Lancemc
Blue Crack Addict
All That You Can't Leave Behind IS U2's Third Masterpiece.
As well all see pretty much everyday here on Interference, U2's once beloved album, All That You Can't Leave Behind is gaining a notoriously bad reputation. There are many reasons for this. One reason is because of the new album out. People can't help but compare it to ATYCLB. If they really love the new album then they are amazed at "how much better it is than ATYCLB". If they don't like the new album then it's "This is almost as bad as that crap they put out in 2000."
Another reason might be because of those few people "hate" it. And those are the ones who voice their opinions the loudest. Every day it seems as if there are more and more of them. The one thing that I'm trying to stess in this post is that this album was praised as U2's third masterpiece the year it came out, and continued to recieve praise well into 2001 and even early 2002 because of the tone it took on after September 11th. What's my point? My point is that this truely is one of U2's best albums.
Before I get into this album too much here I'd like to state that I think How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb is an incredibly strong album, but I'm still not sure yet how exaclty it compares to the rest of their catalogue. Give me another year before I make that desicion.
All That You Can't Leave Behind is not a rock album. It is a pop album. It is a pop album with a good fair amount of rock songs on it, but a pop album nontheless. When most people hear something described as a "pop album" they cringe. Srgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was a pop album. R.E.M.'s Automatic for the People was a pop album. Those are two very highly aclaimed albums by two very well-known and talented bands. Anyone would be quick to call them rock albums, but in reality they are true "pop" records. They are extremely melodic, a bit more complex than your classic rock album, and focus more on the acctual "song" than on the overall theme of the album. The thing is, will all great pop albums, when the songs are good enough, they make the album a great one.
U2's 2000 release accomplished two very important things for U2's career. First, it made them the biggest band in the world once again, a title they have not had since The Joshua Tree. Secondly, and more importantly, U2 finally opened up to embrace what they were trying to ignore all throughout the 90's. After they were finished with all the irony and emmersions into dance-rock, U2 welcomed real pop music with open arms and clean souls. U2 finally just let the song-writing come straight from the heart with no precomceptions except to want to knock us on our asses.
You see, All That You Can't Leave Behind is no the return to rock roots that all the critics were hailing it as. This album was a completely new venue for U2 to write music in. With the brilliant guidance of Daniel Lanois and Bring Eno, the band crafted brilliant songs with beautiful melody and precise musical accomaniment. This isn't the U2 we know and love. This is a U2 that we've never really seen before. It's scary. There's no more waving white flags from scafolding, painted roses or bleeding hearts. Gone is the glam and glitter of Macphisto, and gone are the giant lemons and funk space junk. In it's place is honesty. In it's place is songwriting on a higher level.
"Beautiful Day" is the perfect pop song. It's got a great guitar riff. It's got a catchy chorus and intimate verse. The bridge is next to heaven and the song just soars over us like a jet. Oh it's more than just a pop song. Not anyone can write a song as perfect as this. Not any artist can create a song as powerful and seamingly delicate at "Kite". Only U2 can create something so light and so floating as this album, but at the same time create something so pensive and strong as this album.
With All That You Can't Leave Behind, U2 created a near perfect pop masterpiece. The only problem is how people percieve it. In the beginning the majority saw this album for what it is. Four years later it seems as if other influences, stubborn or confused are clouding what makes this album so beautiful. It is just my wish that in time, even if it takes another 20 years, this album will be seen as a landmark album in this millennium.
Thanks for 'listening',
Lance.
As well all see pretty much everyday here on Interference, U2's once beloved album, All That You Can't Leave Behind is gaining a notoriously bad reputation. There are many reasons for this. One reason is because of the new album out. People can't help but compare it to ATYCLB. If they really love the new album then they are amazed at "how much better it is than ATYCLB". If they don't like the new album then it's "This is almost as bad as that crap they put out in 2000."
Another reason might be because of those few people "hate" it. And those are the ones who voice their opinions the loudest. Every day it seems as if there are more and more of them. The one thing that I'm trying to stess in this post is that this album was praised as U2's third masterpiece the year it came out, and continued to recieve praise well into 2001 and even early 2002 because of the tone it took on after September 11th. What's my point? My point is that this truely is one of U2's best albums.
Before I get into this album too much here I'd like to state that I think How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb is an incredibly strong album, but I'm still not sure yet how exaclty it compares to the rest of their catalogue. Give me another year before I make that desicion.
All That You Can't Leave Behind is not a rock album. It is a pop album. It is a pop album with a good fair amount of rock songs on it, but a pop album nontheless. When most people hear something described as a "pop album" they cringe. Srgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was a pop album. R.E.M.'s Automatic for the People was a pop album. Those are two very highly aclaimed albums by two very well-known and talented bands. Anyone would be quick to call them rock albums, but in reality they are true "pop" records. They are extremely melodic, a bit more complex than your classic rock album, and focus more on the acctual "song" than on the overall theme of the album. The thing is, will all great pop albums, when the songs are good enough, they make the album a great one.
U2's 2000 release accomplished two very important things for U2's career. First, it made them the biggest band in the world once again, a title they have not had since The Joshua Tree. Secondly, and more importantly, U2 finally opened up to embrace what they were trying to ignore all throughout the 90's. After they were finished with all the irony and emmersions into dance-rock, U2 welcomed real pop music with open arms and clean souls. U2 finally just let the song-writing come straight from the heart with no precomceptions except to want to knock us on our asses.
You see, All That You Can't Leave Behind is no the return to rock roots that all the critics were hailing it as. This album was a completely new venue for U2 to write music in. With the brilliant guidance of Daniel Lanois and Bring Eno, the band crafted brilliant songs with beautiful melody and precise musical accomaniment. This isn't the U2 we know and love. This is a U2 that we've never really seen before. It's scary. There's no more waving white flags from scafolding, painted roses or bleeding hearts. Gone is the glam and glitter of Macphisto, and gone are the giant lemons and funk space junk. In it's place is honesty. In it's place is songwriting on a higher level.
"Beautiful Day" is the perfect pop song. It's got a great guitar riff. It's got a catchy chorus and intimate verse. The bridge is next to heaven and the song just soars over us like a jet. Oh it's more than just a pop song. Not anyone can write a song as perfect as this. Not any artist can create a song as powerful and seamingly delicate at "Kite". Only U2 can create something so light and so floating as this album, but at the same time create something so pensive and strong as this album.
With All That You Can't Leave Behind, U2 created a near perfect pop masterpiece. The only problem is how people percieve it. In the beginning the majority saw this album for what it is. Four years later it seems as if other influences, stubborn or confused are clouding what makes this album so beautiful. It is just my wish that in time, even if it takes another 20 years, this album will be seen as a landmark album in this millennium.
Thanks for 'listening',
Lance.