atyclb really didnt cut it for this guy

[The Wanderer]

From what I've read in the press, it's mostly POP that got the dumping. I certainly haven't read any critic bagging AB.

and Zooropa? maybe it's only me, but I've heard/read a lot of comments like, "I loved their 80s stuff, then they went off and did too much experimentation and dance stuff in the 90s, this is what they should've been doing all along"

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

i dont mind atyclb but i find it grotesquely over-rated, similiar as to how salome feels we interferencers love pop to the point of him thinking its over-rated.

well to me the outside world loves u2's latest offering too much, and has discredited all the achievements u2 created in the nineties.

that is the biggest thing ive come to dislike.

pop wails ass over atyclb.

that is ofcourse, my opinion.

god, i never thought i'd agree with you, deathbear, but i agree with you 10000000%.

Wait a second, how did we get from bear quoting a person who dislikes ATYCLB to the everlasting "go POP, boo ATYCLB" debate?

more like the exact opposite. deathbear made one comment as to how pop is better than atyclb, then JaraU2 mentioned how much pop sucked, and everyone just took the ball and ran with it.

as verte said, pop was very underrated. i think most critics stopped after track three at the latest, since i rarely saw a positive interview mention anything besides "oh, it's so techno, all of it" which is FAR from the truth. i can't understand how anyone, fan, casual listener, critic, whoever, can bash pop because it's a techno album. it is not, and if you think it is, then please kindly listen to tracks 4-12.

but to avoid this from becoming another pro-pop post, i'll get onto the real subject. atyclb just didn't do it for me. like it's been mentioned, i don't like how critics completely disregarded all their 90's material and acted like this was the first good cd they've put out since the joshua tree. it isn't, and i'm sure even the casual fans can name at least five songs U2 contributed in the 1990's.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

the change in the band?!?!?! wtf are you talking about???? the band went backwards and made the type of album I would have expected them to make a decade ago on the heels of the JT/ R&H era; they did nothing progressive and innovative, they did manage to make a decent record with a handful of tunes that are excellent U2 songs, but they took absolutely no chances, they resisted challenging themselves and Bono's lyrics are completely blase, though he tries hard to connect with big anthems and themes, we've heard this story before, sure Bono tells it better than just about anyone in music today, but mostly it just sounds generic or worse yet, pedantic

and where the fuck isAdam on that record??? please please please bring back Flood!!!
the irony in it all is that ATYCLB is the "pop" record

i agree. this post was written while i was typing mine, and i was almost going to mention about atyclb being more pop than pop. but i didn't, and the wanderer read my mind!

 

[The Wanderer]

rock n' fucking roll

what is with this "techo" bullshit??? christ almighty I'm sick of hearing that!!!!
U2 have never made a fucking techno song, let alone record!!!!!

 

[verte76]

and Zooropa? maybe it's only me, but I've heard/read a lot of comments like, "I loved their 80s stuff, then they went off and did too much experimentation and dance stuff in the 90s, this is what they should've been doing all along"

I hate hearing this. I've been a fan since '83 and I loved the '90's albums. They were original, sophisticated, daring, and fun. Some people couldn't "adjust" or whatever. To heck with that......I really don't agree at all. AB is my favorite U2 album, EBTTRT is my favorite U2 song, and the EBTTRT video is my favorite U2 video. I also love Zooropa, especially the title track and "Dirty Day", and Pop. especially "Gone" and LNOE.

 

[Zoomerang96]

khanada, it does feel nice to be on the same page as you every once in a while : D

yes wanderer, i know, there is nothing techno about it, though there is alot of experimentation, well maybe not alot, but quite a bit regardless.

and thats good.

if u2 doesnt progress into something more interesting next time around, ill have lost complete interest....and trust me, that really sucks to say cause i really really want them to be my favorite band cause they have so many great ideals and i really dug their old tunes, but i dunno....lately i feel cheated by them.

i mean bono and co dont even appear to care that their 90s stuff is getting crushed in the press, theyre just happy to be riding the waves of success again.

well let me tell you boys, the press will not be fooled again.

on a positive note, if there is a band that can turn around and blow my socks off, its u2.

