You've heard GET ON YOUR BOOTS? - Post all thoughts, reviews, discussion HERE Part 4

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, you're lying or you have selective memory. My post said nothing about how the forum was run until AFTER your comment. Go back and read.

Today, 03:57 PM #147
dan_smee
Refugee




Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 1,756
Local Time: 05:01 PM Quote:
Originally Posted by walkon274
"Haha, funny talking about respect on this site. The same site where people take pleasure in trying to censor every one, close threads, lob insults at anyone who actually voices an opinion, and obsess over whether a new thread has a remote connection to a topic in another thread. If so, you all make sure that poster gets blasted and treated like leper instead of a fellow U2 fan. Wah wah, "this was alread poooooosted." (in a five year old's voice).

Look, I've been visiting this site for a long time. I never posted at all b/c I never wanted to get into the pissing matches that always flare up on here. The people on here remind me of the hardcore fans who nazified the lines to get into the heart during the ATYCLB tour, keeping notebooks of supposed people in line, leaving concerts early to get back in line and "reserve" spots for 20 people who weren't actually in line, etc.

This is a forum is it not? "Forum: b: a public meeting place for open discussion c: a medium (as a newspaper or online service) of open discussion or expression of ideas."

I'm allowed to say the song fucking blows and question how others think it doesn't, if not, then this isn't a forum, this is a factory for groupthink. "

You have succeeded, welcome to you first pissing match

I strongly suggest that if you don't like the way the forum is run, to find another forum.

Threads a re closed and merged for the sake of order. I don't see how that is a problem, because it is chaotic when there are 5 threads on one topic.

As for the rest of your post, if you aren't willing to discuss the difference of opinion like an adult (which I was trying to do with you), I'm afraid I can't help you

I quoted your ridicule of the forum in saying to you that you should find somwhere else. you comment is... just wrong....
 
Just keep Nickelback out of it, and no one gets hurt. ;)

Hahaha... nice. Like the 30 rock quote too.

I fluctuate between loving this song, and having reservations about it. Like most U2 songs, you really need to hear it within the context of the album. But it's not predictable or boring—nice to see them make a song that people are passionate about, either for or against. It's got a little fight in it. A lot less safe then they could have played it.
 
U2 Debuts New Single; Listen to it Now, Before it Makes You Want to Shoot Yourself

It seems 2009 -- much like several other years before it -- is gearing up to be the year we won't be able to escape U2. "Get On Your Boots," the first single off of the mega-band's forthcoming No Line on the Horizon, got its radio and Web debut this morning.

The track is currently streaming on U2's official website -- and for all of you who were fearing another bland misfire of "Vertigo" proportions, it's not half-bad, or at least solid enough to distract us from bristling at Bono's pomposity for a good 3 minutes 24 seconds.

As hinted by Rolling Stone last week, this one's a rocker. An ear-perking drumfill kickstarts the song, followed by a thick, classic-rock guitar riff -- but from there the tune trails off into territory that's anything but predictable. On the verses, Bono speak-sings about both ice cream and international war (really) to a rhythm cribbed from equal parts "Pump it Up" and "Subterannean Homesick Blues." But the nonsense takes an intriguing, hard-rock turn at the chorus -- with an ominous, slowed-down chant (harmonies courtesy The Edge) of "you don't know how beautiful you are" that sounds like it could have come from the dark minds of Queens of the Stone Age.

While the single won't be officially released as a digital download until Feb. 15, iTunes is offering the track, as of today, for 24 hours. No Line on the Horizon is due in stores March 3. It's the band's first album since 2004.

Backhanded praise :cute:
 
I think this is one of the very best tracks they have ever done and in my nearly forty years I have heard them all at least a thousand times. Nothing that all the uber critical fans have said about this being similar to Vertigo or whatever will make me feel otherwise. Not that this even remotely matters because the only thing that matters if you enjoy it or not.
 
as far as the comparisons; that's just it: it sounds like stuff they've done before, as everyone is comparing it to something...everything from Vertigo and Elevation and The Fly and Discotechque and Fast Cars to Wild Wild West and Pump It Up and When The Levee Breaks and Rehab.....

