What the hell is so wrong with Pop?
- Thread starter BrownEyedBoy
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
ultrraviolette
Refugee
Please, Gone, & IGWSHA are my fave Pop songs, but overall it's not one of my favorite albums.
bonosleftone
Refugee
Pop moves me in a way very few albums can
Shade
Acrobat
U2_Guy:
You know, as an American, I see a lot of Americans in my day to day existence, and I'll be the first to call the average American shallow, dumb, or, perhaps, just ignorant. Look at the douchebag we just re-elected as president. But, if you think U2 is making safer albums just for OUR sake, I'd say your own disdain for America in general is behind your bitterness, here. Whatever U2 comes up with in the studio is their creation - and responsibility - not America's. Actually, if you look at what happens when creative people reach middle age and have a bunch of kids - whether it's people who work in movies, literature, or music - they quite often mellow out and start working in broad strokes. Some people even lose their 'touch'. Am I personally happy that U2 seem to have lost their jones for wild experimentation? No. My favorite albums have always been their more experimental ones. But, that fact is, they're humans who are constantly evolving creatively, and they're not always going to do what you or I want them to do. Those are the breaks, man. I'm more than happy to sit here and bitch about it with you. Because, while I think HTDAAB is a great album, it is by and large very safe for them (though a good deal more daring in places than ATYCLB) and that makes me sad inside. But, I'm not going to infer that some foreign country has ruined U2 for the rest of the world, which is what you're doing, here. That's preposterous. Every major chance U2 has taken, including POP, has done well in America. One way or the other, the albums always sell hugely, and the fanbase always grows larger and stronger, despite our perceptions of said country's collective intelligence. Even in your country - wherever that may be - where we can be certain that at least one ignoramus has purchased both ATYCLB and HTDAAB.
Last edited:
bonosleftone
Refugee
I've said in other threads that POP was the best step U2 could take at that time and its obvious the commercial "failure" hurt their egos a bit and made them stop being so forward thinking. I do think ATYCLB is a regression musically and creatively but I feel that HTDAAB is a step up.
What's still great about the most recent two albums is that they're both EXCELLENT. Sure, I don't believe ATYCLB stacks up against the girth of their catalogue (although its better than October lol). HTDAAB is the album ATYCLB isn't. It's got more heart and soul, and is a lot deeper musically and spiritually.
It's by no means a masterwork in my eyes, but it is definitely part of the cream of the crop when pertaining to all U2's music and is easily in the top 5 of their greatest works ever, if not higher.
What's still great about the most recent two albums is that they're both EXCELLENT. Sure, I don't believe ATYCLB stacks up against the girth of their catalogue (although its better than October lol). HTDAAB is the album ATYCLB isn't. It's got more heart and soul, and is a lot deeper musically and spiritually.
It's by no means a masterwork in my eyes, but it is definitely part of the cream of the crop when pertaining to all U2's music and is easily in the top 5 of their greatest works ever, if not higher.
James U2
The Fly
[Q]The problem w/ Pop is Discotheque and it's video. It sunk the ship from day one.[/Q]
I would have to disagree. While you might think that the video is a bit trite, it doesn't change the fact that the single went Gold, the video was in MASSIVE rotation (even headlining a brief electronic video show on MTV called Fuse) and could be heard on the radio about every eight and a half minutes.
What really hurt Pop, in my opinion, was the choice to release Last Night On Earth (and a REALLY bad video!) as the third single. Granted the song went over well live, and U2 was in desperate need to prove that the album wasn't a techno record, but it's one of the weakest songs on the record. Gone would have been a much better choice.
But to the point of the post, I've always felt that Pop was a great record, and U2's high point artistically (though not necessarily musically). People always forget that the initial reviews of the record were great. 4 Stars in Rolling Stone, 9/10 in Spin (back when Spin actually mattered), and Q loved it.
Unfortunately, somewhere along the road some negative press came out and it became the media trend to follow suit. I remember reading articles criticizing U2's Las Vegas tour opener by writers who weren't even there. They were simply regurgitating what others had written, lending the situation uncalled-for negativity.
