Why the hate?

[kingofsorrow]

Thanks for your post, however, I never stated any of what you said, and I don't see how asking a valid question about something I wanted further insight to is bitching? And there is nothing wrong with having an opinion - it's how you convey your personal opinion that matters.

Infact, the replies to this thread have given me a deeper insight as to where a lot of posters are coming from, and how other people perceive it. I'm actually thrilled that people have been so open to discuss something which I thought was going to get ridiculed!

my post wasn't directed at you only/personally. if you did read all the replies like you said, then you would see that i replied to everyone that posted before me.
as for the "why the hate" thing. i see threads like this on every "music" forum. always when someone says something not "praising" of a band/musician they're labeled as "haters" or "trolls".
of course there are those who do nothing but talk shit day and night about the band/musician's. just like there are some who do nothing but kiss ass.
simple solution? ignore the assholes. why do "you" listen to U2? is it because of what others think/feel or what you think/feel?

 

[last unicorn]

The problem with this is that U2 are no longer evolving.

Just because they're going into a direction you may not like doesn't mean they're not evolving.

I guess the band would see it differently.

Plus there's always the possibility to get into other, younger bands who are more innovative.

 

[Gluey]

my post wasn't directed at you only/personally. if you did read all the replies like you said, then you would see that i replied to everyone that posted before me.

Ok, maybe I should have clarified that I realised that it wasn't directed at me personally, however, your post was very vague as to who it was directed to. Unless a post is quoted, ^^ used, or posters named, it's hard to know who the reply is too. I HAD read all the previous posts, but just found yours a little vague.

as for the "why the hate" thing. i see threads like this on every "music" forum. always when someone says something not "praising" of a band/musician they're labeled as "haters" or "trolls".
of course there are those who do nothing but talk shit day and night about the band/musician's. just like there are some who do nothing but kiss ass.
simple solution? ignore the assholes. why do "you" listen to U2? is it because of what others think/feel or what you think/feel?

Why do "I listen to U2? Because I like them and their music. It never has, and never will have anything to do with what other people think, and that's not what I'm trying to ask in my original post. I just find it oppressive and hellishly annoying to have someones opnion shoved down another persons throat, with no openness to hearing out both sides of the story. And hey, let's face it, peoples opinions may never change, but that's up to them, and they shouldn't feel ridiculed for it.

 

[kingofsorrow]

I just find it oppressive and hellishly annoying to have someones opnion shoved down another persons throat, with no openness to hearing out both sides of the story.

that's why we call them assholes. and those of us here who know better ignore them. it's the ability of some folks to let themselves get baited that create an atmosphere where these folks can florish.

 

[LemonMelon]

Now, here's my true answer (since it is entirely possible for me to be serious, though I generally choose to show my coherence and literacy via humor, in contrast to straightforward opinions):

U2, for me, is the most intriguing band of the last 30 years or so, though not necessarily the best. Like The Who, a band they truly admire, U2 is a band wracked with inconsistencies and contrasting personalities that should never gel, yet it's this very tension that has often propelled them to create their best art. The band has always loved to challenge themselves and I truly believe that, to this day, the band is still interested in doing something new with each record, though they often push down this desire and plow forward without it, whether it's because of the positive reaction its predecessor received or their own desire for creative comfort. Regardless, this desire for creativity has given them a very special place in my heart.

The problem that I think many fans have had with the band recently is that they haven't cared much for the direction the band has taken, so they're becoming more impatient with it. Honestly, as someone who has carefully listened to hundreds and hundreds of records, ATYCLB and HTDAAB sound nothing alike to me. It's the same band, yeah, but the ATYCLB II cracks make no logical sense if you actually read the lyric sheets or exert any effort whatsoever in listening to the two records. Hell, even critics made it a priority to mention that HTDAAB was, lyrically, a darker and more personal record. But the fans, who are supposed to be the nerdiest and most obsessive of U2 listeners often fail to notice this and lump the two together. It's very strange to me.

