You've lived with Get On Your Boots for 5 days...

[ramblin rose]

Uhhh, going back 26 years to 1983: New Year's Day, Pride, With Or Without You, Desire, The Fly, Beautiful Day.

I'd say U2 more often than not puts out one of their best songs as the first single.

I'll take Bad over Pride; Streets/OTH over WOWY; AIWIY over Desire; Acrobat/UTEOW/One over The Fly; Kite/Walk On over Beautiful Day and COBL/Fast Cars over Vertigo for that matter.

From the ones you mention only NYD is probably my favorite from it's album.

GOYB could possibly not be the best song from this album but one of the shorter ones. I don't think releasing a 6 or 7 minute song as the first single was a very feasible option.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

So far it looks like I have more to offer to the discussions than you. All you are doing is calling out people for their negativity. Very original.

I reckon you need a vacation.

 

[GibsonExplorer]

I reckon you need a vacation.

This is true.

 

[digitize]

Initially I liked the song, but I now think I was ready to like almost anything new by U2. One of the reasons why I liked the song is because it had more musical variety than Vertigo. Get on Your Boots felt like it came out of the same vein as Vertigo, but it didn't go for the obvious pop song musicalities. It had interesting transitions and no dominating chorus. That felt refreshing at the time.

Now I can barely listen to the song. The lyrics are not only laughable, but annoy me to death. U2's treatise to appeal to the younger folk is coming off pretty bad. People are defending the song by saying The Fly initially was panned too, but the Fly has much more logical and thoughtful lyrics. The lyrics in that song amount to a complete song. It also felt like it was adults speaking to adult music. U2 is playing a bad version of Family Guy here with random references and breezy associations.

The other problem is that the song is interesting for U2 because they never experimented with this type of free form pop music, but a lot of other bands have and done so to much better effect. The biggest complaint about the Beatles is that they mimicked a lot of other bands musical discoveries and incorporated it into their own catalogue, but their version was more bland and just more radio friendly. I feel like U2 did a similar thing here and instead of expanding upon a known genre, they made it more palpable for the average radio goer.

Does this make me think the whole album will be bad? Not at all. I don't care what anyone says, but to me Even Better than the Real Thing is a lame duck pop song. It has a stupid premise with lyrics that barely pass high school pop romance. Some of it is cute, but barely any of it is memorable. The guitar work just aspires to be competent at best. The rest of Achtung Baby is really good, but it's not a perfect album. This could be the story of No Line on the Horizon, too.

I realize that this was posted many pages ago, but I would like to thank the poster of this for calmly presenting a clear, thought-out case of why they dislike Boots instead of saying that it OMG SUXORS BONO IS OLDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.

 

[mikal]

I realize that this was posted many pages ago, but I would like to thank the poster of this for calmly presenting a clear, thought-out case of why they dislike Boots instead of saying that it OMG SUXORS BONO IS OLDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.

agreed. although i disagree with the poster, i'd rather read a post like that.

 

[The_acrobat]

So after reading some of the comments in here, I went back and listened to GOYB. In my truck, alone, cranked up loud as I drove aimlessly. I NOW GET IT! Once I quit comparing it to U2's past work, quit analyzing every little nuance and just listened to it, I finally found the song a place in my heart. I listened to it about 10 times on that drive, and it really is a grower. I hope the whole album doesn't sound like this, but I dig it. I don't care if I'm the only person in the world who likes it.

 

[Airseven]

The track remains as striking to me as it did when I first heard it. I think it's a neat, fun song.

It's not impressive as a single, but it does get me excited about the new album because of it's production, texture, density, influences, and sonic experimentation. I don't think the album will hinge on Boots as it sits right in the middle of the tracklisting. When we hear the entire album, it should make more sense and have a greater impact.

 

[mikal]

So after reading some of the comments in here, I went back and listened to GOYB. In my truck, alone, cranked up loud as I drove aimlessly. I NOW GET IT! Once I quit comparing it to U2's past work, quit analyzing every little nuance and just listened to it, I finally found the song a place in my heart. I listened to it about 10 times on that drive, and it really is a grower. I hope the whole album doesn't sound like this, but I dig it. I don't care if I'm the only person in the world who likes it.

YAY!

 

[SecretFly]

GOYB could possibly not be the best song from this album but one of the shorter ones. I don't think releasing a 6 or 7 minute song as the first single was a very feasible option.

And if GOYB is the best song on the album I will be curled up in fetal postion with thumb in mouth under a cold shower repeatedly saying GOD WHY OH WHY

 

[digitize]

GOYB is the shortest song on the album, isn't it?

