Why "U2 3D" is only disappointing ...

[BVS]

...hm, hm, hm. So finally you know me better than I know myself, don't you? You know, that some people here love to get the attention? And you estimate this thread rather useless?

Well come on, this posters has a point. We had at one point 69.3 threads about U23D(and the main thread was at the bottom of the page when you posted this), and the mods were trying very hard to keep everything U23D related into the the 3D threads they were merging left and right when this movie was released, but you somehow thought your opinion was worth a seperate thread. It's an unwritten rule, actually it's probably a written rule somewhere...

 

[Harry Vest]

Yeah the cost of using a technology that hasn't really been used and then release it in a limited theater release sounds really safe to me. Because everyone's doing it.

Staging two never before seen concert tours (Zoo T.V. and Popmart) with technology that really hasn't been used yet sounds like a really safe idea to me.

 

[BVS]

Staging two never before seen concert tours (Zoo T.V. and Popmart) with technology that really hasn't been used yet sounds like a really safe idea to me.

Nice dodge...

 

[martha]

I haven't yet seen this film but based on the reviews I've read (mostly all positive) I still know what this review is trying to get at. With all the money U2 have why couldn't they shoot several concerts on the tour and then compile the most exciting parts i.e. Toronto "Bad" with Danile Lanois or when the Arcade Fire joined them in Montreal for a lively version of Joy Divisions "Love Will Tear Us Apart" .

Maybe that's not the movie they wanted to make.

 

[last unicorn]

^ Yeah, I supposed they wanted to make a special South American concert movie. Bono said the movie is a "love song to the South American audiences". I don't think I'd like the idea of compiling all kind of stuff from many different concerts. Plus, it would have been much more expensive, just think about carrying the 3d equipment all over the US for half a year.

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

...you somehow thought your opinion was worth a seperate thread. It's an unwritten rule, actually it's probably a written rule somewhere...

...but only because, you don't share my opinion and do praise the movie, you have not come to the idea to me & my thread, don't you?

I don't have to defend, but actually, yes, I thought and still think, that my opinion "U2 3D is disappointing" deserves a thread on its own.
The old "3D" thread, you mentioned is a praise close to worhsipping, what all is great about and in the film. It's fine, that people, who feel so, can do so and exchange their happiness. But: I don't have to be the one posting "Ahem, all your joy fine, but now I tell you the opposite ...".
So this thread in "Everything You Know Is Wrong" (!) is much more sceptical approach and so has its own right – as you might see also in the response, too. There has to be space in "Interference", when you want to/have to speak out loud/share ad discuss points, that are not only "great, awesome, exceptional" etc. – because not every fan thinks, that U2 and their work are always like that.

 

[Mr. V]

i'd appreciate it if you replied to my post earlier in the thread, and answered what exactly you were on about with the quote i used...

 

[BVS]

...but only because, you don't share my opinion and do praise the movie, you have not come to the idea to me & my thread, don't you?

What does this even mean?

I don't have to defend, but actually, yes, I thought and still think, that my opinion "U2 3D is disappointing" deserves a thread on its own.
The old "3D" thread, you mentioned is a praise close to worhsipping, what all is great about and in the film. It's fine, that people, who feel so, can do so and exchange their happiness. But: I don't have to be the one posting "Ahem, all your joy fine, but now I tell you the opposite ...".
So this thread in "Everything You Know Is Wrong" (!) is much more sceptical approach and so has its own right – as you might see also in the response, too. There has to be space in "Interference", when you want to/have to speak out loud/share ad discuss points, that are not only "great, awesome, exceptional" etc. – because not every fan thinks, that U2 and their work are always like that.

I'm not saying you can't speak out against. You really have a hard time understanding certain things.

There were many comments in the original that didn't praise the film.

 

[U2Fanatic4ever]

...but only because, you don't share my opinion and do praise the movie, you have not come to the idea to me & my thread, don't you?

I don't have to defend, but actually, yes, I thought and still think, that my opinion "U2 3D is disappointing" deserves a thread on its own.
The old "3D" thread, you mentioned is a praise close to worhsipping, what all is great about and in the film. It's fine, that people, who feel so, can do so and exchange their happiness. But: I don't have to be the one posting "Ahem, all your joy fine, but now I tell you the opposite ...".
So this thread in "Everything You Know Is Wrong" (!) is much more sceptical approach and so has its own right – as you might see also in the response, too. There has to be space in "Interference", when you want to/have to speak out loud/share ad discuss points, that are not only "great, awesome, exceptional" etc. – because not every fan thinks, that U2 and their work are always like that.

no where in that general u23d thread does it say positive posts and reviews only... If you were disappointed then you could of easily posted in there and still would of gotten the same responses that you are getting here..

I am sorry but I disagree with the thinking that this title/subject of this thread deserves to be seperate from all the rest.. It doesn't and should of been within one of the other threads on this very subject: U23d...

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

this thread makes me laugh... and cry... and laugh some more...

 

[partygirl43]

I don't know if I should even bother at this point but....I think U2 3d is a film that is for the casual U2 fan. I am not a casual fan, but I enjoyed it as a 'distilled' version of a concert. It was nice to take my 6 year old to, as an 'introduction' to a real concert, to see what his Mom and Dad have been talking about for the last 6 years.

Did you expected the 3D technolegy to magically transport you into the front row of your all-time favorite set list dream concert????

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

seriously, say what you want

Sorry for answering that late, mate. It's not the point, what I want. "U2 3D" is simply not, what I like. It's just, that the movie as it is is not that exciting, not that artistically challenging that I did hope for. It hasn't created a single breathtaking picture, not a single iconic moment. It will be forgotten within weeks ...
With "U2 3D" the band, or better the film makers, would have had the chance to create really something new, fresh, unique. But what I get is exactly, what I described: a clustered pseudo-concert, with no sould, no blood – but only a handful of moments, where you said: yes, this is, where it could have been. But in general, when you asked me: What is the most popular clichée, what people could say about U2, Id answer: "Watch this film!"

I repeat myself, but o.k.: "U2 3D" are the big, but somewhat tired and even often ridiculous looking gestures in a close up, the mass sing alongs of war horses, that unfortunately have become big party hymns – instead of at least a little being reflected, what their lyrics and history is. Hopefully the band will take a next step with their next album and tour ...
No comments by whoever, no script, no nothing. Just the idea to use 3D as a toy and to go for it for less than 90 minutes. This is not even a shadow, of what the Vertigo Tour stands for. It's not even a documentary and surely it is no musical journey. It's IMO not working artistically and commercially – nothing more, nothing less.

 

[corianderstem]

big party hymns

That's my new favorite phrase.

It sounds like a compilation album you'd see on a TV ad - the latest collection of Christian rock songs being passed off as cool.

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

It sounds like a compilation album you'd see on a TV ad - the latest collection of Christian rock songs being passed off as cool.

Did you ever really watch the audience nowadays reacting to tunes like "New Year's Day" or "Sunday Bloody Sunday"? There's just the moment, a lot of people seem to wait for, when they do their "oh-oh-oh-oh" stoneage-like howling.
Very bad now even during WOWY – Bono is drowned out completely by the masses' choir, even when tries to add some lines like "Love Will Tear Us Apart". I just have the feeling this U2 party-beer-U2 party-beer madness has overruled the concert experience, which in my eyes, ears and emotions is much more than that. But for many people a U2 gig has become much more a party event than a real concert – where you might be able to listen also, no?
Take "Pride" for instance – now only the mass "oh, oh, oh, oh" seems to be the important part to bring the tune to an end. The people even shout it inbetween, when Bono starts with the "April ..." lines. I don't say, all of the fans act like that – but many of them ...

 

[last unicorn]

Went to see it for the forth time tonight ... and it was my favourite one. Sat perfectly, sound was excellent, big screen, more people than I expected and what I loved most was the fact that there were a lot of casual music fans who couldn't shut up after the film because they were so excited and amazed. THAT'S what makes the experience great for me, casual people enjoying this show and acknowledging how good a band U2 are. And there were even some very nice things said about Bono's voice and him as a singer.

I might even go and see it once again. And I noticed details that I hadn't seen before. Miss Sarajevo, Sometimes and this time especially One gave me shivers, the whole atmosphere was just so great this time, better than the other times.

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

Went to see it for the forth time tonight ... and it was my favourite one.