 

[Salome]

it's not often I get to read such an insane amount of crap in this forum

people being turned off by ATYCLB because the critics (+ the general public) liked it more than POP ???


U2 took a big risk in recording ATYCLB
if they wanted to please most of you they should have Flood produce the ATYCLB sessions left overs + b-sides
the critics would probably say it's not as good as ATYCLB (and they would probably be right) and you would have another "daring, experimental" (I really shouldn't laugh when I'm typing this) album

 

[Zoomerang96]

U2 took a big risk in recording ATYCLB

yes, they took the risk of making songs they already made for a decade.

we get it already.

and its not all crap, that im "spewing." i made a mention of how i hate the way critics treat 90s u2 compared to their new stuff.

the bottom line is, you dont have to take risks to be good, but SINCE bono DOES insist theyre the greatest in the world, and that they are in fact a ROCK band and NOT a pop act (his words, not mine), then you better be willing to see some backlash. i expect to be blown away, and i have every right to be after i read, or hear him say that over....and over...and over again...

hey, if he wasnt such a pompous ass (which is partly why i love the guy, its just that when he brags about his band, then i expect them to put out), i wouldnt be this upset about this issue.

 

[The Wanderer]

hey salome, please explain to me what risk U2 took with ATYCLB??? this was the most calculated and utterly contrived marketing strategy and execution of a pop record in the history of the band, right down to the wretched video they made for that ultimate Hollywood blockbuster flop, and I'm not just talking about their interviews and tv appearances, or their videos, the whole sound of the album is *pop*

I don't even care so much who produces the next album, why don't they just produce the album themselves? or try someone totally different than who they've already worked with, now that would be taking a real "risk," no, everything in the 90s was a monumental risk for the band, and it kicked fucking ass, so they played it safe with this last album to become the darlings of pop rock once again, who can blame them, right? after a decade of stretching themselves to the limits they stayed within themselves, ouch, they concentrated on "good song writing" as people love to say, well that's what they got -- good songs but nothing to creative, nothing that people will say of 10 years from now, "wow, this still sounds so fresh and new, it could have been released last month"

and I'm turned off by ATYCLB because I've grown bored with most of the album in under two years (after about a year really because I haven't listened to it much at all since the tour ended), I'm fucking bored listening to most of those songs and that has never happened to me before with a U2 album, and yes, that in itself really truly sucks

 

[U2Kitten]

I've been a fan ever since War and Red Rocks and I was very into the late 80's stuff. I don't know what some of you are talking about ATYCLB being a throwback or being like the 80's! I just don't hear that at all, it's nothing like JT or R&H! Maybe some of you stuck in the 90's have never really listened to the 80's stuff. Just because it's not weird or freaky sounding doesn't mean it wasn't different! Yes, the band changed- they got older, wiser and more philisophical, and they realized a few things and what they did best and what was the best in them and put it on their record. Wanderer, anything they did was a risk, because after the rejection of Pop by a huge chunk of their fan base, they were worried how they would be recieved. I can tell by some of the comments they've made, particularly on VH-1, that they were very afraid of flopping or not being accepted or successful. ATYCLB succeeded beyond their expectations, so who can really argue with it? If they only wanted to do something that was popular they'd have gone like Limp Bizkit or Kid Rock. They did, as always, what they wanted to do. I don't think they deliberately went for any style, they just sat down and recorded the songs that came out of them and they were good.