To the Pop naysayers, I simply challenge them to show me another band that could create those kinds of songs, with that much experimentation, at even a fraction the level of quality.
And if you're a U2 fan and you hate Pop (and there's lots of them out there), I ask you why you're even a fan of the band? That record represents everything wonderful about them. The courage to expand, the ability to be ahead of the game, the swagger and arrogance that any truly great showcase.
It may have been 1997, but 1987 wasn't coming back - and hasn't since.
james
I would have to disagree. While you might think that the video is a bit trite, it doesn't change the fact that the single went Gold, the video was in MASSIVE rotation (even headlining a brief electronic video show on MTV called Fuse) and could be heard on the radio about every eight and a half minutes.
What really hurt Pop, in my opinion, was the choice to release Last Night On Earth (and a REALLY bad video!) as the third single. Granted the song went over well live, and U2 was in desperate need to prove that the album wasn't a techno record, but it's one of the weakest songs on the record. Gone would have been a much better choice.
But to the point of the post, I've always felt that Pop was a great record, and U2's high point artistically (though not necessarily musically). People always forget that the initial reviews of the record were great. 4 Stars in Rolling Stone, 9/10 in Spin (back when Spin actually mattered), and Q loved it.
Unfortunately, somewhere along the road some negative press came out and it became the media trend to follow suit. I remember reading articles criticizing U2's Las Vegas tour opener by writers who weren't even there. They were simply regurgitating what others had written, lending the situation uncalled-for negativity.
To the Pop naysayers, I simply challenge them to show me another band that could create those kinds of songs, with that much experimentation, at even a fraction the level of quality.
And if you're a U2 fan and you hate Pop (and there's lots of them out there), I ask you why you're even a fan of the band? That record represents everything wonderful about them. The courage to expand, the ability to be ahead of the game, the swagger and arrogance that any truly great showcase.
It may have been 1997, but 1987 wasn't coming back - and hasn't since.
james
Last edited:
bonosleftone
Refugee
James U2 said:
One single cannot sink a record, although I do agree in a sense that LNOE was not a strong choice in comparison to other tracks on the record. The biggest knock against Pop is not even the record as it really was critically accepted in lots of circles. What hurt it was the tour and the incessant labeling of that time as it being "electronica". That was the buzz word that year and very few artists merged it with rock well. U2 and Beck are the only ones I can think of. One word sunk the album. The tour took away the people.
The tour was over the top and blatantly arrogant. A lot of people didnt get "the joke" and I don't think U2 really set it up well in terms of what it represented. It was the antithesis of Zoo TV which was more about the controversy of technology and POP seemed like a grandiose acceptance of everything commercial. From the stupid Lemon and the even crazier costumes (Bono entering the show as a boxer?).
I loved PopMart and dont even agree with what I said in the previous paragraph but I see how one could construe that, it was a great show, great time for me. However to an outsider I could see how PopMart could sour a casual fan or a critic. U2 never made themselves clear to the masses what the point of the idea was. Whereas thier tour before that made exactly clear what they were "rebelling" for and against.
Last edited:
I don't think Pop is a bad record but, for me personally, it just didn't speak to me. That sounds weird, I know. I can't really put it into words but a lot of the songs don't move me. However, "Gone" is in my 10 ten best U2 songs. I guess I just feel like there is something lacking in it for me. It's just not one I pull out and feel like listening to.
Part of it, I think, it what record you became a U2 fan with. Sometimes that sticks out with people. I have a love of UF and JT because that was the time I became a fan. Also, I'm glad they made Pop because it is a record that a lot of people like. We all love U2 but we don't all have to love every song/record in the same way. ATYCLB is one of my favorite records because quite a few of the songs and lyrics I can relate to personally. I was going through a lot medically, at the time and songs like "Walk On" and "Kite" helped me in ways I can't even explain. I'm just happy that we have U2 and that there are many faces of U2 for all different types of people. That's what makes U2 so special.