There you are – even when I thought, that after three times of going to the cinema and paying for a "U2 3D" ticket, it is rather predictable, after a fourth visit you won't make a U-turn and start calling the movie names. Everything else would be a bit strange, no?
Great, you liked it though – and welcome back for the 7th time in the thread, you called rather useless not so long ago. C'mon, now you can admit it: You like it here

 

[BVS]

Did you ever really watch the audience nowadays reacting to tunes like "New Year's Day" or "Sunday Bloody Sunday"? There's just the moment, a lot of people seem to wait for, when they do their "oh-oh-oh-oh" stoneage-like howling.
Very bad now even during WOWY – Bono is drowned out completely by the masses' choir, even when tries to add some lines like "Love Will Tear Us Apart". I just have the feeling this U2 party-beer-U2 party-beer madness has overruled the concert experience, which in my eyes, ears and emotions is much more than that. But for many people a U2 gig has become much more a party event than a real concert – where you might be able to listen also, no?
Take "Pride" for instance – now only the mass "oh, oh, oh, oh" seems to be the important part to bring the tune to an end. The people even shout it inbetween, when Bono starts with the "April ..." lines. I don't say, all of the fans act like that – but many of them ...

Yeah, Bono should tell them to just shut up... Seriously why are you complaining about the audience? First they are anonymous, now they sing too much for you... which is it? This is why you are getting called out so much, your argument is weak and waffling.

"party-beer-U2 party-beer madness"

But this was gold.

 

[4U2Play]

Did you ever really watch the audience nowadays reacting to tunes like "New Year's Day" or "Sunday Bloody Sunday"? There's just the moment, a lot of people seem to wait for, when they do their "oh-oh-oh-oh" stoneage-like howling.... U2 party-beer-U2 party-beer madness has overruled the concert experience

This guy is having a laugh, now, but I'll play along...

Are you one of these people who also whines about the "lame" US crowds all the time? Maybe lame, quiet crowds is what you prefer. Come to America, where all the U2 fans are calm and reflective and don't sing along to the hits. We just hum. It's pretty peaceful and relaxing, you'd love it.

As for "the audience nowadays" remark... I don't know how long you've been seeing the band, but the audiences "nowadays" are far mellower than the crowds during the U2 tours from War to JT.

The "U2partybeer" atmosphere you decry was in full effect at all the stadium shows I saw in Europe in 1987, especially in Edinburgh, where it seemed like every fan there was wearing a U2 shirt, singing every word loudly, constantly fighting and imbibing adult beverages with reckless abandon. It was great U2partybeermadness

 

[corianderstem]

Did you ever really watch the audience nowadays reacting to tunes like "New Year's Day" or "Sunday Bloody Sunday"? There's just the moment, a lot of people seem to wait for, when they do their "oh-oh-oh-oh" stoneage-like howling.

Of course I've seen that. I knew exactly what you meant with that phrase, and I think it's spot-on. I love it.

 

[Diemen]

Hell, the mass sing-a-long is one of the great things about a U2 show. Except when people get too drunk and start swaying hard into you, causing you to miss the first 2/3rds of Bad, the first time ever hearing it live.

Ahem.

But I suppose we should just watch. Yes, sit quietly and watch. Perhaps polite applause at the end of each song would be permissible, though?

 

[last unicorn]

There you are – even when I thought, that after three times of going to the cinema and paying for a "U2 3D" ticket, it is rather predictable, after a fourth visit you won't make a U-turn and start calling the movie names. Everything else would be a bit strange, no?
Great, you liked it though – and welcome back for the 7th time in the thread, you called rather useless not so long ago. C'mon, now you can admit it: You like it here

Since I don't count my posts in a thread I'm ready to rely on you to tell me that this is post number 8.

And I keep coming back because I enjoy hijacking this thread and take it into a positive direction.

Plus, I just had to get out that feeling of real excitement I had yesterday after the movie. Mean, I know, but I'm an emotional person.

But it doesn't mean I still consider it useless, because we're just chasing our own tails here. Those who like it won't hate it and those who don't like the movie won't end up with a burning love in their hearts for this piece.

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

@coriandersterm – thanx, do feel the same
@lastunicorn – welcome back, mate

--- and to all the others, who still analyze me an try to put words in my mouth, I never wrote:

