the next album WILL be the last I think - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-06-2002, 01:57 PM   #1
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 114
Local Time: 09:53 AM
the next album WILL be the last I think

think about it...they'll all be nearing 45 by the time the next album (prob. Oct. 2003 rel.) and tour concludes. Can anyone here really say they could see them bowing out at 45 plus? If they do go on, I doubt they tour.
A year and a half to complete the new album, to me, spells 'if this is our last, lets blow the doors off on the way out.' ...that they'll try to create THE U2 masterpiece. But that's easy to say.
Or maybe it's because they figure with God, oh, I mean Bono, trying to right the world, it will take this long to finish. I just don't see why, with having eight demos now, they can't skip the european tour, and record the new album, release it by Oct. in time for the holidays...????
What ever happened to riding the ATYCLB wave Bono mentioned?
__________________

EXIT_TO_THE_NORTH is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 02:32 PM   #2
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: me to you
Posts: 221
Local Time: 01:53 PM
Damn, no! Think of the Rolling Stones and Paul McCartney, David Bowie...
I absolutely DON'T think this will be their last album. My prediction: They will tour through Europe , release an outstanding album about Christmas and - over the next decade - do their impressive age work. And they will tour!
You're crazy


------------------
Take the money and run
__________________

Don Vito Corleone is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 02:34 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
HeartlandGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7,033
Local Time: 06:53 AM
Think what you will about Madonna, but she made a very good point. Just because an artist reaches 40+ doesn't mean they should put themselves out to pasture.

As long as U2 is in good health and making vital music, they'll be around.

------------------
U2 @ The Blooming Heart
HeartlandGirl is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 02:40 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
elevatedmole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: On a backwards river
Posts: 3,546
Local Time: 08:53 AM
That is stupid. Age does NOT matter. The only thing that seems to matter to U2 is if they are still making good records and still spending time with their families. 45 is NOT that old. 60, yes, that is old. 45 is still young. U2 still is going strong and showing no signs of stopping. I think the only reason they'd stop now is if they weren't happy with their musical efforts and decided U2 was over.

------------------

"You must not look down on someone just 'cos they are 14 years old. When I was that age I listened to the music of John Lennon and it changed my way of seeing things, so I'm just glad that 14 year olds are coming to see U2 rather than group X." - Bono, 1988
elevatedmole is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 02:57 PM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,652
Local Time: 07:53 AM
Think Dylan. He's 61, his voice is shot, but he's been consistently making some of the best music of his career for the last few years. I can't say that about the Stones, McCartney or Bowie, but U2 are a band that has shown us all along they just keep getting better. Plus, they appear to be workaholics. I can't see them quitting anytime soon unless the next record is a total humiliating dud, which is unlikely.

[This message has been edited by joyfulgirl (edited 03-06-2002).]
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 04:05 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 08:53 AM
I thought their last album was rumoured to be AB...no....Zooropa....no....POP.....no....ATYCLB. When they say it's over, then it's over. Till then, speculating is just that...pure speculation.
sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 04:51 PM   #7
The Fly
 
mrsmullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: chicago
Posts: 185
Local Time: 05:53 AM
this wont be their last...they've got a contract until 2010. much more u2 to come!

alison

------------------
It doesn't matter what songs we sing. I'm a drummer. Chicks dig me. - Larry
mrsmullen is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 04:57 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:53 PM
If they stay cool like the Who? The Who essentially have not been a band since 1982. No new music, and in defense of the Stones, they have recorded 5 albums since 1982. I don't see the comparison to the Who since they stopped in 1982 with the exception of the reunion tours.
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:00 PM   #9
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,044
Local Time: 02:53 PM
I agree with Sting re. The Who
comparing U2 to other bands is sort of meaningless anyway IMO

I think they still have a few more albums in them and they will keep touring for a bit

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it
Salome is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:15 PM   #10
Gunslinger
 
Roland of Gilead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Mid-World
Posts: 4,192
Local Time: 06:53 AM
If All That... continues to prove, as it has all along, that it is the band's third masterpiece, then expect more U2. Their songwriting craft is just blossoming and, in case you didn't know, it was only recently during the Pop days that Bono mastered his falsetto.

The band that left their mark in the 80's and 90's are only going to do the same for this decade.

People who post "last album" threads need to be put up against the wall!
Roland of Gilead is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:25 PM   #11
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 114
Local Time: 09:53 AM
But if you noticed, how many BANDS are still going who AREN"T doing it MORE for the money???!!!!!! Not many. CSNY is doing it all for the money, as is Aerosmith, as is the Who. It becomes more about financing and retirement than music at some point, and that point, I THINK, may already be here for U2. They are a money hungry machine! But I love their music. I just think they are a little greedy. Hey, bono, if you care so much about Africa, give them some earnings from , say, part of your tour profits. No, but instead he wants to take it from US taxpayers. yeehaw! Smart man.
EXIT_TO_THE_NORTH is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:31 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by EXIT_TO_THE_NORTH:
Hey, bono, if you care so much about Africa, give them some earnings from , say, part of your tour profits. No, but instead he wants to take it from US taxpayers. yeehaw! Smart man.
you know...that is not only an ignorant and inane statement, but is really quite offensive. First of all, Bono does not equal U2. He doesn't own all the bands' money and what he does with his private life is his business. Secondly, Bono is trying to help implement REAL change and a lasting solution. And what the hell do you know about what he does with his own money? He's not the type to make a big public announcement of his personal monetary contributions to charity. Now THAT would truly be "selling out".

