What is the stupidest decision U2 has ever made?

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Being adventurous and taking chances is fine.

Experimenting strictly for the same of experimenting us stupid.

This idea that somehow Pop is what made them into this "we need to be huge, we need them to love us" band, this the 2000s and beyond, is just plain silly.

They have ALWAYS been that band, and every decision they've ever made was towards that goal. Period.

Achtung Baby was as much a response to not being loved as All That You Can't Leave Behind.

 

[Galeongirl]

It makes no sense that you can't just go to the record store and get Achtung Baby on vinyl. I'd love to know why they didn't release it in a standard format. Of all U2's decisions this is the strangest. I can't imagine why someone thought it was a good idea. The Boots Grammy performance is just bad taste, but this was bad business... odd for a band that's all about the biz.

Huh, as far as I'm aware it's been released on vinyl. I have it, it was about 15 euros or something, just went to the recordstore about a gazillion times and then suddenly I found it. So it is available, just very rare.

Those stupid Aung San Suu Kyi masks.

Sent from my Moto X using Tapatalk

Shit that's a good one too!

 

[youarenotimmune]

Being adventurous and taking chances is fine.

Experimenting strictly for the same of experimenting us stupid.

This idea that somehow Pop is what made them into this "we need to be huge, we need them to love us" band, this the 2000s and beyond, is just plain silly.

They have ALWAYS been that band, and every decision they've ever made was towards that goal. Period.

Achtung Baby was as much a response to not being loved as All That You Can't Leave Behind.

 

[DaveC]

They have ALWAYS been that band, and every decision they've ever made was towards that goal. Period.

Achtung Baby was as much a response to not being loved as All That You Can't Leave Behind.

People seem to forget how similar the situation was after R&H to the situation after POP.

It's a shame we got HTDAAB as the follow up this time around instead of Zooropa. That's the difference right there.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

People seem to forget how similar the situation was after R&H to the situation after POP.

It's a shame we got HTDAAB as the follow up this time around instead of Zooropa. That's the difference right there.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I would actually say that Bomb is to All That You Can Leave Behind what Zooropa was to Achtung Baby... taking what worked on the previous album and pushing it even further.

 

[Irvine511]

Being adventurous and taking chances is fine.

Experimenting strictly for the same of experimenting us stupid.

This idea that somehow Pop is what made them into this "we need to be huge, we need them to love us" band, this the 2000s and beyond, is just plain silly.

They have ALWAYS been that band, and every decision they've ever made was towards that goal. Period.

Achtung Baby was as much a response to not being loved as All That You Can't Leave Behind.

Yes, this.

They simply aren't as good as they once were. And that's ok.

And it's not so much that they aren't as good because they're just making the decision to pander to the kids, it's because they just aren't as good as they used to be. It's that simple. The work within is there, the passion is there, but some magic has been lost on the journey to maturity. It happens to EVERYONE. In all walks of life. Appreciate who they are and what they have to offer now, and don't live wishing they will ever be again who they once were.

That said, they are better than any other band (that I can think of) has ever been in their 50s, and perhaps the best thing they can do, given their advanced age, is really focus on the songs since, as old guys, they probably aren't in the best position to be leading rock into the future like they unarguably did in 1992/3.

Biggest mistake? I might have to say the Apple release. It may have permanently tarnished their legacy in a way that no ignored/unappreciated album ever would have.

And Boots was a bad idea. And so was making R&H so dark and serious and pretentious.




Sent from

 

[kod4967]

A few more:

Bosnia satellite hookup concert buzzkill (the free Bosnia concert in contrast was a great idea)

The first time ASOH was dropped from the setlist





Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[CosmoKramer]

This idea that somehow Pop is what made them into this "we need to be huge, we need them to love us" band, this the 2000s and beyond, is just plain silly.

They have ALWAYS been that band, and every decision they've ever made was towards that goal. Period.

Achtung Baby was as much a response to not being loved as All That You Can't Leave Behind.

Shhhh.....people need more reasons to hate millennial U2, so take your logic and rational thinking elsewhere!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Mrs. Garrison]

Aw. Do you seriously think they should not be touring? And do other posters who said so, really think U2 ought to have retired in 2000?

It's not that i don't think they should be touring, it's how they are touring; 6 nights in NY, 6 nights in Cal., etc. If there were a couple of nights in Dallas or Tenn or Fla thrown in there for good measure, i wouldn't have posted that

 

[bobsaget77]

Last tour they were in Norman, Oklahoma which was amazing; I would've never thought they would go there. Luckily, I lived in Norman at the time so I went.
Nowhere even close to OKC/Dallas this time around which is quite mind boggling they don't at least take a quick whip across Dallas/OKC/Houston/San Antonio. They all have plenty large enough venues......


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[popacrobat]

I'm sure they'll bring the stadium tour to the south in 2016.