 

[Mango]

I've grown a little tired of Get On Your Boots so I downloaded Get Your Boots On by the Daniel Pemberton TV Orchestra. Now THAT song rocks!

 

[mikal]

fan made remix:

YouTube - get on your boots remix dj americo arg u2 2009 no line on the horizon new single

 

[kassandra]

YAY!

 

[Vlad n U 2]

GOYB is the shortest song on the album, isn't it?

Yeah it probably is, the next shortest is over 4 minutes I believe. I don't like songs that go for under 4 minutes.

 

[eas]

So after reading some of the comments in here, I went back and listened to GOYB. In my truck, alone, cranked up loud as I drove aimlessly. I NOW GET IT! Once I quit comparing it to U2's past work, quit analyzing every little nuance and just listened to it, I finally found the song a place in my heart. I listened to it about 10 times on that drive, and it really is a grower. I hope the whole album doesn't sound like this, but I dig it. I don't care if I'm the only person in the world who likes it.

I had the same experience.

Once I stopped comparing it to Achtung Baby, I enjoyed it much more.

Honestly, I don't mind a much more interesting version of Vertigo if the song serves a purpose in the whole album's flow.

By all acounts we will be getting a strong cohesive album of which Boots is a small part and serves a specific purpose. It's a really fun song!

 

[SecretFly]

I'm starting to like the song more and more. To me its a cool fun song with a groovy tune

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I made a compilation of U2 rockers such as Mofo, The Fly, Big Girls, God Part II, and put Boots on there with it; been listening to it in the car and it fits well right there between all those U2 rock songs...

Serious? Yeah, obviously up against Big Girls, which is just a throw away, but the Fly and Mofo? I can't see how it even remotely compares. I'm just happy that it's way better than the Vertigo/Elevation/All Because of You line of "rock" tracks.

 

[last unicorn]

Strangely enough, GOYB even reminds me of MOFO in some parts. That's something for me, because I'm not a fan of MOFO and don't understand why many fans are praising that song so much, but to each their own, I guess. There are certainly parts in GOYB that are similar to MOFO, because there is a lot going on in both songs.

 

[Elk's Club]

I agree...loads of reviews have said that this song picks up where Vertigo left off. To me it picks up where Love and Peace left off, both thematically and sonically. Although it is a little more light hearted in its delivery. The structure also reminds me of Discotheque.

Please, please don't compare it to Discotheque. I can understand sonic comparisons, but when you're dealing with a rock band that plays guitars and likes to frequent them, that could also be a moot point.

To me Get on Your Boots is the antithesis of Discotheque. The former is a pop melody bridged to a rocking number with some interesting transitions in the guitar work, but the former is a truly depth work of structure and guitar work. I've always said this, but Discotheque is a producer's wet dream.

To explain Discotheque, it's U2's attempt to make a dance song out of a guitar driven four piece band (Bono's vocals being very important). Now some people understand dance songs as repititions of a few number of beats, but better dance music is the layering of beats with constantly moving structural changes. Discotheque not only has the longer length to fit the dance number mode, but it has dramatic tonal changes as well while still featuring many of the same instruments and effects. A normal pop song is the effect of a good chorus over some singing and instruments to bridge them, but Discotheque adds numerous varieties of how to display that chorus. The band is even successful to extend the chorus in interesting and different ways. The fact that the song feels neverending and could go on with the variety of ways in which the simple lyrics are sung enshrines it more to the dance hallmarks.

The more I think about Get on Your Boots, the more I'm reminded of live jazz recorded in an album. U2 played with a lot of familar things in the song, but did so with a little more freedom structurally and made it to some loose ends. The fact that Bono's yell at the 2:30 moment is the biggest highlight shows loose with structure the song really is. No structured chorus dominates the song and there is no series of memorable lyrics which the song goes back to. The title of the song, "Get on Your Boots" is repeated, but in background solitude.

Jazz that is meant to feel like it was recorded live also feels the same way. The production isn't as complex because the music is meant to feel off the cusp. The lyrics in Boots certainly feels that way, too. So I can't see how anyone can see how the detailed structure of Discotheque resembles the quircky Get on Your Boots at all.

