A quick question for those who saw a Zoo TV show in person.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
The Fly on the DvD was served well by mixing live footage with the show visuals. Obvioulsy one had a different perspective from the show.

Bullet as well was done well by mixing show visuals as well. The Fly was much edgier than Zoo Station and was more rocking than the Elevation version.
 
I honestly have very little actual memory of the ZooTV show I saw. It was my first U2 concert, and almost my first rock concert. It was all kind of a blur, lost in being overwhelmed and overexcited.

What I do remember from the show is from the bootleg, or a mish-mash of all the other Zoo shows I heard/watched via bootlegs over the years.

And I remember our view being blocked by the merchandise stand in the back of the field.

/unhelpful
 
The opening of the concert was spectacular and that's all I remember although I saw the show something like ten times. Still one of my favorites of all time, although I also liked the starkness of Joshua Tree tour.
 
We were about three rows from the stage. Having all those tv screens flashing away while the song pummeled you was pure sensory overload. It was awesome.
 
I saw 3 shows that tour. Two were on the indoor leg early in the tour, Phoenix, AZ and Los Angeles at the Sports Arena. The third was late in '92 during the stadium leg at Dodger Stadium on Halloween. The first leg was an incredibly tough ticket - instant sell outs on Ticketmaster and brokers were getting a lot of money even for crappy nosebleed seats.

For the Phoenix Arizona show, my girlfriend (later my wife) had a business contact who had a pair of decent lower loge reserved seats available a day before that show if we could get there. We lucked out and got a plane flight that afternoon from LA to Phoenix, took a cab to the arena, got our tickets at will call only 10 minutes before U2 came on - perfect timing.

I was pretty impressed with the first half of the show from a visual standpoint. I thought it was pretty ballsy for the band to play only the new album's songs up 'til the B stage segment. The AZ State arena was a lot smaller than most arenas I've seen shows at and the sound was generally excellent. Bono drop kicked a cup of water late in the show which sailed all the way to the back of the arena hitting the mixing desk. My only real complaint for that show was that they didn't play Desire and Ultraviolet for the encore and I did not care much for the distorted guitar version of "Desire."

One thing that I vividly remember was a lot of fans were actually pissed and depressed leaving after the show that the band had "sold out."

I was so impressed with the AZ show, my best friend and I went to the 2nd LA Sports Arena show the following week without tickets and scored mediocre loges from a scalper for a pretty hefty $300 for the pair. This show was a lot better than the AZ show, better performance and they played Desire and Ultraviolet.

The third show later that year unfortunately kind of sucked for me. A group of 8 of us bought tickets during the TM onsale and only scored terrible nosebleeds in the stadium. The sound was awful as were the sightlines and even though the band was using larger video screens and a bigger stage, it still seemed too small a setup for the stadium.

I will say the ZooTV tour performance of "The Fly" was indeed pretty badass all three shows and for me, the highlight of the set. In '92, such extensive use of video screens, tvs, etc on such a big scale was still pretty rare as was the use of a "B Stage."

I will also say I prefer the 2001 Elevation tour version of "The Fly" over the ZooTV and Vertigo tour versions.

T.B.
 
I think there's been discussion 'round these parts now and again about how AB had its detractors when it first came out, that some fans were really taken aback and unhappy with this new sound and apparent new direction.
 
i was aware that a lot of people were put off the second The Fly came out as the first single, and that it had its detractors, but i was surprised to read they were labelled as sellouts. was it seen as U2's attempt at the time to fit in with the grunge music that was popular and a step away from the more anthemic songs of the 80s?
 
I could imagine people leaving one of the Zoo TV shows and being really put off by the difference between what they saw at U2 shows in the 80s and what they were seeing now.

Who knows what they might have meant by "sell out" - I think then and now people threw that term around a lot without a lot of thought. It's not like they were some tiny band before and were making a huge grab for sales with the new show.
 
i was aware that a lot of people were put off the second The Fly came out as the first single, and that it had its detractors, but i was surprised to read they were labelled as sellouts. was it seen as U2's attempt at the time to fit in with the grunge music that was popular and a step away from the more anthemic songs of the 80s?

it seemed that way to a lot off the fans. to quote bono "it was the sound off the 4 off them chopping down the joshua tree", and to add insult to their injury, u2 was not performing live favs like, electric co., sbs, nyd, gloria, etc.

to answer the original question. it was fabulous. i loved the entire zoo tv experience.
 
people don't realise it now, but the public was so sick off u2 after the JT/R&H era it was tough on u2 fans. the band was being ridiculed on every tv channel. bono took the brunt off it. they were too good too fall into the excesses of the rock world, too pious, goody 2 shoes. by the time 1990 rolled around u2 was the most hated band in rock.
then boom! here they are embracing the rock lifestyle, the cliches. some people got the tongue in cheek comedy off it some saw it as "selling out". it was the biggest story in rock. has u2 lost their minds? what the hell is with bono and the leather and the shades? what is up with those fucking goggles? he's like and elvis impersonator from the future.
zoo tv was a major period in the bands history. right on par with the october era crisis. it was the 2nd time the band had to make a choice that would affect the future off u2.
 
