It is called an opinion. I mean I hate TTYW and I don't like OTH...what kind of grass did you smoke???
But that's just me
Some personal thoughts on No Line On The Horizon, 6 months after release
- Thread starter Zoots
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
But that's just me
roy
Refugee
what kind of grass did you smoke???
What a self-important f**king idiot. No change there then...
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
what kind of grass did you smoke???
whatever it was, i don't want it, bad trip...
Be careful 65980 is going to lecture you on how you have no right to make fun of someone's opinion.
At least he should if he was being consistant in his lectures, but I doubt it.
@nielsgov: i just inhaled the smoke of a very big opinion-cigar. uffaaaaa
i really don't like 95% of the last three albums. the smell of these songs remind me on an austrian shithouse near the border to italy. three of the most smelly songs are MOS, UC and IGCIIDCT. i have to go to the rock doctor right know to get some medication against vomitting-sickness. omfg i am dizzy now by the smell of the smelly, stinky trilogy. help!!*)
*) okay, i like KITE, IALW, OSC, WAS and BREATHE and sometimes i don't skip GOYB, SUC and FEZ
i really like to talk to roy
ola roy
are you a man or are yo a boy?
ola roy
what is you favorite toy?
i really don't like 95% of the last three albums. the smell of these songs remind me on an austrian shithouse near the border to italy. three of the most smelly songs are MOS, UC and IGCIIDCT. i have to go to the rock doctor right know to get some medication against vomitting-sickness. omfg i am dizzy now by the smell of the smelly, stinky trilogy. help!!*)
*) okay, i like KITE, IALW, OSC, WAS and BREATHE and sometimes i don't skip GOYB, SUC and FEZ
what a fun and what a joy
i really like to talk to roy
ola roy
are you a man or are yo a boy?
ola roy
what is you favorite toy?
roy
Refugee
what a fun and what a joy
i really like to talk to roy
ola roy
are you a man or are yo a boy?
ola roy
what is you favorite toy?
Oh dear, oh dear. Did you see what he did there?
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Haha! Well, you got me on Mozart! lol! But I think I can argue he was doing better work then than 10 years previous? And you can go ahead and insert whichever classical composers DID survive to a ripe old age! lol! My point stands!
Enough with the name calling.
Haha! Well, you got me on Mozart! lol! But I think I can argue he was doing better work then than 10 years previous? And you can go ahead an insert whichever classical composers DID survive to a ripe old age! lol! My point stands!
You are aware of that little piece of music called the Requiem?
Not to mention my favourite opera of all time "Don Giovanni"although I must say he wrote that 4 years before he died.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
You are aware of that little piece of music called the Requiem?
Not to mention my favourite opera of all time "Don Giovanni"although I must say he wrote that 4 years before he died.
I love Don Giovanni....... not on his first album, was it?
I don't agree with this post 100% (for instance, I don't like TJT much at all), but the general message is absolutely 100% spot on.
what kind of grass did you smoke???
He's not the only one. NLOTH is my second favorite U2 album, while TJT is solidly in the lower half (probably lowest third) of my U2 album rankings.
It is called an opinion. I mean I hate TTYW and I don't like OTH...
But that's just me
I love OTH, but Trip is an absolute joke of a song. It's below Elevafail and Vertifail for me. I Trip Through Your Failures? I Fail Through Your Wires?
I love Don Giovanni....... not on his first album, was it?
lol.. maybe I get confused when it is late. Did you originaly mean he wrote great music when he was young or when he was old? Well actually he was pretty consistent as you know haha. I am tired, sorry
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
U2 actually sounds like they're having fun on Trip, rather than mailing in another hit to frontload the new album with, and the lyrics are far superior. Granted, that's not saying much when it's being compared to Elevation and Vertigo, but Trip is in another league as far as I'm concerned.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I don't agree with this post 100% (for instance, I don't like TJT much at all), but the general message is absolutely 100% spot on.
Danke!
The fact that they enjoy playing something that awful is even more alarming to me. I'm not sure how the lyrics are superior at all. Individual good-sounding lines don't make up for a shitty (or non-existent) concept for a song or album... and I don't even line any of the individual lines in Trip.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Vertigo has a concept?
Also, every line of Trip is better than every line of Elevation, easily. If Elevation's concept is about being a complete tool with a rhyming dictionary, mission accomplished.
Vertigo has no concept. Neither does Elevation, and neither does Trip. I can't stand any of those three songs. They're all awful in many different ways. Trip is no better than the other two in my eyes.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
What's 'Trip?'
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Uh, actually, Trip does have a concept. It's placed where it is to represent an oasis of sorts in the barren, arid landscape that the previous 7 songs paint. This applies to both the music and lyrics of the track. The final line of the song "thunder/thunder on the mountain/there's a raincloud in the desert sky" chains it to One Tree Hill, which makes good on that line with its final "RAININGHGH!!! RAININ!!!!! RAINING HARRRRRRD" verse. Trip is pretty much the only smile TJT dares to crack, and I kinda love it for that.
Plus, there's always the TV Gaga connection. Superwin.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Oh! That Trip! lol! The one through your wires! 
jphelmet
Refugee
i totally disagree with this premise. i think the fact that an older artist maybe repeating some elements in their later years doesn't necessarily mean the songs aren't as good or better. there is nothing that really comes from being young that makes it better. i think a lot of that myth is marketing. it looks cooler to have a young pretty singer vs. an older balding / fatter guy. its easier to sell. the argument that if you are younger you do better work is directly attributable to that all marketing is aimed at teens-to early 20's. many in that demographic won't buy stuff or take the time to look at something that is not cool. they will totally write off someone in their 50's, regardless of how good the music is.
the latter work ends up not being career defining because it constantly gets compared to their older work when they were more popular (which had as much to do with the marketing as much as it does to the actual work). just because they are older and maybe doing variations on their own sound doesn't mean its not as good.
there is lots of u2 songs that stack up with or are better than their earlier work, and had they released those songs 15 or 20 years ago they would be career defining work. they are victims of their own success and nostalgia. you see it all the time on here, nothing is as good as the past tours (because they are perfect in our memories).
oh, and MOS is unlike anything they have ever done before.
