Shuttlecock XIX - send $40 now for your opportunity to not get a presale code

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe I've said this before, I don't remember. The point of any review site should be exposure to new acts, not confirmation of what you already like. If you're a U2 fan and you enjoy the new album, what Pitchfork thinks should be of zero significance. And it's not like U2 is in some position where they need the exposure to draw in fans. A middling review does not affect them in the slightest, nor should it affect the fans.
 
The only U2 album that Pitchfork has been way off about is NLOTH. Even if you view that album as wildly inconsistent and don't focus on its strengths, it's still more of a 6 than a 4. SOI deserved a poor review and they weren't overly harsh toward ATYCLB or HTDAAB. The reissues were all reviewed very kindly. SOE will probably receive a middling review because that's what the album is.

The bias that Rolling Stone has toward U2, however, is transparent and increasingly appears to have a monetary basis. There's a site I disregard altogether.
 
iron yuppie said:
Maybe I've said this before, I don't remember. The point of any review site should be exposure to new acts, not confirmation of what you already like. If you're a U2 fan and you enjoy the new album, what Pitchfork thinks should be of zero significance. And it's not like U2 is in some position where they need the exposure to draw in fans. A middling review does not affect them in the slightest, nor should it affect the fans.
Click to expand...
The point of any review site should be to give unbiased reviews.

Now that's clearly not easy to do with art in general. People like what they like... and I agree that the best use of Pitchfork is to find new artists that you may otherwise not have noticed.

But they have their clear biases, just like Rolling Stone does.
 
I hate multi-quoting on my phone, so here's some random commute posting:

1. I totally forgot about One Step Closer. That's my pick for worst on Bomb, since I forgot its existence.

2. Popmartijn, was it you who picked White As Snow? I WILL FIGHT YOU.

3. I don't have kids and find the new songs/lyrics lovely.

4. I can barely even rank the songs on the album yet, much less rank it among other albums.

5. Unrelated to anything else, I think I might need to get reading glasses. Oh, the aging.
 
Last edited:
iron yuppie said:
Maybe I've said this before, I don't remember. The point of any review site should be exposure to new acts, not confirmation of what you already like.
Click to expand...

I made a point for years of picking up issues of Q magazine despite those import prices because I have found so much new-to-me music through them.

Love their review section. I pay attention to their ratings, but if something sounds interesting even with a lower rating, I'll see if it's on Spotify.

I finally bit tue bullet and bought a digital subscription. Looked at subscribing to the real thing, but the cost was a lot more than me even picking up an issue every month.

I miss flipping through the pages, though. Totally not the same and I'm much less inclined to read the articles on my phone.
 
corianderstem said:
5. Unrelated to anything else, I think I might need to get reading glasses. Oh, the aging.
Click to expand...

Getting there myself. The distance between the book and my eyes has been increasing gradually, and I'm starting to occupy too much space in my crowded subway commute.
 
I don't think they are biased against U2 so much as they use U2's attitude towards their own work against them. If they weren't so desperate to be relevant in how they address the press, it would be much less offensive to the new generation of music reviewers. It's the refusal to step off the pedestal and "age gracefully" that irks them. And there's some legitimacy to that.

Not that I like Pitchfork. I just don't think it's as simple a resentment as is being implied here.
 
PhilsFan said:
I don't think they are biased against U2 so much as they use U2's attitude towards their own work against them. If they weren't so desperate to be relevant in how they address the press, it would be much less offensive to the new generation of music reviewers. It's the refusal to step off the pedestal and "age gracefully" that irks them. And there's some legitimacy to that.

Not that I like Pitchfork. I just don't think it's as simple a resentment as is being implied here.
Click to expand...
I can go along with this line of thought
 
gvox said:
Quick:

What’s the worst song on each of these albums?

Zooropa
Pop
All That You Can’t
How to Dismantle
No Line
Innocence
Click to expand...

Kenneth Edmonds
If God Will Send Charlie's Girls
The Princess of Monaco
Yahweh (any of the last 3 could work)
White as Snow
Song For Someone
 
I finally had a listen to SOE this morning, or at least the 13 tracks of the album proper.

I have to say I'm pretty disappointed. Way too much adult contemporary U2, and I have to agree with Ax on the lyrics. Bono has become way too dependent on platitudes and cliches.

The Blackout is still probably my favorite track on the album. Nothing else really jumped out at me. I find the back half of SOI more interesting. The comparisons of SOE to AB, well, I'm definitely not hearing it.

Red Flag Day is OK, but I liked it better when it was called A Forest.
 
Damn, based off the samples I’ve listened to this morning this is the U2 album I’ve been waiting for, for a long time. Good lord I can’t wait to get the LP on Friday.
 
Danny Boy said:
I have to agree with Ax on the lyrics. Bono has become way too dependent on platitudes and cliches.
Click to expand...

i really don't get this criticism and imo it's a little unfair to act like this is some new and unfortunate turn. i listened to everything from boy to war yesterday and this is clearly the way he's always been. it's just that back then the platitudes and cliches were a lot more overtly religious or nakedly political rather than based on personal experiences.

yes in the late 80s-90s period he found a talent for being a bit more surreal and poetic, but this really rings to me like people criticizing paul mccartney for writing so many corny love songs in the 70s and 80s and pining for the days of his more abstract beatles lyrics while conveniently forgetting about songs like p.s. i love you and love me do.
 
Last edited:
A review that isn't two thirds recapping the band's recent history or focusing on Bono's Bono-ness, would be welcome
 
I'll be writing a review tonight or tomorrow and I refuse to mention anything about the SOI/Apple release.
 
I'm tempted to bring up taxes, just so I can use my new go-to Bono line:

"If the worst scandal your favorite rock star is caught up in 2017 involves taxes, you really can't complain."

I'll probably just spend 18 paragraphs speculating on his health issue and conclude that the doctor left a scalpel inside of him during one of his many surgeries.

And then add 3 more paragraphs bitching about those ugly glasses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Headache in a Suitcase
  • Sticky
U2 in Vegas - Tips for booking hotels, flights and other Vegasy type things.
20 21 22
Replies
642
Views
34K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
MrsSpringsteen
Bono Wants One Campaign To Be NRA For The World's Poor
Replies
2
Views
631
lazarus
lazarus
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 2 Listening Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
6K
namkcuR
N
T
A must read article: An Open Letter To U2: What Happened To Your Relevance?
4 5 6
Replies
159
Views
12K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
lharper
Innocent Experience - Chapter 6
Replies
3
Views
1K
lharper
lharper

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom