Linkin Park, Green Day, ColdPlay, NiN the Next U2???

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Justin24

Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
6,716
Location
San Mateo
http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=4647
Could Linkin Park, Green Day, Nine Inch Nails Be The Next U2?

Are some of today's rockers modeling themselves after Bono's band of Irish lads?

MTV News, May 23, 2007

Chris Harris

Everyone's heard the saying A&R guys have been kicking around for decades to describe the hottest up-and-comers: "the next Beatles." While this title has been liberally conferred upon many acts since the Beatles' prime, no artist has really been as big a hit or had as profound an influence on pop culture as the Fab Four. But U2 have come pretty damn close.

With upward of 170 million albums sold worldwide and three decades of commercial and critical success, there's no denying that U2 are one of the biggest rock bands on the planet. With the Edge's soaring, signature guitar chime and the group's catalog of arena-size anthems, U2 have consistently reinvented themselves, experimenting with and evolving the direction of their unique sound, even at the risk of alienating some of their die-hard fans.

They've maintained their musical relevance, and the bandmembers have achieved gravity outside the realm of rock and roll. The band -- and in particular frontman Bono, who's become something of a global ambassador -- has used its music and celebrity to shine a spotlight on political and social issues and injustices, working closely with organizations like Amnesty International, Make Poverty History, the ONE Campaign, Live Aid and Live 8. Bono has become increasingly involved in campaigning for Third World debt relief and raising awareness of the plight of Africa, including the AIDS pandemic.

In 2002, Bono formed DATA (Debt, AIDS, Trade, Africa), an advocacy organization dedicated to eradicating extreme poverty and AIDS in Africa, and he's met with a host of world leaders to solicit support for the various campaigns he backs. For his part, the Edge founded Music Rising, a campaign to rescue the musical culture of the U.S.'s Central Gulf region following the catastrophic summer 2005 hurricanes.

So forget the Beatles -- we're more interested in who's poised to become the next U2. Here are some notable candidates.

Linkin Park: It's hard to imagine the architects of "One Step Closer" could one day be as internationally influential as a band like U2. But they're certainly keeping pace with the band as far as album sales are concerned, and aesthetically speaking too, the California hard rockers are definitely on their way. The band's latest video, for the track "What I've Done," resembled U2's "Vertigo" clip in several ways.

First, there's the setting: a dusty, windy desert, where both bands rock out with purpose. Then there's frontman Chester Bennington's penchant for Bono-like shades. In the video, he even seems to borrow Bono's signature microphone-stand manipulation, swaying back and forth and side to side and cradling a pole. And what of the black-and-white cover of Linkin Park's new record, the Rick Rubin-helmed Minutes to Midnight? Doesn't it sort of resemble the cover of U2's 2000 effort, All That You Can't Leave Behind? And is it just a coincidence that U2's next LP will also be produced by Rubin?

Minutes to Midnight is also the most political of Linkin Park's three studio sets, as evidenced by the lyrics to "Hands Held High," on which Mike Shinoda sings, "For a leader so nervous, in an obvious way/ Stuttering and mumbling for nightly news to replay/ And the rest of the world watching at the end of the day/ In the living room laughing, like, 'What did he say?' "

And let's not forget Bennington's humanitarian work. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Bennington appeared with Mötley Crüe at ReAct Now: Music & Relief, a concert to benefit Katrina's survivors, for a rendition of "Home Sweet Home."

The band also helped relief efforts for victims of the 2004 tsunami, staging several charity concerts and setting up an additional fund called "Music for Relief" -- Bennington visited victims of that disaster in Phuket, Thailand. Linkin Park also participated in Bob Geldof's 2005 Live 8 concerts, appearing onstage with Jay-Z in Philadelphia.

According to Bennington, "There's nothing you can say that sucks about being compared to U2."

Green Day: The Berkeley, California, band -- which has influenced the likes of My Chemical Romance and Blink-182 -- has come a long way since the dope and dick jokes that pervaded 1992's Kerplunk. Like U2, they've become one of the most important bands in the world and, also like U2, they believe in reinvention, especially during periods when their relevance has been challenged. Their recent work has contained a much deeper message than the joys and perils of self-manipulation; Green Day's 2004 opus American Idiot was a politically tinged rock opera dealing with the nature of individuality and rebellion and the war in Iraq.

