You Won't Like This - Bands That Should Retire

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
it's not even that.....it's mostly that he doesn't even really seem to know what he's talking about at all...

I mean...what idiot would say U2 should stop touring when they had one of the highest grossing tours last year?

He also said the same thing about the Rolling Stones....


Pretty much I don't take this guys opinion for musch at all


Just like the idiot taht does movie reviews for my local paper and gave Cold Mountain one star...I know he was kicking himself when he watched the Oscars
 
can i please have a moment to :reject: myself once more

because for all of the people i have heard of (that's right, Im not as dumb as I might seem to be) I have no idea who Todd Rundgren is

and I don't see this statement anywhere
 
this song is brought to you by Apple???

well this article is brought to you by a moron
 
bono_212 said:
can i please have a moment to :reject: myself once more

because for all of the people i have heard of (that's right, Im not as dumb as I might seem to be) I have no idea who Todd Rundgren is

and I don't see this statement anywhere
it is ok that you don't know who he is! you aren't writing an article about bands who should retire so it isn't something you should know

:D
 
I can think of dozens of bands in their 20's that should retire.

Besides, in 2004, U2 released their 3rd best album from a 25 year career.
 
MrBrau1 said:
I can think of dozens of bands in their 20's that should retire.

Besides, in 2004, U2 released their 3rd best album from a 25 year career.

wait wait...3rd best of???? huh? theres only been 1980-1990 and 1990-2000...where did that third come out of?
 
europop2005 said:


wait wait...3rd best of???? huh? theres only been 1980-1990 and 1990-2000...where did that third come out of?

I'm talking, of course, of the wonderful "How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb."
 
I agree with this article, but holy fuck...dude is a TERRIBLE rhetoritician. I can't even begin to believe how stupid and uninformed he came across as being. He almost convinced me that he was wrong, but I was able to stay objective.

Man, what a dumbass...isn't the Boston Globe supposed to be a well-respected publication...?
 
In just that small paragraph it is obvious people did not do their research as usual. I am not defending U2. I don't need to. I saw them in an interview and Bono had said that they are not touring or making new music because they need the money. They are doing what they love. I guess they didn't see that interview.:der:
 
That is quite possibly one of the best examples of a writer who has no idea what he is writing about. Why on Earth would U2 stop touring when their latest album has sold millions of copies and swept the grammy's, their concerts sell-out in hours and they are considered the world's biggest band? 45 is not "old".

I agree that some of the bands listed are way over the hill and probably should hang it up before one of them actually dies on stage, but if their concerts continue to sell out why should these bands be somehow forced to retire? Yes the Rolling Stones are old, sound like a shell of their former selves and, quite frankly, look ridiculous on stage. But old people continue to shell out $400 a ticket to see them play. It's their money and if they want to waste it on a bad concert, so be it.
 
bono_212 said:
can i please have a moment to :reject: myself once more

because for all of the people i have heard of (that's right, Im not as dumb as I might seem to be) I have no idea who Todd Rundgren is

and I don't see this statement anywhere

That's OK love. If you weren't born before, well alot of people then you may not be familiar with him. I saw him in the 70's after he released "Hello it me". which I saw him perform live. At the time the song meant a great deal to me and really still does.
All that has really mattered over the years anyway was music.

I saw some great concerts in those days.. and he was one of them.
My point is, you can be old'er and love music from all decades and still appreciate music that is current.

Much like the U2 phenomenon...:wink:
There are alot of artist who don't perform or tour who know their time has come and gone. U2 is not one of these..
 
MrBrau1 said:
I can think of dozens of bands in their 20's that should retire.


:up:


Except for a few, most of the good music is still coming from people who have been around the block for a while. What's with that?

I agree with some of his choices, like Madonna. But he'd really have trouble just eliminating on age alone when so many of the "legends" are still out there, pushing the limits of creativity...and the perceived shelf-life of a band.
 
cypress said:

But old people continue to shell out $400 a ticket to see them play. It's their money and if they want to waste it on a bad concert, so be it.

"old people".. :rolleyes:
Geez, you sound just like writer of this article, that you kind of raved aganist!!
You don't think there were any young people attending these massive concerts?
I mean really all the walkers and wheel chairs couldn't have been up front..:laugh:
Come on you get over yourselves..
oh and :rockon:
 
Shit article (no-one has the right to determine who should stop touring) but I must admit...this made me laugh a bit, cruel as it is:

"The day Keith Richards is banging out the opening riff to "Satisfaction" and has to stop mid-way to adjust his colostomy bag appears to be on the horizon."
 
europop2005 said:


wait wait...3rd best of???? huh? theres only been 1980-1990 and 1990-2000...where did that third come out of?

Note the absence of the word "of". Brau said U2 released their "third best" album, as in only two U2 albums are better.
 
fair play to the guy , i agree with him on everyone. u2 are doing it for the money tbh, and the rolling stones will die on stage lol :wink: .
 
Back
Top Bottom