W000t....in 3 weeks everyone will be like "When's the album leak??"

:lol:

I'm amazed that rock music sounds like other rock music. Amazed.
 
Here is the proof... http://www.u2interference.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5772417&postcount=147

Please respond... I am DYING to hear what you'll come up with next

Dude, you're wrong. The response that made me start a direct discussion with you was fueled by the following:

Originally Posted by walkon274
"Welp, I'll express my opinion. This song absolutely blows. Been listening to U2 for 18 years. I love their old stuff, I love most of their new stuff. This though is complete trash. There is absolutely no substance whatsoever to the song. It's not creative or original, as it is a rip off of "Wild Wild West", a terrible '80's song. It took Bono four and 1/2 years to think up saying "let me in the sound" 20 times straight. Gee, real creative there brother. How about "let me turn the radio off when this trash comes on."

"It boggles my mind how many people on here are going nuts over this song. The Edge's riff is annoying, the chorus is terrible. I'm actually ashamed this is a U2 song. It may be time for them to hang it up."

Posted by dan_smee
"it shouldn't boggle your mind, because some people in the world like emo music, some like all kinds of things."

"Respect that other like it, and we'll repect that you don't." (bye bye face)

I also noticed you added a paragraph in there at the end on an edit after I responded. Your original response is right above. I'm not talking about your earlier response.

This has gone on long enough for tonight. I think the song sucks. You like it. I just want to hear someone explain to me why they like it in a logistical manner. Perhaps another time.
 
I dunno ... I don't think you have to explain why you like a particular bit of music in a logical manner. Or explain it at all.

No one should have to rationalize something that makes them feel.

Obviously, the same song that makes me feel happy might make you feel repulsed. Nothing wrong with that. ;)
 
Last edited:
Dude, you're wrong. The response that made me start a direct discussion with you was fueled by the following:

Originally Posted by walkon274
"Welp, I'll express my opinion. This song absolutely blows. Been listening to U2 for 18 years. I love their old stuff, I love most of their new stuff. This though is complete trash. There is absolutely no substance whatsoever to the song. It's not creative or original, as it is a rip off of "Wild Wild West", a terrible '80's song. It took Bono four and 1/2 years to think up saying "let me in the sound" 20 times straight. Gee, real creative there brother. How about "let me turn the radio off when this trash comes on."

"It boggles my mind how many people on here are going nuts over this song. The Edge's riff is annoying, the chorus is terrible. I'm actually ashamed this is a U2 song. It may be time for them to hang it up."

Posted by dan_smee
"it shouldn't boggle your mind, because some people in the world like emo music, some like all kinds of things."

"Respect that other like it, and we'll repect that you don't." (bye bye face)

I also noticed you added a paragraph in there at the end on an edit after I responded. Your original response is right above. I'm not talking about your earlier response.

This has gone on long enough for tonight. I think the song sucks. You like it. I just want to hear someone explain to me why they like it in a logistical manner. Perhaps another time.

2 quick points. YOU asked ME about why i asked you to find somewhere else, and that was solely based on you trashing the forum. No getting around it. You asked. I told.

Secondly, no-one can explain why it is good in a logistical manner, because the song hasn't been distributed yet. If you want to talk LOGIC, then refer to my post addressing your comments. If you want to talk LOGISTICS, talk to a courier :wave:
 
So ive just woken and given the track another spin. You could easily be mistaken for thinking it to be from 'Pop'. I believe the track has that hit or miss appeal that was 'Pop' was full off.
 
Dude, you're wrong. The response that made me start a direct discussion with you was fueled by the following:

Originally Posted by walkon274
"Welp, I'll express my opinion. This song absolutely blows. Been listening to U2 for 18 years. I love their old stuff, I love most of their new stuff. This though is complete trash. There is absolutely no substance whatsoever to the song. It's not creative or original, as it is a rip off of "Wild Wild West", a terrible '80's song. It took Bono four and 1/2 years to think up saying "let me in the sound" 20 times straight. Gee, real creative there brother. How about "let me turn the radio off when this trash comes on."