Yeah, I think a lot of fans were taken aback by the complete overhaul of both the bands image and music.

I know I certainly was, I had a difficult time trying to get my head around AB and ZOO TV in particular. This didn't seem like the same passionate, emotive band that I'd followed throughout the Eighties. It seemed like an entirely different group of people, which I suppose was the point.

I know that fans at the time were asking themselves whether this was just a facade or if Bono really had lost it. I guess it's a testament to how well he played 'The Fly' that people were unable to tell. I remember him saying in an interview that it didn't matter if the new direction meant that they lost 'the pop kids' because they didn't need them anyway. I know this kind of riled the fans who were upset that they didn't play whatever old classic they wanted to hear. Bono was especially brilliant at foxing the media during this period too, after slating him for much of the previous 10 years, they now found him impossible to pin down.

I actually prefer AB and ZOO TV much more now. I can see that it's just another part of their long career.

U2 learnt a key lesson from The Beatles: that once you reach a certain point of success, you have to go back to scratch and rethink the whole outfit. You have to confound expectations with a complete change in direction, it's the only way to remain relevant. The Beatles were always in flux, they never stood still even for a second, both musically and visually they were always developing into something else. U2 followed a very similiar path, at least for the first 20 years of their career.
 
Friends ,

I saw 5 Zoo Tv shows , and they were some of the best U2 shows I`ve ever seen.
1 indoor Rotterdam `92 and 4 outdoor Rotterdam `93 (3x) and Nijmegen `93

And all five times I was blown away by the whole show , what a ride.
Back in those days , The Fly was just...information overload.

Cheers ,

Mauwer

p.s. check out the Rotterdam 11th May `93 version of The Fly , Bono says Achtung Ya`ll a verse too early and he makes up a cool rap.
 
but the public was so sick off u2 after the JT/R&H ATYCLB/HTDAAB era it was tough on u2 fans. the band was being ridiculed on every tv channel. bono took the brunt off it. they were too good too fall into the excesses of the rock world claw, too pious preachy, goody 2 shoes activism-oriented. by the time 1990 2010 rolled around u2 was the most hated band in rock.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. :)
 
wow really?? interesting to read thanks for sharing! man what i would do to go back in time.

i was aware that a lot of people were put off the second The Fly came out as the first single, and that it had its detractors, but i was surprised to read they were labelled as sellouts. was it seen as U2's attempt at the time to fit in with the grunge music that was popular and a step away from the more anthemic songs of the 80s?

Yeah this is something that is lost on newer fans. ALL the complaints you hear now were being echoed back then.

Just to name a few:

Remixes - many U2 fans saw this as a huge sellout.

MTV - they fully embraced it and lots of folks didn't like that. Trying too hard to grab the younger audience.

Live shows - quit playing their favorites, dressing up, weren't acting sincere. Static setlists, too many props and choreography.

Music - was too surface oriented, too pop, baby this baby that...

And a lot of their Christian music base were totally turned off and I know a few that still won't listen to them today because of that...

You name it, almost every single argument you hear today, you would have heard back then.
 
My impression overhearing the comments from a group of people as we were all leaving the arena after the AZ show was that this particular bunch of people were upset that U2 had somehow abandoned their "Christian" roots (yeah, I was scratching my head wondering wtf they were talking about) by turning towards this full blown "rock star" imagery in the stage production and especially in Bono's new "look."

I really think a certain segment of U2's fans at the time were really in a sort of shock after seeing those shows early in the tour before it was widely known just how much the band had changed their image for that tour. A lot of people who were familiar with the '8-0's version of U2 just didn't "get it" at first even though the album and tour was a huge success right from the start. A lot of other comments I caught that night was complaints about how they didn't play this or that pre-Achtung Baby song.

I remember the day I first heard a promo cd single of The Fly when it was about to be released to radio. The song itself blew me away but what really startled me was the incredibly dense production of the song. It was a total reinvention of the band from top to bottom. I can't think of too many other albums I was so eager to hear after hearing a pre-release single.

A good friend was totally confused by the song and couldn't understand what the band was trying to say or accomplish by releasing such an unconventional leading single. Add to that was the B-side remix and the Clockwork Orange cut that further puzzled many fans at the time. It really wasn't until the album was released and "One" started getting heavy airplay that anyone I knew starting saying "yeah, that's the U2 I know and love."

T.B.
 
I remember going to the computer lab in college to read good old alt.music.U2 (or something like that). Lots of bitching about Achtung and Zooropa.
Holy shit I'm old...
 
Back
Top Bottom