U2 - Zoo TV - Opening Night (1992)

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
wow, that video was awsome!

i found it interesting to hear EBTTRT from the first show. seems that they played it in the same key that its in on the album.

thanks for the video!
 
I saw a comedy show at Lakeland arena back in March, and all I could think of was the historical significance to U2 fans, and that the fuckin' Fly was born there. Although, I must say, the place is sorely outdated now....and small!

I won't say anything bad about the town of Lakeland, but let's just say it wasn't my favorite city....
 
Dusty Bottoms said:
I want that U2 back.

Not necessarily the same music/image/tour, but that attitude.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of it stemmed from the fact that they were in their early 30's -- an age when they were wise enough to know how to play the game, but young enough to take chances and were still restless.

I'd love to see 'em come back with that same attitute, though, too, somehow.
 
I think this somewhat dispels the idea that U2 were as calculating when it comes to marketing and demographics as they have been this last decade.

I don't know that wishing for that attitude again has anything to do with nostalgia.
 
It fits right along with the gazillions of drooling posts over 90's U2. :shrug: Talk about being stuck in a moment.

As for calculating, they were soaking up (or sucking up to, if you prefer) MTV big time (and AB was U2 feeding off the early 90's Europe-namely Manchester scene). Nothing as calculating as, a few years later, hiring a DJ to produce your album right along the techno/dance craze in Europe, too.
 
LyricalDrug said:


I think a lot of it stemmed from the fact that they were in their early 30's -- an age when they were wise enough to know how to play the game, but young enough to take chances and were still restless.

I'd love to see 'em come back with that same attitute, though, too, somehow.
Click to expand...

Hopefully they have rebuilt their stature enough over the past decade that they can go back to taking more risks. I love the question at the end about some fans being disappointed that old warhorses weren't being played, and Bono said he didn't care if they lost some fans because of that, they were doing what they wanted to do. It would be nice if this attitude was brought back for the next tour.
 
U2girl said:
It fits right along with the gazillions of drooling posts over 90's U2. :shrug: Talk about being stuck in a moment.

As for calculating, they were soaking up (or sucking up to, if you prefer) MTV big time (and AB was U2 feeding off the early 90's Europe-namely Manchester scene). Nothing as calculating as, a few years later, hiring a DJ to produce your album right along the techno/dance craze in Europe, too.
Click to expand...


Berlin is not Manchester, and "Europe" (whatever the fuck that vague term mans) was not some easy-money making style to chase in '90. Go look at the top selling albums from that period. If they were trying to soak up the Madchester scene that much, they would have recorded there. Plus, the album sounds nothing like the Manchester aesthetic save for a couple riffs. It's much, much deeper than that. U2 has for a long time been influenced by more than one thing going on. It's the amalgamation of what they expose themselves to, combined with their own experimentation that makes them as good as they are.

As for MTV, U2 appearing on MTV once they stopped playing videos (as they did this last decade) is desperate. Back in '91, MTV was it. It was the only channel that would have bothered to show a lengthy interview. Bono's cheeky and standoffish attitude certainly doesn't look like whoring to me.

Also, started collaborating with Howie B. and Nellee Hooper as far back as 1995. Not exactly a bandwagon back then. They experimented with electronic music with eno and wanted to explore dance culture further in the music, and found a couple people to work with that they could relate to. How is that calculated? They were leading that hybridization, not following it.
 
Last edited:
I read somewhere that the closer 'Love is Blindness' was the permanent closer, because people would still be chanting 'How long' wanting them to come back and perform 40...
 
lazarus said:



Berlin is not Manchester, and "Europe" (whatever the fuck that vague term mans) was not some easy-money making style to chase in '90. Go look at the top selling albums from that period. If they were trying to soak up the Madchester scene that much, they would have recorded there. Plus, the album sounds nothing like the Manchester aesthetic save for a couple riffs. It's much, much deeper than that. U2 has for a long time been influenced by more than one thing going on. It's the amalgamation of what they expose themselves to, combined with their own experimentation that makes them as good as they are.

As for MTV, U2 appearing on MTV once they stopped playing videos (as they did this last decade) is desperate. Back in '91, MTV was it. It was the only channel that would have bothered to show a lengthy interview. Bono's cheeky and standoffish attitude certainly doesn't look like whoring to me.

