U2 Opening Acts...yay or nay?

[U2SavesTheWorld]

I don't think U2 should have an opening act.

U2 are at a level now where I think I can safely say that the majority of the audience is there to see U2.

I think that the band would do a service to their fans if they just dropped the opening act.

What do you guys think?

 

[nbcrusader]

I agree - no opening band.

Having to listen to another band would just hurt my ears.

 

[jick]

yay for me.

The fans need something to listen to while buying some popcorn and getting ready for the concert. I think Bon Jovi or Avril Lavigne would make good opening acts for U2 in the future.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[BVS]

You can't get rid of the opening act. This is a long lasting tradition of Rock n Roll. The opening act is an essential part of the night. It acts as the grease to lube the wheel so to speak, it acts as a springboard for up and coming artist, and it allows band such as U2 to bring acts that they respect and show them to their audience. It's U2 giving back to other artists. Obviously U2 in the past has had it's hits and misses with this. They did a great job choosing artist that would make their audience think like Public Enemy and Rage against the Machine. They brought truly talented and overlooked artist like PJ Harvey and the Pixies. And then they just got plain lazy and picked crap bands like Smashmouth and Third Eye Blind. But overall U2 has done an amazing job of bringing band into the light. Obviously some of the opening acts have gone over better than others. And you're always there to see U2, so sometimes it may make it unbearable to sit through a band you don't know cause you're filled with such anticipation you can't concentrate. But all in all, if you take the opening act away from a rock show it's like taking the foreplay out of sex.

 

[FallingStar]

No, no opening act. People who go to a U2 concert really just come for seeing U2 and not somebody else.

 

[JOFO]

yay for me.

The fans need something to listen to while buying some popcorn and getting ready for the concert. I think Bon Jovi or Avril Lavigne would make good opening acts for U2 in the future.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

bon jovi or advil lagrene can clean the toilets in u2's dressing room.

 

[FallingStar]

But all in all, if you take the opening act away from a rock show it's like taking the foreplay out of sex.

Wouldn't be that bad at all, would it?

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

i think they should take away the opening act and play the whole time, during when both bands would perform. three hour concerts =

 

[HelloAngel]

I would venture to say that opening acts and the need for one - is more to do with the record label - Universal/Interscope in this case - also promoting a fellow label mate.. hence No Doubt, etc.. on the Elevation Tour.

The say-so for an opening band and the need for one is not always in the headlining band's control.

 

[pinkfloyd]

1st and 2nd gigs in Boston , 2001 , were concerts of PJ Harvey to me , she looked fresh , ultra sexy and great with her band , they sounded awesome . U2 were somewhat tired and very star-alike ( maybe cause of video shoot pressure ) , but only 3rd,4th night was when U2 really rocked .

 

[BVS]

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
But all in all, if you take the opening act away from a rock show it's like taking the foreplay out of sex.

Wouldn't be that bad at all, would it?

I knew someone would repy with that.

But to answer your question. No, there's nothing bad about that, but you're missing out on a lot my friend. You may get the end result, but you miss the experience. And I'm a strong believer that opening acts are all part of the experience. U2 would never play any longer because there is not opening act. It's not like these venues are rented per hour. If they wanted to play for 3 hours they could. The thing is there aren't many rock acts out there that can do that night after night. You'd be missing out and hurting yourself in the long run if got rid of the opening act.

 

[cell]

You can't get rid of the opening act. This is a long lasting tradition of Rock n Roll. The opening act is an essential part of the night. It acts as the grease to lube the wheel so to speak, it acts as a springboard for up and coming artist, and it allows band such as U2 to bring acts that they respect and show them to their audience. It's U2 giving back to other artists. Obviously U2 in the past has had it's hits and misses with this. They did a great job choosing artist that would make their audience think like Public Enemy and Rage against the Machine. They brought truly talented and overlooked artist like PJ Harvey and the Pixies. And then they just got plain lazy and picked crap bands like Smashmouth and Third Eye Blind. But overall U2 has done an amazing job of bringing band into the light. Obviously some of the opening acts have gone over better than others. And you're always there to see U2, so sometimes it may make it unbearable to sit through a band you don't know cause you're filled with such anticipation you can't concentrate. But all in all, if you take the opening act away from a rock show it's like taking the foreplay out of sex.

i agree

 

[wertsie]

I could definitely do without the opening acts. I hate having to sit through someone else to watch the band I'm REALLY there to see!

