Question for 00's Bashers/90's Lovers...

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

Hoodlem

War Child
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
816
Location
Payson, UT
...of which I consider myself one of. (Although I can appreciate a lot of the 00's material it is just not as exciting or artistic, IMO...but this discussion has been done to death and is not the point of this thread. So on with the question.)

If U2 put out an album now that was truly innovative and ranked with their best material and was in every way an undeniable classic, would it be easier to accept ATYCLB and HTDAAB simply as a phase of the band that gave us some actually pretty decent pop music (rather than as the downfall of U2)?

I'm not sure if that question makes sense.

For myself, and I think maybe for other as well, the disappointment of the 00's material is the idea/fear that maybe they have "lost it" and can no longer reach the artistic peaks of the past. I think however, if they were to make something extraordinary at this point, I could more easily dismiss/accept the last 2 albums as an interesting sidestep for the band in which they tried something different with varying degrees of success. In other words, it would help to know they've still got it.

So, would an innovative classic, at this point, change your opinion of the last 2 albums or would they still seem like wasted opportunities?
 
Good question

I agree. I actually really enjoy 00s U2, as it has a special place in my heart for getting me hooked on U2 in the first place. However, I think you've hit the nail on the head. I think that the bashing probably comes from a fear that U2 have lost the ability to make groundbreaking music in a studio setting. ATYCLB and HTDAAB are not transcendental like War, UF, JT, AB and Pop are (in many opinions). However, perhaps if U2 can prove that 00s was experimentation, not scraping the bottom of the bucket for all thats left, then the U2 community can forgive them and appreciate them in their own right. We can enjoy them, rather than just feel disapointed by them.

So, yes, I really think it would help to know that they've still got it.
 
You overlooked the attitude of the band in this decade. The decision to become more mainstream and poppy. The hype and bullshit about these last two albums from members of the band. Making new fans and pleasing casual fans over their core support. The whole mindset of the band this decade is something I don't think a lot of people can get over because of one album. :shrug:

Nothing will change my belief that ATYCLB and Bomb are crap. It was the downfall of U2. They have diluted the band's catalog. They have hurt the band's legacy. In my eyes, a great album in their remaining years can't change that they went away from evolving and creativity for the sake of money. :shrug:
 
This is an interesting point.

Personally, the idea of U2 having lost the plot seems a bit ridiculous at this point, considering a large number of their recent songs are considered by the general public to be among their classics. Besides, such an idea is largely subjective anyway.

In any case, yes, an undeniable classic would make the last two albums seem more understandable, if not stronger. I have no problem with them as it is, but such an album (especially if it's in a similar vein but miles better) would really give those two a positive context.
 
You overlooked the attitude of the band in this decade. The decision to become more mainstream and poppy. The hype and bullshit about these last two albums from members of the band. Making new fans and pleasing casual fans over their core support. The whole mindset of the band this decade is something I don't think a lot of people can get over because of one album. :shrug:

Nothing will change my belief that ATYCLB and Bomb are crap. It was the downfall of U2. They have diluted the band's catalog. They have hurt the band's legacy. In my eyes, a great album in their remaining years can't change that they went away from evolving and creativity for the sake of money. :shrug:

You're right, there ARE chiming cash registers in One Step Closer! Now I just feel cheated. All of those emotions I felt, wasted. :sad:
 
I think that is a great point. The best case study I can think of to support this is the Rocky and Rambo movies.

Weird I know, but for fans of both series, they would have been thoroughly disappointed with the supposed final installments (Rocky 5, and Rambo 3).

The existence of Rocky balboa, and Rambo (the 6th and 4th installments) that are MUCH better then the preceeding installments, make the others better films. I enjoy both Rocky 5 and Rambo 3 much more as films since the new films have been released.

The same could be true for U2. Hopefully, the last 2 albums will be much better appreciated once the New album kicks their arses!
 
If U2 put out an album now that was truly innovative and ranked with their best material and was in every way an undeniable classic, would it be easier to accept ATYCLB and HTDAAB simply as a phase of the band that gave us some actually pretty decent pop music (rather than as the downfall of U2)?

I would certainly see it that way. That's not to say I dislike everything from the last two albums, as you said. But I would certainly not like to think that the overall quality of those two albums is the absolute best or most unique they can achieve from now on. I don't have my hopes up, though, and it's not because I have no faith in the band, it just sucks more to get into the mindset that it's going to be really, really good before you hear any of it and be dissapointed than it is to have medium expectations (based on what you like from them) and have it be what you expect or maybe better...if that makes any sense. .
 