Also, started collaborating with Howie B. and Nellee Hooper as far back as 1995. Not exactly a bandwagon back then. They experimented with electronic music with eno and wanted to explore dance culture further in the music, and found a couple people to work with that they could relate to. How is that calculated? They were leading that hybridization, not following it.
Click to expand...

NO NO NO! (stomps foot)
 
Interesting video. Every era of U2 has it's own little quirks and character. Thankfully though they realized when that overly ironic "who cares" act got old around Pop and went to dream it all up again, like at the end of Lovetown. I wonder what kind of band they'll be next.
 
the whole "ZOO TV" era was calculated. it shed that "holier than thou" attitude that u2 had been accused of having. remember the whole R&H backlash? well A.B. got them back into the cool circle. and don't tell me it didn't, otherwise they wouldn't have sold out the 1st show in 8 min.
 
No, I can not agree with a lot of statements here. I was shocked, when I watched these scenes on TV back then. Munich '92 was going to be my first ever U2 gig to attend – and as a long-time fan I did love the early albums. Not because I was a "pop kid", but I estimated – and still do now – a lot of material from their three studio records, early singles plus the live format from '83, as some of their best output. A part of the oeuvre, I want to listen to. Even worse: U2 chose only two songs (Bad and the even then Greatest Hit Pride) from their '84 album – that makes two songs from their first four studio albums in total...
I was angry about Bono – instead of playing/being the modest preacher of the 80ies – now pretending to be/wannabe/being V.I.P. rock star saying "We didn't want to ...", "We will lose some of the pop kids ..." and thus denying their origins and first big steps as artists completely.
Where were:
- Out Of Control, 11 O'Clock Tick Tock, I Will Follow, An Cat Dubh/Into The Heart, Gloria, October, I Fall Down, Tomorrow, Party Girl, Sunday Bloody Sunday, N.Y. Day, '40', A Sort Of Homecoming, The Unforgettable Fire?
But in the end, it was not the decision not to play anything from this list above – but the arrogant way, how Bono spitted it in the microphone. I felt it as a smash in their long-time fans – simply embarassing for anybody, who bought the albums, bought a ticket – and loved their music.
 
lazarus said:

Care to elaborate, Ernie? You're normally very articulate.
Click to expand...

I was just being a bit silly/rude. For some reason U2girl holds tightly onto that belief - that 90s U2 were simply a bandwagon jump and nothing more. I don't really have the energy at the moment to mount the counter argument, but I don't think it would matter anyway. None of the evidence to the contrary - which as a starter includes the songs on the albums themselves - seems to matter.
 
ZOOTVTOURist - Two decisions in time have kept U2's career exactly where they want it. The decision in 1991 to ditch the old, and the decision in 1999 to ditch the new. I think most people here are thankful that U2 didn't wander off into the wasteland in the 90s and become a dinosaur 80s band touring on the back of a few hits and a couple of classic albums from way back when. And I think most people here are glad they didn't wander into the 00s on a fringe, a band that used to pack stadiums and be heard 10 times a day on the radio, but now satisfying a niche end of the overall music spectrum. Plenty of people would have been happy with those results as well, for sure, but the majority, including the band themselves, wanted to hold their place, and in 1991 that meant unleashing U2 2.0 and it meant distancing themselves in as many ways as possible from 1.0.

Personally I think it's great with ZooTV because it works. They still have the feel and energy there of a fresh, young band. They are, with that, able to pull off the idea of hitting a reset button and providing an alternate version of themselves. Where they got lucky was with such blindingly great music. Where they really slammed it home was with such a depth of concept and ideas, incredibly so. The combination, I think, was highly unique (who else has done it to anywhere near that complete level) and stunningly successful.
 
Last edited:
lazarus said:



Berlin is not Manchester, and "Europe" (whatever the fuck that vague term mans) was not some easy-money making style to chase in '90. Go look at the top selling albums from that period. If they were trying to soak up the Madchester scene that much, they would have recorded there. Plus, the album sounds nothing like the Manchester aesthetic save for a couple riffs. It's much, much deeper than that. U2 has for a long time been influenced by more than one thing going on. It's the amalgamation of what they expose themselves to, combined with their own experimentation that makes them as good as they are.

As for MTV, U2 appearing on MTV once they stopped playing videos (as they did this last decade) is desperate. Back in '91, MTV was it. It was the only channel that would have bothered to show a lengthy interview. Bono's cheeky and standoffish attitude certainly doesn't look like whoring to me.