 

[djparky]

So after reading some of the comments in here, I went back and listened to GOYB. In my truck, alone, cranked up loud as I drove aimlessly. I NOW GET IT! Once I quit comparing it to U2's past work, quit analyzing every little nuance and just listened to it, I finally found the song a place in my heart. I listened to it about 10 times on that drive, and it really is a grower. I hope the whole album doesn't sound like this, but I dig it. I don't care if I'm the only person in the world who likes it.

agreed- i always try to not to do the comparison thing with new material by any band- doesn't always work mind you

 

[rihannsu]

So after reading some of the comments in here, I went back and listened to GOYB. In my truck, alone, cranked up loud as I drove aimlessly. I NOW GET IT! Once I quit comparing it to U2's past work, quit analyzing every little nuance and just listened to it, I finally found the song a place in my heart. I listened to it about 10 times on that drive, and it really is a grower. I hope the whole album doesn't sound like this, but I dig it. I don't care if I'm the only person in the world who likes it.

See this is where I think a lot of hardcore fans make a big mistake. They start off listening to a new song in an analytical way, trying to figure it all out. What they tend to forget is that usually the reason they became fans in the first place was through "experiencing" a U2 song. U2 are not and never will be traditional musicians. They don't have the same background or mind set towards music even though they have now been in the business for 30+ years. Musical analysis is almost irrelevant because the focus for the band has always been how the songs make you feel and not what they sound like. They try for current sounds not so much for the sounds themselves but because those are the sounds that are reaching the current generation. So the only way to truly judge a U2 songs is to surrender to it and let it move you. Even then you won't necessarily get it but that might be because you don't particularly need it right now.

The beauty of U2 is that sometime down the road that same song that does nothing for you today may just ambush you with exactly what you need. U2 is music to experience not just music to listen to but the full benefit is only felt when you truly open your heart to them. And yes I know full well that this may sound extremely cheesy but that doesn't mean it isn't true. The U2 catalog has done me more good in my life than any self-help book around.

Dana

 

[Zoomerang96]

the chorus has a pretty neat groove, i do admit. there's something interesting about that, but again, it's the lyrics that really, really let me down.

all in all, i don't hate the song, but as fitz. mentioned earlier, this song is not a departure from what the band have done recently (vertigo, xanax/fast cars, all because of you, etc.).

we'll see what the rest of the album brings, but this doesn't exactly whet my appetite. if i had to rate it out of ten, i'd probably give it a five.

 

[Salome]

Dana

The more I think about Get on Your Boots, the more I'm reminded of live jazz recorded in an album. U2 played with a lot of familar things in the song, but did so with a little more freedom structurally and made it to some loose ends. The fact that Bono's yell at the 2:30 moment is the biggest highlight shows loose with structure the song really is. No structured chorus dominates the song and there is no series of memorable lyrics which the song goes back to. The title of the song, "Get on Your Boots" is repeated, but in background solitude.

I agree with this
I actually think this is why years from now I will probably prefer Boots over Discotheque

when I try to think of what Discotheque sounds like I just hear that 1 riff that goes on way too long for my personal liking

with Boots everything just seems to pop up and out again
nothing drones on for too long
I think it's a clever song

 

[bram]

Please, please don't compare it to Discotheque. I can understand sonic comparisons, but when you're dealing with a rock band that plays guitars and likes to frequent them, that could also be a moot point.

To me Get on Your Boots is the antithesis of Discotheque. The former is a pop melody bridged to a rocking number with some interesting transitions in the guitar work, but the former is a truly depth work of structure and guitar work. I've always said this, but Discotheque is a producer's wet dream.

To explain Discotheque, it's U2's attempt to make a dance song out of a guitar driven four piece band (Bono's vocals being very important). Now some people understand dance songs as repititions of a few number of beats, but better dance music is the layering of beats with constantly moving structural changes. Discotheque not only has the longer length to fit the dance number mode, but it has dramatic tonal changes as well while still featuring many of the same instruments and effects. A normal pop song is the effect of a good chorus over some singing and instruments to bridge them, but Discotheque adds numerous varieties of how to display that chorus. The band is even successful to extend the chorus in interesting and different ways. The fact that the song feels neverending and could go on with the variety of ways in which the simple lyrics are sung enshrines it more to the dance hallmarks.

The more I think about Get on Your Boots, the more I'm reminded of live jazz recorded in an album. U2 played with a lot of familar things in the song, but did so with a little more freedom structurally and made it to some loose ends. The fact that Bono's yell at the 2:30 moment is the biggest highlight shows loose with structure the song really is. No structured chorus dominates the song and there is no series of memorable lyrics which the song goes back to. The title of the song, "Get on Your Boots" is repeated, but in background solitude.

