All "Is U2 Breaking Up" Discussion

[Irvine511]

The problem with NLOTH is a high-class one, ultimately -- it's full of beautiful music. It's probably one of the most "album" albums of recent years. The music is gorgeous; it is mostly all of one piece ("Boots," "Crazy Tonight," and "SUC" notwithstanding). It is not, however, full of hook-driven songs that drive radio play and make the average consumer sing along.

Such was not the case with "ATYCLB", which had "BD," "Stuck," and "Elevation," all of which are massive singalong pop tunes. Even HTDAAB, reviled as it may be by some on this board, has some great songs on it. NLOTH has more in common with the second half of ATYCLB -- more experimental, darker, less in-focus. It's "Unforgettable Fire," not "Joshua Tree."

To those who say U2 only care about singles, keep in mind that -- until ATYCLB -- U2 wasn't really known for being a singles band. (Edge even said as much in interviews back then.) The lead singles for U2 albums were generally known for being a throwdown to radio, a challenge, a subversion. "Discotheque" was a statement, "The Fly" was a statement, "Numb" was a statement. "With or Without You" was a statement. Even "Desire" was a statement, since it A) didn't sound like anything U2 had done before, and B) was out of step with where rock'n'roll was in 1988. These songs all seemed calculated to shake up radio, to declare that U2 was going in a new direction, to subvert both the establishment and their own audience's expectations. (Interestingly, only "With" and "Desire" were big radio hits -- "The Fly" wasn't a hit, "Numb" wasn't a hit, "Discotheque" wasn't really a hit. They were like burning stars, fading quickly.)

By contrast, "BD" was a different kind of statement, part of U2's pronounced desire to retake the Biggest Band in the World title. It may have been the first time U2 released a single as a statement of humility rather than of hubris, and the crowd responded -- because A) it was a great song, and B) it was not challenging the mainstream but seeking to re-enter it. When the single picked up three Grammies, even Larry was impressed and grateful, by all accounts (or at least his own in "U2 By U2"). "Vertigo" was a similar kind of statement -- another hook-laden rocker that was positioned well thanks to the iTunes commercial. "Get On Your Boots" was another lead single in this tradition, but I don't think the band knew how miscalculated a move it was. It's nice that they still believe in the song, and that people respond to it live, but it was a massive failure commercially and (in the eyes of some) creatively -- one attempt too many by U2 this decade to strive for mainstream popularity.

yes, absolutely.

everyone who actually listens to NLOTH likes it. everyone who spends the 7 1/2 minutes with MOS, thinks it's great. the problem was that GOYB has a crappy, cheap-sounding riff in the 5-seconds of commercial space that you need to gain people's attention (contrast that to the thunderous, "hello, hello" of Vertigo).

and everyone is irritated by Bono these days.

that's really about as deep as it goes. there's only so much headspace people have for one band.

most people who turned on U2 turned on them with Pop, not ATYCLB.

 

[Niceman]

Radiohead didn't abandon melody. It's difficult to say what inspired Radiohead's post OK Computer reinvention, but most accounts tie it to an infatuation with electronic music and being tired of playing rock music. I've never heard U2 mentioned.

I don't think a U2 influence can be attributed to Bowie when he was making Outside (unless that's a joke, like oy vey baby...what a piece of trash!)

I don't think Radiohead would have reinvented themselves the way they did had they not seen U2 do it first. (It's a shame they never looked back and are now un-listenable IMO.)

I do think Bowie had Achtung in mind when he did his work on Outside. Of course, its cross-fertilization. Achtung wouldn't have happened without Bowie's influence in the first place. And we DO have Eno involved in both projects.

And yes, Oy Vey, baby was crap. Such a disappointment since the first Tin Machine album was brilliant - but they had to complete the contract SOMEHOW.

 

[catlhere]

Why do discussions about U2's irrelevance or unpopular perception from people only include the last 3 albums. I always hear "since 2000" in these topics. Pop is one of their most irrelevant albums ever, critically and musically, but no one includes it in the arguments. It's like untouchable. Far more people talk about, enjoy, recognize ATYCLB than Pop yet somehow ATYCLB is painted as some sell-out turning point for the band and Pop is given a pass.