 

[pinkfloyd]

ATYCLB is a dull and boring record , if you will compare it to POP , the end tracks of atyclb are total disaster ( grace , POE , When i look at the world - the worst song they wrote in years ) . elvation which to my opinion came very uncompleted on CD , ofcourse NYC , Beautiful Day and Walk On are excellent songs , Kite and stuck are telling us that bono just don't want to write rock tunes but endless oldman style ballads . :lemon: :lemon: :lemon:

 

[U2Kitten]

I think POE and WILATW are two of the best and most beautiful songs they've written. The more I listen the more I fall in love with them, and Bono's precious voice. Interesting that a guy who said Miami was the best song they ever wrote would dare call ANYTHING a total disaster. I have my own opinion of a total disaster, but

 

[The Wanderer]

well ok, since Bono's voice is "precious" on ATYCLB, you've got me, I can't argue with that, and of course I've never heard anything from the 80s *never said anywhere that ATYCLB sounded like one of the 80s albums*

btw, U2 have never made a song that qualified as *weird and freaky* (one simply doesn't exist in their catalogue)

I agree with pinkfloyd, those tracks at the end of ATYCLB are a disaster, and Miami is a great song

 

[The Wanderer]

Yes, the band changed- they got older...

If they only wanted to do something that was popular they'd have gone like Limp Bizkit or Kid Rock. They did, as always, what they wanted to do. I don't think they deliberately went for any style, they just sat down and recorded the songs that came out of them and they were good.

uh huh, they are getting older, Kid Rock and Limp Bizkit? if they even tried to sound like those people it would have been the most ridiculous spectacle in the history of music, and everything they had ever done would have been negated, please don't make completely useless analogies like that

 

[MBH]

the change in the band?!?!?! wtf are you talking about???? the band went backwards and made the type of album I would have expected them to make a decade ago on the heels of the JT/ R&H era; they did nothing progressive and innovative, they did manage to make a decent record with a handful of tunes that are excellent U2 songs, but they took absolutely no chances, they resisted challenging themselves and Bono's lyrics are completely blase, though he tries hard to connect with big anthems and themes, we've heard this story before, sure Bono tells it better than just about anyone in music today, but mostly it just sounds generic or worse yet, pedantic

and where the fuck isAdam on that record??? please please please bring back Flood!!!
the irony in it all is that ATYCLB is the "pop" record

Unfortunately, I agree with a lot of what you said, Wanderer. On POP and for most of the 90's, U2 took chances and made albums which THEY wanted to make. On ATYCLB, they seem to make an album that the PUBLIC wanted them to make. It was commercial, radio-friendly (4 singles +) and ubiquitous.

I do think that it is a hell of an album with some wonderful tunes, meaningful lyrics and beautiful music. During the hype for ATYCLB, I was excited at hearing the fact that the "old" U2 was coming back and that they would return with their glorious anthemic sound. Heck, just the other day I heard a dj in NY (Q-104.3) talk about how they experimented in the 90's and he and his U2-fanatic friends didn't like it and were so happy to hear ATYCLB.

Although I am an avid listener of All That and think that it is a solid album, it is somewhat over-rated. POP was more daring, experimental and "ballsy." Wanderer, you summed it up best with your last line in your previous post: the irony on ATYCLB is that it is the true pop album---MBH

 

[U2Kitten]

BWHAHAHA!!!! Hey Salome! .......

 

[oliveu2cm]

Although I am an avid listener of All That and think that it is a solid album, it is somewhat over-rated. POP was more daring, experimental and "ballsy."

I'll agree with all of this. While I'm still making up my mind on if U2 actually "sold out" by making ATYCLB - I do think Pop is more cohesive (despite being released unfinished) and was more daring. ATYCLB has broken new ground in rock, in a sense, that other artists are scrambling to get this "forward to the basics" sounds and appearance (i've heard this from the indigo girls among others). But it also is much more mellow sounding than Pop so I can see where it seems they are giving into the mainstream- but possibly, they are just giving in to themselves?

I dont know, personally I enjoy Pop more for its spunk and fire and heavy lyrics and rhythm and bass. But go figure, i listen to ATYCLB more, guess 'cuz it's easier for me to take.