Part of it, I think, it what record you became a U2 fan with. Sometimes that sticks out with people. I have a love of UF and JT because that was the time I became a fan. Also, I'm glad they made Pop because it is a record that a lot of people like. We all love U2 but we don't all have to love every song/record in the same way. ATYCLB is one of my favorite records because quite a few of the songs and lyrics I can relate to personally. I was going through a lot medically, at the time and songs like "Walk On" and "Kite" helped me in ways I can't even explain. I'm just happy that we have U2 and that there are many faces of U2 for all different types of people. That's what makes U2 so special.
Last edited:
James U2
The Fly
[Q]Whereas thier tour before that made exactly clear what they were "rebelling" for and against.[/Q]
But did it really? I mean, how many people outside of big U2 fans even care what a tour is supposed to represent? And at every Popmart show I was at (and so i suppose the rest of them, as well) the crowd went nuts when the lemon opened up, the band came through the crowd, etc. There was no "joke" to be gotten by the mainstream public - and that includes the casual U2 fan. You think that most people got that the metal snake towering over a Rolling Stones stage 15 years ago represented Jagger's infinite penis? Well, I'm sure it didn't, but you get my point. As Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." Most people just want to see a good show. For the people who felt that Popmart was arrogant, did they actually attend it? Because I can't see how that tour would be arrogant to you but not ZooTV. One had lots of small screens (relatively speaking) and one had one giant screen. If U2 hadn't topped ZooTV then what, might I ask, would that represent? That they lacked confidence in the new material or their ability to continue playing well live?
Keep in mind that Popmart sold roughly 85% of U.S tickets - hardly an insignificant number considering 40,000 people venue's.
The fact of the matter is that there are far more casual U2 fans out there than there are die-hards like us. The casual fan didn't want to hear U2 playing that kind of music or see them in space-cowboy suits. The only markets where U2 didn't fair well were level C markets, the kind of cities they didn't even play on the Elevation tour.
But I do agree that one single can't necessarily kill a record (especially in U2's case). I'm just saying that that song didn't help the record.
james
But did it really? I mean, how many people outside of big U2 fans even care what a tour is supposed to represent? And at every Popmart show I was at (and so i suppose the rest of them, as well) the crowd went nuts when the lemon opened up, the band came through the crowd, etc. There was no "joke" to be gotten by the mainstream public - and that includes the casual U2 fan. You think that most people got that the metal snake towering over a Rolling Stones stage 15 years ago represented Jagger's infinite penis? Well, I'm sure it didn't, but you get my point. As Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." Most people just want to see a good show. For the people who felt that Popmart was arrogant, did they actually attend it? Because I can't see how that tour would be arrogant to you but not ZooTV. One had lots of small screens (relatively speaking) and one had one giant screen. If U2 hadn't topped ZooTV then what, might I ask, would that represent? That they lacked confidence in the new material or their ability to continue playing well live?
Keep in mind that Popmart sold roughly 85% of U.S tickets - hardly an insignificant number considering 40,000 people venue's.
The fact of the matter is that there are far more casual U2 fans out there than there are die-hards like us. The casual fan didn't want to hear U2 playing that kind of music or see them in space-cowboy suits. The only markets where U2 didn't fair well were level C markets, the kind of cities they didn't even play on the Elevation tour.
But I do agree that one single can't necessarily kill a record (especially in U2's case). I'm just saying that that song didn't help the record.
james
Last edited:
Zoots
Blue Crack Supplier
Pop rules!
Ah, the classic Pop discussion! Gotta love it. I can only wish that U2 would go back to the daring and adventurous days of Pop. ATYCLB was sugar pap. HTDAAB sounds better... The Edge has dusted off his guitar and is actually using it now.
Ah, the classic Pop discussion! Gotta love it. I can only wish that U2 would go back to the daring and adventurous days of Pop. ATYCLB was sugar pap. HTDAAB sounds better... The Edge has dusted off his guitar and is actually using it now.
MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
Disco killed the record. "meat and potatoes" rock fans heard the title, tune, and saw the video, and thought U2 went "gay." The band tried to be too smart. It went top 10 because the charts in 97 included single sales/airplay in their rankings. U2's first single in 4 years was bound to shift alot of units, crap or not.
