What if "Discotheque" had not been the first POP single? (FOR REAL THIS TIME)

[pax]

What if "Discotheque" had not been the first POP single? (FOR REAL THIS TIME)

Well? Here's a thread for some heavy theorizing: what if, instead of the God-awful "Discotheque," U2 had picked something else to kick off POP to the public?

In my worst songs thread, someone (I forget who, sorry) pointed out--correctly, I think--that releasing "Discotheque" as the first single was a bad move. So would it have been different if they had picked something else, and how?

And, in the poll, what should have been the first single from POP if not "Discotheque"?

 

[LOVE MUSCLE]

I like SATS the best, so I picked it. I wish they would have played it electric though on tour.

 

[wertsie]

IGWSHA...Seems more radio-friendly to me.

Good poll, btw!

 

[U2Kitten]

I went with SATS. It would have been a better move, but still with the rest of the album and the general sound and image I doubt it would have helped much in the long run with most of the fans who rejected it.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

mofo. they were trying to go for dance, and they should've picked a dancier song. granted, i love the discotheque song and video, but it should've been like the second or third single.

 

[U2Kitten]

mofo. they were trying to go for dance, and they should've picked a dancier song. granted, i love the discotheque song and video, but it should've been like the second or third single.

That may have been the only move worse than what they did. I can't understand a Duran Duran fan being into that type of stuff, I was a big Duran Duran fan and Nick was hottest!

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

I can't understand a Duran Duran fan being into that type of stuff

huh?

 

[pax]

I voted for "Please." It might have placated those more political U2 fans (smile, guys!).

 

[The Wanderer]

btw, for those interested, U2 did perform SATS semi-electric at the beginning of PopMart, check out the version from openning night in Las Vegas (of course, they start it and stop because they had the timing fucked up, but managed to get through it on the 2nd try, but soon switched to a much easier acoustic version ever since)

 

[Achtung Zooropa]

I chose Do You Feel Loved. It's got a pretty rocking beat and guitar to it and a nice catchy chorus. I know it's very close to the song Alien Groove Sensation, but I think it would have been the best choice as an openner to introduce the album to the public and then after a short amount of radio play switch to a different song, like Gone or Last Night on Earth. I still think Discotheque was a good single and should have been a single, but maybe not the first one. I'll bet many or you would feel differently about the song if it didn't have such a bad reputation as the song that ruined POP from the get-go. If it had never even been a single we'd all probably be scratching our heads at why it wasn't. Hindsight is always 20/20. Either way I was pleased by the singles from POP. I personally feel it is one of their strongest records and it could have had 7 singles instead of just 5.

 

[Salome]

Discotheque is one of the best tracks on POP
the video was fun

in general people just didn't really like what U2 was doing on most of the POP album

 

[SweetOnU2]

Last Night On Earth!!

 

[elevatedmole]

Well.. I love Discotheque a lot, however I think it might have been a better marketing move to release a more rock-oriented single first, then Discotheque. Please would have been a pretty good first single, as would IYWTVD (quiet, sexy, etc.), and IGWSHA. But.. I think Staring at the Sun would be best, so I voted for that. However.. like I said.. I love Discotheque.

a little off topic: it never occurred to me that Pop has 2 somewhat similar song titles:

If God Will Send His Angels
If You Wear That Velvet Dress

 

[christiana]

"Discotheque rocks, bitch!"

but I'm not calling you bitch!

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

in general people just didn't really like what U2 was doing on most of the POP album

exactly

which is why you really can't choose an alternate single. anything else probably would've stunk just as much in the public's eyes.

 

[Salome]

indeed

 

[pax]

"Discotheque rocks, bitch!"

but I'm not calling you bitch!

Hee hee, thanks.

I was worried I'd get flamed for implying that Discotheque ought not have been the 1st single.

 

[U2Kitten]

Hee hee, thanks.

I was worried I'd get flamed for implying that Discotheque ought not have been the 1st single.

With good reason. It takes a lot of balls to say anything against Pop on this board because of the abuse that can follow. We can never really get an accurate representation of what most fans think because a, most fans are not here on this board, and b, most who are here are afraid to say what they really think in fear of flames. You are right, thanks for having the guts to bring this up for discussion. I do think a different first single would have been better but as I stated earlier I don't think it would have made a lot of difference in the long run, the entire album and image was just not going to make it with many fans regardless of the first impression. Oh, and Discotheque does not 'rock' because it is not a rock song. I know you said that because you knew that's what some of them were going to jump in and say. LOL.

 

[follower]

Man...is this endless arguing pro/against POP getting boring or what?