 

[Salome]

Wanderer, Zoomerang et all

if you would say that ATYCLB is the biggest pile of lame shit you ever had the misfortune of listening to I really wouldn't care that much
that would be your miss as far as I'm concerned and it shows that you'll never please everybody (funny though, since most people in this thread do seem to think that ATYCLB was just that - an attempt to please everybody with soft pop music)

what I really don't get though is why and how a more experimental album would - as by magic - make a better album
and when you add that one of the reasons why you dislike ATYCLB has to do with how other people regard the album then you have truly lost me

to me any album released by a band as big as U2 - especially U2 since they do have the pretentions of being the biggest band in the world - is a daring project
and ATYCLB is certainly isn't the exception
if the songs on the album had been any less the critics + the general public would have had a field day blasting the band for doing everything you mentioned in this thread
no experiment, pop music, etc etc
the band must have known that ATYCLB could easily have meant the end of U2
so for me it is a daring project
a project that has led to some amazing music as far as I'm concerned

and I prefer to call it an album with a lot of soul instead of a pop album
show me any (pop) album that has had the emotional impact ATYCLB has had this past year

 

[U2Kitten]

Let me explain my last post. Like Salome, I fail to see what was so 'ballsy' about Pop or so 'safe' about ATYCLB and the endless redundant cascade of such comments becomes hilarious. I think saying they made an album to please the public and not themselves is an insult to Bono, Larry, Edge and Adam themselves. Do you really think this wasn't the album the band wanted to make? I don't think U2 would ever do an album that wasn't exactly what they wanted to do. I just think some of you avid Pop fans cannot accept that this WAS the album they wanted to do, and it was a much bigger success because more fans liked it. Some of you have even admitted to resenting ATYCLB because it was such a big success. It's time to got over this. But I have one more question- what DID you expect them to do? More Pop? Rap? Country maybe? No, they made the album THEY wanted to make, I love it, and I love them for making it.

 

[MBH]

I'll agree with all of this. While I'm still making up my mind on if U2 actually "sold out" by making ATYCLB - I do think Pop is more cohesive (despite being released unfinished) and was more daring. ATYCLB has broken new ground in rock, in a sense, that other artists are scrambling to get this "forward to the basics" sounds and appearance (i've heard this from the indigo girls among others). But it also is much more mellow sounding than Pop so I can see where it seems they are giving into the mainstream- but possibly, they are just giving in to themselves?

I dont know, personally I enjoy Pop more for its spunk and fire and heavy lyrics and rhythm and bass. But go figure, i listen to ATYCLB more, guess 'cuz it's easier for me to take.

ATYCLB was given credit for "breaking new ground in rock," huh? That is the first I heard of that; very interesting. I think some of the great band that have been around for a long time like U2 and the Red Hot Chili Peppers are just naturally progressing and maturing with age. They are getting older and are writing about things that someone in their late 30's or early 40's would write about.

The new Peppers Cd is fantastic but I could see how some people, especially younger people (teens in particular, even early 20's) wouldn't enjoy it or may not be able to relate to it. The sounds on both the latest U2 and RHCP cd's are very mellow, light and pleasant. Rock in its purest form is meant to be raw, energetic, challenging and hard.

Or, it could be that both of these future HOFer's are beginning a new phase of their careers that may abandone some fans yet produce meaningful and emotional music. Boy, getting old really sucks.........

 

[U2Kitten]

what I really don't get though is why and how a more experimental album would - as by magic - make a better album
and when you add that one of the reasons why you dislike ATYCLB has to do with how other people regard the album then you have truly lost me

to me any album released by a band as big as U2 - especially U2 since they do have the pretentions of being the biggest band in the world - is a daring project
and ATYCLB is certainly isn't the exception
if the songs on the album had been any less the critics + the general public would have had a field day blasting the band for doing everything you mentioned in this thread
no experiment, pop music, etc etc
the band must have known that ATYCLB could easily have meant the end of U2
so for me it is a daring project
a project that has led to some amazing music as far as I'm concerned

show me any (pop) album that has had the emotional impact ATYCLB has had this past year

Yay Salome, you're exactly right!!

 

[oliveu2cm]

ATYCLB was given credit for "breaking new ground in rock," huh? That is the first I heard of that; very interesting.