 

[Hallelujah Here She Comes]

And then they just got plain lazy and picked crap bands like Smashmouth and Third Eye Blind.

When did Smashmouth or Third Eye Blind open for U2??

I agree with you, btw, especially about opening bands being a part of the whole experience. And, in general, U2 picks excellent artists to open for them, so I get to see two great bands for the price of one.

 

[U2SavesTheWorld]

You can't get rid of the opening act. This is a long lasting tradition of Rock n Roll. The opening act is an essential part of the night. It acts as the grease to lube the wheel so to speak, it acts as a springboard for up and coming artist, and it allows band such as U2 to bring acts that they respect and show them to their audience. It's U2 giving back to other artists. Obviously U2 in the past has had it's hits and misses with this. They did a great job choosing artist that would make their audience think like Public Enemy and Rage against the Machine. They brought truly talented and overlooked artist like PJ Harvey and the Pixies. And then they just got plain lazy and picked crap bands like Smashmouth and Third Eye Blind. But overall U2 has done an amazing job of bringing band into the light. Obviously some of the opening acts have gone over better than others. And you're always there to see U2, so sometimes it may make it unbearable to sit through a band you don't know cause you're filled with such anticipation you can't concentrate. But all in all, if you take the opening act away from a rock show it's like taking the foreplay out of sex.

Have you caught Springsteen on this tour???
No opening act and its HEAVEN.

There are a lot of bands that have toured without an opening act.

I think in the case of a band as big as U2 an opening act is just a big fat waste of time.
Don't get me wrong, I've loved most of the bands that have opened for them over the years but I would rather see them on another night.

50,000 people screaming "U2" don't want to watch Avril Lavigne or whatever walk onto the stage and sing their hit.

 

[BVS]

During PopMart. I don't remember the time blocks, but I saw three Pop Mart shows and three different opening acts. Rage in Dallas, TEB in San Antonio, and Smashmouth in Houston.

 

[Hallelujah Here She Comes]

During PopMart. I don't remember the time blocks, but I saw three Pop Mart shows and three different opening acts. Rage in Dallas, TEB in San Antonio, and Smashmouth in Houston.

Well shiver me timbers. You learn something new everyday...

 

[wertsie]

When did Smashmouth

I saw Smashmouth open for U2 on 10/31/97 (Halloween/Larry's b-day). Ugh...they were terrible! It just sounded like a lotta noise to me...but it was kind of funny because they were dressed up like old ladies...

 

[wertsie]

Have you caught Springsteen on this tour???
No opening act and its HEAVEN.

Bruce didn't have an opening act? Awesome!!!!

Now I'm kicking myself even more for not catching him when he went to The Palace.

 

[ouizy]

they should play for over two hours and have 130 songs rehearsed, oh no wait that is the Stones...

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

Bruce didn't have an opening act? Awesome!!!!

Now I'm kicking myself even more for not catching him when he went to The Palace.

Nope, it was fecking AMAZING.





I loved who opened for the boys this tour, so no complaints from me. But, a 3 hour U2 show would make me wet my pants.

 

[elevatedmole]

I think BonoVoxSupastar put it well. U2, overall, has picked great opening acts. I became a fan of Garbage because of U2 -- I wouldn't have ever noticed them otherwise. Smashmouth and Third Eye Blind are the only bad ones I can think of. I completely understand when an opening act is bad -- it's a big waste of time. But with U2's track record, you have a pretty good chance to at least be mildly entertained.