 

[Hayward79]

Although U2 might not be as CONSISTENTLY great as they were in the past, they still are often able to conjur up material that is just as good as anything they've ever done. Moment of Surrender, Every Breaking Wave, Breathe, and The Troubles are a few examples. So I suppose I would disagree in general with the statement "they are just not as good as they were." I also have always felt that the first six songs on ATYCLB are as good as anything they have ever done.


Worst decisions? I have three, in no particular order:


1. Boots as the first single/Grammy performance - this damaged U2 to such an incredible extent that they are still having real trouble recovering from it, to the extent that I feel like it retroactively soured people on the two albums that came before it. The world was in the middle of the Great Recession, people were pretty scared about what was going to happen next, U2 hadn't delivered an album in nearly 5 years, and suddenly the new song has Bono singing about "sexy boots"???? I WISH, more than almost anything, that I lived in an alternate universe where U2 released Moment of Surrender as the lead single from NLOTH, like they originally intended. It would have bolstered the goodwill and popularity that the band still had after ATYCLB, HTDAAB and the corresponding tours. Moment of Surrender is a beautiful song that would have connected with a lot of people and was very relevant to the time period. Quite simply, it would have been huge.


2. The Discotheque video. Note: not the song, which I recall most people my age at the time (18) very much liked. The video, however, made them look absolutely ridiculous and hurt their image.


3. The Apple deal. All they had to do was say "it's free if you want to download it" and the response would have been uniformly positive. Terrible miscalculation.


I will say that, despite all of the missteps, and despite some mean-spirited reviews from indie-music websites, people really seem to be responding to SOI, and Every Breaking Wave is starting to get some serious airplay here in the States with minimal to no promotion at all. That speaks to the continuing strength and greatness of U2's music.

 

[Hayward79]

\

Runner up:the decision to turn away from the "Stateless" vein and more towards the "Elevation" vein. Might be hand in hand with fear of another so-called POP failure. Whatever the case, U2 from 1998-2000 is the reason for the U2 since. And whatever we can pin that on, is the culprit for dumbest decision, without question, in my mind. Broadly speaking, that means the stupidest decision was when U2 became "U2".[/QUOTE]

Wow. Definitely disagree with this. ATYCLB for me and the incredible Elevation tour and a huge group of fans my age wasn't U2 turning into something they were not, it was U2 finally being comfortable with who they were. And songs like "Stateless", while somewhat interesting from a musical perspective (I guess), barely registered at all because, quite simply, the songs aren't very good.

 

[Mrs. Garrison]

I'm sure they'll bring the stadium tour to the south in 2016.

Maybe, we'll see

 

[DaveC]

I would actually say that Bomb is to All That You Can Leave Behind what Zooropa was to Achtung Baby... taking what worked on the previous album and pushing it even further.

Interesting thought.

I guess then we can take it even further and say the Boots performance at the Grammys was the Discotheque video 2.0?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Bad Exit]

The world was in the middle of the Great Recession, people were pretty scared about what was going to happen next, U2 hadn't delivered an album in nearly 5 years, and suddenly the new song has Bono singing about "sexy boots"???? I WISH, more than almost anything, that I lived in an alternate universe where U2 released Moment of Surrender as the lead single from NLOTH, like they originally intended. It would have bolstered the goodwill and popularity that the band still had after ATYCLB, HTDAAB and the corresponding tours. Moment of Surrender is a beautiful song that would have connected with a lot of people and was very relevant to the time period. Quite simply, it would have been huge.

I agree.

U2 had usually been good at speaking to the world in the right time and that's been a huge part of their success: they came with a purpose and a meaningful message in the superflous 80's; extravagant, sarcastic and ironic in the too serious 90's; they were hopeful in the dark early 00's... finally they messed it up with Boots.

 

[Bad Exit]

Interesting thought.

I guess then we can take it even further and say the Boots performance at the Grammys was the Discotheque video 2.0?

The pattern seems to be:

1. Try something different (TUF)
2. Since it worked, push it forward (TJT)
3. Become arrogant and believe you're entitled to do whatever you want (R&H)
4. Repeat

It doesn't work for Boy-Oct-War, though.

 

[Irvine511]

Although U2 might not be as CONSISTENTLY great as they were in the past, they still are often able to conjur up material that is just as good as anything they've ever done. Moment of Surrender, Every Breaking Wave, Breathe, and The Troubles are a few examples. So I suppose I would disagree in general with the statement "they are just not as good as they were." I also have always felt that the first six songs on ATYCLB are as good as anything they have ever done.

i'm probably one of the bigger lovers/defenders of the 00's of any consistent poster in here, and i love unpopular-for-here songs like Stuck and OOTS. and i agree that MOS, EBW and The Troubles are top-tier U2 songs, and there's a lot of material out there to compete with.

i admire and enjoy craft a great deal, and i love a well-crafted pop song no matter who it's by. for me, pleasure is actually an underrated quality in music amongst people concerned with projecting "taste" or looking to sound credible or informed.