I said that based on a few observations I've from reading the phrase "Back to the basics" applied on other albums that have been released lately and on the style of tours happening.

I think some of the great band that have been around for a long time like U2 and the Red Hot Chili Peppers are just naturally progressing and maturing with age. They are getting older and are writing about things that someone in their late 30's or early 40's would write about.

I agree. But U2 did it first Seriously tho- isn't that what we expect? I don't see the problem. Bono's lyrics have always been intensely intimate, expressing things he has gone through. So it makes sense that as they get older, more settled in their skins, in the chaos of being a rock band, rock stars, their songs will reflect that.

light and pleasant. Rock in its purest form is meant to be raw, energetic, challenging and hard.

Or, it could be that both of these future HOFer's are beginning a new phase of their careers that may abandone some fans yet produce meaningful and emotional music. Boy, getting old really sucks.........

U2's never been afraid of losing fans. This is the ultimate sign to me that they make the music THEY want to make and feck the naysayers. They felt this way about Achtung Baby, about Pop and I'm sure about ATYCLB.

Personally I love this band for doing what THEY want to do- (and if I dont understand it I examine it since I trust they are not throwing shit at me) they didn't cave into the religious banterings and continued as a rock band AND kept their faith; they produced one of the most unique albums for its time ever- The Joshua Tree - rather than turn into a 'hairband' of the 80s; they f'cked with the media during Achtung Baby, using the mask of rock and roll to hide the pain and rawness of the lyrics; they exploited themselves during Pop, commericializing themselves rather than be commercialized, while giving us some incredible songs (mofo- the song bono says most sums up his life!! or SATS, or Please- where he attacks innaction, his own and others); and in ATYCLB they rooted themselves and scraped away the whole rock and roll mask (if you hold on to it too long it's no longer a mask, yknow) and bono sung about death, about survival, about Grace..

I just see don't the word "compromise" in their repitoire.

 

[Zoomerang96]

ive said everything i wanted to say.

the bottom line really is that its u2 were talking about, and were all fans. i guess i cannot seem to drill it into your heads what im talking about, and youve made your mind up already, just like i have.

i firmly believe that atyclb was done to make them popular again, not because they wanted to do it. i dont care if they publicly say otherwise, i simply dont believe it.

and, popularity isnt bad either. but because of the whole situation, i just dont think u2 needed to feel "cool" again, cause they were and always will be cool.

bah, whatever. i dont know what to say right now.

 

[MBH]

I said that based on a few observations I've from reading the phrase "Back to the basics" applied on other albums that have been released lately and on the style of tours happening.

[/b]

I agree. But U2 did it first Seriously tho- isn't that what we expect? I don't see the problem. Bono's lyrics have always been intensely intimate, expressing things he has gone through. So it makes sense that as they get older, more settled in their skins, in the chaos of being a rock band, rock stars, their songs will reflect that.



U2's never been afraid of losing fans. This is the ultimate sign to me that they make the music THEY want to make and feck the naysayers. They felt this way about Achtung Baby, about Pop and I'm sure about ATYCLB.

Personally I love this band for doing what THEY want to do- (and if I dont understand it I examine it since I trust they are not throwing shit at me) they didn't cave into the religious banterings and continued as a rock band AND kept their faith; they produced one of the most unique albums for its time ever- The Joshua Tree - rather than turn into a 'hairband' of the 80s; they f'cked with the media during Achtung Baby, using the mask of rock and roll to hide the pain and rawness of the lyrics; they exploited themselves during Pop, commericializing themselves rather than be commercialized, while giving us some incredible songs (mofo- the song bono says most sums up his life!! or SATS, or Please- where he attacks innaction, his own and others); and in ATYCLB they rooted themselves and scraped away the whole rock and roll mask (if you hold on to it too long it's no longer a mask, yknow) and bono sung about death, about survival, about Grace..

I just see don't the word "compromise" in their repitoire. [/B]

Well said, Olive! In fact, that was an accurate summary of U2 '87-'02......don't you think they "removed" the masks on the last album?