You overlooked the attitude of the band in this decade. The decision to become more mainstream and poppy. The hype and bullshit about these last two albums from members of the band. Making new fans and pleasing casual fans over their core support. The whole mindset of the band this decade is something I don't think a lot of people can get over because of one album. :shrug:

Nothing will change my belief that ATYCLB and Bomb are crap. It was the downfall of U2. They have diluted the band's catalog. They have hurt the band's legacy. In my eyes, a great album in their remaining years can't change that they went away from evolving and creativity for the sake of money. :shrug:

Can I ask one question of you then?


Why are you still here?

If they have been that bad, and that disappointing, surely you have given up on them?
 
I kinda made a comment about ATYCLB being a thoroughly artistic and authentic album in another thread somewhere not long ago. It's not by any means one of my favourite U2albums, but it can be quite stunning, and a vision is there, and it sounds nothing like any other band. It's still U2 and only U2.....hardly a sell-out, but very much a new direction, at times exciting, if a little lacking in cohesion as a whole album.

With HTDAAB, the album suffers due to how shambolic the recording sessions were. U2 again had a vision, but the whole kerfuffle over Thomas and all these other distractions distorted the accomplishment of any initial vision. The album had to be rescued, and U2 threw up what is recognised by most as an engaging (if a little all over the place) offering.
 
I kinda made a comment about ATYCLB being a thoroughly artistic and authentic album in another thread somewhere not long ago. It's not by any means one of my favourite U2albums, but it can be quite stunning, and a vision is there, and it sounds nothing like any other band. It's still U2 and only U2.....hardly a sell-out, but very much a new direction, at times exciting, if a little lacking in cohesion as a whole album.

With HTDAAB, the album suffers due to how shambolic the recording sessions were. U2 again had a vision, but the whole kerfuffle over Thomas and all these other distractions distorted the accomplishment of any initial vision. The album had to be rescued, and U2 threw up what is recognised by most as an engaging (if a little all over the place) offering.

Nicely put.

The choppiness of HTDAAB is all too often used as an example of U2 losing their ability to craft a cohesive set of songs, but no context is ever given for why that may have occurred. I think ATYCLB had a clearer vision, but the sequencing is so terrible that it's a bit tricky to pick out what it is, exactly.
 
You know, it is possible to like a band without liking their current work. I like talking about U2 and being around U2 fans. I find it insulting that you'd ask that question. :down:

"Nothing will change my belief that ATYCLB and Bomb are crap. It was the downfall of U2. They have diluted the band's catalog. They have hurt the band's legacy. In my eyes, a great album in their remaining years can't change that they went away from evolving and creativity for the sake of money."

That's not insulting? For a band who put months and months of hard work into recording an album, touring for the album, being on the road for a year at a time, missing families for much of that time, Bono travelling from America to Dublin every night to be with his dying father...

Im sure he did that in support of some half-arsed, sell-out garbage songs that a sullying their catalogue...

It is very possible to like a band without liking their current catalogue, i agree. But there is a big difference between not liking something, and questioning the integrity and motives behind producing something. Saying the albums are crap in such blunt terms, without regard to any external factors, just one persons opinion (to which you are entitled) is a very definitive statement.

I was also not questioning your past history with the band. I am questioning your present. If you find it insulting, then it is insulting. That band have given us all more than anyone would be due. 11 albums, and over 30 years of joy. They have dedicated their lives to their fans, and in the one fell swoop can destroy their motives, integrity and just about eveything they stand for.

I make no apologies.
 
"Nothing will change my belief that ATYCLB and Bomb are crap. It was the downfall of U2. They have diluted the band's catalog. They have hurt the band's legacy. In my eyes, a great album in their remaining years can't change that they went away from evolving and creativity for the sake of money."

That's not insulting? For a band who put months and months of hard work into recording an album, touring for the album, being on the road for a year at a time, missing families for much of that time, Bono travelling from America to Dublin every night to be with his dying father...

Im sure he did that in support of some half-arsed, sell-out garbage songs that a sullying their catalogue...

It is very possible to like a band without liking their current catalogue, i agree. But there is a big difference between not liking something, and questioning the integrity and motives behind producing something. Saying the albums are crap in such blunt terms, without regard to any external factors, just one persons opinion (to which you are entitled) is a very definitive statement.

I was also not questioning your past history with the band. I am questioning your present. If you find it insulting, then it is insulting. That band have given us all more than anyone would be due. 11 albums, and over 30 years of joy. They have dedicated their lives to their fans, and in the one fell swoop can destroy their motives, integrity and just about eveything they stand for.

I make no apologies.

Excuse me but that's the way U2 has approached things in this decade. It is not insulting. It is the truth. They are the ones who have fueled questions about thier motives and integrity.
 
