Reviewing From The Sky Down

[hand0lotion]

According to @U2:
"In August 1989, Adam made headlines after two undercover cops busted him for possession of a small amount of marijuana in Dublin. To avoid conviction, the judge allowed Adam to make a "donation" of £25,000 to the Dublin Women's Aid Refugee Center. In U2 by U2, Adam described his conviction as a "minor offense that some individuals tried to blow up into something quite serious." At the time, Ireland was dealing with an expanding drug culture and the arrest was meant to send a message; however the story never got the traction authorities were looking for. Adam has since expressed regret over being caught breaking the law, but did not mind making a donation to the refugee center. Sadly, this was not to be the last time that he had to deal with substance abuse."

This was in addition to comments made by the band over the years that Adam was the only one in U2 in the early 80s taking advantage of the rock star lifestyle. But Bono praised him in interviews in the late 80s for saying, "Field Marshal Clayton! No matter what Adam's up to at night, if there's a meeting at 8 am, he's there at 8 am." So while it's clear there were indulgences prior to the early 90s, it sounds like things were at least under control.

Thanks to all the Adam aficionados (feels clever *snicker*) for the Adam details.

Yeah, he was happily dating/wooing Naomi C during the Zooropa recording sessions, not AB (again, if memory of At the End of the World serves)

 

[Nick66]

The weakest link : too much pre-AB U2 history. This isn't a crash course on getting to know the band.

Couldn't disagree more, I found the pre-AB, R&H stuff to be the most revelatory and interesting.

 

[Nick66]

I thought Adam's troubles only begain during the tour? During the recording of AB (after the Hansa times), he was happily dating Naomi C right? (if memory of At the End of The World serves).

Although I'm a huge Adam fan, for the sake of a historic piece of cinematographic documentation (and all other titles this film is being coveted with), I guess what the film covered was more insightful than Adam's issues. Tons of docus have been made about the rock'n'roll boozey lifestyle. Some other time, when it's all about the band members, we can cover the evolution of Adam

I'm not sure Adam was ever "happily" dating Naomi C....read Bill Flanagan's book and it's pretty obvious that relationship was a lot of drama from almost day one.

And apparently Adam's problems eventually got so bad that there was talk for a brief period of time of a U2 future w/o Adam.

 

[Rachel D.]

So I watched it the other day. It's a really honest documentary that simply tells what happened without trying to promote something or portray the band in a certain light, which sets it apart from all the other U2 documentaries I've ever seen. I really want to watch it again soon, but here are my impressions for now.

I don't think there's anything wrong with telling about the early days and the R&H period. A lot of people seem to be thinking that this is supposed to be a making-of-AB film, but it's not, and it never claimed to be. It's a story about how the band survived a difficult time period. In order to tell that story, it makes sense to tell a little about how they started. The R&H parts are really important to the story, because that shows what the "conflict" was for the characters and where their problems started. It would be hard to illustrate the significance of Achtung Baby without understanding what came before it. It also shows that there is no shortage of material for an anniversary edition/remaster of Rattle and Hum, so I expect a lot from that when it comes out!

At first I was a little surprised that the film ended just as they were starting to mention the ZooTV Tour, but then it occurred to me that it doesn't matter, because this isn't supposed to be about the ZooTV Tour. I think that since U2 has such a long history, it's easy for us to say, "But they didn't tell about this or about that," but there has to be a line drawn somewhere or the movie would go on and on. It did leave me wanting more, but that's a good thing, and I'm hoping that we'll get to see some outtakes on the separate DVD release.

Some other interesting things:
- Seeing how both "Mysterious Ways" and "One" emerged from the same 35-minute take
- The honest look into how the band felt during the Joshua Tree tour and having fame suddenly thrust upon them; seeing them so uptight and self-conscious stressed me out a little just imagining what that must have been like.
- Watching Bono during the rehearsal scenes, it struck me that he was operating like a painter, but he has to depend on the band instead of paint brushes to make the idea he has in his head come to life. That makes him look controlling, but it's only because he can't do it himself and needs someone else to express it. I know that sounds really weird...
- I was surprised to hear Bono use the F-word so many times; in most of the interviews I've seen and read over the past few years, he seems to have really cut back, but in the movie he says it about four or five times, I think.
- The look on Bono's face in that R&H-era film of he and Ali at the carnival made me laugh out loud. "That's mah wife!"
- The scene where they were all riding in the Trabant and Adam couldn't get out was cute.