I think this topic is tough to be answered, simply because POP is so diverse, I mean, the songs have so different moods and approaches... I think they described POP (not sure if it was Bono...), saying that it was more like a party for the three first tracks, than it came the hungover...something like that, can?t remember exactly. Well, my point is that any choice they could possibly make would be a tough one. Anyways, I voted for Last Night on Earth, something in between the classic rock song and a more dancing one IMO

 

[wertsie]

With good reason. It takes a lot of balls to say anything against Pop on this board because of the abuse that can follow.

I love POP. It's my third-favorite U2 album (1.AB, 2.October). But I do think that Discotheque was a poor choice for their first single off that album. I like it, but I know it turned some of even the most devoted fans off.

 

[rafmed]

mofo. they were trying to go for dance, and they should've picked a dancier song. granted, i love the discotheque song and video, but it should've been like the second or third single.

ditto

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

ditto

yeeees!! *dances*

 

[Danospano]

I don't believe it would have made any difference. Pop was too experimental for U2's fanbase, and too damn good for the mainstream. People went with U2 on Zooropa, but Pop was too much. Releasing Discotheque may have been a bad choice, but I doubt releasing any other song would have led to greater sales in the long run.

My choice, if not for Discotheque would have been "Last Night on Earth". It's a great rock song that needed more promotion than it got. I have a feeling that by the time it was released in late 1997 early 1998, the record company and radio stations had given up hope on Pop. Had it been released first, it would have hung around longer on the charts. Staring at the Sun would have still been a good choice for the second single, and perhaps Discotheque at third.

 

[follower]

Exactly Danospano, that?s what I tried to say in my previous post. Not so brilliantly tough.

 

[bullet the blue sky]

This POP debating is becoming tedious. After nearly two years on here, it is quite simple to reach the following conclusion.

If you like POP... then you are musically diverse, open-minded, you like to be challenged musically and you enjoy making an effort with music.

If you dislike POP... you like things simple, you like clarity, you want things to be immediate and you are pretty linear musically.

 

[Foxxern]

With good reason. It takes a lot of balls to say anything against Pop on this board because of the abuse that can follow. We can never really get an accurate representation of what most fans think because a, most fans are not here on this board, and b, most who are here are afraid to say what they really think in fear of flames.

Not to drag this out too much, but I don't think that is exactly right. I think that most people who are on this board are fairly hardcore, not casual fans. And in fact, most hardcore fans did embrace POP and the style the band took up at the time. I don't think its that most people on here are afraid to get flamed, I think honestly that most people on here really love POP! Of course there are exceptions, such as yourself. If you don't like it after giving it a fair chance, then so be it.

Personally, I think if you could take U2's entire fanbase, casual and hardcore, you'd probably find that the POP-lovers are more skewed to the younger side, just because we tend to be more aware of techno/trance styles of music that U2 drew influences from on POP. But I'm not sure how old you are, you might be younger than me (20). So obviously there are exceptions to every rule. I'm just generalizing.

 

[GypsyHeartgirl]

Foxxem, I want to tell you that as a diehard, hardcore U2 lover since 1981, I hated Pop and the entire Pop image and era. I must tell you that everyone I know feels the same way. I'm telling you my husband, his coworkers, my friends and old high school classmates, my brothers and their wives and friends, my neices (two who have been on this board) nephews and their cool but sometimes drunken friends ( ages 20-25) even kids who hang around with my teenage son to this day think Pop is a joke, laughable, that the band sounded and looked terrible, ridiculous, forgive me, but some say gay, and that the music was terrible and a disgrace to U2's otherwise glorious legacy. People in record stores. In fact, except online I have NEVER met a Pop fan in real life. That is why I find it so surprising that it is so popular here. After having read this list and several others for the last two years, I come to the conclusion that, as J on wire used to say, that Pop fans are the very vocal minority. What happens is, there are a few dozen, maybe even a couple hundred very active and very loud Pop advocates on the internet, but no, they do NOT represent the fanbase as a whole. I have seen people say this many times. I have seen good people shut up or vanish until only the pro-Pop opinion stands alone because everyone else is so afraid to say anything against it, so it looks like Pop is popular with few or no detractors, but that's because they've all given up. I KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE because, though I would never reveal their names or sn's, I have talked to MANY people in private emails from here and the mailing lists, and that's what they say. Pop may look popular among the people here, but that is the reason, people are afraid to say they don't like it so they just let it go. Either they've been flamed, or seen someone else flamed and they just think it's not worth the trouble, but that doesn't mean they love it! I do think, and others here have said, that there are a disproportionate number of Pop fans on here and the lists compared to the fan base as a whole. Please consider that not every U2 fan has the time to come here, or will post if they do. Some of the very best fans I know are not members here. There are millions of U2 fans out there who love the band and do not like Pop that you never hear from. The very fact that Pop was so much less successful than the other albums since they hit the big time shows that in the real world, and in the grand scheme of U2 fans, Pop is not as popular as many of you would like to believe.