Wow, there's a lot of touchy people on this forum. I'm insulted, ure insulted, we're all insulted. Wow. U2 is just a band, people. It's like when i'm on Youtube and some idiot says "Bob Dylan sucks and has a bad voice". Now what would be the point of battling against a moron like that? I know Dylan's great, and if this kid doesn't get it then so be it, his loss. If someone thinks U2 have sold out during this phase of their career, to the point where it is insulting to that someone, then let him think that. You can argue against him, but come on...is it really that offensive for someone to state "u2 has sold out"? I think U2 did sell out to some degree on their last album. I don't really feel like getting into it, but I do believe that. I think ATYCLB was and is a great album. I don't think selling out is making mainstreamy music as long as ure doing it in ure own unique style. That was the difference between ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

I think if the new album is amazing and radical , then it will probably be in the critics eyes, a conscious step away from the straightforward and mainstream pandering of HTDAAB, much like Atchung was seen as the conscious step away from Rattle and Hum.
 
Wow, there's a lot of touchy people on this forum. I'm insulted, ure insulted, we're all insulted. Wow. U2 is just a band, people. It's like when i'm on Youtube and some idiot says "Bob Dylan sucks and has a bad voice". Now what would be the point of battling against a moron like that? I know Dylan's great, and if this kid doesn't get it then so be it, his loss. If someone thinks U2 have sold out during this phase of their career, to the point where it is insulting to that someone, then let him think that. You can argue against him, but come on...is it really that offensive for someone to state "u2 has sold out"? I think U2 did sell out to some degree on their last album. I don't really feel like getting into it, but I do believe that. I think ATYCLB was and is a great album. I don't think selling out is making mainstreamy music as long as ure doing it in ure own unique style. That was the difference between ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

I think if the new album is amazing and radical , then it will probably be in the critics eyes, a conscious step away from the straightforward and mainstream pandering of HTDAAB, much like Atchung was seen as the conscious step away from Rattle and Hum.

Actually, I tihnk you'll find that i wasn;t the one that was insulted. I mentioned that what was said was insulting, but not to me. I agree with what you say to a certain extent. Fine let some people think what they want, and yes people are entitled to opinions. What I had a problem with was someone being openly insulted by something I said, when they were openly insulting in a previous message.

All I'm saying is that if I were Bono, I'd be pretty gutted that I'd been accused of selling out when I continue to tour America for the fans, while my father was dying in a Dublin hospital, travelling home every night to be with him, and then travelling back to Amerrica to play a show 2 nights in every 3.

I'm sorry, but selling out implies a lack of genuine belief and feeling in the art. A totally swap of morality and credibility for money. No-one would put themselves in that position, and do what bono did in the situation for a few extra bucks. They could have postponed the tour, a-la Australian leg of Vertigo. It's not like they need the extra money!
 
Actually, I tihnk you'll find that i wasn;t the one that was insulted. I mentioned that what was said was insulting, but not to me. I agree with what you say to a certain extent. Fine let some people think what they want, and yes people are entitled to opinions. What I had a problem with was someone being openly insulted by something I said, when they were openly insulting in a previous message.

But it isn't insulting to the band because it is the truth. They choose mainstream success over creativity/experimentation. :shrug:
 
On a similar note, I think U2 always wanted to be on the radio and in the mainstream, (and have been since 1987), but they always did it on their own terms, whereas lately their sole aim was radio greatness and not musical greatness.

That's just how i perceive it. If the next album is amazing, then I'll just be happy to see they can still pull it off, because after HTDAAB I became very nervous that they've lost the magic.
 
But it isn't insulting to the band because it is the truth. They choose mainstream success over creativity/experimentation. :shrug:

That is such an invalid arguement! U2 know more than anyone here that they could record themselves shitting onto a plugged in toaster and it'd sell 10 million copies!

It's not a choice they make. They will sell no matter what, so they are not choosing mainstream success over creativity. They know they will get mainstream success. Over the course of their career they have MADE mainstream. Genres are popular, becuase U2 make them popular.
 
That is such an invalid arguement! U2 know more than anyone here that they could record themselves shitting onto a plugged in toaster and it'd sell 10 million copies!

It's not a choice they make. They will sell no matter what, so they are not choosing mainstream success over creativity. They know they will get mainstream success. Over the course of their career they have MADE mainstream. Genres are popular, becuase U2 make them popular.

There is one major flaw in your logic. U2 claims to compete for the title of biggest band in the world. In turn, they give us two of their least creative albums and they start making radio friendly songs again. Biggest band must mean most popular and most financially successful. Like I said mainstream success over creativity.
 
If U2 put out an album now that was truly innovative and ranked with their best material and was in every way an undeniable classic, would it be easier to accept ATYCLB and HTDAAB simply as a phase of the band that gave us some actually pretty decent pop music (rather than as the downfall of U2)?

I don't like ATYCLB, I really like HTDAAB, ES, THTBA, WITS... but I do see them as 'pop music'...

Even without the new album I accept those.

