I appreciate POP.
Originally posted by Desire4Bono:
I do agree that without POP you would have had not ATYCLB and Elevation the way they turned out. Each album and each era has its own place and importance in time and history, and they all had a purpose.
what fun would it be if we all agreed anyway? ;-)
Originally posted by Zoocifer:
U2 seemed to be darker, alittle bit hipper, and there was more attitude in the music. It showed me that you could mix many different styles of music but still be who you are.
Originally posted by oliveu2cm:
Let's remember that Discotheque "failed" as a first single (imo)
Originally posted by KhanadaRhodes:
yes, but the fly, off of achtung baby, did as well. in fact, looking at boy (if you count out of control or even a day without me), october, achtung baby, zooropa (since the only real single was stay), and pop...all of their first singles flopped.
it's a shame too because discotheque is such a great song. one of my favourites, in fact. i hope this didn't come off as attacking you, because i do indeed agree with you. discotheque did fail as a first single for pop.
so what's better?? LOL! this is a great point- you have people arguing both sides.to me it seems like they made pop not caring who it pissed off or alienated. on the other hand, it seems that atyclb was a cop out, to try to regain the fans and critics they'd lost with pop.
umm, I agreeOriginally posted by oliveu2cm:
exactly! which is why intense pop bashing shouldn't occur
Originally posted by SweetonU2:
Why can't people who hate it stay away? I understand that way things were stated in the first post was a litle "EH" but in the future when you see "POP APPRECIATION THREAD" and you don't like it..... stay away!
Originally posted by Hawkfire:
...when U2 were deliberately trying to do stuff they had NEVER done before, when they were not concerned with alienating audiences, or how many teens in the 12-18 demographic gave a crap about them.
U2 wasn't about incessant marketing or making paint-by-the-numbers FM-lite rock tunes for cheesy soundtracks in 1997. Only the "true" U2 fans were interested, and people at the concerts weren't clamoring for Sunday Bloody Sunday. It was a great time, people.
POP is a flawed, but ultimately brilliant album. It will stand the test of time and ultimately prove more lasting and more influential than ATYCLB. POP is an easy bashing target for many casual U2 fans or 80s U2 fans (is there a worse kind?) But this album and the clever stadium tour that followed will be REDEEMED. Light years ahead of their time. [edit]
Originally posted by bullet the blue sky:
After having read through all of these responses, I think the only logical thing that can be drawn from this discussion is that, judging by the thoughts and opinions on many of this forum's regular contributors, that I am in the right.
Originally posted by SweetOnU2:
Eh sure why not!! Just for today your right! I mean it is April Fools Day!
Originally posted by Hawkfire:
I am amazed at the lethal responses my original post has drawn. While nowhere in my post does it say "you're not a true fan if you don't like POP!", quite a number of people have made this leap, which is entirely unfounded. Read my original post and my 2 follow-ups once more.
Fire away!! And to those who find this discussion boring or old, I pity you: serious debate can be both healthy and fun...
Amen!Originally posted by Salome:
in my opinion you should clean up your language
and there is nothing redundent about that