In 2005 Green Day performed as part of Live 8, and last year the band collaborated with none other than U2 themselves on a Rick Rubin-produced cover of the Skids' "The Saints Are Coming." Sales from the single benefited the Edge's Music Rising campaign. In April, frontman Billie Joe Armstrong headed to New Orleans to help rebuild homes destroyed by the storm.

Green Day have also joined forces with the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the most effective environmental organizations in the U.S., for the "Move America Beyond Oil" campaign and other environmental concerns. The work they've done has helped raise awareness of the nation's dependency on oil and offers possible courses of action to reverse the trend.

Coldplay: From a strictly political standpoint, of all of rock and roll's big names, Coldplay are perhaps the most comparable to U2.

Chris Martin, who leads the British quartet, has been particularly outspoken on issues of fair trade and has become the face for Make Trade Fair, a campaign organized by Oxfam International to promote trade justice among governments, institutions and multinational corporations. Martin has personally traveled to Ghana and Haiti to see firsthand the effects of unfair trade practices. And when the band performs live, he can usually be spotted with the words "make trade fair" or an equal sign written on his left hand.

Martin has been fairly active in politics and has been a vocal critic of Bush and the war in Iraq. He threw his support behind John Kerry's failed presidential bid in 2004 during his acceptance speech at the 2004 Grammy Awards, when the band's song "Clocks" was awarded Record of the Year honors. The band also supports Amnesty International.

Oh yeah, and Martin's been known to refer to himself as "Crono," a play on the name of his "hero," Bono.

Nine Inch Nails: Trent Reznor has gone from crafting tunes about his personal anguish and misery to addressing social and political themes on his most recent outing, this year's Year Zero. The concept album revolves around the generally terrifying story of a future society poised on the brink of spiritual, moral, political and environmental Armageddon -- his response to Bush's presidency and the war in Iraq.

Reznor, of course, has made no secret of his disapproval of the POTUS; in 2005, he dropped out of performing at the 2005 MTV Movie Awards because of a disagreement with the network over the use of an unaltered image of George W. Bush as a backdrop to the band's performance of "The Hand That Feeds." The song includes the lyrics, "What if this whole crusade's a charade/ And behind it all there's a price to be paid/ For the blood on which we dine/ Justified in the name of the holy and the divine."

Reznor -- whose work has influenced the likes of Marilyn Manson and Filter -- has also thrown his support behind People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, which he filmed a public-service announcement for in 2006. Reznor narrated an undercover video exposing the gruesome cat- and dog-fur trade in China and the barbarity of the fur industry throughout the world. "Workers kick and stomp on the cages and jab the animals with sticks to get them out, then their weakened bodies are bludgeoned, hanged, bled or strangled with wire nooses to kill them," he says in the spot. "Many of the cats and dogs still have collars on, proof that they were someone's beloved companions."

System of a Down: Descendants of survivors of the 1915 Armenian Genocide, System of a Down had no choice but to be a political band. Frontman Serj Tankian helped form the Axis of Justice, a nonprofit organization dedicated to bringing together musicians, music fans and grassroots political organizations to fight for social justice, and the band frequently promotes awareness of the Armenian Genocide.

Every year (with the exception of 2006), System of a Down have organized "Souls" concerts to raise money to support the cause. System's song "P.L.U.C.K. (Politically Lying, Unholy, Cowardly Killers)," from 1998's self-titled debut, touches upon the genocide, and in the CD's booklet, the band dedicates the track "to the memory of the 1.5 million victims of the Armenian Genocide, perpetrated by the Turkish Government in 1915." The song "Holy Mountains," from 2005's Hypnotize, is also about the genocide.

"B.Y.O.B.," the Grammy Award-winning single that was featured on Hypnotize's counterpart LP, Mezmerize, questions the integrity of war and was believed to be a direct attack on Bush's international policies.

Last spring, the band asked its fans to contact Bush, urging him to properly characterize the Armenian Genocide as "genocide" in presidential statements. Tankian said at the time that "the constant, ridiculous denial of the Armenian Genocide by not only Turkey but by consecutive U.S. administrations made me aware of the world of disinformation and injustices around the globe."

But with the future of the heavy-metal act unclear (they announced they'd be going on an indefinite hiatus a year ago), System don't seem a very likely candidate for the title of "the next U2."

