dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
I mean - they played without Adam in Sydney
I think we're also probably over-estimating the value of being the Sphere's debut act. While I have no doubt the venue will be cool as hell, the vast majority of people aren't ever going to visit it, and will just know it as "that arena in Vegas" without much other context. Whatever PR is gained by playing at this venue, it'll be drowned out by "is U2 breaking up???" media attention.
Read on current situation:
- unreasonable guitar music as song vs ep vs album points to this being new things being recorded as a stop gap because the album planned is being delayed until they know more about Larry.
I mean - they played without Adam in Sydney
There was an interview or article recently where Bono says something about one of them being "broken" or "needing fixing" or something along those lines, and that it isn't him this time.
I've been trying to find it in light of the recent revelations but I'm lazy. If anyone recalls where the interview/article that would be great
Headache is vastly overestimating the importance of this venue. It could be bigger on the inside like the TARDIS, but it would still just be a weird venue in Vegas, and a rock band doing a Vegas residency would still be a joke. Vegas itself will still be a joke.
It was a video taken outside one of his promotional appearances.
The idea that they’d play without a member of the band just to be the first to play a venue is preposterous.
My thoughts are Larry being cool with it doesn’t mean the other band members should be cool with it.you've never addressed the "but larry is cool with it" part.
Just because Larry is OK with it, does that make it a good idea given how U2 has been about the four of them, from the very start, for over 40 years now?
I know that Bono being unable to perform could be seen a step too far (although it was the Zoo TV opener where they had to face the prospect of canceling the gig or having Edge sing lead vocals wasn't it?), but vocals aside, then you probably end up at the position where you're saying you could replace Larry or Adam and crack on if it was temporary.
Am just playing devil's advocate, but genuinely don't know how I'd feel about going to see them play live if it wasn't the four of them.
you've never addressed the "but larry is cool with it" part.
My question is, it's been over two years since the last tour wrapped. Wondering why he hasn't already gotten the surgery and been rehabbing over this time period.
Did you tell “gotcha!” before you typed that? But since you asked…
The rest of the band shouldn’t be cool with it for personal and musical reasons: it won’t sound like U2 without him.
You didn’t address my other reasons for thinking it would be an absurd thing for them to do.
I doubt they’re considering playing without him.
Don’t you work for MSG?
It would be absurd because U2 doesn’t sound like U2 without Larry playing drums.
It would be absurd because they can play the venue at a later date - it’s not time sensitive.
It would be absurd to celebrate an album/tour/era with only 3/4 of the band. It would be absurd because they postponed tours when other members were unable to play.
Do you really think that Vegas isn’t a punchline? Come on, man. And the venue, interesting as it may be, will be seen just another weird thing because of where it is. It would be seen differently if it was in a city that was respected.
Don’t you work for MSG?
they played a gig without Bono.