 

[U2girl]

As much as I agree with you U2girl about your crash course comment, I think that this background information is particularly important to those people who don't know who U2 really is.

What I mean is that someone who watches this doc may know Bono and who the Edge are, but really have no idea of how musically important they were historically with JT and their earlier catalogue of material.

I really felt this gave the viewer some insight into how "huge" they were musically and how they struggled individually dealing with fame and what happens next.

That's all true...but the core audience, people buying the AB remaster, the big fans, already know all this. The movie could easily have had more things like MW/One connection, or the Hansa 2011 AB songs (both easily the highlights of the movie). Maybe in the DVD extras...

Who's the guy playing the tapes back to Bono and Edge in Berlin ? Chris Rainey or some other engineer ?

 

[U2girl]

And apparently Adam's problems eventually got so bad that there was talk for a brief period of time of a U2 future w/o Adam.

No, they never considered that.

 

[U2BROTHR]

- The honest look into how the band felt during the Joshua Tree tour and having fame suddenly thrust upon them; seeing them so uptight and self-conscious stressed me out a little just imagining what that must have been like.

Bonkers huh? I felt the same way. And to think....all those years I was listening to the Joshua Tree, I would have never thought they felt that way during that time.

- Watching Bono during the rehearsal scenes, it struck me that he was operating like a painter, but he has to depend on the band instead of paint brushes to make the idea he has in his head come to life. That makes him look controlling, but it's only because he can't do it himself and needs someone else to express it. I know that sounds really weird...

He did seem pretty "in control". I wasn't sure what to expect really, but someone needs to take the reins.

- The look on Bono's face in that R&H-era film of he and Ali at the carnival made me laugh out loud. "That's mah wife!"

Hilarious.....don't fuck up Bono.....she can hunt you down

 

[Diemen]

No, they never considered that.

I'm assuming there's some interview or quote somewhere to confirm this?

 

[TheEdge25]

That's a great clip... I love Edge's face. Recognition and then "see? SEE?"

Exactly!! haha, I was laughing so hard when I saw Edge's face...I had to watch it again.

And then right after that, Bono's just looking over the papers and then he recognizes it and is like, "Wait...I know that song...did that?...did we?...wait...Edge was right...what...?" hahaha hilarious!

 

[gvox]

Uh ok you guys do realize that part was a re-enactment right?

 

[hand0lotion]

I'm not sure Adam was ever "happily" dating Naomi C....read Bill Flanagan's book and it's pretty obvious that relationship was a lot of drama from almost day one.

And apparently Adam's problems eventually got so bad that there was talk for a brief period of time of a U2 future w/o Adam.

I SKIMMED At The End of The World (or, I'm an old lady with dementia) but I recall Edge did say something TO THE EFFECT of 'we never considered dumping Adam', but I'm 80& sure this was during the early days when the other 3 were questioning Christianity and it's appropriateness for a rock band, not the AB era. So I shan't look the quote up.


Whether it was a happy relationship or not, we'll never know, and it's pretty subjective. I remember the part when he was wooing Naomi and of course he was happy when he snagged her. She qas a cartoonish diva in the book, but the most laidback member of U2 didn't seem to mind, in the words of Flanagan

 

[hand0lotion]

- I was surprised to hear Bono use the F-word so many times; in most of the interviews I've seen and read over the past few years, he seems to have really cut back, but in the movie he says it about four or five times, I think.
- The look on Bono's face in that R&H-era film of he and Ali at the carnival made me laugh out loud. "That's mah wife!"
- The scene where they were all riding in the Trabant and Adam couldn't get out was cute.