Seriously, who even mentions Pop outside of U2 fansites besides to scoff at it?

 

[Niceman]

Rattle and Hum was hated, was it not?

No. A few critics didn't like the movie but the 4 singles owned the airwaves and MTV and U2 ruled the world.

 

[BVS]

Europeans usually prefer U2 with more spice.

That's a rather large group you're trying to lump together. I spent time in Italy and in some Latin countries and 00 U2 was pretty big there.

 

[Niceman]

Why do discussions about U2's irrelevance or unpopular perception from people only include the last 3 albums. I always hear "since 2000" in these topics. Pop is one of their most irrelevant albums ever, critically and musically, but no one includes it in the arguments. It's like untouchable. Far more people talk about, enjoy, recognize ATYCLB than Pop yet somehow ATYCLB is painted as some sell-out turning point for the band and Pop is given a pass.

Seriously, who even mentions Pop outside of U2 fansites besides to scoff at it?

POP was brilliant. When people bag on it, that just means they didn't get it.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

Zooropa boasted Bono singing about lemons in an ironic falsetto.

This has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever seen written about U2. If this clown can't see beyond lemons and actually listen to the lyrics I dont see the point of reading anything further he has to say.

 

[Hollow Island]

I'm not disagreeing with that, but I just think one fits into the category of "art rock" more than the other.


The sample is very prevelant in the intro... and no I'm not speaking for the world, just what I hear and how many critics described it upon release, and how many talked about it in here.

Fair enough. It's a matter of degrees.

 

[nathan1977]

Rattle and Hum was hated, was it not?

No. A few critics didn't like the movie but the 4 singles owned the airwaves and MTV and U2 ruled the world.

In 88 U2 were just coming down off the critical laudations the previous year for "Joshua Tree," including winning the Grammy. But there was indeed a critical backlash to Rattle and Hum -- most famously Jon Pareles' critical drubbing in the NY Times, labelled "When Self-Importance Interferes With the Music." The album was a huge seller, but it was not critically embraced, and the huge marketing push for the album and movie resulted in a popular backlash against the band -- "Desire" hit #3 and "Angel of Harlem" hit #14, but "Love Comes to Town" only hit #68, and "All I Want Is You" hit #83. All of this in turn fueled the rush into Achtung Baby.

 

[Irvine511]

Seriously, who even mentions Pop outside of U2 fansites besides to scoff at it?

a lot of people in here discovered U2 with Pop. thus, it's an album they hold dear. a lot of people in here discovered U2 with Achtung, and Pop was their first experience with U2 backlash, which makes them naturally defensive about the album having had to spend 1997/8 defending/explaining the album to the detractors.

also, there aren't a lot of good songs.

 

[LUNEDEMINUIT]

See I find this to be a very odd statement.

WOWY is by far the furthest from a pop song on that list, prior to 87 that structure would not have made it on the radio.

But yes NYD, SBS, Streets(after the intro) are all pop songs.

And Pride is by far the most pop song of their career prior to the Joshua Tree, U2 will be the first to admit that.

I think we differ on the terminology of the word "pop" here.Songs about war(SBS,NYD) doesn't resonate has pop for me.

lol,not only we don't agree on the term of relevancy but now we differ on whats pop music is.It's okay.

I'm affraid you perceive me has antagonism here for some reason.I can assure you that is not my personnality.Sorry for that perception.

 

[Niceman]

In 88 U2 were just coming down off the critical laudations the previous year for "Joshua Tree," including winning the Grammy. But there was indeed a critical backlash to Rattle and Hum -- most famously Jon Pareles' critical drubbing in the NY Times, labelled "When Self-Importance Interferes With the Music." The album was a huge seller, but it was not critically embraced, and the huge push for the album and movie resulted in a popular backlash against the band...which, in turn, fueled the rush into Achtung Baby.