U2: It's not as though the Irish rockers are going anywhere anytime soon, and they've shown no signs they're ready to renounce their place as rock and roll royalty. They're hard at work on their next album -- what will be their 12th studio release -- with Rubin at the boards, and Bono's humanitarian efforts have not waned one bit. Bono just joined the Irish government's Hunger Task Force as part of his continuing efforts to raise awareness of world poverty.

© MTV News, 2007.
 
Linkin Park? No, for obvious reasons.

NIN? No. Year Zero came out with almost no press. Trent has pretty much disappeared into obscurity, not that there's anything wrong with that, but he won't make the next U2.

Coldplay? As stale as this band is, out of the list they have a good chance, but time will tell. They will either have to really reinvent themselves or they will just disappear slowly...

Green Day has the greatest chance, they started out very slow and only to a niche audience, but they have reinvented themselves pretty well...I'm still very :| about most of their music, but we'll see.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with all the bands listed. The problem with Coldplay is that well...they are TOO similar to U2. The band to be the next U2 (why are people so obsessed with having to find that?) does not exsist yet I do not think.
 
mandrake said:
I disagree with all the bands listed. The problem with Coldplay is that well...they are TOO similar to U2. The band to be the next U2 (why are people so obsessed with having to find that?) does not exsist yet I do not think.

I agree. If you look at the biggest bands in history you'll notice how different each one is. It is also entirely possible that the next U2 won't be the biggest band in the world. If the latter is true, I think Arcade Fire has the best shot. However, if we are talking about a huge band I don't think there is anyone unique enough and able to ascend to that popularity on the musical landscape.
 
There's no such thing as a "next U2" necessary. Simply because U2 do still record (nice) albums, they still do tour and play (even nicer concerts) and they still belong to the (nicest) active musicians here. So the start of this debate makes no sense at all. And: The groups mentioned are fine or crap - depends on perspectice & taste - but they are not comparable with a group having been together now for 30 years, having created albums and songs that changed alt least the musical world forever - and having been a band, that still wants to surprise thmselves and us.
 
It's usless to point it out (yet again) but I will anyway: Linkin Park's new album does not sound like their previous albums. There's a song on there that sounds just like With or Without You (I even mashed them up and it was disturbing :lol: )

That said, it breaks my brain. I love U2. I love Linkin Park. I don't really want Linkin Park to turn into U2. I like where they are now. I'd be fine to let them stay right there.

But this amused me:

It's hard to imagine the architects of "One Step Closer" could one day be as internationally influential as a band like U2.

Because, you know, U2 have a One Step Closer too :wink: And Linkin Park have a Numb. I'd say more mashups are in order, but I think that would be a bad idea in both cases.
 
I don't really like any of those bands; except I liked American Idiot, and some LP songs, and I love Coldplay. But one thing I've really noticed was that LP's clip for What I've Done was veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery U2. I'm wondering if they're moving in that direction.
 
What a dumb ass text! Next U2 won't appear soon and none of these bands (neither Muse, as some claim sometimes) will fill that place. What I see is that these fool frontmen think that they just have to be Bono, wearing some shaves, make some stage movements and voilá.

Linkin' Park has released now an album that didn't acheive consense about critics (there have been real bad critics too about "Minutes To Midnight"). Plus, many people still don't like Linkin' Park, neither its sound.

Coldplay: we know that Chris Martin is a big asshole, he really want to be Bono (his band even tried to make a copy of TUF... a really bad copy) but he's just a kid playing to be like big bands. If the next album produced by Brian Eno is really great and if they change their posture, maybe they can become a great band, but never be the next U2.

S.O.A.D. and NIN (and Muse too)... does many people (the common listener) know these bands? No.

Green Day has acheived a status that can be compared to U2's one some years ago (15-20 years). If they keep surviving they'll be an ever bigger band, but Green Day never changed the structures U2 did and in 13 years (since "Dookie") they didn't suffer such transformations as U2 did in the same timeline.
 
I really think that u2 were "the last of the rockstars" supergroups. I just think the music industry is more a disposable culture these days and is not set up for bands to forment and take over the world.
 
The idea of there being a "next U2" is a little difficult to address, in the same way it is difficult to address the "next Beatles".