1. No, Im "not the one, who complains about the U.S. audiences". This really is, what legends ar built upon with manipulationg a poster's words ... Fortunately I trevelled more than once from Europe to the U.S.A to enjoy the country, the people and the atmosphere of concerts there. Have made beautiful memories there and witnessed often for sure much better shows than on the old continent – at least during the last two u2 tours.
2. No, after having attended for sure much more U2 concerts than a lot of people here around; I know, that the audience singing along is a highlight of the gigs. But I'm not talking about this at all. @coriander got the point, others here obviously not. I'm talking about, that the old war horses – who are heavy lyrics – seem now to be only played and awaited as the tunes, where people do their "oh-oh-oh-oh" choir. Just fear, that these rituals get more and more, much to the cost of the beautiful tunes being shrinked that way. That's why a version of "Sunday Bloody Sunday" worked so fine in '97/'98 – it told the story again, brought back the attention – and still remained the beloved tune in its essence ...
3. No, singing along and anonymous mass are no contraries. It's just, that both phenomenemons are different and have nothing to do with each other. "U2 3D" only focusses on the audience as a big, mad, sometimes excited, sometimes hysterical, sometimes sleeping mass of people. There's a face, but the faces are exchangeable. You don't get statements, you don't learn more about them – it would have been enough to do some seconds of an interview to let also those people speak out, maybe before & after the gig. But now it's simple the big picture with a mass that only has a voice, when it's turned up (artificially) and a mass that is mute, when their volume has switched of (artficially).
4. No, my arguments are not weak – they are strong, just because they are observations and emotions, I had. Don't try to put logic in this thread, it is a matter of feeling & taste – and there we now, at the latest from our missionary man "respect the difference". So do I ...

 

[BVS]

There's a face, but the faces are exchangeable. You don't get statements, you don't learn more about them – it would have been enough to do some seconds of an interview to let also those people speak out, maybe before & after the gig. But now it's simple the big picture with a mass that only has a voice, when it's turned up (artificially) and a mass that is mute, when their volume has switched of (artficially).

I'm still baffled by your crowd arguments, we're on page 10, you've been asked several times and you still haven't been able to explain or give an example of what you mean.

Give us an example of a concert film that interviewed the audience, or where we learned more about them...

I actually really liked how the sound was effected by camera angle(i.e. if you were in the crowd, the crowd noise and chatter was louder). Every other concert film I've ever seen the mix was constant, but this film made you feel like you were behind the camera.

4. No, my arguments are not weak – they are strong, just because they are observations and emotions, I had. Don't try to put logic in this thread, it is a matter of feeling & taste – and there we now, at the latest from our missionary man "respect the difference". So do I ...

I'm not talking about your emotions, I'm talking about the "facts" or observations that you get incorrect; the way it was filmed, the ghost effect, the contradictions regarding the audience, the whole premise of the film(no one told you this was going to be a full length R&H part 2), the commercial failure, etc...

 

[martha]

I actually really liked how the sound was effected by camera angle(i.e. if you were in the crowd, the crowd noise and chatter was louder). Every other concert film I've ever seen the mix was constant, but this film made you feel like you were behind the camera.

I loved this part as well.

 

[Bono's Doll]

The only thing disappointing about U23D was that there were only a handful of people at the theatre each time we went. People I know who love love love U2 said they
were going but "never got around to it."

 

[Popmartijn]

I just got back from the U2 3D screening. It was excellent!
In a way, I'd expected a bit more pronounced 3D (apart from a few instances, there wasn't a Bono/Edge/Adam/Larry standing right in front of me). But I think that in the end the subtle use is indeed a better approach. Because everything did appear very 'real' to me. Because of the depth, the images really did come alive. So it was a very good night out.

 

[Popmartijn]

I just have a doubt: I don´t know where I read about it (I just can´t remember now...) but some scenes in this movie were created just for this movie and they´re not parts taken from the live shows in South America. Am I crazy ??? Am I wrong??? or this is TRUE ? or a lie?

Apparently, some scenes are indeed not from South America, as they also filmed a bit in Melbourne. And if I recall correctly, they filmed some close-ups in Melbourne. For this U2 played a show just for the cameras (so in a stadium without an audience).

 

[BVS]

Apparently, some scenes are indeed not from South America, as they also filmed a bit in Melbourne. And if I recall correctly, they filmed some close-ups in Melbourne. For this U2 played a show just for the cameras (so in a stadium without an audience).

I don't think they did any close-ups in Melbourne, Bono and Larry already had their new haircuts by then...

 

[last unicorn]

I think they filmed only crowd scenes in Australia.

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

I think they filmed only crowd scenes in Australia.

Sorry to correct you again, but they didn't. As I was told in melbourne by the film crew, the "3D"-project needed extra pictures of the crowd AND the band.

Don't tell me about different hair cuts & other tralala – I know that. I was told, that more pictures especially of Adam were needed and so he was filmed a lot (and moving a lot in concert ...Yes!). Please do not create myths