Also, started collaborating with Howie B. and Nellee Hooper as far back as 1995. Not exactly a bandwagon back then. They experimented with electronic music with eno and wanted to explore dance culture further in the music, and found a couple people to work with that they could relate to. How is that calculated? They were leading that hybridization, not following it.
Click to expand...

Every article from that era I read seems to say Bono and Edge were into dance music and the Manchester scene.

It's just funny how they didn't get any shit for listening to that in the 90's, or listening to American music in the late 80's but once they got into (actual) pop music in the new millenium, people come out blazing with all guns firing. What I'm saying is let's, then, apply the same iron fist, relentless standard for this hyped era too.

BD got plenty of airplay on MTV over here, as did other ATYCLB videos. The difference is they were HUGE only 4,5 years ago in that era (it's not like people won't come see you play if your last tour was well received 5 years ago), and being on the radio/MTV then was far easier. In contrast, it's now 20 years since JT, 15-or so years from AB now, and a gang of 40+ year old whiteys in a rock band ( coming off a flop of an album and a much critisized tour) have to work much harder to get out there besides the rap/hip hop/pop flooded MTV and the radio - and who plays 40+ year old whiteys anymore? - which includes playing promo shows, U2Ipods etc.
And personally I thought the "pop kids" comment was very smug. I doubt the young kids were into hearing the older songs, it was the longtime fans. I think the band owes it to them, and their first three albums, to play stuff from it - even if it's just IWF, Gloria, SBS and NYD. (what do you know? they did that, after they got on stadiums) Also, I wonder how much of Bono's new attitude was really a spontaneous change and how much of it was due to critics from Rattle and Hum era. You really think the change would be as radical if it wasn't for the flaming they got ? I get a kick out of their super duper reinvention actually in part coming not by being against the critics, but by doing exactly what they wanted. Lay off the preaching ? Check. Lighten up ? Check. Shut up during the shows and just play songs ? Check.

There were two things they were into in 1995: dance music and the rise of brit pop (where's the dedication to Noel Gallagher on Staring at the sun?). What is calculated is saying "right, let's get a DJ". For what? Street cred ? They were doing just fine in that dance-meets-rock department without hiring a DJ on previous two albums.
 
Last edited:
The band being into dance music or the Manchester sound (something no one is disputing) doesn't equate to aping it. Edge was also into industrial electronic music like KMFDM, which I suspect has a greater connection to Berlin than Manchester's music does. Veering towards that harsh, metallic sound is the exact OPPOSITE of the druggy reverb of Manchester, and certainly less likely to be popular hits. They were combining these sounds into something completely new, as well as trying trip-hop about 4 years before they became in vogue.

As for your comments about MTV, I understand the nature of what they were up against at the turn of this recent millenium. But like it or not, they came off more as desperate shills this decade than they did when Bono was engaged in confrontational interviews like the one linked at the top of this thread. The attitude of "screw you, I'm not going to be the rock star you want or expect me to be" was certainly a reaction to the backlash of Rattle & Hum, but I think the band were sick of what they were doing anyway. So the sound of the music is a natural desire to change, and the band's new image follows it. The only thing that's really calculated is Bono's play acting, which is half fun and half a shield against the arrows that had been aimed his way in the past.

And as I said in my previous post, the reason they moved from Eno to Howie B is because they wanted to explore the club scene further. Eno is a creative isolationist; he's not interested in checking out what's "happening" and letting it influence the music. The band wanted to get their hands dirty. And you're also creating a straw man argument when you say "hiring a DJ". Correct me if I'm wrong, but Howie B had already produced Bjork and Tricky before U2. It's not like he was there just to do some scratching. They wanted a more organic sound than the chilly, inward aesthetic found on Zooropa and Passengers, and through Nellee Hooper, I imagine (it's not like they put an ad up or were trolling at the clubs) connected with Howie to help recreate the club atmosphere.

Was it an attempt to be more accessible? The effect of making something that's more about "the people" is going to likely result in that. But guess what? It didn't, and POP sold even less (in the US, at least) than Zooropa did.
 
Then we agree they were into dance/Manchester/industrial sounds. I also remember an article that said Bono was imitating one of the Brit singers of the time on Mysterious ways verses (the name escapes me).

What I'm getting at is that with Joshua Tree and Rattle and Hum (even the movie alone) you could sense the honest soaking up and admiration/respect of American culture and music. With AB/Pop/ATYCLB it feels more like "ok, this is the hot music now in Europe/UK, let's sound like that". It's not they were doing that to make money, it' feels more like they were hopping onto the latest sounds of the time, to be hip. In contrast, there seems to be a more genuine desire in moving into Morocco for Arabic/African sounds.