The only thing that I put into question is the fact that they (U2) must have realized that their American fans were abandoning them b/c they felt abandoned by the last album and U2 then just made a-commercial-friendly album that fans would like instead of something else, that's all.....critics have accused them of this as well, IMA......

 

[MBH]

ive said everything i wanted to say.

the bottom line really is that its u2 were talking about, and were all fans. i guess i cannot seem to drill it into your heads what im talking about, and youve made your mind up already, just like i have.

i firmly believe that atyclb was done to make them popular again, not because they wanted to do it. i dont care if they publicly say otherwise, i simply dont believe it.

and, popularity isnt bad either. but because of the whole situation, i just dont think u2 needed to feel "cool" again, cause they were and always will be cool.

bah, whatever. i dont know what to say right now.

You may be onto something here and I have thought about this many times myself. Think about it: they experimented for 3 albums in the 90's, their previous album (POP) was a disappointment (by U2 standards) in the US, they are getting older......all of this = lets make a conservative, pop-sounding, radio-friendly album that will get us back in the good graces with our fans, make loads more $(even though they were already rich) and put us back into the spotlight. If you think about it, it does make sense.

The bottom line is this, though: if anyone could know how to write an album that would be as successful both commercially (11 million worldwide sales, nearly 4 million in the US) and critically (heaps of praise from the critics everywhere), they would. Even if U2 tried to make a certain type of public-friendly album, there is no way of telling that it would be this successful. Plus, ATYCLB is a well-written album anyway. The bigger question at hand--which we have discussed several times here--is all of the promotion/marketing and omnipresence that U2 undertook for this last tour. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed and I think some of us U2 fans are just getting antsy for new work and need something interesting to talk about, LOL!

 

[oliveu2cm]

Well said, Olive! In fact, that was an accurate summary of U2 '87-'02......don't you think they "removed" the masks on the last album?

Definitely! It was necessary- because "They say that what you mock Will surely overtake you And you become a monster So the monster will not break you" - if you become the parodoy it's no longer a parody- it's reality! And U2 weren't/aren't egotistical shmucks, so they had to take off that mask and get away from it all.

The only thing that I put into question is the fact that they (U2) must have realized that their American fans were abandoning them b/c they felt abandoned by the last album and U2 then just made a-commercial-friendly album that fans would like instead of something else, that's all.....critics have accused them of this as well, IMA......

This is definitely something to consider. In examining their motivations for making albums in the past, it doesn't match up. They could have easily gained more fans if they went the Bon Jovi route in the 80s, or if they did another Joshua Tree in the 90s. But it wouldn't have lasted long, and they knew it, and they risked losing fans by challenging themselves musically. So I *don't* think they'd make ATYCLB to get their fans back. Once they MADE the album- I think they certainly wanted their fans back because they realized it was a 'lovable' album- and they went after America in a full frontal assualt, doing all sorts of promotions.

I wonder how they feel going after the fans who gave up on them at certain periods in their lives. I can't imagine that doesn't hurt. In personal life (and we know how close U2 are w/ their audience), I have a hard time opening myself up to people after they've hurt me. It must take a lot to expose yourself, get shot down and then say well, i'm coming back and offering myself to you again.

And for once, zoomerang96, i've agreed with you on several points and others i'm still trying to figure out on my own- but I'm wondering, what would you have rather seen them do instead of ATYCLB? Out of curiosity, if you don't mind answering. (and since sincerity is hard to show on message boards, i'll tell you i'm asking sincerely.)

 

[U2girl]

the irony in it all is that ATYCLB is the "pop" record

ATYCLB is the "pop" album for U2 - pop done U2 style (some of the songs anyway).
There has never been any irony about that.

I'd like to ask ATYCLB bashers this: do you dislike the album because of its popularity in the media or do you have a problem with the music itself?
I really don't think U2 went for the popularity itself; i will agree though that it was a matter of coming back at the top or failing for them as a band, and to match and rival other bands. (U2 has always been about ambition)
And they did it.

