NLOTH´s real mediocrity trio

[djerdap]

Get on My Boots!

 

[Hewson]

You Shall Follow.

 

[bobsaget77]

Who's Gonna Ride On My Wild Bicycle


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

what about Always Forever Later or 2 Minute Warning? Those are great tunes!

In all seriousness, anyone who doesn't like Slug should be beaten to death with their own shoes.

 

[bobsaget77]

My favorite on OST1 and top 25 overall U2 song.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[LemonMelon]

Won

Those poor buffalo

 

[Hewson]

With and Without Me.

 

[bono_212]

This is quickly turning into the worst Buzzfeed article of all time.

 

[Axver]

Theme From The Swine.

If you dislike Beach Sequence, or if you can't grasp the concept of a pseudonym, you're swine. Enjoy your theme.

 

[cobl04]

Just because I'm a sucker, I'll weigh in on the "Is Passengers a U2 album or not?" question. Here's my take on it:



-- There is no definitive answer to these kinds of questions, so arguing about it endlessly is incredibly pointless. Every U2 fan can have his/her interpretation of it, which is fine.

-- Here is my interpretation of it: "U2" is Bono, Edge, Adam, and Larry. "Passengers" was Bono, Edge, Adam, Larry (or not), and Eno (anyone else? I don't know...). Anyway, since the band decided Eno was a "member" of Passengers, and the band decided the record wasn't "U2", I therefore don't interpret the album as being by U2.





Before someone chimes in with "But-they-put-Miss-Sarajevo-on-a-U2-album" etc., my point above is about THE PASSENGERS ALBUM only.

You are so tedious

 

[VintagePunk]

This is quickly turning into the worst Buzzfeed article of all time.

Clickbait.

 

[Bad Exit]

My take is that it is a Brian Eno album featuring U2. I would even agree if someone said Passengers is its own "group"(i.e. Not U2 or an Eno album).

This is the way I see it aswell.



---

(Still, that doesn't explain how can you dislike Your Blue Room)

 

[djerdap]

I know I shouldn't keep bringing this up, but how in the fuck could it be "a Brian Eno album featuring U2"?

Have you people been actually listening to Eno records?

Edge especially is all over the album. Just because you can't hear any "chiming" riffs, doesn't mean there isn't a lot of guitar on the record.

And although Larry hates it, I think the irony lies in the fact that some of his most memorable drum parts are on that album. I love his work on Your Blue Room and Always Forever Now.

When Bono isn't singing, his musical ideas are some of the most poignant ones he brought to the plate. The piano in Beach Sequence may be primitive, but it's beautiful. It's what this band was all about.

 

[LemonMelon]

The only moment when OS1 truly feels like a pure Eno record to me is Plot 180 because he also produced this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEluoeMLTCI

I'm not saying he outright pillaged his past for Plot 180, but I would argue that he certainly recontextualized this track for a more modern setting, perhaps without realizing it.

 

[djerdap]

Plot 180 is pretty boring anyway. If Passengers was a 10-song album, it would have been a great one. It's still a very good one though.

He pillaged his past with the intro to Cedars of Lebanon alright. On a proper U2 album!

 

[LemonMelon]

Certainly not a popular opinion, but if OS1 were capable of maintaining the quality of its first half across 11-12 songs, it would be a top 5 U2-related project type thing.

Sadly, the second half only works in fits and starts. Still a great record regardless. I'd rather listen to it over anything they've done since, save Pop.

 

[mikal]

Certainly not a popular opinion, but if OS1 were capable of maintaining the quality of its first half across 11-12 songs, it would be a top 5 U2-related project type thing.

Sadly, the second half only works in fits and starts. Still a great record regardless. I'd rather listen to it over anything they've done since, save Pop.

Agreed 100%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bad Exit]

how in the fuck could it be "a Brian Eno album featuring U2"?

Have you people been actually listening to Eno records?

(...)

The only moment when OS1 truly feels like a pure Eno record to me is Plot 180 because...

It's very easy to change those arguments into "Have you people been actually listening to U2 records?" and "The only moment when OS1 truly feels like a pure U2 record to me is..."