I'm sure they were sick of their 80's sound anyway, I just think the backlash may have added a notch or two to the reinvention (image and attitude, for Bono in particular). I feel like he hasn't yet dropped the "rock star" out of his system, either.

Maybe Howie B has produced other people before, but I recall articles stating he was spinning records on the turntables to get the band into this particular music. As for sales, the poor tour start, overall image didn't help, also Zooropa was in the middle of the whole Zoo era which people ate up. That, and maybe with a monster single the likes of WOWY/I still haven't found.,../Desire/One/BD/Vertigo things would be different.

*edit I don't see what's so desperate about them trying to be out there now - and this is U2 we're talking about. The only difference is that, for obvious reasons, they have to work harder. If BD or Vertigo is the "price" of younger folk getting into their catalogue so be it.
 
Last edited:
Well I think it's somewhere in between...

There were many that saw Zoo TV as desperation, or as selling out.

I can understand the divide between the 80's and 90's fans, and I can understand the divide between the 90's and 00 fans. Fortunately some people are open enough to enjoy it all.

But let's face it, in this industry the older you get the more desperate you look it's just the fucked up nature of the industry.
 
Personally I don't think they sound like anything that came out of the Madchester scene.

So therefore I don't think it was a bandwagon jump.

They'd ended the Joshua Tree era on the Lovetown Tour and realised there was no-where else to take it.

It was change or die.
 
I could be slated here for my opinion on this subject, especially as my username is StoneRoses but anyway,

I think U2 made the bravest desicion of their entire career when they recorded Achtung Baby because i think to be honest they could of carried on making Joshua Tree style albums well into the 90's and sold millions, and not upset there loyal fanbase they'd worked so hard to get over the previous 10 years.

I think they knew this and maybe they thought it was to easy an option, and being U2 they decided to make the music that they wanted to and make the music that excited them rather than make another Joshua Tree/Rattle and Hum style album that they knew would be a safe bet.

As for the Manchester scene i have read interviews with Bono from 89/90 where he says he is into the Madchester scene and that he liked the Stone Roses.
U2 and Achtung Baby were definitley not part of that scene, most people who liked the Madchester scene would've hated U2 at that time, but i think U2 definitley stole some of the sounds from that period (Happy Mondays, Primal Scream,Stone Roses) and incorporated it into their own sound, which is what all great musicians do, and came up with the best album they have ever made.
 
ZOOTVTOURist said:
No, I can not agree with a lot of statements here. I was shocked, when I watched these scenes on TV back then. Munich '92 was going to be my first ever U2 gig to attend – and as a long-time fan I did love the early albums. Not because I was a "pop kid", but I estimated – and still do now – a lot of material from their three studio records, early singles plus the live format from '83, as some of their best output. A part of the oeuvre, I want to listen to. Even worse: U2 chose only two songs (Bad and the even then Greatest Hit Pride) from their '84 album – that makes two songs from their first four studio albums in total...
I was angry about Bono – instead of playing/being the modest preacher of the 80ies – now pretending to be/wannabe/being V.I.P. rock star saying "We didn't want to ...", "We will lose some of the pop kids ..." and thus denying their origins and first big steps as artists completely.
Where were:
- Out Of Control, 11 O'Clock Tick Tock, I Will Follow, An Cat Dubh/Into The Heart, Gloria, October, I Fall Down, Tomorrow, Party Girl, Sunday Bloody Sunday, N.Y. Day, '40', A Sort Of Homecoming, The Unforgettable Fire?
But in the end, it was not the decision not to play anything from this list above – but the arrogant way, how Bono spitted it in the microphone. I felt it as a smash in their long-time fans – simply embarassing for anybody, who bought the albums, bought a ticket – and loved their music.
Click to expand...


ZOOTVTOURist :shocked:



:wink:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Hello From Alberta, Canada
Replies
4
Views
399
NormB
N
Z
Hello!
Replies
3
Views
821
zoo skis
Z
prbiker15
U2:UV Boxscore Discussion
Replies
20
Views
1K
DeVaul
DeVaul
MrsSpringsteen
Atomic City
Replies
11
Views
1K
HeartlandGirl
HeartlandGirl
TheWanderer
2022 subscriber gift: Achtung Baby 30 Live
3 4 5
Replies
148
Views
16K
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom