Rolling Stone Review

[wizard2c]

The April 21st edition of Rolling Stone gave U2 at San Diego Sports Arena a four star rating. to quote: "Twenty-five years in, U2 are as good as they've ever been."

Hola! See more exclusive live photos of Bono and the boys at
rollingstone.com/u2




PS: I'm eliminating the formal format of my posts to keep things simple.

 

[edge3]

David Sinclair, writing in The Times (UK), gave them a 5 star rating (out of 5 - naturally). His headline was :

"Bono, saviour of the world, back to what he does best"

He started his review by saying :

"U2 is now the only superpower left in the pop world..."

And finished with :

"Conjuring the illusion of intimacy with a natural grandiloquence, U2 have maintained their implacable sense of purpose while all those around them have faltered or to some extent fallen by the wayside. This show marked yet another sure-footed step along the way."

 

[Zoovation]

Are there more reviews of the shows?

 

[edge3]

Yes : In UK The Sun's Victoria Newton devoted an entire double page spread of her daily Bizarre column to the opening gig. Unfortunatley my scanner is too small to cope with the whole spread. But in her exclusive she said :

"....when U2 kicked off their Vertigo world tour in front of 15000 fans in California, they blew them away with an electric show and proved they are STILL the world's best rock 'n' roll band."

And :

"....If it were up to me, I know which band I'd chose to open the new Wembley Stadium - and it wouldn't be The Rolling Stones."

Last time I looked there were also a load of reviews (mainly US) at U2.com - they all seemed to be very good.

 

[dn9909]

Yes : In UK The Sun's Victoria Newton devoted an entire double page spread of her daily Bizarre column to the opening gig. Unfortunatley my scanner is too small to cope with the whole spread. But in her exclusive she said :

"....when U2 kicked off their Vertigo world tour in front of 15000 fans in California, they blew them away with an electric show and proved they are STILL the world's best rock 'n' roll band."

And :

"....If it were up to me, I know which band I'd chose to open the new Wembley Stadium - and it wouldn't be The Rolling Stones."

Last time I looked there were also a load of reviews (mainly US) at U2.com - they all seemed to be very good.

What the fook do that fat slag know about music?!!!!She prolly have never been to a U2 concert in her life.

I wouldn't trust anything that is being printed by Victoria Newton or The Sun for that matter.

 

[dn9909]

RollingStone magazine is not relevant ANYMORE. RollingStone is a sham nowadays.

 

[edge3]

Wow! Nothing like a bit of negativity! I think you're being somewhat harsh on Victoria Newton : I mean she may not be a musical expert but she was actually AT the U2 concert. Also last time I saw her picture I wouldn't have classed her as a 'fat slag'. As for Rolling Stone being irrelevant....well how come they have such a massive worldwide readership & influence within the music industry? I suppose you think The Times is irrelevant as well & all the other newspapers who seemed to give the concert unanimous critical acclaim.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

What the fook do that fat slag know about music?!!!!She prolly have never been to a U2 concert in her life.

whoah, ease up a little bit okay? she's probably not a member here but there's still no need for the personal attacks.

i don't understand why people are getting upset over these POSITIVE reviews??

 

[indra]

i don't understand why people are getting upset over these POSITIVE reviews??

I'm scratching my head over that too.

 

[dn9909]

Wow! Nothing like a bit of negativity! I think you're being somewhat harsh on Victoria Newton : I mean she may not be a musical expert but she was actually AT the U2 concert. Also last time I saw her picture I wouldn't have classed her as a 'fat slag'. As for Rolling Stone being irrelevant....well how come they have such a massive worldwide readership & influence within the music industry? I suppose you think The Times is irrelevant as well & all the other newspapers who seemed to give the concert unanimous critical acclaim.

Don't ya get it, these evil cunts are just trying to sell more magazines.

Concerning Victoria Newton, she is what I called a "populist tabloid journalist" who's only objective is to appease the masses; who know shit all about music.

Thank you for listening.

 

[Matthew_Page2000]

Don't ya get it, these evil cunts are just trying to sell more magazines.

Concerning Victoria Newton, she is what I called a "populist tabloid journalist" who's only objective is to appease the masses; who know shit all about music.

Thank you for listening.

I wouldn't know Victoria Newton from Sporty Spice but I do know one thing--U2 are a populist band. For the "people" and not above them. And doesn't "people" sound better than "masses?"

 

[dn9909]

I wouldn't know Victoria Newton from Sporty Spice but I do know one thing--U2 are a populist band. For the "people" and not above them. And doesn't "people" sound better than "masses?"

YOU. JUST. DON'T. GET. IT.

 

[pepokiss]

dudes, go listen to a bootleg in your basement and cut the crap... really

PS: I get it

 

[dn9909]

dudes, go listen to a bootleg in your basement and cut the crap... really

PS: I get it

I'm trying to preach to the misguided.

If you get it, then shut your face.

 

[indra]

What the fook do that fat slag know about music?!!!!She prolly have never been to a U2 concert in her life.

I wouldn't trust anything that is being printed by Victoria Newton or The Sun for that matter.

So.... what you're saying is that Victoria Newton doesn't know crap and if she writes something it must not be true. So you really think that U2 sucks donkey balls, eh?

 

[pepokiss]

nobody reads this

I'm trying to preach to the misguided.

oh... thank you, Lord

 

[learn2kneel]

EW has an interesting review, i don't remember the exact contents but i remember it that the writer sounded like they got all their information about U2 on google and then added some stylish word usage.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

What the fook do that fat slag know about music?!!!!She prolly have never been to a U2 concert in her life.

I wouldn't trust anything that is being printed by Victoria Newton or The Sun for that matter.

I think what has been overlooked in the melee was the point that Ms Newton writes for THE SUN, ie a Murdoch tabloid. What is printed in a Murdoch paper is not worth the tree pulp it's written on, positive U2 review or no positive U2 review.

PS someone made the point of many good reviews on U2.com. Well, like they're gonna put on some NEGATIVE reviews?!

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Don't ya get it, these evil cunts are just trying to sell more magazines.

dn9909, stop it. i've already asked you before to stop with these insults and then you say this. you're allowed to have your opinion on this but you're going to have to express it in a better way without calling women cunts.

as matthew page said, U2 are out there for everyone. that means everyone is allowed to like them and listen to them, including people who didn't like them back during pop or people who only like whoever's in the top 20.

and i'm still trying to figure out why a good review is a bad thing, even if it's from someone you don't like.

 

[MsMofoGone]

RollingStone magazine is not relevant ANYMORE. RollingStone is a sham nowadays.

Well, my "Q" to you is this ... Do you actually read Rolling Stone ??
It's one of the BEST magazines out there nowadays ...
I absolutely love this magazine and I've been a subscriber for several ... and I mean several ... years.

I wouldn't trade any of the following sections ...
Random Notes, Top 40 Albums, the CD .. DVD .. Movie or Book Reviews and especially all those GREAT photos ...
Plus they have excellent articles relating to all areas of music, politics and religion.

Rolling Stone is still sold at bookstores, music outlets, even the grocery stores carry this magazine ... plus it's also in high rotation ... with thousands of readers ... worldwide included ... and inspired within the music industry. So, I'm wondering how you can say Rolling Stone is not connecting or that it's a sham ...
I for one, certainly do NOT agree with you !!

 

[dn9909]

Well, my "Q" to you is this ... Do you actually read Rolling Stone ??
It's one of the BEST magazines out there nowadays ...
I absolutely love this magazine and I've been a subscriber for several ... and I mean several ... years.

I wouldn't trade any of the following sections ...
Random Notes, Top 40 Albums, the CD .. DVD .. Movie or Book Reviews and especially all those GREAT photos ...
Plus they have excellent articles relating to all areas of music, politics and religion.

Rolling Stone is still sold at bookstores, music outlets, even the grocery stores carry this magazine ... plus it's also in high rotation ... with thousands of readers ... worldwide included ... and inspired within the music industry. So, I'm wondering how you can say Rolling Stone is not connecting or that it's a sham ...
I for one, certainly do NOT agree with you !!

Did ya also get the issue when Jessica Simpson was on the cover?!!! So fook off! You're part of the fookin queue.

 

[edge3]

...PS someone made the point of many good reviews on U2.com. Well, like they're gonna put on some NEGATIVE reviews?!

OK...now that's a fair point. So much so that I'll let you into a bit of a secret : NME also covered the opening gig and said :

"...the show wasn't without its glitches..." and "Reworked versions of The Fly and Elevation were clunky and it took all of U2's experience to get to the end of them...". Bono even said "We came off at the corners a few times...".

So maybe they've been reading too many copies of The Sun then.

 

[dn9909]

dn9909, stop it. i've already asked you before to stop with these insults and then you say this. you're allowed to have your opinion on this but you're going to have to express it in a better way without calling women cunts.

as matthew page said, U2 are out there for everyone. that means everyone is allowed to like them and listen to them, including people who didn't like them back during pop or people who only like whoever's in the top 20.

and i'm still trying to figure out why a good review is a bad thing, even if it's from someone you don't like.

Sorry, I'm not as gullible as you are.

 

[doctorwho]

Sorry, I'm not as gullible as you are.

Your opinions are justified, but insulting members - especially the mods - is not the way to relay your points. And calling anyone rather offensive names (like c*nt) does nothing for your credibility. If you are trying for hegemonic rhetoric, you are failing spectacularly.

As for Rolling Stone... I admit, they often feature TV or movie stars on their covers. However, featuring an artist you don't like doesn't mean they aren't credible. Rolling Stone can - and does - feature hip artists as well as "flavor of the month" artists - and they *always* have. They can't always feature little known acts as no one would buy the magazine! Rolling Stone has to cater to a large public with very diverse tastes. Just because you might want to see an artist like Modest Mouse or Audioslave on the cover doesn't mean everyone else would.

Nonetheless, even if you hate a reviewer or a magazine/paper, it seems a bit ridiculous to rant so harshly over a positive review. If you wish to ignore the review because of the author or publication, so be it.

 

[gareth brown]

Worst thread ever. Some people need their heads screwing back on.

 

[dn9909]

I think what has been overlooked in the melee was the point that Ms Newton writes for THE SUN, ie a Murdoch tabloid. What is printed in a Murdoch paper is not worth the tree pulp it's written on, positive U2 review or no positive U2 review.

PS someone made the point of many good reviews on U2.com. Well, like they're gonna put on some NEGATIVE reviews?!

Exactly!

C'mon Baby Blue/ Shake your eyes up/ The world is waitin for ya

 

[pax]

This thread's continued existence is problematic for me.