The bands in the best position to be a "next U2" are GREEN DAY (who are one innovative and revloutionary album away from legend status) and SNOW PATROL (whose next album will need to be a radical departure from what they've done to date).

The Killers and Franz Ferdinand and Coldplay are also remote possibilities.

That said, it's not an easy topic to address. The music industry has changed so much in the past 10 years that it might be impossible to look at a band in the same way people (fans and non-fans) have looked at U2 over the years.
 
gman said:
I really think that u2 were "the last of the rockstars" supergroups. I just think the music industry is more a disposable culture these days and is not set up for bands to forment and take over the world.

:up:

I agree with everything you say here... except "forment" :wink: I have no idea what that means :wink:
 
I don't think U2 ever set out to make popular albums; it's more that U2 made the albums they wanted to make, and the mainstream accepted them. If you think about Zoo TV, or you think about Pop, you see that U2 paid attention to what was going on around them so that they could poke fun at it. They didn't want to imitate the sound of other popular bands, nor did they necessarily cater to what they thought listeners wanted.

What it ultimately comes down to is that there will never be another U2. That's not to say that there will never be another huge band, but if you look at truly legendary musicians--Miles Davis, for instance, or Patsy Cline, or the Beatles, or the Stones--you see the way that they reshaped the musical landscape, but also that while they greatly influenced others, no one has followed in their steps exactly. I think it will be the same with U2.
 
BonoIsMyMuse said:
I don't think U2 ever set out to make popular albums; it's more that U2 made the albums they wanted to make, and the mainstream accepted them. If you think about Zoo TV, or you think about Pop, you see that U2 paid attention to what was going on around them so that they could poke fun at it. They didn't want to imitate the sound of other popular bands, nor did they necessarily cater to what they thought listeners wanted.


Yes, but Dr. Muse, those albums were made in the last decade, when the music business had not become as market-oriented, digital-oriented and commerical tie-in oriented as it is ow. I don't think you can argue that ATYCLB or HTDAAB are "albums that U2 wanted to make and the mainstram accepted them." Both those albums were an attempt to appeal to the mainstream, or at least the mainstream in alternative music, since the mainstream is Kelly Clarkson and Justin Timberlake.

Will there be another U2, whose front man is instantly identified by 80% of the general music-loving population and whose four members are individually recognizable personalities? I don't rule anything out, but the days when a band toils in medium recognition for the first nine years and then explodes into wider conscousness, a la Joshua Tree, might not be allowed to happen given the rough times record labels face.
 
Also if you look at where U2 was in the 80s...very politically vocal and seemed to not be afraid to take a stance. The next U2 will have to be very socially aware and not afraid to stand by their words. But on the other hand...what is there to be politically active against in America that is simiar to what U2 lived through in Dublin? (I am talking about violence between Protestants and Catholics)

I am saying this because when a band today is "political" all they have to do is scream and rant against George Bush, which is easy to do and has really become the cool thing to do in the music industry. Another words, be political, but do so that it doesn't polarize your fanbase and are active in issues that matter and not directed at one leader. I suppose Coldplay has come close to that with their support of Fair Trade, but I dunno.
 
mandrake said:
Also if you look at where U2 was in the 80s...very politically vocal and seemed to not be afraid to take a stance. The next U2 will have to be very socially aware and not afraid to stand by their words. But on the other hand...what is there to be politically active against in America that is simiar to what U2 lived through in Dublin? (I am talking about violence between Protestants and Catholics)

I am saying this because when a band today is "political" all they have to do is scream and rant against George Bush, which is easy to do and has really become the cool thing to do in the music industry. Another words, be political, but do so that it doesn't polarize your fanbase and are active in issues that matter and not directed at one leader. I suppose Coldplay has come close to that with their support of Fair Trade, but I dunno.

I disagree with this in two ways. First, U2 isn't so much a political band rather a better title would be socially-conscious. Secondly, there are things outside of Bush that worry, concern and anger people in the United States. Just pay a visit to FYM.
 
silvrlvr said:

Yes, but Dr. Muse, those albums were made in the last decade, when the music business had not become as market-oriented, digital-oriented and commerical tie-in oriented as it is ow. I don't think you can argue that ATYCLB or HTDAAB are "albums that U2 wanted to make and the mainstram accepted them." Both those albums were an attempt to appeal to the mainstream, or at least the mainstream in alternative music, since the mainstream is Kelly Clarkson and Justin Timberlake.