"It boggles my mind how many people on here are going nuts over this song. The Edge's riff is annoying, the chorus is terrible. I'm actually ashamed this is a U2 song. It may be time for them to hang it up."

Posted by dan_smee
"it shouldn't boggle your mind, because some people in the world like emo music, some like all kinds of things."

"Respect that other like it, and we'll repect that you don't." (bye bye face)

I also noticed you added a paragraph in there at the end on an edit after I responded. Your original response is right above. I'm not talking about your earlier response.

This has gone on long enough for tonight. I think the song sucks. You like it. I just want to hear someone explain to me why they like it in a logistical manner. Perhaps another time.

Dude, let it go. just leave it at "i don't like the song". when you say it's mind boggling how someone could like it, you come off as an asshole. maybe you are an asshole, i don't know. either way... why someone would have to explain it to you in a logistical manner is fucking mind boggling. are you like that in real life? ridiculous. it's a song that MAY have some meaning behind it, is different than vertigo, and will have people that like it. get over yourself.
 
After hearing the song what must be at least 30 times, I've pretty much pinned down my opinion.

Get On Your Boots is a good, solid, fun song. It was my least favorite of the original beach clips, and the only part that really jumped out at me as spectacular back in August was the chorus. As a lead single, the song is weaker than Beautiful Day or Vertigo, but I don't suspect that NLOTH is the kind of album that's loaded with classic standalone singles. It's a big, dumb rock song superficially, but it's the only U2 lead single of the '00s that really has the potential to grow on you like The Fly did. It will likely only improve in its intended context.

4/5, 8/10, B+, etc.
 
Can people stop using the word logistical?

The word is logical...

Logistical means the process for managing the flows of goods....
 
The haters are like those old, moldy folks saying how good everything was in the old days. They are still sleeping in their unforgetable fire t-shirt and playing Joshua Tree around the clock.
 
The haters are like those old, moldy folks saying how good everything was in the old days. They are still sleeping in their unforgetable fire t-shirt and playing Joshua Tree around the clock.

Dude, its seriously ok. If they are like that, then feel sorry for them, just try and enjoy it yourself.

There's no place for being offensive because people dont think the way you do.

You can discuss things, sure, but dont be abusive, it doesnt help anyone.

Enjoy the song :wave:

Just like ive been saying it is possible to like the song without being a sheep, its juts as possible to dislike it without being a crusty old fuddy-duddy
 
Alright. Fan since the first album (i'm 45...UF is fav album). Finally got to listen to this. Must say song just nails everything right. It feels fresh and exciting and like a huge step forward for this band. Each band member shines (even with not-ideal sound quality as it's posted).

Cannot wait for the album.
 
Alright. Fan since the first album (i'm 45...UF is fav album). Finally got to listen to this. Must say song just nails everything right. It feels fresh and exciting and like a huge step forward for this band. Each band member shines (even with not-ideal sound quality as it's posted).

Cannot wait for the album.

:up:
 
Dude, its seriously ok. If they are like that, then feel sorry for them, just try and enjoy it yourself.

There's no place for being offensive because people dont think the way you do.

I know what you are saying but it seems that everytime U2 puts out something new there is this whole clan of so called U2 fan who seem so eager to tear it apart. I knew this was comming because it is like that every time but it is still ennoying as hell. You don't have to like the new song but a lot of those people have no respect for the band.
 
I know what you are saying but it seems that everytime U2 puts out something new there is this whole clan of so called U2 fan who seem so eager to tear it apart. I knew this was comming because it is like that every time but it is still ennoying as hell. You don't have to like the new song but a lot of those people have no respect for the band.

i get where you're coming from mate :)

just try and enjoy it for yourself. :hug:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom