(11-30-2004) Review: U2's 'Bomb' fails to explode - CNN*

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

HelloAngel

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Sep 22, 2001
Messages
14,534
Location
new york city
Review: U2's 'Bomb' fails to explode
Band's new album hits some heights but often falls flat

By Todd Leopold


(CNN) -- U2 tends to remind me of middle-period Who: two bands whose pretensions are usually undercut -- beneficially -- by punkish roots and crack musicianship.

The Who managed to avoid the ponderous pitfalls of Pete Townshend's big concepts by simply playing the hell out of "Tommy," "Who's Next" and "Quadrophenia."

Similarly, U2 has never shied from trying to sound like the world's most important band, but thanks to the group's chops, humor and self-knowledge, even a song such as "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" -- or a lyric as determinedly poetic as "Have you come to play Jesus/To the lepers in your head" -- avoid artistic affectation.

Usually.

On the band's new album, "How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb," U2 is again aiming high. "Love and Peace or Else" evokes the Middle East to talk about relationships, big and small; "Yahweh" uses a name for God in a song about pain, love and the cleansing of the soul.

What's missing, too often, is melody -- and without melody, the lyrics call too much attention to themselves. After all, in the best U2 songs, such as "Pride (In the Name of Love)" and "One," the music is as lyrical as the words. Not even all Bono's emoting -- sometimes growling, sometimes belting -- can overcome having nothing to sing.

So "Miracle Drug," a song about love, drags. "City of Blinding Lights" meanders. They're not bad songs, but they're not memorable either.

That's not to say the album doesn't have its moments. "All Because of You" and "A Man and a Woman" have the understated power the band generates like no other. They're sneaky songs, gaining depth with each listen.

And "Vertigo," the lead track, somehow combines nightclub darkness with brutal introspection ("the jungle is your head," "it's everything I wish I didn't know"), yet works as a great single, thanks to Edge's blazing guitar and the propulsive Larry Mullen-Adam Clayton rhythm section. It's "Mama Told Me Not to Come" with spikes.

"How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb" isn't a dud. There's too much tight playing, too many solid songs for that. But the album tends to hold back when it needs to let go. Because of that, this "Bomb" doesn't quite have the explosiveness of the band's best work.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Music/11/30/review.u2/
 
I completely agree with this review.

Not a bad album, but most of the songs are missing that sing-along melody that makes a song great.
 
I'm going to stop reading any reviews good or bad.

The fact is, before reading any reviews, good or bad, I fell madly in love with this new album. Reviews are just sooooo damn pointless!! I'm not going to sit here boring people to tears about why I love "Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own" and why I hate "Rattle and Hum", what I think of Bono's voice or The Edge's new line of t-shirts!.......who cares about my opinions of U2? nobody, or at least they shouldn't because I quite frankly (and no disrespect to any other U2 fans) don't care about theirs when it comes to U2...I like what I like and hate what I hate (or is that "like what I hate"? I'm confused now)....so these reviewers can just go to...


hmm, had to edit this because yes reviews do obviously serve a point and that is to steer impressionable people towards or against whatever it is. However, I'm sticking by what I've said...there is no such thing as a good reviewer or a bad reviewer unless they just stick to facts rather than opinions. Imagin if newreaders gave their opiions on news items? bah, I'm in a bad mood!
 
Last edited:
This review has no substance as to why hes saying the album is falling flat other then that he probably isnt a U2 fan in the first place.
 
haha, it's hilarious how people immediately discredit a review just because it doesn't agree with their own person opinions.
 
While I think this review is filled with a lot of douchitude, there are a couple points that I do agree with:

The Edge, Larry, & Adam really crank it up a notch, making songs that might otherwise be blah really kick.

It doesn't 'explode' as an album. The pun is lame, but I like almost every song on the album, but I just feel like it doesn't work as an album. I've said a few times on these boards that I really dislike the order of the tracks, and that could be why it doesn't pop for me. My other inclination is to say that HTDAAB may be slightly over-produced. And yes that term can be critic mumbo-jumbo, and coming from a DJ, such an accusation would be wholly appropriate. However, what I mean is: part of me really wants to rip the reverb off Bono's vocals, and ditch some of the orchestration.....I think the songs on HTDAAB will really hit in concert when it's just the four lads minus the studio tricks.

But yeah...bottom line is I can't exactly put my finger on why an album with so many great songs doesn't work as an album. Those are my guesses though.
 
I think this critic is mistaking a lack of melodicism on this album (which he is correct in assessing) for a lack of brilliance. For melody, he need only go to the band's last album: All That You Can't Leave Behind was full of melody, and while it was a great album, I don't think it can equal Atomic Bomb. Melody has it's place, to be sure; it makes the music much more immediately accessible and, possibly, enjoyable. Atomic Bomb is neither in its immediacy. It requires multiple listenings to get into and enjoy. However, the payoff is greater in the long run. Maybe this critic didn't give the album enough of a chance, or maybe he just doesn't like it all that much. Regardless, I disagree with his take on it. Atomic Bomb has a greatness that burns from within, and can only be felt with patience.
 