Bunbury
Refugee
BrownEyedBoy said:
Nothing, don't listen to these haters
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
Since we're painting in broad strokes here - very broad strokes - I'd just like to say that South America and Australia loved POP.
Although I do think it was one of their sloppiest records ever, the highs were very high... and that's important to me.
Although I do think it was one of their sloppiest records ever, the highs were very high... and that's important to me.
Miggy D
War Child
BrownEyedBoy said:I know it's been said a lot and I know you've covered this, but I don't get it. What the hell is so bad about Pop? This was the album that made me a fan and then I come over to interference and all of you are dissing it so bad. So, go ahead. Explain to me what is so bad about it.
Most of the songs are good, like so:
(the tracklist may be off because I don't have the CD with me right now)
1. Discotheque ..............................good
2. Do you feel loved.......................good
3.Mofo ..........................................good
4. If God Would Send His Angels.....great
5. Staring at the Sun.....................good
6.Gone............................................Good
7.Last night on Earth...................good
8. Miami ..........................................bad
9.Playboy Mansion...........................decent
10. If you wear that velvet dress....very cool song, no one's ever done anything like it
11. Please.......................................good
12.Wake up Dead Man...................good
There you go. Only one bad song in the whole thing.
Pop is a great album.
..................
1. Discoteque - ok
2. Do you feel loved - ok/good
3. Mofo - good.
4. If God Would Send His Angels - ok. single version - very good
5. Staring at the Sun - good. Best Of Version - great
6. Gone = great
7. Last Night On Earth - good. Single version - great
8. Miami - bad
9. Playboy Mansion - bad. (Too many pop culture references made it cheesy and dated it horribly.)
10. If You Wear That Velvet Dress - ok. Would be a lot better if the producer would have turned up the volume just a TAD.
11. Please - ok. Single version - BRILLIANT.
12. Wake Up Dead Man - ok/good. (He made the world in seven...horrible lyric. By the way Bono - God made the world in SIX DAYS.)
Miggy D
War Child
I also don't get these kinds of conversations anymore. Pop came out in 1997. It's been discussed to death. Yet every 'Pop rocks! and 'Pop sucks!' thread that gets started gets 50+ replies. Let it go, people! Everyone! Let...it...go!
I know I replied as well but that's because I have only been a member for a few months and have never said how I feel. I'm only doing it once.
I know I replied as well but that's because I have only been a member for a few months and have never said how I feel. I'm only doing it once.
indra
ONE love, blood, life
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 12,689
Miggy D said:I also don't get these kinds of conversations anymore. Pop came out in 1997. It's been discussed to death. Yet every 'Pop rocks! and 'Pop sucks!' thread that gets started gets 50+ replies. Let it go, people! Everyone! Let...it...go!
I know I replied as well but that's because I have only been a member for a few months and have never said how I feel. I'm only doing it once.
The reason these discussions get so many responses is because it's fun. It's fun to find out what other people think is the good, the bad and the ugly about U2 (and other topics too). That's what discussion boards are for.
Miggy D
War Child
indra said:
Discussion boards....for discussion?
For shame!
For shaaaaaame!
I like half of the songs but it's funny how the only U2 album considered a flop and unfinished gets so overrated. Reasons why I think it's not all that great:
In search of effects and samples and loops, U2 forgot about songwriting (luckily that got back in ATYCLB/HTDAAB). By far Staring at the sun and Gone stick out, and even those aren't great by U2 standards.
It is uneven (are we rock? are we techno? are we something else?), and unfinished. (leading to still recording when they ought to have been rehearsing for the tour - hello opening night debacle)
Worst Bono voice ever.
Weird production - honestly, it's the only U2 album where I can't stand the sound of Edge's guitar.
U2 was obviously trying to top AB/Zoo TV with Pop/Popmart, only it was far less inspired and thus they failed.
Ridicioulus image of the band and try as they might, they were not cool.
Miami.
In search of effects and samples and loops, U2 forgot about songwriting (luckily that got back in ATYCLB/HTDAAB). By far Staring at the sun and Gone stick out, and even those aren't great by U2 standards.
It is uneven (are we rock? are we techno? are we something else?), and unfinished. (leading to still recording when they ought to have been rehearsing for the tour - hello opening night debacle)
Worst Bono voice ever.