I think it's a bit of revisionist history. Yes, there were some critics who didn't like the movie and even the album, but the music was VERY popular.

And the 4 singles got heavy radio and video play.

 

[OpenG180]

Why do discussions about U2's irrelevance or unpopular perception from people only include the last 3 albums. I always hear "since 2000" in these topics. Pop is one of their most irrelevant albums ever, critically and musically, but no one includes it in the arguments. It's like untouchable. Far more people talk about, enjoy, recognize ATYCLB than Pop yet somehow ATYCLB is painted as some sell-out turning point for the band and Pop is given a pass.

Seriously, who even mentions Pop outside of U2 fansites besides to scoff at it?

Pop is U2's best hidden secret.

 

[Irvine511]

Pop is U2's best hidden secret.

are you from Europe?

 

[U2girl]

Pop is U2's best hidden secret.

I think NLOTH might be their best secret, in time.

 

[nathan1977]

I think it's a bit or revisionist history. Yes, there were some critics who didn't like the movie and even the album, but the music was VERY popular.

Not really. Read Carter Alan's "U2: Outside is America" or Flanagan's "U2 at the End of the World." Or, a quote from Rolling Stone, 1989:

"YOU VOTED THEM Artist of the Year and Band of the Year for the second year in a row, but lots of you are going to complain that we put them on the cover. A good number of letters, in all likelihood, will say the same thing: 'Not them again!'

"As Rattle and Hum the movie heads for videocassette and Rattle and Hum the album continues its stay in the Top Ten, it's clear that U2's problem is more than simple overexposure. After years of favorable fan and press reaction to the band's music; years of dramatic stage performances; years in which underground credibility turned into mass success; years of articles based on intense conversations with a hyperbolic, socially minded lead singer and his three more retiring band mates; years of grainy black-and-white photos of deadly serious, brooding faces, growing from dewy-cheeked youth to bestubbled adulthood; after all that, the U2 backlash has set in. ...

"As for Rattle and Hum the album...Well, it sold millions, and lots of people loved it. But it also drew the kind of flak that until now U2 had avoided. A Rolling Stone reader wrote in to say that the album will be remembered as "the downfall of a great band." The New York Times greeted the album's release with a review -- headlined "When Self-Importance Interferes With The Music" -- that described the album as "a mess." "Rattle and Hum is plagued by U2's attempt to grab every mantle in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame." Jon Pareles wrote. "Each attempt is embarrassing in a different way." And in the Village Voice, Tom Carson wrote, "By almost any rock and roll fan's standards, U2's Rattle and Hum is an awful record. But the chasm between what it thinks it is and the half-baked, overweening reality doesn't sound attributable to pretension so much as to monumental know-nothingism." Others painted a similarly unflattering portrait of U2 as a humorless, self-satisfied band, trying to boost its own image by aligning itself with the giants of American roots music."

And the 4 singles got heavy radio and video play.

Again, "Desire" and "Angel of Harlem" did well on the charts, but "Love Comes to Town" and "All I Want is You" tanked.

It was tough being U2 in 1988/1989.

 

[OpenG180]

are you from Europe?

No. Not north american either.

 

[WalkOn21]

everyone who spends the 7 1/2 minutes with MOS, thinks it's great.

Untrue. I don't care much for MOS, even though I've listened to its full 7m24s countless times.

 

[Niceman]

Again, "Desire" and "Angel of Harlem" did well on the charts, but "Love Comes to Town" and "All I Want is You" tanked.

I heard them on the radio and saw them on MTV constantly. Whether that translated to chart success is another question. But WLCTT was more omnipresent than Vertigo in its day.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

"tanked". Just because their chart figures on the main US charts weren't high like the other two (they still charted in the top 100), doesn't mean they tanked. They were still both top 20 charts on the rock charts and charted elsewhere in the world.

I wasn't alive around then but it's my understanding that the film obviously had the critics but the music was still

 

[Irvine511]

Untrue. I don't care much for MOS, even though I've listened to its full 7m24s countless times.

then by the logic in here, it means you just don't get it.