Very true, especially with regards to ATYCLB. I think that has a lot to do with why that's my least favorite U2 album. There are some songs on it I do like, but overall, ATYCLB feels watered-down to me. HTDAAB is a step back in the right direction in my mind; there are some strong songs, but still some that feel safe. It's definitely a much more consistent album in my mind, though.

I'd love to see another radical reinvention on the next album, but I don't know that it will happen. Considering they're already heading back to the studio, that doesn't leave them much room to dream it all up again.
 
But none of the bands have the balls U2 have been having for 30 years! U2 was not born in a stable structure, it's a band that came from a not-well-seen country (in the 1980s), known for it's political/religious conflicts and that established it self in the UK and later in the US almost without big help, but witk the public recognition.

If one of the named bands in this topic will become a next big rockstars group it will be because the press says so, not because they deserve that.
I insist that none of these bands have a "Bono", almost all of them have lack of charisma and none of them are able to change some structures even if they try to be political.
 
This is a little pet peeve of mine, but Coldplay is one word, not ColdPlay or Cold Play
 
I forces myself to listen to the new Linkin Park single on the radio when I was driving home from blockbuster the other day. Sure it sounded different...uhhh...but it was still god-awful. I'm seriously lucky it didn't cause me to pass out and crash into a bus stop or something
 
Maybe one of the people at the bus stop was listening to it too, and was praying you'd hit them.
 
Out of the bands listed, I think Coldplay has the best shot. Green Day got political, but I don't see them changing their sound too much.
And, as BVS said, Coldplay needs to reinvent themselves and it sounds like that's what they're doing working with Eno and did I hear Timberland?

Aside from Coldplay, Mute Math is the next U2. :wink:
 
I don't think any of those bands really have a shot. Yes, Linkin Park was able to reinvent themselves, and they do sound a lot like U2 now, but that doesnt mean theyre the next U2. sounding like U2 doesnt mean you are U2 (I'm looking at you, Chris Martin. Crono? what a douche)

I think the industry has changed so much that another band with mega superstar status like U2 is pretty much impossible. for one, rap is such a big part of the market now. If anything, Outkast has a better shot at being the next U2 than any of those rock bands. They have both critical success and mass appeal, and they've been around and popular for over a decade (since like 1994 I believe), which is pretty good for a hip hop act. Idlewild was a bit like Rattle and Hum after the huge success of Speakerboxxx/The Love Below, but if Outkast comes out with something else amazing they could be on top again. But really, with the internet and mass communications and everything, there are way more bands getting exposure than ever before, so it's harder to be really huge with so much competition, especially for a long time.

but if I had to pick a band that I'd want to be the next U2, and that I think could on a purely musical basis, it'd be Bloc Party.
 
AtomicBono said:


but if I had to pick a band that I'd want to be the next U2, and that I think could on a purely musical basis, it'd be Bloc Party.

that's just because you like bloc party :wink:

I agree that only Coldplay could reach the amount of people that U2 has, the others are too far into the selling out that they dont care about the music any more.
 
As if either Linkin Park or NIN want to even be the next U2 first of all.

Link Park are harder while Trent is in just such a completely different genre and skill level to U2, as much as I love U2, Trent is a production perfectionist and musical genius. His music covers so many different genres, absolutely amazing musician without a doubt.. but it's evident he don't want to be rocks pin up boy!

To be fair I feel the article is coming from a Social awareness point of view, Trent is really fucked off with America at the moment and with what happened in his home town of New Orleans, Hence why Year Zero is set in the future, a not too distant possible future where a US government is in total control of it's people and the world hangs on the balance of global warming and world war 3

So I spose recently all of these artists are making strides towards becoming more socially aware.
 
Eazy-V said:
Arctic Monkeys



kthnxbai

Is that a serious answer?

They're like the UK equivalent to Nickelback, except throw in some mild Oasis and there you go: Carnation Instant Shit.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
.

NIN? No. Year Zero came out with almost no press. Trent has pretty much disappeared into obscurity, not that there's anything wrong with that, but he won't make the next U2.


Uh, there was actually a really clever marketing scheme behind Year Zero and it debuted at #2 on the charts.
 
Back
Top Bottom