U2's Weakest Link? - Page 2 - 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 02-10-2004, 05:34 AM   #21
War Child
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wallyworld
Posts: 571
Local Time: 09:29 AM
Jick, you are grasping at straws. First, why should PM worry about release dates of other artists if U2 is to be bigger than the Fab4/King/Chairman? You would think It'd be the other way around.

The use of booze/smoking is problematic, but many other artists, INCLUDING the benchmarks cited, have done much worse.

The third GH album is not a big issue if you think outside the box for a minute. It doesn't have to follow the pattern set by the first two. Im thinking a concert anthology like springsteen's 1975-85 would be nice. I'd also like to see some of their early non-album singles get released as a set.

Finally, U2's position in music history won't be fully measured until they are done. Comparing active artists with inactive ones never made much sense to me. As a band they have out lasted, in terms of years of service, the Beatles and Zeppelin COMBINED!

FWIW, A recent poll showed U2 trailing only the Beatles and Stones in terms of best band of all time. I don't know if I believe that completely, but Im damn sure OK with it. We will know U2's importance 20 years from now when THEY are the band that others are judged by.

In my mind, this band has made the most out of limited talent. They got where they are by working their collective asses off. Not by being lazy. Anthing they do from now on is just icing.

Yeah, sure, Paul really stunk up the joint with this band......

Clark W. Griswold, Jr is offline  
Old 02-10-2004, 07:00 AM   #22
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
Diemen's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,685
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Yes, McGuiness is the one holding the little known band called U2 from stardom.

Not that I'm surprised, but your argument is poorly thought out without any really solid evidence to support your opinions, Jick, and often with false information or obviously biased opinion presented as fact.

-The members of U2 didn't want to relocate. Yeah, lets move the boys somewhere they don't want to live, force them away from friends and family, and shove them in a studio to work all the time. What tensions could possibly arise?

-The boozing argument is just plain stupid and utterly false. To this day? If I recall, the missed gig occured in the mid 90s. It is now.... hmmm ...2004. Adam gave up drinking after the incident, and so far as I can tell is still sober to this day, and really, other than that there has been absolutely NO history of alcohol abuse in U2 (at least at the level that would garner notice in the rock n' roll world). As far as Bono's operation...that appears to be a sinus problem, so once again, your facts are not facts at all.

-A manager is not supposed to be a babysitter, nor is he supposed to cut band members off from other passions in their life. 3 or even 4 years between albums is not that bad, especially when you consider that U2 generally tours extensively for each album. Just because you think they take forever doesn't make it fact, and it certainly doesn't put any guilt on McGuinness. U2 ultimately make the decisions to do what they do.

-The POP 'fiasco.' McGuinness may have booked the dates in the end, but you can be sure not before he had U2's full consent, so the blame lies just as equally with U2 as it does with McGuinness. Same with the marketing for POP. And as others have pointed out, the Beatles never had the amount of marketing that today's bands have, and yet they still remain just as popular if not more popular than many of today's bands. Care to explain that one using your argument's logic?

-The release dates is just stupid too. We should be worrying about Alanis and JayZ? Remember, it's not all about how high it gets on the ratings, but whether or not people like the record. As you said, U2 are already filthy rich, so hitting #1 on the Billboard charts shouldn't be the goal. Writing solid records should be. I could care less about chart placement.

I don't know why I bother replying...boredom I guess. At least you're staying consistent, jick: presenting one inaccurate and weak argument after another.

Diemen is offline  
Old 02-10-2004, 10:04 AM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,771
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Originally posted by Clark W. Griswold, Jr
The use of booze/smoking is problematic, but many other artists, INCLUDING the benchmarks cited, have done much worse.
No kidding. We're not likely to find them on some "E! True Hollywood Story" or whatnot anytime soon talking about drug and alcohol abuse (thank god).

Also, great job with the rest of your post. Same with you, Diemen.

Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 02-10-2004, 12:43 PM   #24
Blue Crack Supplier
BVS's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:29 AM
I think U2's weakest link are the fans that want to change them. We bitch about the manufactured pop bands, but then I've seen so many people in this forum want to "manufacture" U2 into something they're not.
BVS is offline  
Old 02-11-2004, 03:29 PM   #25
LetItGo's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 4
Local Time: 04:29 AM
This thread just makes no sense. This would assume that managers of rock bands get to tell them where to live, when to go to sleep, what not to drink or smoke, and what personal and political causes to support in their free time

How absurd. I see little that held U2 back because they are not back. I think you forget the onslaught of attention and publicity after ATYCLB; they were literally EVERYWHERE in every form of media. Bono still gets top billing here in NYC when he is spied eating dinner somewhere, and they somehow make a news story out of this.

U2 does the smart thing between albums and tours, which is to mellow out and get out of the spotlight. We are all aware of what over-exposure from the media does to people in this country. We eat them up, then we spit them out. Or as Bono said (paraphrasing) Crucifixion is the next door down the hall after Beatification.
LetItGo is offline  
Old 02-11-2004, 07:17 PM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 04:29 AM
Greatest hits deal was a fantastic one for them to sign AND the record label determines the release dates, so those arguments can be thrown away....

I do agree though that he gets a bit too much credit and the POP Mart incident should have never occured.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 03-08-2004, 12:55 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Jamila's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,454
Local Time: 03:29 AM
I guess I'm not understanding the necessity of this thread

If U2 ever changed in any way, they would not be the group they are today. IT TAKES ALL FOUR OF THEM TO BE U2 - Bono, Edge, Larry and Adam would each tell us this.

Let's find more constructive ideas to discuss in these forums.

My favorite is Bono, but I love all four of them. I wouldn't want to see them change in any way. Peace.
Jamila is offline  
Old 03-09-2004, 03:14 AM   #28
War Child
alexvilagosh's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 695
Local Time: 07:29 PM

Not that Adam is the weakest link, but I don't think Paul is...
alexvilagosh is offline  
Old 03-09-2004, 05:38 AM   #29
Jesus Online
Angela Harlem's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 08:29 PM
My God! If I wasn't a mod around here I'd speak my mind and say 'Who gives a fuck!' maybe add a

But that's entirely non constructive
So I ask instead what's the point of pondering a whole bunch of what ifs? We could ponder what they all might have done with their lives if they weren't musicians. But they didnt do anything else, so it doesn't matter. Like this, I guess. They didn't do anything differently so why contemplate the potentially limitless different outcomes a few different decisions might have led to?
<a href=https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 03-09-2004, 05:51 AM   #30
you are what you is
Salome's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,063
Local Time: 10:29 AM
I think I know the answer to that question
but since I am a mod I won't post it
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
Old 03-09-2004, 02:32 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
pepokiss's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 7,984
Local Time: 05:29 AM
after reading a lot of your posts, Jick (a lot of them, if not all, bashing U2), I'm really starting to think you kinda hate U2, unlike the rest of us, or like I do with you... and quite frankly, you should stop... for good




pepokiss 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 04:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com