If a public figure recommended we institute change in our debt policies, would you deride them and tell them that they should pay for it out of their own pocket? Hardly. So then why the double standard?

Personally, I am sick and tired of hearing this. It's hypocritical and childish and shows a lack of critical thinking.
sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:37 PM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
elevatedmole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: On a backwards river
Posts: 3,546
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by EXIT_TO_THE_NORTH:
But if you noticed, how many BANDS are still going who AREN"T doing it MORE for the money???!!!!!! Not many. CSNY is doing it all for the money, as is Aerosmith, as is the Who. It becomes more about financing and retirement than music at some point, and that point, I THINK, may already be here for U2. They are a money hungry machine! But I love their music. I just think they are a little greedy. Hey, bono, if you care so much about Africa, give them some earnings from , say, part of your tour profits. No, but instead he wants to take it from US taxpayers. yeehaw! Smart man.
http://forum.interference.com/u2feed...ML/018417.html

------------------

"You must not look down on someone just 'cos they are 14 years old. When I was that age I listened to the music of John Lennon and it changed my way of seeing things, so I'm just glad that 14 year olds are coming to see U2 rather than group X." - Bono, 1988
elevatedmole is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:38 PM   #14
Acrobat
 
Zoocifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: On the sheer face of love
Posts: 387
Local Time: 07:53 AM
You can not stop a musician from making music. No matter what happens - the 4 will continue to make noise.

~z~

------------------
" You love this town - even if that doesn't ring true. You've been all over, and it's been all over you " - Bono

" Don't you know there ain't no Devil, that's just God when he's drunk " - Tom Waits
Zoocifer is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:44 PM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
david's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: southern california
Posts: 10,519
Local Time: 06:53 AM
U2 would only continue to make music for the love of making music. They wouldn't have to continue just to make money, they've been smart with all the money they made throughout the years. They'll make music as long as they find it challenging, and as long as they still have the ability to make music that is viable still.

------------------
The more of these I drink the more Bono makes sense.. - Bean from the KROQ Breakfast with U2.
david is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:44 PM   #16
New Yorker
 
*Ally*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,714
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4:
you know...that is not only an ignorant and inane statement, but is really quite offensive. First of all, Bono does not equal U2. He doesn't own all the bands' money and what he does with his private life is his business. Secondly, Bono is trying to help implement REAL change and a lasting solution. And what the hell do you know about what he does with his own money? He's not the type to make a big public announcement of his personal monetary contributions to charity. Now THAT would truly be "selling out".

If a public figure recommended we institute change in our debt policies, would you deride them and tell them that they should pay for it out of their own pocket? Hardly. So then why the double standard?

Personally, I am sick and tired of hearing this. It's hypocritical and childish and shows a lack of critical thinking.

well said, sula!! i agree 100% with everything you just said. first of all, we don't know how much money bono gives to charity- or whether he gives at all. however, given his political involvement, as well as that of his wife, i think he probably DOES give money to charity.

but this point is irrelevant, as individual contributions to charity will NOT solve the problems being faced in africa. although money from individuals/charities helps to bring about short term solutions, bono is trying to enact a long-term, global scale plan. he is trying to change the SYSTEM, instead of just writing a check and ignoring the larger problems. i think what's he doing is noble. i wonder, would all his naysayers prefer that bono just sit back and do nothing?? is that a better solution? i fear to think what this world might become if all people around the world were to follow that credo....


*Ally* is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:46 PM   #17
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,652
Local Time: 07:53 AM
what sula said
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:51 PM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
david's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: southern california
Posts: 10,519
Local Time: 06:53 AM
in another thread this was mentioned. just handing over money to something does not mean all the problems will be solved. you need to start at where it's important and that is convincing the people that govern that things need to be changed. the problem is far more worse than money. bono just can't give africa a million dollars and expect everything to be a-okay.

------------------
The more of these I drink the more Bono makes sense.. - Bean from the KROQ Breakfast with U2.
david is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 05:56 PM   #19
Elvis' Naughty Angel
 
Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: not here
Posts: 4,609
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by EXIT_TO_THE_NORTH:
I just think they are a little greedy. Hey, bono, if you care so much about Africa, give them some earnings from , say, part of your tour profits. No, but instead he wants to take it from US taxpayers. yeehaw! Smart man.
Do you smoke crack?

Angel is offline  
Old 03-06-2002, 06:42 PM   #20
Refugee
 
Foxxern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 1,284
Local Time: 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
If they stay cool like the Who? The Who essentially have not been a band since 1982. No new music, and in defense of the Stones, they have recorded 5 albums since 1982. I don't see the comparison to the Who since they stopped in 1982 with the exception of the reunion tours.
Sorry, I should have clarified. When I mean cool like The Who, I mean the image, and the fact that they are able to continue to draw in younger fans. They have managed to create soemthing that continues to resonate with people my age, and I think that's really incredible--to create something that transcends generations.

I don't ever want to go to a U2 concert and see it full of only older people (older than 35 or so). No offense to people of that age, there's certainly nothing wrong. But I think its awesome that U2 have been able to stay relevant for people of all ages as well. At least half the people at the Elevation shows I went to were under 30, and about one-quarter looked like they were college age. There are quite a few people in this forum who only became fans after ATYCLB came out. How many other bands who are around for even 10 years can continue to do that? Looking at the Stones, I don't know, they seem really unhip to me and my friends. It seems like they lost the passion long ago. They just don't have the image of being a cool band anymore.



------------------
Change is the only constant
__________________

Foxxern is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×