 

[BVS]

I think we differ on the terminology of the word "pop" here.Songs about war(SBS,NYD) doesn't resonate has pop for me.

lol,not only we don't agree on the term of relevancy but now we differ on whats pop music is.It's okay.

I'm affraid you perceive me has antagonism here for some reason.I can assure you that is not my personnality.Sorry for that perception.

No worries.

When it comes to pop music I think one has to define it by structures. There's a lot of people that don't listen to lyrics. Would you disqualify a rhianna song as a non pop song just because she decided to sing about war or mlk?

 

[WalkOn21]

then by the logic in here, it means you just don't get it.

No, it means you can't argue about taste. Discarding someone's dislike of a song by saying they "just don't get it" is self-righteous crap.

 

[nathan1977]

"tanked". Just because their chart figures on the main US charts weren't high like the other two (they still charted in the top 100), doesn't mean they tanked. They were still both top 20 charts on the rock charts and charted elsewhere in the world.

Sure, but U2 has always had a focus on conquering American charts specifically, and this was the height of their domestic popularity. To be rebuffed by both American critics and (eventually) the public was a painful thing, one that Flanagan recounts in exhaustive detail. Keep in mind that by 1991, the LA Times was reporting in the wake of the bootleg Achtung Baby release that nobody was buying U2 records anymore. Ouch.

And the omnipresent nature of U2's videos in 88/89 was part of the problem. As Carter Alan says in "U2: Outside Is America," "Outside of U2's core following, America's mainstream music consumer had apparently had enough of U2 by the spring of 1989. Since the release of The Joshua Tree two years earlier, the band's singles had dominated CHR airwaves while its tours regularly criss-crossed the country. U2's videos were show on MTV with ever increasing (and eventually annoying) frequency, magazines and tabloids spotlit the band almost daily, and the supposedly calmer rock and roll media had doled out lavish praise portraying U2 as the new savior of rock. Then the multimedia juggernaut of a havily promoted movie with its attendant soundtrack album, singles, and book arrived. ... Bob Catania, then vice-president of promotion at Island (said) in June 1989, 'The backlash is that they take themselves too seriously. Now U2 is in a corner, there has been a slide and Island is in a marketing dilemma.'"

I wasn't alive around then but it's my understanding that the film obviously had the critics but the music was still

I think most of Rattle and Hum stands up incredibly well -- "Desire," "Hawkmoon," "All I Want is You," "God Part II" are all amazing songs -- but it was the perception of U2 that they were fighting in 88/89, and it was the perception that was the problem. Even the band talks about this in Flanagan's book -- the music of the album was great, it was everything around it that was the problem.

 

[doctorwho]

I don't know a single person outside of this forum with a kind word for ATYCLB (except for Beautiful Day.) I know a lot of people. I get out! In my own opinion, it's their weakest album.... but that doesn't mean I don't love it - especially In a Little While.

And I've had to spend a lot of time defending HTDAAB - just on this board!

I meet strangers. They ask me what kind of music I listen to. I tell them "U2 is my favorite band." They often have to restrain themselves and try to be polite because their opinion of our band's last 10 years is honestly so strongly negative.

Hmm...

Maybe they are just negative towards you.



It could be an age thing. When I tell people that, I don't get this attitude. If you are in your teens or 20's, U2 may seem "old" to those people. U2 could release an album with God and these folks would still feel U2 is too old.

 

[Nick66]

I don't know a single person outside of this forum with a kind word for ATYCLB (except for Beautiful Day.) I know a lot of people. I get out! In my own opinion, it's their weakest album.... but that doesn't mean I don't love it - especially In a Little While.

And I've had to spend a lot of time defending HTDAAB - just on this board!

I meet strangers. They ask me what kind of music I listen to. I tell them "U2 is my favorite band." They often have to restrain themselves and try to be polite because their opinion of our band's last 10 years is honestly so strongly negative.

I've been with U2 since War and have seen every tour since TUF (except Lovetown), and I love ATYCLB...it's easily in my Top 5. I place NLOTH either right below it or right above it depending on my mood.