Yeah, cute band moments! Teehee, Bono and Adam have so much brotherly love. Ok, I'm watching the very end when they're walking the bridge in Berlin, and they switch places when the camera cuts from their backs to their fronts (after they emerge from behind the pillar). Very distracting! (My eye is always drawn to the silver beacon that is Adam's head )

 

[nathan1977]

I SKIMMED At The End of The World (or, I'm an old lady with dementia) but I recall Edge did say something TO THE EFFECT of 'we never considered dumping Adam', but I'm 80& sure this was during the early days when the other 3 were questioning Christianity and it's appropriateness for a rock band, not the AB era. So I shan't look the quote up.


Whether it was a happy relationship or not, we'll never know, and it's pretty subjective. I remember the part when he was wooing Naomi and of course he was happy when he snagged her. She qas a cartoonish diva in the book, but the most laidback member of U2 didn't seem to mind, in the words of Flanagan

Flanagan talks about how Adam and Naomi had a row in the summer of 93, which led to Adam falling off the wagon and ordering out for a number of prostitutes and paying for them with a credit card, leaving an ugly trail of proof. The only comment from Principal was that Adam and Naomi had since reconciled. (And Flanagan insinuates that bringing Naomi out on stage during the Dublin 93 show was an attempt to stave off paparazzi speculation about the strength of their relationship.)

And also in the Flanagan book, Edge quickly agrees when Flanagan asks if U2 could survive without one or more of the members. Edge says yes, though he then consents that it wouldn't be the same band. So while you would be hard-pressed to say that they "seriously considered dumping Adam," you wouldn't be beyond the pale to say that they perhaps considered it.

 

[Nick66]

That's all true...but the core audience, people buying the AB remaster, the big fans, already know all this.

Well, the "core audience" knows almost all of it.

 

[Nick66]

Originally Posted by Nick66
And apparently Adam's problems eventually got so bad that there was talk for a brief period of time of a U2 future w/o Adam.

And also in the Flanagan book, Edge quickly agrees when Flanagan asks if U2 could survive without one or more of the members. Edge says yes, though he then consents that it wouldn't be the same band. So while you would be hard-pressed to say that they "seriously considered dumping Adam," you wouldn't be beyond the pale to say that they perhaps considered it.

I never said they were "seriously considering dumping Adam". Why did you put that in quotes? I just said there was brief talk of it...which there was, and not just from Edge, I think McG mentioned the possibility several times as well (which is ironic b/c for a long time McG was closer to Adam than any of the others).

 

[gvox]

 

[gherman]

I loved it. Don't know what all the bitching is about...

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I loved it. Don't know what all the bitching is about...

You must be new here...

 

[catlhere]

I very much enjoyed it too. I do agree with those who would have liked to see a little bit more of the "Classic Albums" style documentary where they explain each track and the specific parts they played on them, but that's not what the movie was about. It was to show what the band was going through during that time. So I understand that most of the movie wasn't so much about the songs in particular but the group as a whole. How they found a way to work together again when it very easily could have gone south. Good stuff, I'll watch it again when Showtime airs it.

Still, I would love to see them profile the rest of the album like they did with 'One' in the movie. Dip into the old tapes of the sessions and talk about how they came up with specific chords, lyrics and drum patterns, etc. That stuff could keep me entertained for hours.

 

[Nick66]

It's all in Flanagan's book. You might want to check it out (it's at least a 7th grade reading level though, you know, so you might have to work up to it).

 

[U2girl]

You could try re-reading Flanagan if that's your source for "dropping Adam" discussion in the band.

 

[Nick66]

You could try re-reading Flanagan if that's your source for "dropping Adam" discussion in the band.

Again with the quotes. Where did I say "dropping Adam?" Apparently, you're saying I said that, because you put it in quotes. So please just point out to me where I said that.

 

[gvox]

(it's at least a 7th grade reading level though, you know, so you might have to work up to it).

Ah Nick, you never fail to disappoint with the personal jabs. I've been keeping it light with my somewhat off-kilter humour, which usually isn't aimed at anyone in particular, the cartoon you quoted included. Please exercise your right to ignore my posts if they're going to lead you to further attempts to bait/troll for a fight, thanks.