Jazz that is meant to feel like it was recorded live also feels the same way. The production isn't as complex because the music is meant to feel off the cusp. The lyrics in Boots certainly feels that way, too. So I can't see how anyone can see how the detailed structure of Discotheque resembles the quircky Get on Your Boots at all.

While I respect your effort to try to put Discotheque into some dance-rock superleague, I don't actually think your description of the song is very accurate. There aren't any "dramatic tonal changes"--at least nothing close to what happens at the end of GOYB. I do think it's an example of well-done layering, and it flows pretty well from verse to chorus to bridge to outro, etc. I like Discotheque as much as the next U2 fan but I don't think it's an example of something particularly "deep", musically or otherwise. I also think that a comparison of GOYB to Discotheque is probably just as legitimate as one to Vertigo or even to EBTTRT. In the end, we will all likely accept that GOYB doesn't fit into a previous U2 song any more than one of their other songs.

Edit: Also, I'd love to see a first encore of GOYB, Vertigo, Discotheque, and Mysterious Ways. Boom-cha.

 

[Cask]

I stil don't like it as a whole. I think the main riff is great, and I like the chorus (not its lyrics). However I really hate the lyrics of the song, the whole execution of the vocals, and I can't listen to the let me in the sound part. To me that part feels very dumb and out of place. I was really looking forward to the song and it has some good stuff, but overall I just don't like it. Hopefully I'll like the rest of the album better.

 

[super fly guy]

So after reading some of the comments in here, I went back and listened to GOYB. In my truck, alone, cranked up loud as I drove aimlessly. I NOW GET IT! Once I quit comparing it to U2's past work, quit analyzing every little nuance and just listened to it, I finally found the song a place in my heart. I listened to it about 10 times on that drive, and it really is a grower. I hope the whole album doesn't sound like this, but I dig it. I don't care if I'm the only person in the world who likes it.

Replace truck with car and that could be me!

 

[iacrobat]

Please, please don't compare it to Discotheque. I can understand sonic comparisons, but when you're dealing with a rock band that plays guitars and likes to frequent them, that could also be a moot point.

To me Get on Your Boots is the antithesis of Discotheque. The former is a pop melody bridged to a rocking number with some interesting transitions in the guitar work, but the former is a truly depth work of structure and guitar work. I've always said this, but Discotheque is a producer's wet dream.

To explain Discotheque, it's U2's attempt to make a dance song out of a guitar driven four piece band (Bono's vocals being very important). Now some people understand dance songs as repititions of a few number of beats, but better dance music is the layering of beats with constantly moving structural changes. Discotheque not only has the longer length to fit the dance number mode, but it has dramatic tonal changes as well while still featuring many of the same instruments and effects. A normal pop song is the effect of a good chorus over some singing and instruments to bridge them, but Discotheque adds numerous varieties of how to display that chorus. The band is even successful to extend the chorus in interesting and different ways. The fact that the song feels neverending and could go on with the variety of ways in which the simple lyrics are sung enshrines it more to the dance hallmarks.

The more I think about Get on Your Boots, the more I'm reminded of live jazz recorded in an album. U2 played with a lot of familar things in the song, but did so with a little more freedom structurally and made it to some loose ends. The fact that Bono's yell at the 2:30 moment is the biggest highlight shows loose with structure the song really is. No structured chorus dominates the song and there is no series of memorable lyrics which the song goes back to. The title of the song, "Get on Your Boots" is repeated, but in background solitude.

Jazz that is meant to feel like it was recorded live also feels the same way. The production isn't as complex because the music is meant to feel off the cusp. The lyrics in Boots certainly feels that way, too. So I can't see how anyone can see how the detailed structure of Discotheque resembles the quircky Get on Your Boots at all.

To the extent that GOYB is driven by Edge's single, picked riff (mirrored by Adam's bass) almost through the entire song, it reminds me of Discotheque. There are some other bits too that remind me of it, I certainly would not argue anything beyond this.

 

[mrex]

I've enjoyed the song from first listen, but haven't played it very often. I usually burn out on the first single, and by the time the album hits, I don't see it as a piece of the album. I'm trying to avoid that this time around.

I think what I like about it, is that it's not obvious at all.

 

[Zoocoustic]

Well, I loved Vertigo and hated the rest of HTDAAB.

I wouldn't say I "hate" Boots, but I don't think it's a very good song. So hopefully, the rest of the album will really wow me.

Truly, I was expecting a lot more from the lead single after a five year gap between albums. There is nothing catchy or memorable about Boots whatsoever, except the title.

 

[bathiu]

Truly, I was expecting a lot more from the lead single after a five year gap between albums.

4 years, 3 months, 8 days