SOE FAN + industry reviews only

[BEAL]

We live in a societies now that value cynicism and flat out hate. No one has time for joy, for peace, for love. Instead it's "Oh, i wonder what skeletons they have" or "Who the fuck does he/she think they are preaching about kindness??? Fuck you!"

The internet has given rise to this mentality, where it feels good to put others down.

John Lennon would not survive in this world.
Marvin Gaye wouldn't either.

Hell, Jesus Christ wouldn't stand a chance with all his talk about compassion, service to others, and love.

U2 come from a different era, their influences are obviously from another time. So they are an easy target because Bono puts his heart on his sleeve and is a loud mouth. So it's easy to hate him more when it does come out that he's made an investing mistake, or the U2 business dodges some Irish Taxes.....

Most negative reviews focus on this stuff. It's sad, but just ignore it.

At least with some of the reviews that aren't 100% positive, they've been a little more fair. I've been a U2 fan all my life, and my initial review of the album would be 4 stars. It could move up to 5, or down to 3 over time depending on how this album works within the framework of my life.

The only thing I knock the album for is the songs feel a little too short and neat for U2. Extend a few of the songs out, and I think I could push it closer to the 5

 

[BigMacPhisto]

It’s strange to say but it seems that fans on this forum are more equipped to objectively review the album than professional critics.

I did a spit take.

 

[Jmoro]

Metacritic at 62 now with 10 reviews.
Unfucking believable. It's such a brilliant record.

 

[Sickly Vulpine]

Can 'Songs of Experience' make U2 matter again?

Half article, half review. Fairly written, but not overly positive either. Don't know if the 2 1/2 stars is out of four or five.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Metacritic at 62 now with 10 reviews.
Unfucking believable. It's such a brilliant record.

Alright then, what are your thoughts on some better received albums from this year? How about the new Fleet Foxes LP or War on Drugs or....

Because I don't think anybody who listens to the most exciting new music out there would find anything "brilliant" about a record as middle-of-the-road and bland as SOE.

 

[superchuk5]

Can 'Songs of Experience' make U2 matter again?

My take is that if an artist gives a stated intention for a piece of work - whether it's film, TV, music, painting, sculpture, etc. - a review needs to ask and answer the question "did they succeed? If so, how? If not, how?"

Some of the pans aren't doing that, but at least this leaning-negative review asks and answers the question.

I think the album succeeds at its intention. It's perfectly ok to disagree, but a review that doesn't wrestle with this questions is incomplete.

 

[corianderstem]

Yeah, that was a decent review, even if I liked it a lot more than that guy did.

 

[Sickly Vulpine]

https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/mu...-safe-space/AGn1OrGtg3CjvWJM3noceL/story.html

Boston Globe. Mixed. Not much of a review.

 

[JoRu]

We live in a societies now that value cynicism and flat out hate. No one has time for joy, for peace, for love. Instead it's "Oh, i wonder what skeletons they have" or "Who the fuck does he/she think they are preaching about kindness??? Fuck you!"

The internet has given rise to this mentality, where it feels good to put others down.

John Lennon would not survive in this world.
Marvin Gaye wouldn't either.

Hell, Jesus Christ wouldn't stand a chance with all his talk about compassion, service to others, and love.

U2 come from a different era, their influences are obviously from another time. So they are an easy target because Bono puts his heart on his sleeve and is a loud mouth. So it's easy to hate him more when it does come out that he's made an investing mistake, or the U2 business dodges some Irish Taxes.....

This is exactly it. It's been brewing and going on for a while, but the backlash against optimism and compassion in culture and all of society is truly in its peak right now (that's not saying it's gonna get better any time soon); Bono saying in interviews that the joy in their music is some kind of defiance sounded ridiculous and cheesy to me at first, but the more I think about it and read these kinds of reviews...he's kinda right though, isn't he? In a way it is defiance, except as of right now I feel lots of people don't want that.

 

[Sickly Vulpine]

My take is that if an artist gives a stated intention for a piece of work - whether it's film, TV, music, painting, sculpture, etc. - a review needs to ask and answer the question "did they succeed? If so, how? If not, how?"

Some of the pans aren't doing that, but at least this leaning-negative review asks and answers the question.

I think the album succeeds at its intention. It's perfectly ok to disagree, but a review that doesn't wrestle with this questions is incomplete.

Agreed about the importance of asking the correct questions when critiquing and that the band mostly succeeded in what it was going for on this outing.

 

[purpleblackeye]

Alright then, what are your thoughts on some better received albums from this year? How about the new Fleet Foxes LP or War on Drugs or....



Because I don't think anybody who listens to the most exciting new music out there would find anything "brilliant" about a record as middle-of-the-road and bland as SOE.

My favorite records of this year are from LCD sound system, the national, grizzly bear and queens of the sound stage and I still think SOE is brilliant.

 

[Irvine511]

I can take the point that this is a safe record. It is. And to love it, you have to love — or at least be emotionally invested — in U2.

Those Philly and Boston reviews aren’t unfair.