There are two most stupid questions "00's lovers" can ask:
1) why are you still here? :rolleyes:
2) what's wrong with U2 sounding like U2? :doh:
Why the most stupid? because:
1 - with U2 you never know what's next, it's sad 00's lovers are forgeting about it... if the new album really is that different it will be very interesting reading their comments about that album:hmm:
2- I'll put it this way... did U2 sound Like U2 on War (at the time), did U2 sound like U2 on UF, on JT... on AB... on Zooropa.
It's not just the 90's. U2 changed on every album.
That's why I accept ATYCLB and HTDAAB, I understad they had to go "back to their roots/full circle" :blahblah:
HTDAAB is to ATYCLB the same thing as October was to Boy, as R&H was to JT, as Zooropa was to AB.
That's what they do and I can't wait for what's next :hyper::wave:
 
There is one major flaw in your logic. U2 claims to compete for the title of biggest band in the world. In turn, they give us two of their least creative albums and they start making radio friendly songs again. Biggest band must mean most popular and most financially successful. Like I said mainstream success over creativity.

U2 were the biggest band in the world after the Joshua Tree, did you hate it too?

There is one major flaw in your logic, that leads you to believe that there is a major flaw in my logic. Read the sentence "Biggest band must mean most popular and most financially successful."

Again, I refer you to The Joshua Tree. Rock's Hottest Ticket. So they sold out then too? You can't make assumptions like "Biggest means most popular and Most Financially successful." Doesn't work like that.

By all means you could stretch it to mean most popular, but since when has anyone sold out trying to get their message out?

Screwtape, you assume, because you don't like the current direction they are taking, that it is selling out. That is your own issue to deal with. Your main problem in this, and the other thread is that you think because YOU personally don't like something, that it is crap and they have sold out. You ignore the fact that U2 have absolutely no need to sell out, they have piles of cash, millions of adoring fans, and they are approaching 50. They don't need to work anymore, they don't need more money. They do it for the music now, and if that's where they are, and you don't like it, stiff shit. As much as you want it to, the equation doesn't read:

U2Music = shit when Screwtape deosn't like it.
 
U2 were the biggest band in the world after the Joshua Tree, did you hate it too?

There is one major flaw in your logic, that leads you to believe that there is a major flaw in my logic. Read the sentence "Biggest band must mean most popular and most financially successful."

Again, I refer you to The Joshua Tree. Rock's Hottest Ticket. So they sold out then too? You can't make assumptions like "Biggest means most popular and Most Financially successful." Doesn't work like that.

By all means you could stretch it to mean most popular, but since when has anyone sold out trying to get their message out?

Screwtape, you assume, because you don't like the current direction they are taking, that it is selling out. That is your own issue to deal with. Your main problem in this, and the other thread is that you think because YOU personally don't like something, that it is crap and they have sold out. You ignore the fact that U2 have absolutely no need to sell out, they have piles of cash, millions of adoring fans, and they are approaching 50. They don't need to work anymore, they don't need more money. They do it for the music now, and if that's where they are, and you don't like it, stiff shit. As much as you want it to, the equation doesn't read:

U2Music = shit when Screwtape deosn't like it.

The difference was The Joshua Tree was a very creative record. They weren't making a conscious decision to go away from what they were doing to be the biggest band. TJT is a natural progression from TUF.

The rest of your post is just insulting and wrong.
 
But it isn't insulting to the band because it is the truth. They choose mainstream success over creativity/experimentation. :shrug:

How do you know it is the truth? What quotes do you have to present this as fact?
And yes, quotes from the band/McGuinness only please, no interpretations of their actions. Because if you're making assumptions, then it's not certain it's the truth.
 
The difference was The Joshua Tree was a very creative record. They weren't making a conscious decision to go away from what they were doing to be the biggest band. TJT is a natural progression from TUF.

The rest of your post is just insulting and wrong.

insulting and wrong. good to see the use of evidence to support your case. No you seem to think that the magic word 'creativity' equalls selfless devotion. If something is creative it can;t be sold out and vice versa. Let me give you a scoop, it takes a hell of a lot of creativity to write music, a hell of a lot more to write 11 albums worth of material. again, what you think isn;t creative, someone else may do.

You blindly oppose whatever I say, and use no evidence to do so, andwon't except that something like music is subjective, and opinions vary. I respect your right to an opinion. I am telling you that your motivation is wrong.

I spose that every time you get proved wrong in an arguement you can just cry foul and be "insulted" and that will deflect attention away from the fact that you can;t present a coherent and well-structured arguement to support your point?
 
You ignore the fact that U2 have absolutely no need to sell out, they have piles of cash, millions of adoring fans, and they are approaching 50. They don't need to work anymore, they don't need more money. They do it for the music now, and if that's where they are, and you don't like it, stiff shit.

:up: Logic for the ultimate win.
 
Back
Top Bottom