I admire Werstie very much, because though she is a big Pop fan, she realizes and believes many good fans don't like it and never tries to deny that or force it on anyone. She says she remembers it being rejected by teenagers when it was new. None of this should matter of course if you love the album. What bothers me is that some people here are so busy trying to say that people 'didn't get it' or 'didn't give it a chance' or something they refuse to see what Werstie knows to be the truth- very many good U2 fans don't like it!

I am not condemning anyone for liking it, only refusing to accept the fact that no matter how much you like it, millions of U2 fans did not like it and still don't. There's nothing wrong with us, some of us are much better and devoted fans than some of you. There also seems to be a great deal of resentment towards ATYCLB here because more fans accepted it. As I said in my post on diamond's thread a few days ago, it seems like some of the same people who rag on people for not liking Pop are always putting down 80's stuff and ATYCLB, so I wonder, are they really U2 fans, or just Pop fans? Of course this does not apply to all who like Pop, only the ones who defend it to the point of insulting the intellect and fandom of those who don't. Can't you just like it and enjoy it without blaming its relative failure on fans who hated it? If I really liked something I wouldn't give a damn what anyone thought.


Not every U2 fan who buys records, goes to shows and collects stuff is here to speak their story, and the ones who speak up here are by no means a scientific sampling of fans. Sales and concert attendance and TV rating is though, meaning ATYCLB was loved far more than Pop by far more people.

 

[GypsyHeartgirl]

Re: What if "Discotheque" had not been the first POP single? (FOR REAL THIS TIME)

Well? Here's a thread for some heavy theorizing: what if, instead of the God-awful "Discotheque," U2 had picked something else to kick off POP to the public?

In my worst songs thread, someone (I forget who, sorry) pointed out--correctly, I think--that releasing "Discotheque" as the first single was a bad move. So would it have been different if they had picked something else, and how?

And, in the poll, what should have been the first single from POP if not "Discotheque"?

That would be me- and I stand behind every word I said because it's true. This was a good idea for a thread though the 'it rocks bitch' is inevitable. Some people need to see the truth that no matter how much they like it, it was not the best move for the band at the time, it has been proven and even the band knows it.

 

[lazyboy]

This POP debating is becoming tedious. After nearly two years on here, it is quite simple to reach the following conclusion.

If you like POP... then you are musically diverse, open-minded, you like to be challenged musically and you enjoy making an effort with music.

If you dislike POP... you like things simple, you like clarity, you want things to be immediate and you are pretty linear musically.

Nicely put!

And Gypsyheartgirl, I got no bother with you or anyone else disliking it, but you should read over what you just wrote there a minute ago, about "everyone hating it" , "declaring it gay, laughable" , "only people you met online like it" etc. I dunno bout that. And you seem pretty damn hate filled towards it. If you start making those statements people are obviously gonna stick up for it. I'd just like to say that it was much differently received this side of the pond! Most my friends around the 20 age mark love it anyway.

People have a problem accepting your hatred of a thing when you don't really give any ground. Like the fact you hate everything to do with Pop and the Pop era, the look, EVERYTHING! This gives the impression you have a stubborn grudge against it. Some psychological barrier against accepting anything from this era. That's a bit childish and narrowminded IMO. It can't all be bad, I know this for a fact! You can't possibly not have liked Edge's funky foot flip during MW Mexico popmart can you?

 

[Achtung Zooropa]

I am a huge POP fan, probably my 3rd favorite U2 album. I dig everything on the album and there is something there for just about every mood you could be in. Up-beat, slow, sorrowful, clever, spiritual. I know many people on this board and many people in general dislike POP and view it as a major blemish to U2's career. On the other hand, all of my friends think POP is brilliant. Granted they are all 21 or younger, but I think they get the irony and they appreciate how diverse and heavy the album is. But, most of them dislike most of their 80's work. I think it all comes down to age personally. I am not saying that older people hate POP and younger people love it. I'm just noting that in my experience, the younger crowd seems to have given POP a little more of a chance. I am not worried about being flamed, because I think everyone here is appreicative of the opinions of everyone else. We are all U2 fans and are on this forum because we are devoted to the band. Sure we disagree about certain things, because that's human. But like so many things, the opinion war over POP rages on...and on.