The hilarious and gorgeous U2 comics of Kelly Eddington of atu2.com

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Muldfeld

Refugee
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Messages
1,893
Location
Canada
She's really cool and wittily funny and able to criticize all the right stuff about the band. She loves U2 enough to know the details, but is smart enough to be critical. I especially love how she portrays Bono as overly ambitious and almost selfishly eager; it's really adorable. Her work is the best thing about atu2.com -- maybe the only good thing.

Here's her latest about what she wants from U2:
Achtoon Baby from @U2


There are hilarious ones from the past:
Problems getting tickets:
Achtoon Baby from @U2
HTDAAB packaging:
Achtoon Baby from @U2
U2 fans:
Achtoon Baby from @U2 (I can relate to the "stubble provies subversive thrill. I am so Bono today"!)

The very cute Lil U2 comics:
Achtoon Baby from @U2
Achtoon Baby from @U2
Achtoon Baby from @U2
 
^^^^^^Because the most recent one is about what she wants from U2 on the eve of a new album.

Ok usually U2 themed stuff (such as U2 themed comics and things like that) generally suck in my opinion, because it's more of an effort in trying to shoehorn U2 into something and less about the humor or whatever blah blah blah

But I absolutely LOVED the one about what she wants from U2. And I agree 100%. Especially the last bit about Pop.

I keep hoping one day we'll get another album that had the daring and balls that Pop did. That had a completely new sound for U2. But unfortunately I think that was a one off (that somehow got deemed a "failure"), and now we're relegated to things like Attyculb and Hutdab for the rest of their career which are "safe and familiar." It's a shame though because I feel it is some of their weakest work while I feel Pop was a masterpiece and easily one of their best.

I miss 1997 :(.
 
I don't like any of her Bun the Cat things, but the Lil U2's Busiest Fall Ever one is very good.
 
I like some of the stuff, as long as the cat isn't in it, they are not really funny.
I think she sometimes exaggerates in the way she portraits the band/band members, thought I believe she's really talented.
Generally, I've been growing sick of almost anything on @u2.com recently, there is too much complaining going on, random people posting their personal opinion about the band instead of real news and all these uninteresting questions and surveys.
 
Generally, I've been growing sick of almost anything on @u2.com recently, there is too much complaining going on, random people posting their personal opinion about the band instead of real news and all these uninteresting questions and surveys.

Then don't spend a lot of time here on Interference. It'll kill ya!
 
Then don't spend a lot of time here on Interference. It'll kill ya!

I spend a lot of time here, and I'm still alive. :lol:

Seriously: There's a difference between a discussion forum and a U2 news site. I go to a discussion forum to discuss stuff. I go to a U2 news site to get news and facts, not some random people's personal opinion about everything and anything concerning U2. I'm not interested in "advice" fans want to give the band, and I don't think the latest cartoon is especially original, because all this whining about what some fans want the band to do or look like or sound like is just getting lame.
 
Her comics are great, I usually hate that kind of stuff. Very funny. I like the ones with the cat best.
 
I really enjoy her comics and find the artwork very good.

I even like the Bun ones, but nowhere near as much as the usual stuff.
 
...not some random people's personal opinion about everything and anything concerning U2. I'm not interested in "advice" fans want to give the band....


Phew!...thank God we don't that kind of stuff on this site! :wink: :D

Seriously though...I like the site. Personally, I think it offers a more concise version of what's, usually, already been discussed to death over here, so it's good for a sort of catch-up if you've been too busy to keep up with things. I don't mind the original articles from the site contributors, in the past, there have been some exceptional articles - ones that have been extremely well written and that I totally related to.

I'm sure it's not easy trying to keep a U2 site interesting between albums - even this place struggles sometimes...but hey, to each their own :)
 
Phew!...thank God we don't that kind of stuff on this site! :wink: :D

Seriously though...I like the site. Personally, I think it offers a more concise version of what's, usually, already been discussed to death over here, so it's good for a sort of catch-up if you've been too busy to keep up with things. I don't mind the original articles from the site contributors, in the past, there have been some exceptional articles - ones that have been extremely well written and that I totally related to.

I'm sure it's not easy trying to keep a U2 site interesting between albums - even this place struggles sometimes...but hey, to each their own :)

I so agree. AtU2 is a very good site, and I'm grateful to Matt for keeping it alive so long. I visit them daily, and often get my U2 news from them first. I love their U2 fan poll every year, and the occasional contests they hold.
It's a great site for info about the upcoming album.....
 
Yes, there IS some nice and interesting stuff on that site.
Overall I feel that Interference is the better source for news, especially concerning the new album. It's closer to the fans.
You can come here for news, for opinion, rumors, discussion, everything.

@u2 is having a lot of tabloid stuff and anti-U2 articles on their site, many of them are from other media, but it annoys me that they're sending this stuff around without giving the opportunity to discuss the contents.

And I'm getting tired of always receiving the same old U2 fan questions and surveys when, in fact, I want to read some U2 news.
But overall, yes I agree, they have some very good stuff on their site as well. Like a Song is a feature I like very much, I just wish they'd give more fans the chance to contribute something.
 
I keep hoping one day we'll get another album that had the daring and balls that Pop did. That had a completely new sound for U2. But unfortunately I think that was a one off (that somehow got deemed a "failure"), and now we're relegated to things like Attyculb and Hutdab for the rest of their career which are "safe and familiar." It's a shame though because I feel it is some of their weakest work while I feel Pop was a masterpiece and easily one of their best.

I miss 1997 :(.

I don't.

In 2000, right before the release of "Attyculb", I listed to "Pop". It immediately brought back all those memories from late 1996 (when I first heard "Discotheque") and 1997.

Then I listened to it again. The second listening was more interesting, IMO, because the personal nostalgia feelings were gone.

And I realized something - it's not that good of an album.

Oh, it has its moments. But the parts that were a supposed "stretch" for U2 were really nothing more than what groups like Prodigy and the Chemical Brothers were doing at that time (and they were doing it far better). Instead of leading the way, for the first time ever, U2 was following.

Then there was the very Beatlesque "Staring..." which could have been written by G. Harrison.

Some songs had hope, like "Miami" and "Wake Up..." but neither seemed quite right - too much screaming and noise instead of passion and power. And throwaway songs, like "Playboy Mansion", are now ridiculously dated.

What "Pop" did bring about was a change in Bono's lyrical style. From "Boy" through "Zooropa", Bono's lyrics were very open, very abstract. A song like "I Will Follow" as well as "Lemon" may have been inspired by Bono's mother, but that's not indicated in the lyrics. With "Pop", we saw a shift to a more obvious and personal side that has remained with the last two albums. But now, Bono's found a way to combine personal with abstract. He's still working on it, but I found the lyrics on HTDAAB much better than on ATYCLB.

I'm not saying that ATYCLB and HTDAAB are perfect albums. What I am saying is that there is a completeness to those songs. Maybe neither stands as great of an album as "War", UF, JT and AB, but as a collection of songs, they succeed (and that was U2's goal at the time). "Pop" is a "failure" as it doesn't really succeed as an album (as U2 bounce all over with themes and sounds) or as a collection of songs (as many aren't quite complete). Nor do I get the feeling of U2 "taking chances" with "Pop" as all they did was tap into an already popular genre (at least in Europe). In other words, it's not this revolutionary bit of work so many claim.

You may not like the more "safe" feeling of ATYCLB, and that's fine. But don't dismiss some of the more ground-breaking work done on HTDAAB. The album still has the elements of U2's sound, but you can already hear them experimenting with songs like "Love & Peace" and "Fast Cars". Even "Vertigo" is a rare sound for them.

To me, wishing it was 1997 is just as bad as wishing it was 1987 (with the JT fans gushing) or even 1977 (with their rawness, inexperience and lack of skills).

Do I want to be surprised? Yes. And copying a style too closely, as was done on "Pop", is not a way to do it. I prefer U2 to stand out - just as they did in 1983 and 1984, when their sound didn't match anything on the airwaves (think Culture Club and Wham). In 1987, when Bon Jovi and Michael Jackson and Debbie Gibson were popular, U2 once again stood out. In 1991-1993, when grunge dominated, U2's sound was a refreshing change. In 2000, when Britney Spears, N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys ruled the charts, U2 was a breath of fresh air. In 2004 and 2005, when a new version of R&B (meaning rap combined with singing to an old 70's hit) was all the rage, U2 once again were fresh. In 1997, they were not.

As the tides have shifted and we see bands like The Killers and Coldplay and others making waves on the charts, ATYCLB and HTDAAB wouldn't be fresh any more. So now I am hoping for something that stands out - as long as it stands out in the U2 world (not them trying to blend in with the rest).

As for the cartoons - always fantastic. She's so ridiculously talented. :yes:
 
And I realized something - it's not that good of an album.

and I would have to say you're wrong..IMO


Oh, it has its moments.

that's an understatement. again, imo. :wink:

Then there was the very Beatlesque "Staring..." which could have been written by G. Harrison.

he wishes. (may he rest in peace)

Some songs had hope, like "Miami" and "Wake Up..." but neither seemed quite right - too much screaming and noise instead of passion and power. And throwaway songs, like "Playboy Mansion", are now ridiculously dated.

Oh my..:ohmy:

With "Pop", we saw a shift to a more obvious and personal side that has remained with the last two albums. But now, Bono's found a way to combine personal with abstract. He's still working on it, but I found the lyrics on HTDAAB much better than on ATYCLB.

So you might say, HTDAAB was the third in a trilogy, some like to imagine?

"Pop" is a "failure" as it doesn't really succeed as an album (as U2 bounce all over with themes and sounds) or as a collection of songs (as many aren't quite complete).

I just think you bought into the rhetoric. :wink: I find it a fascinating album, because of these factors.

You may not like the more "safe" feeling of ATYCLB, and that's fine. But don't dismiss some of the more ground-breaking work done on HTDAAB. The album still has the elements of U2's sound, but you can already hear them experimenting with songs like "Love & Peace" and "Fast Cars". Even "Vertigo" is a rare sound for them.

This is spot on.. I agree completely. :up:

Do I want to be surprised? Yes. And copying a style too closely, as was done on "Pop", is not a way to do it.

Damn you were doing so good..:huh:

I prefer U2 to stand out - just as they did in 1983 and 1984, when their sound didn't match anything on the airwaves (think Culture Club and Wham). In 1987, when Bon Jovi and Michael Jackson and Debbie Gibson were popular, U2 once again stood out. In 1991-1993, when grunge dominated, U2's sound was a refreshing change. In 2000, when Britney Spears, N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys ruled the charts, U2 was a breath of fresh air. In 2004 and 2005, when a new version of R&B (meaning rap combined with singing to an old 70's hit) was all the rage, U2 once again were fresh.

There you go..:up: oh wait..
In 1997, they were not.

FAIL! :doh:

As the tides have shifted and we see bands like The Killers and Coldplay and others making waves on the charts, ATYCLB and HTDAAB wouldn't be fresh any more. So now I am hoping for something that stands out - as long as it stands out in the U2 world (not them trying to blend in with the rest).

Can't think of anytime when that actually happend. But you have your opinion.

As for the cartoons - always fantastic. She's so ridiculously talented. :yes:

Yeah.. you got that right. :yes:
 
Back
Top Bottom