U2 and Metallica sharing a stage ? Lars Ulrich is up for it

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Haha i'd love to see that; Metallica are one of those long-running bands that i haven't heard U2 acknowledge at any point in the past, despite the fact that they are possibly their closest current contemporaries. I reckon a duet between Metallica and Bono on 'Nothing else matters' would be awesome personally.
 
Napster douchies ?
Pass on that, and I think U2's had less than stellar things to say about metal music. I do remember reading about Lars doing the air drums along to Bullet at one of the Elevation shows.
 
Bono did a snippet of Enter Sandman at the Scandinavian shows of the Vertigo tour, he gave shout outs to Lars Ulrich and the band, so I don't think there are any personal animosities between them. However, I don't see a collab because I just don't think the music of these two bands would go together in any way.
 
Oh come on, really? :eyebrow:

I dont see why not BVS, they have been around for nearly as long sustaining a continued level of popularity and success, I think they've sold nearly as many albums as U2 have. Each Metallica album is awaited with the same fevour as a U2 album is. Name me a modern-day band who is more of a contempary. I'm not referring to style or sound or image, im talking in terms of longevity and stature in the music scene today.
 
Bono did a snippet of Enter Sandman at the Scandinavian shows of the Vertigo tour, he gave shout outs to Lars Ulrich and the band, so I don't think there are any personal animosities between them. However, I don't see a collab because I just don't think the music of these two bands would go together in any way.

This hasn't stopped collabs between BB King, Willie Nelson, Frank Sinatra or Green Day in the past has it?!
 
I dont see why not BVS, they have been around for nearly as long sustaining a continued level of popularity and success, I think they've sold nearly as many albums as U2 have. Each Metallica album is awaited with the same fevour as a U2 album is. Name me a modern-day band who is more of a contempary. I'm not referring to style or sound or image, im talking in terms of longevity and stature in the music scene today.

The thing about Metallica is they started out with a very niche audience, they grew and expanded that audience in the 90's, but they've seemed to have gone back to that niche audience. Not that that's a bad thing, I just think "closet current contemporary" is a stretch for Metallica have fallen a little in their stature. To be honest I'm not sure who I would consider their CLOSEST CURRENT contemporary, I mean bands like Pearl Jam or REM come to mind but PJ seems to keep the biggest cult band status and REM have slipped a little lately. And I'm not talking about quality here, I'm talking purely on how "big" they are...
 
Metallica are metal and u2 are pop i dont see how this will work.

Thank you for proving my point. It's this mentality(not that it's a wrong mentality) that would always prevent this from happening. Metallica in the 90's had some crossover appeal(of course their base called it selling out) but they don't anymore...:shrug:
 
The thing about Metallica is they started out with a very niche audience, they grew and expanded that audience in the 90's, but they've seemed to have gone back to that niche audience. Not that that's a bad thing, I just think "closet current contemporary" is a stretch for Metallica have fallen a little in their stature. To be honest I'm not sure who I would consider their CLOSEST CURRENT contemporary, I mean bands like Pearl Jam or REM come to mind but PJ seems to keep the biggest cult band status and REM have slipped a little lately. And I'm not talking about quality here, I'm talking purely on how "big" they are...

_517112_jagger_bono.jpg


that's about it.

honestly, u2 have seperated themselves into the stratosphere of all time rock bands that only a few before them have reached, in terms of quality, quantity, length, relevance, popularity and influence. the only other band that comes to mind that has been able to stay at that level for that long are the stones. other bands have been as good (or better), but none have stayed to the point where they can still claim that they're the biggest band in the world (or at least top 3) for as long as u2 or the rolling stones. not the beatles, not the who, not zep, certainly not rem, metallica or pearl jam. u2 and the stones. that's it.
 
I have also thought about U2 and Metallica as contemporaries. Just different styles of music. Other than that, similar career arcs. Many people my age (35) grew up listening to both bands. Personally, the last Metallica album I liked was Master of Puppet. But Everything up to and including that KICKS ASS.:rockon:
 
I'll be like the beauty and the beast. Can you imagine Edge play the into to Nothing Else Matters with a little shimmker and delay?:drool:
 
I could see them doing Unforgiven, Hold Me Thrill Me Beat Me Screw Me, Bullet, or Enter Sandman. It's not out of the realm of possibility. Harder bands have played U2, and U2 has covered stranger stuff and had crazier collaborations.
 
They could do an interesting collab. They're friends anyway and have mutual respect for each other. It wouldn't surprise me if they ended up doing something together at one point.
 
Not a fan of Lars but I like his comment: “I’ll play at one in the afternoon, in a parking lot in Ireland, I don’t give a sh*t. As long as I can do that.” Over to you, Bono.
 
I have also thought about U2 and Metallica as contemporaries. Just different styles of music. Other than that, similar career arcs. Many people my age (35) grew up listening to both bands. Personally, the last Metallica album I liked was Master of Puppet. But Everything up to and including that KICKS ASS.:rockon:

So the last album you liked was 1985? Is that the same with U2?

How are they similar arcs? Will someone please explain?
 
So the last album you liked was 1985? Is that the same with U2?

How are they similar arcs? Will someone please explain?

They both evolved and expanded their sound over the years (read: corporate sellouts).

edit: Maybe then Edge would finally play a real solo: :cry:
 
The career arcs as far as i can tell only being a casual fan really are that they both emerged into prominance during the 80s, really making a name for themselves, before then going on to achieve a career-high peak in the early 90s. From there both U2 and Metallica disappeared somewhat from the mainstream during the mid-90s until then both reemerging with a new sound/image which were both controversial to their fanbases. And from there have both enjoyed a certain renaissance by going back to their roots and not really straying too far from a 'winning' formula.

The simple fact is that Metallica are easily the biggest metal band of all time, and certainly in the early-90s were in the stratosphere that really only U2 occupied at that time. I'm sure others would disagree with my somewhat simplified career analysis but there you go.
 
I dont see why not BVS, they have been around for nearly as long sustaining a continued level of popularity and success, I think they've sold nearly as many albums as U2 have. Each Metallica album is awaited with the same fevour as a U2 album is. Name me a modern-day band who is more of a contempary. I'm not referring to style or sound or image, im talking in terms of longevity and stature in the music scene today.

It may be more actually, certainly no U2 album has sold as well as the Black album.

They are definitely contemporaries inasmuch as they have huge loyal followings, their product immediately goes to #1 and gets massive publicity, theire last albums (prior to last week's death magnetic release) sucked canal water, etc.

There are few bands who have this kind of following and can still draw huge crowds after so many years, U2 and Metallica are 2 of the few who can.
 
Back
Top Bottom