I am as optimistic as anyone on this forum RE: the band's future. There aren't any U2 albums I hate, and some of them are among my all-time favorites. The descriptions (vague they may be) are exciting to me, and I'm as big a fan as I ever was. As someone who is known for their open mockery of the band on a regular basis, I just wanted to let you all know that. Trust me, I wouldn't be here if I didn't think much of their music was absolutely brilliant.

 

[Addicted To Bad]

..Umm.. Am I at:

'EVERYTHING YOU HATE IS WRONG " room ?

 

[beegee]

The last two albums were explicitly about getting back in touch with their roots

When you say U2 have gone back to their roots with the past two albums, what does that refer to?

And no, it is not a matter of me just not liking the direction they're taking. I didn't like the direction they took after Joshua Tree but I still understood that it was a brilliant thing to do.

 

[LemonMelon]

I didn't like the direction they took after Joshua Tree but I still understood that it was a brilliant thing to do.

Wait, what?

 

[Moser]

Wait, what?

I got the same reaction.

 

[Rosebud]

When you say U2 have gone back to their roots with the past two albums, what does that refer to?

It refers to how the band went through a process of reevaluating how far out there their music gone up through zoo and pop, and decided (though those projects were fantastic, important, and I for one loved them too) that it was time to reconnect with the kind of music style they started out from -- paired down, stripped to the essentials, honest and bare rock and roll.

That's not my opinion of where the new direction came from, by the way. As I said "explicitly", I meant that the band have actually said that's what they're doing. They explained it in just about every interview they did around the times of the releases.

Hope that cleared things up.

 

[U2girl]

Bomb was U2 revisiting much of their past sounds, ATYCLB tried writing pop music (with hints of vintage U2 in Walk on and Kite).

It's like saying JT and Rattle and Hum are the same album.

 

[Zoots]

Well... R&H was in some ways just a sequel to JT.

 

[LemonMelon]

Well... R&H was in some ways just a sequel to JT.

There is no "Well......." It's like considering Godfather II and Godfather III the same movie. One is a sequel, but it's radically different.

 

[Utoo]

Now, here's my true answer (since it is entirely possible for me to be serious, though I generally choose to show my coherence and literacy via humor, in contrast to straightforward opinions):

U2, for me, is the most intriguing band of the last 30 years or so, though not necessarily the best. Like The Who, a band they truly admire, U2 is a band wracked with inconsistencies and contrasting personalities that should never gel, yet it's this very tension that has often propelled them to create their best art. The band has always loved to challenge themselves and I truly believe that, to this day, the band is still interested in doing something new with each record, though they often push down this desire and plow forward without it, whether it's because of the positive reaction its predecessor received or their own desire for creative comfort. Regardless, this desire for creativity has given them a very special place in my heart.

The problem that I think many fans have had with the band recently is that they haven't cared much for the direction the band has taken, so they're becoming more impatient with it. Honestly, as someone who has carefully listened to hundreds and hundreds of records, ATYCLB and HTDAAB sound nothing alike to me. It's the same band, yeah, but the ATYCLB II cracks make no logical sense if you actually read the lyric sheets or exert any effort whatsoever in listening to the two records. Hell, even critics made it a priority to mention that HTDAAB was, lyrically, a darker and more personal record. But the fans, who are supposed to be the nerdiest and most obsessive of U2 listeners often fail to notice this and lump the two together. It's very strange to me.

I am as optimistic as anyone on this forum RE: the band's future. There aren't any U2 albums I hate, and some of them are among my all-time favorites. The descriptions (vague they may be) are exciting to me, and I'm as big a fan as I ever was. As someone who is known for their open mockery of the band on a regular basis, I just wanted to let you all know that. Trust me, I wouldn't be here if I didn't think much of their music was absolutely brilliant.

Rock on, dude.





Though I would've preferred it in cartoon form.