The "Eno album ft U2" is obviously an exaggeration, as much as it would be to say that it's a "U2 album ft Eno". The reason is that it is neither Eno nor a U2 album, it's a Passengers album and that's the way they intended it to be. Not sure how it is that confusing.

 

[cobl04]

There are very few arguments on this forum as boring as the "is Original Soundtracks 1 a U2 album". Peddled by the same people with the same bland tastes, something a little bit different therefore it might besmirch the U2 canon.

It's part of their discography, it's great, end of story.

 

[LemonMelon]

You guys may not have believed me at first when I said this was the worst done-to-death argument on the site, but now you know.

 

[djerdap]

I had a long reply to this last asinine argument, but fuck it.

It just doesn't compute how people can think it is equivalent to say "Brian Eno feat U2" and "U2 feat Brian Eno" for this particular record.

 

[digitize]

I just think that OS1 is a great album and I don't care at all how someone chooses to classify it. However, when I think about U2's catalog, I personally include it, because it's an important part of what U2 did and who U2 were in the 90s.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[CosmoKramer]

Peddled by the same people with the same bland tastes, something a little bit different therefore it might besmirch the U2 canon.

So people who love 80's, 90's and 00's U2 albums/songs and rank them in their top 5 but don't like Passengers have "bland tastes"??

To me the boring argument is that in order for U2 to do something interesting it has to be "experimental/different" for U2 or its them just "playing it safe".







Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference

 

[CosmoKramer]

This is the way I see it aswell.







---



(Still, that doesn't explain how can you dislike Your Blue Room)

Your Blue Room on its own is a decent song, atmospheric and has some slight aspect that I enjoy but for me it suffers because it is surrounded by awful "songs" and I associate it with Passengers. If it were on Zooropa or Pop, it may very well get a boost being surrounded by higher quality songs.

But that's just my take....


Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference

 

[mikal]

I just think that OS1 is a great album and I don't care at all how someone chooses to classify it. However, when I think about U2's catalog, I personally include it, because it's an important part of what U2 did and who U2 were in the 90s.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Ding ding!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LemonMelon]

"songs"

Ugh does Passengers even count as music??

 

[BVS]

The pretentious and pomp on both sides of this most asinine argument in this forum since greenslimer is more grating than the original subject of this thread, way to go


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[bono_212]

Agreed. The "your music taste is bland" counter is probably worse than the people who don't think a side project can still be a band project.

 

[Bad Exit]

It just doesn't compute how people can think it is equivalent to say "Brian Eno feat U2" and "U2 feat Brian Eno" for this particular record.

You're right, my mistake. It's not even close.
But still U2 worked on this album, so it would be absurd to call it a "Brian Eno Album" just like that.

Interestingly, both Brian Eno and U2 released albums in 1993 (before Passengers) and in 1997 (after Passengers).
I've included the link to all four albums in the spoiler, in case someone hasn't listened to any of them.

You're right that it wouldn't be equivalent to say "Eno ft U2" and "U2 ft Eno".

---

1993 / 1997

---

1993 / 1997

---

After listen to those 4 albums... in which catalog would fit better this baby?

1995

Why can't we just call it a Passengers's album?

---

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfHCt5z1kd8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWZSDpUq5Ik
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suL_fUn27XA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN6sSJ3lDeM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YaGR8ZX9Zo

---

Plot Twist

I have Passengers in my U2 catalog aswell.
So I'm not complaining.

Sure, in my U2 catalog I also have half of MDH soundtrack, In the Name of the Father, and any collaboration involving any member of U2, so take that with a grain of salt.

(and in my Roger Waters catalog I'm including Pink Floyd albums, The Police albums are in my Sting folder, and Morrissey and The Smiths share the same room... thanks god we can organize our records however way we want to regardless of what the artists intended to do).

 

[An Cat Gav]

I just think that OS1 is a great album and I don't care at all how someone chooses to classify it. However, when I think about U2's catalog, I personally include it, because it's an important part of what U2 did and who U2 were in the 90s.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Agreed.

Also, strange how some of the songs from OS1 by Passengers are featured on U2's 2nd greatest hits package and classified as U2 songs there. Seems like U2 themselves don't see it as being a clear cut non-u2 album either.