Opening acts are needed, I think, no matter how great the concert you're going to is. Unless, in the case of Springsteen, they're doing an extra long set -- it would be too short.

I hope my post was somewhat coherent.

 

[spanisheyes]

There was a time many moons ago when U2 was an opening act, and the fans of the opening bands probably thought they were crap, but at the same time, I'm glad that these band gave U2 a chance to gain the exposure that they needed. For many of these bands their record label in unwilling to do to the measure that opening for a successful band would bring. It is almost like U2 is saying thank you for all the times that some other band let them open up for them. Also, U2 is a fan of music, probably more so than there fans, that is what got them to where they are now, making great music, so I've never been surprised of how much exposure U2 has given to new bands.

Chris

 

[david]

God, the worst opening act ever for U2 were the Daltons!

 

[adamswildhoney]

bon jovi or advil lagrene can clean the toilets in u2's dressing room.

 

[*BOOMCHAA!*]

I think Bon Jovi would make good opening acts for U2 in the future.

Heh.

 

[mad1]

Im for concert openers. they play an important part as someone said in stirring the crowds energy up...

for us all to stand then 1 hour later Bono and the gang slam-dunk the stage for two hours doin everything in almost every position...the crowd would just be like stood-still, almost waiting to be poked in the ribs....ya get?

 

[bonosloveslave]

I saw Smashmouth open for U2 on 10/31/97 (Halloween/Larry's b-day). Ugh...they were terrible! It just sounded like a lotta noise to me...but it was kind of funny because they were dressed up like old ladies...

I was there too, definitely poor costume choices by Smashmouth. I wouldn't pay to go see them in concert or anything, but I think they would be much more tolerable to sit through today. Back then they had only had one hit, I would know alot more of their songs now.

As to the foreplay analogy, I say "do me dry" (but only in this particular situation *hehe*) - I'd rather just get to the good stuff!

 

[UltravioletU2]

I was there too, definitely poor costume choices by Smashmouth. I wouldn't pay to go see them in concert or anything, but I think they would be much more tolerable to sit through today. Back then they had only had one hit, I would know alot more of their songs now.

As to the foreplay analogy, I say "do me dry" (but only in this particular situation *hehe*) - I'd rather just get to the good stuff!

Me, too! It was halloween so they wanted to dress up and like you said, their costumes were terrible! Actually, their whole act was awful. The U2 fans were not impressed with their costumes or their music, so basically ignored them. Smashmouth was so pissed at the audience they started swearing telling them to f%&*in' cheer, etc. I've never heard so much profanity in the 10 time frames between the songs!!

As for opening bands, I agree, you have to have them, but some of the choices have been pretty bad. I didn't mind Garbage TOO much. And I like Third Eye Blind. A big band like U2 should have good opening acts if they have to have them. B'sides, if you have a predetermined seat, you don't have to be there on time. It is part of the experience, though.

 

[Blue Room]

Nope, it was fecking AMAZING.





I loved who opened for the boys this tour, so no complaints from me. But, a 3 hour U2 show would make me wet my pants.

I was at Bruce in Detroit and I have to say it was OK. Not great, not bad. It made me realize why U2 plays so many hits. Because most of the crowd are not die hards. Bruce was 7 songs in and I knew 1 song he had played. The only people really getting into it for the whole show were the people in the pit (the die hards). Still a decent show, but I wasnt super impressed like I thought I would be.

Regarding opening acts. I think U2 has looked at it in the past as giving someone they like an oppurtunity to be exposed to thousands of people who normally would not have seen them. There have been a couple of U2 opening acts and opening acts for other artists that I have enjoyed and have actually bought their CD as a result. U2 isnt going to play longer even if they dont have an opening act. So whats the big deal, it is something to watch to pass the time. If you dont like the opening act, go onto the concourse and have a beer or something.

Now if losing an opening act meant 3 hours of U2, then I would be all for losing the opening act. I dont think U2 would ever do a 3 hour show on a consistant basis though.