 

[Zoots]

It's like considering Godfather II and Godfather III the same movie. One is a sequel, but it's radically different.

They're still just different parts of the same movie... same story. Aren't they?

My point is I can kinda see why some people may think that the Bomb is ATYCLB part 2 because both are full of songs with similar themes. Just like I won't blame somebody for thinking Zooropa is Achtung part 2 and Pop is Achtung part 3.

 

[LemonMelon]

They're still just different parts of the same movie... same story. Aren't they?

My point is I can kinda see why some people may think that the Bomb is ATYCLB part 2 because both are full of songs with similar themes. Just like I won't blame somebody for thinking Zooropa is Achtung part 2 and Pop is Achtung part 3.

Well, most people adore one and despise the other...the two films aren't that similar at all.

I would certainly blame somebody for thinking HTDAAB is ATYCLB part dos or Pop as Achtung Baby 3. That's simply ridiculous. It's a lazy way of processing music. What similar themes do HTDAAB and ATYCLB have? One is far more introverted than the other, and the production isn't even similar.

 

[BVS]

Bomb is Boy part 11

 

[U2girl]

Well... R&H was in some ways just a sequel to JT.

It definitely pushed the Ameirca infatuation, but it's still noticeably different to JT. Just like Bomb pushed some of the first "we're getting back to sounding like ourselves" bits of ATYCLB.

Both Rattle... and Bomb are darker and more introspective lyrically compared to JT and All that.

 

[Zoots]

One is far more introverted than the other, and the production isn't even similar.

Who cares about Production?!! You cannot deny that ATYCLB & HTDAAB have similar songs, both musically and thematically. Vertigo is a light disposable number just like Elevation. Crumbs is very similiar musically to Walk On. Sometimes is thematically similar to Stuck or even Walk On. One Step Closer is kinda like the Grace of HTDAAB. Both albums are bursting at the seams with really personal themes. C'mon now! I still sort of believe the trilogy theory. The next album will probably also be very "of the heart".













And then the rap metal trilogy will start.

 

[LemonMelon]

Who cares about Production?!!

Uhh...you should, because that's what gives the album its feel.

You cannot deny that ATYCLB & HTDAAB have similar songs, both musically and thematically.

I do believe I just did.

Vertigo is a light disposable number just like Elevation.

That's the broadest brush I've ever seen someone attempt to paint with.

Crumbs is very similiar musically to Walk On.

No. The chorus is borderline.

Sometimes is thematically similar to Stuck or even Walk On.

It's a personal discussion of his father's death. I don't think so.

One Step Closer is kinda like the Grace of HTDAAB.

How so? They're nothing alike lyrically in any way. And musically only because they're both slow.

Both albums are bursting at the seams with really personal themes.

All of their albums do, but HTDAAB has far more of them.

 

[Zoots]

How You Can't Dismantle An Atomic Behind.

 

[LemonMelon]

Bomb is Boy part 11

That's what U2 wants you to think.

 

[Purplereign]

It's that musical / intellectual snobbery that is the undercurrent to alot of these 'opinions' that gets people all defensive, imo. It's almost as if we're made to feel dumb for liking, say, ATYCLB, or that we just aren't as seasoned or expert in the field of Real Music....I thought I was the only one who felt this undercurrent, I guess not!

Speaking as an absolute noob I have to say this is one of the most intimidating things about joining this fabbo forum.

I love reading all the different opinions but always feel slightly hesitant to jump in with both feet & add my two cents cuz it sometimes feels like your opinion won't rate if there isn't an element of 'cool' attached to it!