BoyOnTheHorizon
Refugee
People are missing the point a bit. I'm not nostalgic just for the sake of being like that. In fact i'm not nostalgic at all.
Of course i think the 80' were much better than the 00's musically speaking. But that don't stop me for digging new stuff like The Killers, Coldplay, Strokes and many more.
I don't think the pre AB U2 is better just because its older, but because they were really fantastic, the best group of all time in that period. Now they are good, sometimes great. But the spark is gone. Go on and play Streets or SBS very loud and you'll see what i mean...
Of course i think the 80' were much better than the 00's musically speaking. But that don't stop me for digging new stuff like The Killers, Coldplay, Strokes and many more.
I don't think the pre AB U2 is better just because its older, but because they were really fantastic, the best group of all time in that period. Now they are good, sometimes great. But the spark is gone. Go on and play Streets or SBS very loud and you'll see what i mean...
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
If you can listen to Moment of Surrender and it doesn't touch you the way the best of their 80s work does...... well it's my personal opinion that it's you and not the work which is missing a piece...
I mean no insult. Very few people manage to remain as open to new experiences, new art, etc as they grow older. Life has a numbing effect. And everything looks sunnier in our memories... But seriously, Moment of Surrender is as powerful and vital as anything in their catalogue.
I don't know you, so obviously I'm not making a specific comment about you. I'd say this about anyone who raves about U2's 80s work and can't feel MOS.
Vertigo and Elevation also have concepts, then: to make money.
mikal
Blue Crack Addict
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Or, more specifically:
Elevation: act sexy in spite of age and/or how stupid it looks, make $$$$$
Vertigo: revisit "punk roots" in spite of their dubious presence in our history, offend the Spanish-speaking population, make $$$$$
Yeah, basically. Also, for Vertigo add one: to make digitize not like Steve Lillywhite anymore.
Those commenting on my age-comment seem to have missed my point:
In theory, I'm sure we all agree with you. The fact remains that 99% of great rock and rollers did their best work well before 40; in fact, more before 30. (Note that I'm talking about rock and roll here, so no comparisons to Beethoven or Bill Evans, please.)
Well, it's only natural that younger people prefer younger artists. There's nothing wrong with that -- it's understandable. By the same token, people like Bob Dylan and Paul McCartney were able to have #1 albums recently because baby-boomers prefer to buy CDs and they buy them from people of their generation.
I think I gave some clear reasons in my previous post at to why younger artists tend to do rock music better -- rock music is simple, visceral, powerful, comes on strong and goes away quickly, etc., etc. It's also aggressive, and traditionally (not to say necessarily) deals with lyrical themes of youth.
I don't disagree with you. But the fact that the same band is doing it twenty years later means that they've probably done it before. Obviously, the older you get, the harder it is to come up with something new or different. This applies to any creative form -- like writing novels --, not just rock music.
They are certainly great U2 songs this decade, and I mentioned that Atomic Bomb is my 4th or 5th favorite U2 album. But even though I like it more than Boy or War, I still don't think it's newer, fresher, or breaking in any new ground. That is to say, it's not as vital. U2 clearly broke new ground with Achtung Baby and consolidated that on Zooropa. They tried to push some new sonic frontiers with Pop, but largely failed due to bad production and some compromises made along the way. Since then, I haven't heard anything particularly vital -- lots of good stuff, but nothing particularly new.
If I ever make it to the end of this track without falling asleep, I'll let you know if I agree!
Anyway, I wasn't saying that younger is better. I was saying that telling people that they're stuck in the past for preferring the old stuff is wrong, in the same way that liking all the new stuff because it's new is also wrong.
In theory, I'm sure we all agree with you. The fact remains that 99% of great rock and rollers did their best work well before 40; in fact, more before 30. (Note that I'm talking about rock and roll here, so no comparisons to Beethoven or Bill Evans, please.)
Well, it's only natural that younger people prefer younger artists. There's nothing wrong with that -- it's understandable. By the same token, people like Bob Dylan and Paul McCartney were able to have #1 albums recently because baby-boomers prefer to buy CDs and they buy them from people of their generation.
I think I gave some clear reasons in my previous post at to why younger artists tend to do rock music better -- rock music is simple, visceral, powerful, comes on strong and goes away quickly, etc., etc. It's also aggressive, and traditionally (not to say necessarily) deals with lyrical themes of youth.
I don't disagree with you. But the fact that the same band is doing it twenty years later means that they've probably done it before. Obviously, the older you get, the harder it is to come up with something new or different. This applies to any creative form -- like writing novels --, not just rock music.
They are certainly great U2 songs this decade, and I mentioned that Atomic Bomb is my 4th or 5th favorite U2 album. But even though I like it more than Boy or War, I still don't think it's newer, fresher, or breaking in any new ground. That is to say, it's not as vital. U2 clearly broke new ground with Achtung Baby and consolidated that on Zooropa. They tried to push some new sonic frontiers with Pop, but largely failed due to bad production and some compromises made along the way. Since then, I haven't heard anything particularly vital -- lots of good stuff, but nothing particularly new.
If I ever make it to the end of this track without falling asleep, I'll let you know if I agree!
Anyway, I wasn't saying that younger is better. I was saying that telling people that they're stuck in the past for preferring the old stuff is wrong, in the same way that liking all the new stuff because it's new is also wrong.
Similar threads