i'll even say that "MMMBop" is a better song than "Smells Like Teen Spirit." it's more essential to *why* people listen to music, and the role it plays in their lives, and throughout their lives.

i think U2 now does craft better than they ever have, and though the quality of his voice has declined, Bono is a better singer (and often lyricist) than he has ever been.

but i admit that there's a "magic" or alchemy that was lost sometime after Zooropa. that was, i think, the tipping point when U2 became "U2." the failure of Pop on many levels i think hurt them more than it should have, and they became people who wrote songs rather than people who expressed emotions via music. some of that is due to becoming "better" in the traditional sense. the transportive quality of AB and JT and, less successfully, in UF and, in its own way, War, is now the exception rather than the rule. i think it's the sound of a band that really writes songs, and does so in spaced apart chunks of time over many years, rather than young men who can do nothing else than write music in a concentrated period of time.

it is all about the songs now, for better and worse.

 

[lazarus]

That's a great observation.


Probably belongs in another part of the forum as opposed to the area where half the people still eat crayons.

 

[U2girl]

The pattern seems to be:

1. Try something different (TUF)
2. Since it worked, push it forward (TJT)
3. Become arrogant and believe you're entitled to do whatever you want (R&H)
4. Repeat

It doesn't work for Boy-Oct-War, though.

Sounds about right.

 

[Bad Exit]

i think U2 now does craft better than they ever have, and though the quality of his voice has declined, Bono is a better singer (and often lyricist) than he has ever been.

but i admit that there's a "magic" or alchemy that was lost sometime after Zooropa. that was, i think, the tipping point when U2 became "U2." the failure of Pop on many levels i think hurt them more than it should have, and they became people who wrote songs rather than people who expressed emotions via music. some of that is due to becoming "better" in the traditional sense. the transportive quality of AB and JT and, less successfully, in UF and, in its own way, War, is now the exception rather than the rule. i think it's the sound of a band that really writes songs, and does so in spaced apart chunks of time over many years, rather than young men who can do nothing else than write music in a concentrated period of time.

it is all about the songs now, for better and worse.

I agree with this.
(This is what I tried to say in the "unpopular opinions" thread a couple of days ago.)

If you stop expecting them to create another AB, and start enjoying the songs, U2 is at a great moment of their careers.

 

[popacrobat]

it is all about the songs now, for better and worse.

I'd bet that Bono would admit to that too. During Vertigo tour, I recall him saying "we're all about the tunes now."

 

[U2girl]

Although U2 might not be as CONSISTENTLY great as they were in the past, they still are often able to conjur up material that is just as good as anything they've ever done. Moment of Surrender, Every Breaking Wave, Breathe, and The Troubles are a few examples. So I suppose I would disagree in general with the statement "they are just not as good as they were." I also have always felt that the first six songs on ATYCLB are as good as anything they have ever done.

The craft replaced the "magic" as they've gotten more experience in songwriting. They just weren't making albums after/since Zooropa (nothing wrong with well-crafted song collections though), and SOI is a great step in the right direction. Once the guitar player stops resting on his laurels we might be getting a real reinvention but that's another story...

The only time they were consistently great was 1983-1987. It's hit or miss other times as far as the outside world is concerned. (or indifference in the case of last two albums). Also, do not think the internet fan forums speak for the whole U2 fanbase.

 

[BVS]

The only time they were consistently great was 1983-1987. It's hit or miss other times as far as the outside world is concerned. (or indifference in the case of last two albums). Also, do not think the internet fan forums speak for the whole U2 fanbase.

I think you'd be crazy to say AB was hit or miss to the "outside world".



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I think you'd be crazy to say AB was hit or miss to the "outside world".



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Well...

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Once the guitar player stops resting on his laurels we might be getting a real reinvention but that's another story...

I won't respond to your Edge criticisms, because, well, you're you...

But what, exactly, would you like them to reinvent themselves as, at this point in their career, that

A ) they haven't already done?

or

B ) wouldn't be incredibly lame and pathetic for a band of their age?


Polka? Pan flute?

 

[trevgreg]

I won't respond to your Edge criticisms, because, well, you're you...

But what, exactly, would you like them to reinvent themselves as, at this point in their career, that

A ) they haven't already done?

or

B ) wouldn't be incredibly lame and pathetic for a band of their age?


Polka? Pan flute?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[LemonMelon]

Edge's guitar playing has gotten really boring though. The argument that Edge only had one guitar tone was total bullshit for a long time (Out of Control, Promenade, Zoo Station, Numb, Playboy Mansion, none of these tracks sounded like the same guy), but now it's basically true. Except he also occasionally picks up a slide and does something whatever with it. Did he give away all of pedals but one to Music Rising?

 

[kod4967]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Here you go. Pan flute U2
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l2HcEbI9DrM


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[An Cat Gav]

That's a great observation.


Probably belongs in another part of the forum as opposed to the area where half the people still eat crayons.

sounds about right.