We are all fans for a million different reasons, so I'm not naive enough to believe everyone has to agree that every song is sheer brilliance but being derided / ridiculed for an opinion/or liking a song is pretty hard to take

:jumps off soapbox:
Gluey An absolutely brilliant thread - has been fascinating reading - thanks for sticking your neck out and putting into words what it seems lots of people have been thinking for a while

I've loved U2 forever, each album has a special place in my heart and musical memory for a variety of different reasons & whilst some songs may get 'skipped' I totally get that every song has a different appeal to someone - it's what makes U2 one of the most inspirational and loved bands around - technically they may not be able to compete, but emotionally they take the prize - at least thats the way it is for me

Looking forward to reading some more in the coming days

 

[beegee]

Wait, what?

What do you not understand about what I said?

I was referring to the post in which someone said, "Just because they're going into a direction you may not like doesn't mean they're not evolving"

It has nothing to do with me not liking the direction they're going.

After Joshua Tree they released an album that was a whole new sound, a whole new direction. Personally, I didn't care for the new sound, it was quite a shock, actually, but I knew why they did it and thought it was brilliant that they did. They had to.

I hope that clarifies.

 

[LemonMelon]

What do you not understand about what I said?

I was referring to the post in which someone said, "Just because they're going into a direction you may not like doesn't mean they're not evolving"

It has nothing to do with me not liking the direction they're going.

After Joshua Tree they released an album that was a whole new sound, a whole new direction. Personally, I didn't care for the new sound, it was quite a shock, actually, but I knew why they did it and thought it was brilliant that they did. They had to.

I hope that clarifies.

Dunno. Just thought that having some sort of positive reaction towards something is criteria for considering it brilliant.

Furthermore, I believe that the band is still evolving. Evolution does not always necessitate "progress" or "improvement", but adaptation. The band has adapted to its environment and changed their sound accordingly, to great success. Of course the band is still evolving. Perhaps your dislike for this new sound is largely the reason you don't think it's brilliant.

 

[beegee]

Dunno. Just thought that having some sort of positive reaction towards something is criteria for considering it brilliant.

No, not really.

I don't care for Daniel Day Lewis but I understand that he is a brilliant actor. I don't like books written by Nathaniel Hawthorne but I understand that he is a brilliant writer, etc, etc.

 

[DoctorMacPhisto]

Dunno. Just thought that having some sort of positive reaction towards something is criteria for considering it brilliant.

Furthermore, I believe that the band is still evolving. Evolution does not always necessitate "progress" or "improvement", but adaptation. The band has adapted to its environment and changed their sound accordingly, to great success. Of course the band is still evolving. Perhaps your dislike for this new sound is largely the reason you don't think it's brilliant.

Woot 1st post!

Exactly.

I think the whole "adaptation" and "evolution" of this band is what does it for me. I love the fact that they can go from the sound of The Joshua Tree to Achtung Baby within 4 years and do it so gracefully. Personally I loved HTDAAB, as well as ATYCLB, those albums showcased a return to the classic U2 sound but with the electronic influence that they developed through the 90s.

If a certain era of U2 doesn't do it for you, that's your problem. What I've found is that tastes change over time, and that you can find yourself loving something you hated over time. "Adaptation".

For all the haters who spam this board, please honestly ask yourself why you registered for this forum in the first place. If the reason isn't because your a fan of the band, then you shouldn't come on here and leave pointless and stupid threads about "Bono's awful voice" or "Larry's crappy drumming". Don't waste our time . If your a fan, be a fan.

 

[pepokiss]

And then the rap metal trilogy will start.

I TOLD YOU Timbaland was next

 

[Zoots]

I TOLD YOU Timbaland was next

You're talking about the hip hop trilogy!

when hip hop drove the big cars

Maybe Bono will duet with Rihanna... ella ella ella ay ay ay

 

[gvox]

-- paired down, stripped to the essentials, honest and bare rock and roll.

I understand that they might have said this, but I don't consider ATYCLB and even less so HTDAAB pared down, bare rock and roll. There's a ton of stuff going on in those two albums.

The tours were certainly themed that way insofar as visuals and 'dramatic' content, for sure, I mean there were no Mirrorball Men, lemon spaceships or bubble pants, so yes they were 'pared down'. But not the music, imo.