Bomb, on the other hand, is placed firmly in my bottom 3.

 

[LUNEDEMINUIT]

No worries.

When it comes to pop music I think one has to define it by structures. There's a lot of people that don't listen to lyrics. Would you disqualify a rhianna song as a non pop song just because she decided to sing about war or mlk?

I think we are highjacking this thread by talking about Rhianna,lol!But i understand you brought her up has an example.

My original question about the fly vs beautiful day was in regard to Bono's comment about the relevancy of the band in todays music world and questionning the end of U2 ,which produce this thread.And to me,by what he said ,that sounded more close to where the band was after pop,rather than after RAH.Maybe i should have use AB/ATYCLB comparison, rather than just 2 specific songs.To me Achtung Baby is 100 times more relevant than All that you...because without AB,or a failure of it,there would not be a ATYCLB.

Using "The fly" has the first single was not about going back on the radio,because they were on radio with the previous album (RAH) "Desire","Angel of harlem" even "All i want is you".So that is why they didn't go with "One" for the first single with AB.Compare to "Beautiful day",that was the intention.'because the album "pop" didn't produce any hits.So at the expence of relevancy,they aimed for popularity.I understand that BD is huge hit for them,but for many observers, it was an attempt to recapture their presence on the radio more than to take their sound somewhere else.

 

[Hollow Island]

Hmm...

Maybe they are just negative towards you.



It could be an age thing. When I tell people that, I don't get this attitude. If you are in your teens or 20's, U2 may seem "old" to those people. U2 could release an album with God and these folks would still feel U2 is too old.

It probably is an age thing. Most people in their 20s (most people I know are in their 20s and 30s) weren't old enough, or weren't paying attention, during Zoo TV, or weren't around in the 80s, so they don't remember when U2 were truely, undeniable awesome. I became a fan when I was 12, between Achtung and Zooropa, and even around Pop time people were really not digging U2. it was all hip hop, mall punk, and grunge before in the years between Zoo and Pop. Everyone loved Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, but U2...not so much. They were too weird. Now they're too bland!

I experienced the same phenomena with the Stones. When I was a kid I hated them because songs like Start Me Up and Rock In A Hard place were huge, and fucking stupid, and bad. Then, thanks to U2 At The End Of The World, I got Exile and went backwards and was introduced to the truth. That's what young people need to do, and will do in the future. Start at AB or Zooropa and move backwards. I know a lot of people feel really strongly about Pop, and I love most of it, but it's just as uneven as ATYCLB, though it is more interesting musically. And I'm not trying to say that what they've done since 93 isn't really good because a lot of it is, but the work up to and including Zooropa is way better than what came after, and that's the work that's responsible for their stature.

I think that we here are victims of clouded judgement because we love them so much, and most of us can remember when they were the greatest band in the world, and that band still lives in our minds. Unfortunately, they don't exist in the real world.

 

[Niceman]

Hmm...

Maybe they are just negative towards you.



It could be an age thing. When I tell people that, I don't get this attitude. If you are in your teens or 20's, U2 may seem "old" to those people. U2 could release an album with God and these folks would still feel U2 is too old.

I'm in my thirties. I get this from people my age, younger, whatever. Anyway, there are a lot of people who think this way. Too many.

 

[Niceman]

I think we are highjacking this thread by talking about Rhianna,lol!But i understand you brought her up has an example.

My original question about the fly vs beautiful day was in regard to Bono's comment about the relevancy of the band in todays music world and questionning the end of U2 ,which produce this thread.And to me,by what he said ,that sounded more close to where the band was after pop,rather than after RAH.Maybe i should have use AB/ATYCLB comparison, rather than just 2 specific songs.And to me Achtung Baby is 100 time relevant that All that you...because without AB,or a failure of it,there would not be a ATYCLB.

I think Achtung Baby verses ATYCLB would have been a much better example. In that case, I would answer that Achtung was FAR more important artistically, creatively, and as far as its influence on the world. - And its 100x the album in general.