Zoomerang96 said:
haha, it's hilarious how people immediately discredit a review just because it doesn't agree with their own person opinions.

If there is any reference there to my post then you hadn't read it properly.

I don't care about other people's opinions on U2's music, if I did I wouldn't have any friends because none of my friends actually like U2. In fact I'd say most of them hate U2, but that's them.

What I hate, and I probably did not articulate it clearly enough, is reviewers, whether I agree or disagree with their views does not matter....they serve no real point. In fact we shouldn't even be wasting our time discussing reviews because of their pointlessness other than that some people do actually buy records because of reviews...unbelievable. What matters is whether the music is good to you. But the CD, keep the receipt, take it home, play it, play it a few times, decide whether to keep it and let it grow on you, decide if you still want to keep it, take it back to shop or sell it on eBay. You are the best reviewer not some journalist.
 
let the backlash begin....let's face it with so much good publicity about this album and the favorable reviews there will be a ton of folks who simply will bash for the sake of bashing and a really catch title "U2's 'Bomb' fails to explode" whoa this guy is a genius to come up with this line. I agree reviewers opinions do not matter but it goes without saying they do influence some people...
 
hey don't worry about reviews ans critics in the end it won't count, just remember that AB when come out the most reviews were very critical just to give an exemple NME give it a 7 and now gave the bomb a 9. what is really important for me is if i like it and i love the bomb, for the history what matters is if it soulds massivly and if it gets alot of grammys, if it does great in those two points the same people that give bad critics on this album in the next one they will say that that new one is not that good compare with the masterpiece of the bomb. this is allways the same and if you want to be smart and have a self concious just stick with your opinion
 
"City of Blinding Lights" meanders.

MEANDERS?!?!? Did he listen to the same song I did???
Ok, I get it. Music critics are SUPPOSED to criticize, and I don't think everyone HAS to love U2, but I hardly think COBL "meanders"! :no:
 
everyone has the right to their opinion as how I see it however, I tend not to follow reviews as much as I can 'cause one person's junk is another treasure.
 
I think the only U2 songs that might meander are off of Unforgettable Fire, other than that, and especially concerning this album, no way. I've tried to give music reviewers a chance by going with a suggestion (to try some music) and ugh, I ended up with some crap. So, I agree that it was an article contrived simply for the catchy phrase. Too ambiguous. My least favorite song on here is Vertigo; it just doesn't seem to sit well with me. Too many repeated phrases.

a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle
 
Zoocoustic said:
I completely agree with this review.

Not a bad album, but most of the songs are missing that sing-along melody that makes a song great.

Wow... I can't disagree more with that statement! It's almost as if we were talking about different albums! If HTDAAB has a weakness, it's that it's almost too commercial. The reviewer's comment about poor melodies is so far off base, it makes me wonder if he listened to the album at all! This album is full of many potential hit songs, all with great melodies. But that's also HTDAAB's weakness - it's almost TOO melodic with TOO many sing-a-long songs. Yet, you and the reviewer feel this is what's lacking. :scratch:
 
I am being sarky.. but I think the review has it's merits though I don't 'agree' with some parts.

Though, personally from the slide solo in MD to the end of Sometimes, COBL, the last minute and a half of OOTS and 'this love is like a drop in the ocean' in Yahweh are certainly moments of explosion for me.

In my PANTS! I DID A SEX WEE!
 
GiacomoHoldini said:
I think this critic is mistaking a lack of melodicism on this album (which he is correct in assessing) for a lack of brilliance. For melody, he need only go to the band's last album: All That You Can't Leave Behind was full of melody, and while it was a great album, I don't think it can equal Atomic Bomb. Melody has it's place, to be sure; it makes the music much more immediately accessible and, possibly, enjoyable. Atomic Bomb is neither in its immediacy. It requires multiple listenings to get into and enjoy. However, the payoff is greater in the long run. Maybe this critic didn't give the album enough of a chance, or maybe he just doesn't like it all that much. Regardless, I disagree with his take on it. Atomic Bomb has a greatness that burns from within, and can only be felt with patience.
:up:
Couldn't have been better said.
 
Last edited:
Well, IMO this guy is obviously a jackass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

IMO, of course.

p.s. I was referring to the gentleman who wrote the original review.
 
Last edited:
Are you psychic? My first impression of the album was exactly the same (a lot of chanting with really great guitar, drums and bass)! Each time I listen to it, though, the lack of melody becomes more and more melodic and makes perfect sense with the lyrics. I remember a comment Bono once made about "With or Without You" not sounding like anything else that was happening at the time. Maybe it's the same with these songs (in a slightly different way from "With or Without You") and time will expose them as brilliant gems (or not). For now, I'm content to listen to the album again and again and bask in the sound-glow of music that is new from U2!
 
Back
Top Bottom