Grammys 2009

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

mirrorballman12

The Fly
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
88
U2's last two albums dominated the grammys winning a combined fifteen. Will NLOTH do the same even though Bono basically called the award show frivelous. Personally, I do not think the grammys matter any more, but it is always nice to see u2 winning some type of award.


I am new here and hope this is the right forum to post this question in.:wave::wave:
 
no. But look at it this way, if the Grammy's diss NLOTH then thats even worse than if they don't. I mean if they can't even get a Grammy with all of the crap music out there....who do you want to win album or song of the year...Lady GaGa? That would really be the death of the Grammys. Fuck Em!! Though im sure those little statues look good on a shelf..
 
If NLOTH wins album of the year, I want the Grammies to go to U2 as well as Eno and Lanois. They deserved to be recognized.

But the thought of Eno with a Grammy... :lol:
 
I personally like watching the Grammys and I care who wins. It doesn't affect my judgement of an album, but I went out and bought the Plant and Krauss album this year after the Grammys because I saw their songs performed and they sounded great to me. So if U2 wins at the Grammys, at least it'll cause some people to be exposed to this great album and go out and buy it. It's also nice to have to rub in a haters face if you need to.

Magnificent -- ROCK SONG OF THE YEAR. I'm calling it right now. August 6th, 2009 at 1:30 AM Pacific time. Cjboog called it.
 
Crap though the grammys are, they're still big news, U2 certainly see them as a big deal, and yeah, I'm sure NLOTH will do well.
 
that would be cool if Fez-Being Born won Record Of The Year just because it's so damn good.
 
If NLOTH wins album of the year, I want the Grammies to go to U2 as well as Eno and Lanois. They deserved to be recognized.

But the thought of Eno with a Grammy... :lol:

Well that's not how Album of the Year works. The award goes to who it was released under... It could be an album of covers without a single instrument recorded by the artist but if it's released under his/ her name they win the grammy. Now 'Record of the Year' is different, if it was a song that Eno and Lanois contributred than they would receive a Grammy.
 
Yea the Grammys are not what they used to be, but I sure love seeing our boys perform and listening to their crazy acceptance speeches!
 
When HTDAAB won "Album Of The Year" I lost whatever residual respect I had for the Grammys.
 
U2 have reached that point in their career where they could release an album documenting their bowel movements and it would get nominated (and likely win).
 
No Line should win a Grammy more than Atomic Bomb. Its all so fucked up.

Ugh. Alas...the music biz is a durrty world.
 
i think it would be nice to see U2 nominated but then respectfully decline to attend and/or withdrawl their nomination. Why? I dont know really...they could say because "they want to give younger bands a chance at winning" which would be another way to secretly say grammys suck. It might give them some street cred with the young whippersnappers, you know, that coveted demographic this band lost back in the late 90's. :wink:
 
Back
Top Bottom