Weird production - honestly, it's the only U2 album where I can't stand the sound of Edge's guitar.
U2 was obviously trying to top AB/Zoo TV with Pop/Popmart, only it was far less inspired and thus they failed.
Ridicioulus image of the band and try as they might, they were not cool.
Miami.
Last edited:
Miggy D
War Child
Miami needs to be taken out, put in a burlap bag, and beaten with sticks.
Aardvark747
Blue Crack Addict
Nice idea...!
U2FanPeter
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I think the Pop stigma is due more to the tour and the way the group was presented.
-Worst haircut of Bono's career?
-A record they admitted was not finished
-Booking a US stadium tour 2 months before anyone hears the record. Some dates were 9 months in advance. It was obviously that intended multiple shows were unnessesary. One added show(phili?) was cancelled after only 4,000 tickets were sold.
-Bono's voice which which he admitted once or twice was at it's lowest point of his career.
-underrehearsed opening show.
-underrealised visual concept for the tour - what did the pieces add up to?
U2 learned they can never do a US stadium tour straight out of the gate. never have been able to. A fetal lesson which explains the arenas dates in 2001 and 2005.
<<The only markets where U2 didn't fare well were C-level markets not visited on the elevation tour>>
Explain Vancouver 1997 with 20,000 empty seats? it was their 4th visit to that venue, their last visit was a nearly sold out 2 night stand 5 years earlier. To this day no-one has released an official audience count for this show it's so embarressing. I was there and there were ACRES of unsold tickets. BC Place has not been booked as a full concert venue since that day in 1997.
Yet vancouver 2001 was one of the hardest tickets to aquire on the 2001 tour in North America.
U2FP
I would love to see Pop get a 10 anniversary triple disc in 2.5 years. #1- remastered original album #2 - newly "Finished" version(like best of 90-00)plus bonus tracks. #3 - Mexico DVD
-Worst haircut of Bono's career?
-A record they admitted was not finished
-Booking a US stadium tour 2 months before anyone hears the record. Some dates were 9 months in advance. It was obviously that intended multiple shows were unnessesary. One added show(phili?) was cancelled after only 4,000 tickets were sold.
-Bono's voice which which he admitted once or twice was at it's lowest point of his career.
-underrehearsed opening show.
-underrealised visual concept for the tour - what did the pieces add up to?
U2 learned they can never do a US stadium tour straight out of the gate. never have been able to. A fetal lesson which explains the arenas dates in 2001 and 2005.
<<The only markets where U2 didn't fare well were C-level markets not visited on the elevation tour>>
Explain Vancouver 1997 with 20,000 empty seats? it was their 4th visit to that venue, their last visit was a nearly sold out 2 night stand 5 years earlier. To this day no-one has released an official audience count for this show it's so embarressing. I was there and there were ACRES of unsold tickets. BC Place has not been booked as a full concert venue since that day in 1997.
Yet vancouver 2001 was one of the hardest tickets to aquire on the 2001 tour in North America.
U2FP
I would love to see Pop get a 10 anniversary triple disc in 2.5 years. #1- remastered original album #2 - newly "Finished" version(like best of 90-00)plus bonus tracks. #3 - Mexico DVD
doctorwho
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Most U2 albums take time to grow on me. This was true with HTDAAB (the first few times I listened to it, I wasn't impressed - now I really enjoy it and rank it amongst my favorite), AB and even JT.
I contrast, the first time I heard "Pop", I was mesmerized. I loved it. Likewise, I thought "Discotheque" had a fantastic riff and the video was hilarious.
However, as time wore on, this fascination with the album faded. Unlike other U2 albums, where I became more interested in the songs and found new gems, "Pop" seemed to dissipate.
In 2000 or early 2001, shortly after ATYCLB was released, I listened to "Pop" at work. The first time through, it brought back all the memories I had of 1997 and was enjoyable. However, when I played it a second time, I realized that the album didn't stand my personal test of time.