IMO it's pretty impressive that a band that has been around this long, can produce relevant music, can successfully compete with competition, and at the same time is commercially succesful.

What's wrong with being popular anyway? It's not like U2 isn't known for its masse-appeal (at least since JT days).

ps: I suppose it would be better for U2 if they made another experimental album and get destroyed by the media and critics for sure?

You can't please everyone, and this is definitely the case for U2.

 

[MBH]

IMO it's pretty impressive that a band that has been around this long, can produce relevant music, can successfully compete with competition, and at the same time is commercially succesful.





Well said. I think that sums up the most outstanding thing about U2 in the first place. They have been around for over 22 years(I know they formed in about '77) and have remained extremely popular (probably the most popular in the world), relevant, commercially successful and critically appealling. I have read recent articles and seen interviews with contemporaries and the one thing that sticks out is the sustanance in popularity and longevity that U2 has maintained. I cannot recall an ACTIVE band that has remained as popular and successful as U2......truly amazing!

 

[verte76]

There were items of uncertainty on ATYCLB. Would anyone give a damn? Had they gone cold in the U.S? Why not think about their fans in the U.S? Is that a crime? Not to us American fans! ATYCLB was not a copy or a clone of JT. That would have been the safest thing to do. They did not do this, but they brought back the intimacy factor, something that indeed worked for them in the '80's. They're still the only band that can pull this off. It's an amazing quality. Why not use it? It's the best of the '80's. It's audial as well as visual, and they learned alot about the visuals in the '90's. So they synthesized it and came up with new ways to connect both musically and visually. If you've been around 25 years you know what works and what doesn't. If something works, hey, you use it. It's very attractive and exactly what alot of people, myself included, wanted to see. It's their act; no one else can do this. If it's U2, and it's damn good, what's the problem? If it ain't broke don't fix it. I've been a fan, nonstop, since 1983. I must say I loved seeing and hearing the best of both decades of this amazing band.

 

[Desire4Bono]

I'd like to ask ATYCLB bashers this: do you dislike the album because of its popularity in the media or do you have a problem with the music itself?
I really don't think U2 went for the popularity itself; i will agree though that it was a matter of coming back at the top or failing for them as a band, and to match and rival other bands. (U2 has always been about ambition)
And they did it.

IMO it's pretty impressive that a band that has been around this long, can produce relevant music, can successfully compete with competition, and at the same time is commercially succesful.

What's wrong with being popular anyway? It's not like U2 isn't known for its masse-appeal (at least since JT days).

ps: I suppose it would be better for U2 if they made another experimental album and get destroyed by the media and critics for sure?

You can't please everyone, and this is definitely the case for U2.

I agree with you U2Girl! You make some good points. Salome bringing up the emotional impact of this record, (esp. since 9/11 and the deaths of Joey Ramone and Bono's father) was also something no one had touched on that needed to be.

It's absurd to think U2 contrived this album to win back popularity. I agree with Kitten and Verte who say it sounds nothing like JT or the 80's work, where do you get that? I don't think they plotted what would sell, because who knows what will sell?! You have to remember where they were when they wrote their albums.

War- they were angry young men who had grown up in a country they love and hated to see full of turmoil.

UF- They were gaining popularity, and recording in an ancient castle.

JT- Deeply religious, deeply in love. In the desert, growing and expanding as artists and songwriters.

AB- Berlin, well, you've all read the book!

POP- Into the dance scene, gay bars, transvestites, ecstasy scene, triphop, etc. and questioning their spirituality.

ATYCLB- Getting older, all but Adam having new babies, Bono finding out his father was ill, Bono crusading for debt relief and AIDS help and trying to save a world he felt very bad about.

I think, no, I KNOW all of these factors influenced the songs the band produced at the time. I don't believe any album was created for any other reason than they were what the band felt at the time and produced. As Bono recently said, it's about waking up with a tune in your head. The songs come to them, they don't go looking for them for any particular reason. That's just my 2 cents.