 

[Nick66]

Ah Nick, you never fail to disappoint with the personal jabs. I've been keeping it light with my somewhat off-kilter humour, which usually isn't aimed at anyone in particular, the cartoon you quoted included. Please exercise your right to ignore my posts if they're going to lead you to further attempts to bait/troll for a fight, thanks.

Nice try. Your little pic was directed at me (don't embarrass yourself by trying to deny it), as was your little crow pic. It's cute, it's passive aggressive, but it's also transparent. In fact, I thought we'd come to an understanding until I saw your little pic there. So, I'll be happy to ignore you...unless you want to keep picking fights.

And you really just want to ignore each other, you can start by not responding to this post.

 

[gvox]

Nice try. Your little pic was directed at me (don't embarrass yourself by trying to deny it), as was your little crow pic. It's cute, it's passive aggressive, but it's also transparent. In fact, I thought we'd come to an understanding until I saw your little pic there. So, I'll be happy to ignore you...unless you want to keep picking fights.

Nick others have recently cracked jokes at you, even calling you by name. You didn't attack them. You have clearly shown again and again that you have a vendetta against me. That's the only thing transparent here.

I repeat, my joke was not aimed at you in particular, it was referencing these repeated discussions that pop up speculating about band member's personal lives and substance abuse. It's a recurring theme that you've not been party to, I guess. I regret that it struck a sore spot with you and that you haven't been able to move past previous disagreements.

Please refrain from personally attacking me again. I think you've been told that enough.

 

[Nick66]

Nick others have recently cracked jokes at you, even calling you by name. You didn't attack them. You have clearly shown again and again that you have a vendetta against me. That's the only thing transparent here.

I repeat, my joke was not aimed at you in particular, it was referencing these repeated discussions that pop up speculating about band member's personal lives and substance abuse. It's a recurring theme that you've not been party to, I guess. I regret that it struck a sore spot with you and that you haven't been able to move past previous disagreements.

Please refrain from personally attacking me again. I think you've been told that enough.

The only person who has "told" me anything about responding to you is you. So let's dispense with that nonsense right away.

Secondly, with the occasional lull, it's become sport for you to throw repeated barbs my way for months, since the "Why do you care" nonsense. Then you get upset and offended when I have the temerity to respond.

So considering your record of attacking me (and others) here, you'll understand if I saw this as yet another attack. If it was indeed not directed at me, then I apologise for responding in kind. I've been told by people on here everything from you're a complete jerk to "Gvox isn't so bad". I'm just trying to figure out which Gvox I'm dealing with.

 

[gvox]

No Nick, I don't understand your responses and unwarranted attacks. I think you have a hard time letting go of things, and this is been proven over and over. In addition, even with your so-called apology/explanation of things, you can't resist further character assault, dredging up silly quibbles, and your pathetic last resort "considering your track record blah blah blah". It's just ridiculous. If you don't like my posts, PUT ME ON IGNORE. Don't respond, and don't attack me.

If you continue to take things I say generally and aimed at noone in particular and twist them to somehow justify further personal attacks on me, they will be reported.

This argument is over. Stop finding things to pick fights about.

 

[Nick66]

No Nick, I don't understand your responses and unwarranted attacks. I think you have a hard time letting go of things, and this is been proven over and over. In addition, even with your so-called apology/explanation of things, you can't resist further character assault, dredging up silly quibbles, and your pathetic last resort "considering your track record blah blah blah". It's just ridiculous. If you don't like my posts, PUT ME ON IGNORE. Don't respond, and don't attack me.

If you continue to take things I say generally and aimed at noone in particular and twist them to somehow justify further personal attacks on me, they will be reported.

This argument is over. Stop finding things to pick fights about.

Gvox, there are only a couple people I've had a serious problem with on here, and you're one of them, and both of you have run into trouble with others before and been warned about it. Now, as long as you don't continue to direct attacks my way, there's no reason for us to have any problems. Ignore me, and I'll ignore you.

 

[gvox]

Nick: It is not your place to remind anyone about any warnings they've had. You are not, and never will be, a mod. Leave their job to them.

I have directed no attack your way, stop twisting it to somehow excuse you to lob yet another insult my way.

 

[Moser]

Um...let's not hijack threads.