fan said:
Personally, I'd like to see U2 retire sooner rather than later. I'd hate to see them turn into some type of Rolling Stones-nostalga act. I've been a fan since the late-80's, but I think it's getting close for them to retire.

By what standards?

U2 had a #1 album around the world that has sold 9 million copies. Retiring acts don't hit those type of sales.

U2's tour has sold out - everywhere. Now, I'll admit a lot of old bands do have sell-out tours, but U2 is still attracting young people, as well as those in their 40's.

U2 just had a huge hit song! They scored two #1 songs in the U.K. - the first time U2 has ever had two #1's from the same album!!

With this type of success, retirement shouldn't be discussed - yet. There are plenty of artists around U2's age who have lost that commercial aspect - but I don't hear people saying how these artists should retire.

Just because a person is 45 doesn't mean they should retire from the rock world. I think there will come a time - and it may be 2010, when Bono turns 50 - that retirement will come. But that's a scant 5 years from now. So let's enjoy the moment before U2 are really gone.
 
People always use the Rolling Stones example, but what about Lou Reed? He's around the same age as the Stones but still has plenty of credibility and still tours. What about Ray Davies and the Kinks? They're credibility is still intact and they still play live.

Blues artists like BB King and the late John Hooker, their credibility seems to build the older they get!

So although I don't want to see U2 go the Rolling Stones route, there are other possible avenues which don't involve breaking up the band just because some of the public thinks they're told old to be rockers.
 
Back
Top Bottom