 

[U2freakboy]

Metacritic at 62 now with 10 reviews.
Unfucking believable. It's such a brilliant record.

I noticed that the glowing AP review wasn’t on there. Surely that should be counted by Metacritic shouldn’t it? That’s the review more Americans will read than any other.

Also, we know the Rolling Stone review will help its current score.

 

[U2freakboy]

It’s also amazing to see how almost every critic has a different favorite song on the album. I’ve read everything from Lights of Home, to Best Thing, to Landlady, to Little Things to Love is Bigger — which to me, speaks to the strength of the album.

 

[RH87]

We live in a societies now that value cynicism and flat out hate. No one has time for joy, for peace, for love. Instead it's "Oh, i wonder what skeletons they have" or "Who the fuck does he/she think they are preaching about kindness??? Fuck you!"

The internet has given rise to this mentality, where it feels good to put others down.

John Lennon would not survive in this world.
Marvin Gaye wouldn't either.

Hell, Jesus Christ wouldn't stand a chance with all his talk about compassion, service to others, and love.

U2 come from a different era, their influences are obviously from another time. So they are an easy target because Bono puts his heart on his sleeve and is a loud mouth. So it's easy to hate him more when it does come out that he's made an investing mistake, or the U2 business dodges some Irish Taxes.....

Most negative reviews focus on this stuff. It's sad, but just ignore it.

At least with some of the reviews that aren't 100% positive, they've been a little more fair. I've been a U2 fan all my life, and my initial review of the album would be 4 stars. It could move up to 5, or down to 3 over time depending on how this album works within the framework of my life.

The only thing I knock the album for is the songs feel a little too short and neat for U2. Extend a few of the songs out, and I think I could push it closer to the 5

Well Said. I haven't listened to the album yet. It will take a few listens as it always does to develop an opinion.

 

[TinKnight]

It’s also amazing to see how almost every critic has a different favorite song on the album. I’ve read everything from Lights of Home, to Best Thing, to Landlady, to Little Things to Love is Bigger — which to me, speaks to the strength of the album.

I've heard American Soul from at least two critics now, so its like, can we trust anyone?

 

[corianderstem]

I can take the point that this is a safe record. It is. And to love it, you have to love — or at least be emotionally invested — in U2.

Those Philly and Boston reviews aren’t unfair.

I agree.

And I'd say my own reaction to it also comes from a place of acceptance of where U2 is at this stage in their career. I totally understand frustration at U2 being "safe" and not taking risks.

I've just come to terms with where they are and am mostly okay with it, so it's easy for me to be pleasantly surprised to find a lot to love in the last handful of albums.

 

[U2freakboy]

I've heard American Soul from at least two critics now, so its like, can we trust anyone?

Ha! Very true. I actually like the song but I certainly wouldn’t rank it anywhere near the best.

 

[superchuk5]

I noticed that the glowing AP review wasn’t on there. Surely that should be counted by Metacritic shouldn’t it? That’s the review more Americans will read than any other.

Also, we know the Rolling Stone review will help its current score.

It probably works like Rotten Tomatoes. The site may automatically include scored reviews, but in most cases the critic submits their review and if they did not assign a score, they'll assign one for Metacritic.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

My favorite records of this year are from LCD sound system, the national, grizzly bear and queens of the sound stage and I still think SOE is brilliant.

Liar!

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Hey kids

Remember when you all made fun of the Rolling Stones when they released Voodoo Lounge and Bridges To Babylon?

Yea. Now you know how it feels.

Relax, have a glass of wine that these young whipper snappers can't even afford, and don't give a turkey about what some douche who dictates to you what the "exciting music" is says.

But remember, you were once that douche.

 

[purpleblackeye]

Liar!

You’re right. I was trying to show my Pitchfork hipster cred. Only SOE is brilliant.

 

[Sickly Vulpine]

Music review: Fully integrated U2 thrill with ‘Songs of Experience’

The Detroit News. Short review. Grade: A. Says it's Associated Press, but I don't believe it's the same one from before.

Edit: strike that. It's the same review.

 

[NintendoFan204]

Lol. Music "critics". Does anyone actually read music reviews before listening to an album? I've never understand how music can be reviewed. It's one of the most subjective things there is. For movies and TV shows reviews make sense to me, but I never understood the point of album reviews.

I haven't heard the album yet, but I'm sure I will love it. Fuck music critics. I care more about what the fans think, and hopefully the band does as well.

 

[purpleblackeye]

Why don’t we just pull a maniac Trump and call all bad reviews #FakeNews. The Rolling Stones review will be U2’s Fox and Friends. [emoji57]

 

[Haywa1979]

Alright then, what are your thoughts on some better received albums from this year? How about the new Fleet Foxes LP or War on Drugs or....

Because I don't think anybody who listens to the most exciting new music out there would find anything "brilliant" about a record as middle-of-the-road and bland as SOE.

This has to be a joke, right? War on Drugs is as derivative as it gets, and doesn't hold a candle to SOE.

 

[Haywa1979]

I agree.