Now in 2004, I consider "Pop" one of U2's weaker albums. Yes, there are some innovative songs and some very good songs. However, there are also some very weak tracks - perhaps the weakest I've heard from U2.
"Discotheque" still has that fantastic riff from Edge - love it. But I really dislike Bono's lyrics. While I once defended those very lyrics, I now feel they are amongst Bono's worst. Furthermore, I don't put "Discotheque" in that "experimental" category others have. It's just a rock song.
"Do You Feel Loved" and "Mofo" are far more experimental and better tracks for it. "Mofo" remains one of my favorite U2 songs.
"If God Will Send...", however, kills all momentum "Loved" and "Mofo" created. I rank this song amongst U2's three worst (the other two being from JT and AB). Bono belts out that "Cartoon network" line as if he's singing some brilliant revelation - yet the analogy is simple and far from original.
While I appreciate the significance of tracks like "Wake Up Dead Man", musically it's not for me. The Jools Holland remix of "Velvet Dress" is about 1000x better than the somewhat creepy album version. "Last Night on Earth" is a good song, but now I always associate it with that horrid video (what were U2 thinking?).
"Gone" is a highlight of the album - if it just didn't have that ear-piercing beginning. I both love and hate "Miami" - I love the "bah buh bah's" in it, but hate when Bono starts screaming (which ruins the song, IMO).
Fans often refer to "Pop" as experimental, but really, it only has a few tracks that qualify as such. "Please", for example, could have easily been on a plethora of U2 albums, including UF, JT, AB, and more recently, ATYCLB and HTDAAB. "Please" also has some of Bono's best lyrics. As such, it stands out. But with too many other songs falling apart, the album just doesn't do it for me.
It's not that I dont' "get it". Trust me, I did and still do. I got the additional irony and the image, etc.
However, in retrospect, I feel U2 went one step too far. AB (which I don't feel is horribly experimental - just a darker more rocking sound from U2) excelled because of outstanding lyrics, melodies and music. U2 "got away" with their whole "irony" image because AB's music was brilliant. "Zooropa" fed off that brilliance and in some cases, expanded on it (and in other cases, fell short of it). But "Pop" seemed to definitely take a step back. It was as if U2 was now trying too hard.
In terms of marketing the album, U2 was a disaster - but that's another post.
All of the above said, I still feel "Pop" was one of the better, if not even the best, album of 1997. I never got into "O.K. Computer" and felt it was horrid. And the year of Spice Girls and Hanson did little for me.
But I hope this clears up why I'm not fanatical about "Pop". It's good and even great for many artists, but falls way short by U2 standards.
I contrast, the first time I heard "Pop", I was mesmerized. I loved it. Likewise, I thought "Discotheque" had a fantastic riff and the video was hilarious.
However, as time wore on, this fascination with the album faded. Unlike other U2 albums, where I became more interested in the songs and found new gems, "Pop" seemed to dissipate.
In 2000 or early 2001, shortly after ATYCLB was released, I listened to "Pop" at work. The first time through, it brought back all the memories I had of 1997 and was enjoyable. However, when I played it a second time, I realized that the album didn't stand my personal test of time.
Now in 2004, I consider "Pop" one of U2's weaker albums. Yes, there are some innovative songs and some very good songs. However, there are also some very weak tracks - perhaps the weakest I've heard from U2.
"Discotheque" still has that fantastic riff from Edge - love it. But I really dislike Bono's lyrics. While I once defended those very lyrics, I now feel they are amongst Bono's worst. Furthermore, I don't put "Discotheque" in that "experimental" category others have. It's just a rock song.
"Do You Feel Loved" and "Mofo" are far more experimental and better tracks for it. "Mofo" remains one of my favorite U2 songs.
"If God Will Send...", however, kills all momentum "Loved" and "Mofo" created. I rank this song amongst U2's three worst (the other two being from JT and AB). Bono belts out that "Cartoon network" line as if he's singing some brilliant revelation - yet the analogy is simple and far from original.
While I appreciate the significance of tracks like "Wake Up Dead Man", musically it's not for me. The Jools Holland remix of "Velvet Dress" is about 1000x better than the somewhat creepy album version. "Last Night on Earth" is a good song, but now I always associate it with that horrid video (what were U2 thinking?).
"Gone" is a highlight of the album - if it just didn't have that ear-piercing beginning. I both love and hate "Miami" - I love the "bah buh bah's" in it, but hate when Bono starts screaming (which ruins the song, IMO).
Fans often refer to "Pop" as experimental, but really, it only has a few tracks that qualify as such. "Please", for example, could have easily been on a plethora of U2 albums, including UF, JT, AB, and more recently, ATYCLB and HTDAAB. "Please" also has some of Bono's best lyrics. As such, it stands out. But with too many other songs falling apart, the album just doesn't do it for me.
It's not that I dont' "get it". Trust me, I did and still do. I got the additional irony and the image, etc.
However, in retrospect, I feel U2 went one step too far. AB (which I don't feel is horribly experimental - just a darker more rocking sound from U2) excelled because of outstanding lyrics, melodies and music. U2 "got away" with their whole "irony" image because AB's music was brilliant. "Zooropa" fed off that brilliance and in some cases, expanded on it (and in other cases, fell short of it). But "Pop" seemed to definitely take a step back. It was as if U2 was now trying too hard.
In terms of marketing the album, U2 was a disaster - but that's another post.
All of the above said, I still feel "Pop" was one of the better, if not even the best, album of 1997. I never got into "O.K. Computer" and felt it was horrid. And the year of Spice Girls and Hanson did little for me.
But I hope this clears up why I'm not fanatical about "Pop". It's good and even great for many artists, but falls way short by U2 standards.
Miggy D said:
I'm also tired of the 'Pop is daring and now they're safe' bullshit. Look, these guys were in the studio for 3 years, they said they were going to rock, they said it was punk rock made on Venus, what you got IS what was in them, they are NOT holding back or being 'safe.' This is what U2 is, on the inside. If you don't like it maybe you are not as much of a fan as you think. U2 have NEVER played to the current market and they have always been successful. They are not putting out something they think will sell. They are putting out what came out of four guys in a studio over 3 years. Like it or leave it alone, there is no evil, 'safe' anti-Pop plot behind it! Pop was what was in them in 1997. This is what is in them now.
Nothing wrong with Pop. In fact I organized my playlists from the dSet & the nineties lists were full of Pop songs.
It was one of the strongest era in U2 history & Pop can stand on its own merit anytime!
Lyrics are some of Bono's strongest & musically, it was probably the band's experimental height.
@ the core, it shows how multimdimensional they are as band.
I'm not sure we'll ever get that type of U2 again...
It was one of the strongest era in U2 history & Pop can stand on its own merit anytime!
Lyrics are some of Bono's strongest & musically, it was probably the band's experimental height.
@ the core, it shows how multimdimensional they are as band.
I'm not sure we'll ever get that type of U2 again...
U2Kitten said:
I'm also tired of the 'Pop is daring and now they're safe' bullshit. Look, these guys were in the studio for 3 years, they said they were going to rock, they said it was punk rock made on Venus, what you got IS what was in them, they are NOT holding back or being 'safe.' This is what U2 is, on the inside. If you don't like it maybe you are not as much of a fan as you think. U2 have NEVER played to the current market and they have always been successful. They are not putting out something they think will sell. They are putting out what came out of four guys in a studio over 3 years. Like it or leave it alone, there is no evil, 'safe' anti-Pop plot behind it! Pop was what was in them in 1997. This is what is in them now.
Some ppl sound like if they were U2's lawyer deffending the band in Court...
rjhbonovox
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,139
Shade said:
Come on you gotta agree that the last two albums have been geared towards an American Audience which mostly loved their 80's stuff. I am from Europe but I can see that this music is not entirely geared towards a European Audience. As Edge said in 1991 about Achtung Baby it sounds like European Blues to me, well this is more geared towards American Mainstream Rock.
Anyway to keep the thread going POP's the 2nd greatest album U2 have ever made and will probably ever make. It amuses me that U2 released an album 2 days ago and people are more interested in talking about an album that was made 7 years ago. hehehehehe I think it shows the quality of the new album, maybe?
Similar threads