And I'd say my own reaction to it also comes from a place of acceptance of where U2 is at this stage in their career. I totally understand frustration at U2 being "safe" and not taking risks.

I've just come to terms with where they are and am mostly okay with it, so it's easy for me to be pleasantly surprised to find a lot to love in the last handful of albums.

To be fair, they took some risks with NLOTH and got crushed by the critics for it.

 

[purpleoscar]

We live in a societies now that value cynicism and flat out hate. No one has time for joy, for peace, for love. Instead it's "Oh, i wonder what skeletons they have" or "Who the fuck does he/she think they are preaching about kindness??? Fuck you!"

The internet has given rise to this mentality, where it feels good to put others down.

John Lennon would not survive in this world.
Marvin Gaye wouldn't either.

Hell, Jesus Christ wouldn't stand a chance with all his talk about compassion, service to others, and love.

U2 come from a different era, their influences are obviously from another time. So they are an easy target because Bono puts his heart on his sleeve and is a loud mouth. So it's easy to hate him more when it does come out that he's made an investing mistake, or the U2 business dodges some Irish Taxes.....

Most negative reviews focus on this stuff. It's sad, but just ignore it.

At least with some of the reviews that aren't 100% positive, they've been a little more fair. I've been a U2 fan all my life, and my initial review of the album would be 4 stars. It could move up to 5, or down to 3 over time depending on how this album works within the framework of my life.

The only thing I knock the album for is the songs feel a little too short and neat for U2. Extend a few of the songs out, and I think I could push it closer to the 5

Ressentiment - Wikipedia

"It is a fundamental truth of human nature that man is incapable of remaining permanently on the heights, of continuing to admire anything. Human nature needs variety. Even in the most enthusiastic ages people have always liked to joke enviously about their superiors. That is perfectly in order and is entirely justifiable so long as after having laughed at the great they can once more look upon them with admiration; otherwise the game is not worth the candle. In that way ressentiment finds an outlet even in an enthusiastic age. And as long as an age, even though less enthusiastic, has the strength to give ressentiment its proper character and has made up its mind what its expression signifies, ressentiment has its own, though dangerous importance. …. the more reflection gets the upper hand and thus makes people indolent, the more dangerous ressentiment becomes, because it no longer has sufficient character to make it conscious of its significance. Bereft of that character reflection is a cowardly and vacillating, and according to circumstances interprets the same thing in a variety of way. It tries to treat it as a joke, and if that fails, to regard it as an insult, and when that fails, to dismiss it as nothing at all; or else it will treat the thing as a witticism, and if that fails then say that it was meant as a moral satire deserving attention, and if that does not succeed, add that it was not worth bothering about. …. ressentiment becomes the constituent principle of want of character, which from utter wretchedness tries to sneak itself a position, all the time safeguarding itself by conceding that it is less than nothing. The ressentiment which results from want of character can never understand that eminent distinction really is distinction. Neither does it understand itself by recognizing distinction negatively (as in the case of ostracism) but wants to drag it down, wants to belittle it so that it really ceases to be distinguished. And ressentiment not only defends itself against all existing forms of distinction but against that which is still to come. …. The ressentiment which is establishing itself is the process of leveling, and while a passionate age storms ahead setting up new things and tearing down old, raising and demolishing as it goes, a reflective and passionless age does exactly the contrary; it hinders and stifles all action; it levels. Leveling is a silent, mathematical, and abstract occupation which shuns upheavals. In a burst of momentary enthusiasm people might, in their despondency, even long for a misfortune in order to feel the powers of life, but the apathy which follows is no more helped by a disturbance than an engineer leveling a piece of land. At its most violent a rebellion is like a volcanic eruption and drowns every other sound. At its maximum the leveling process is a deathly silence in which one can hear one’s own heart beat, a silence which nothing can pierce, in which everything is engulfed, powerless to resist. One man can be at the head a rebellion, but no one can be at the head of the leveling process alone, for in that case he would be leader and would thus escape being leveled. Each individual within his own little circle can co-operate in the leveling, but it is an abstract power, and the leveling process is the victory of abstraction over the individual. The leveling process in modern times, corresponds, in reflection, to fate in antiquity. ... It must be obvious to everyone that the profound significance of the leveling process lies in the fact that it means the predominance of the category ‘generation’ over the category ‘individuality’." —Søren Kierkegaard, The Present Age (Alexander Dru tr.), 1962, pp. 49–52

 

[purpleoscar]

Hey kids

Remember when you all made fun of the Rolling Stones when they released Voodoo Lounge and Bridges To Babylon?

Yea. Now you know how it feels.

Relax, have a glass of wine that these young whipper snappers can't even afford, and don't give a turkey about what some douche who dictates to you what the "exciting music" is says.

But remember, you were once that douche.

Yes we were, and I remember U2 were criticizing The Rolling Stones in the '80s.

It probably is ageism.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Yes we were, and I remember U2 were criticizing The Rolling Stones in the '80s.

It probably is ageism.

It's not ageism. It's the natural course of things.