cobl04
45:33
There's a reason Ian McCullogh can talk shit about anyone and Bono doesn't. The reason is this: when Bono says anything publicly, people actually care.
where did your nipples go?
There's a reason Ian McCullogh can talk shit about anyone and Bono doesn't. The reason is this: when Bono says anything publicly, people actually care.
I like your style, dude. Well said!Exactly, and that is all that it is... snark, bravado, chest-puffing nuggets for the NME.
Save your anger for those blocking/slowingdown/and lying thier @sses off about healthcare reform. Those on the right and middle left that are not blocking due to principle but as they don't want to lose all of that money they get from the insurance and pharmaceutical industry.
Now THAT is a good reason to be angry. Not Ian McCulloch being Ian McCulloch.
The quote implies that the world thinks that The Killing Moon is up there with Suzanne, Blowin in the Wind and In My Life which would mean it is one of the best and important songs ever. I have never heard Bono make such a claim about a U2 song. It certainly isn't one of the best or important songs ever. I mean, while it is a great song, it isn't even the best song on the Donnie Darko soundtrack (IMO).
Also, U2 isn't very honest anymore. I remember my big brother telling me that when Bono heard the Pet Shop Boys' cover of "Where the Streets Have No Name" he said, referring to one of their song titles, "What have I done to deserve this?"
Yeah, but there's an important difference in the power that Bono and McCullough wield. McCullough is definitely insecure and has to work hard to promote his stuff. Bono is still insecure, but not in the same way. He doesn't have to verbally promote his stuff; he has all kinds of corporate power behind him. His band has hit the big time, so he doesn't have to say "One" is one of the greatest song of the '90s -- though I believe that.
Also, U2 isn't very honest anymore. I remember my big brother telling me that when Bono heard the Pet Shop Boys' cover of "Where the Streets Have No Name" he said, referring to one of their song titles, "What have I done to deserve this?" That's a pretty big put down, and it's a hell of a lot better than the awful covers and collaborations U2 has been allowing: Mary J. Blige, the Black Eyed Peas, Green Day? Old U2 had the guts to call it. New U2 cares more about marketing to different segments of the population to ensure their legacy and also about kissing butt to artists like Beyonce (who sucks!) to ingratiate themselves and get their help on DATA.
Listen to some of these interviews.
U2 Interview Archive � (1991-1994) Achtung-Zooropa
New U2 might consider them snobby, but it's so cool how The Edge attacks the mainstream US media for its superficiality and other artists. The old Edge would never have said, "I wish I wrote 'Wonderwall' by Oasis", simply because hugely popular, even if, at best, it's just nice enough. New U2 has crappy bands like Snow Patrol on tour? Yuk! The band did have the guts to play "TV on the Radio" over and over on the speakers before taking stage, but Bono only name-checks artists who are already successful to seem modest when it really isn't.
Actually....i remember this....and the actual quote was...."what have i....what have i...what have i done to deserve this"
They talk about Echo and the Bunnymen on the Elvis Costello show and they mentioned that Ian said he wanted to kill Bono. I'm sure he didn't mean that literally.
I like your style, dude. Well said!
Yeah, but there's an important difference in the power that Bono and McCullough wield. McCullough is definitely insecure and has to work hard to promote his stuff. Bono is still insecure, but not in the same way. He doesn't have to verbally promote his stuff; he has all kinds of corporate power behind him. His band has hit the big time, so he doesn't have to say "One" is one of the greatest song of the '90s -- though I believe that.
Also, U2 isn't very honest anymore. I remember my big brother telling me that when Bono heard the Pet Shop Boys' cover of "Where the Streets Have No Name" he said, referring to one of their song titles, "What have I done to deserve this?" That's a pretty big put down, and it's a hell of a lot better than the awful covers and collaborations U2 has been allowing: Mary J. Blige, the Black Eyed Peas, Green Day? Old U2 had the guts to call it. New U2 cares more about marketing to different segments of the population to ensure their legacy and also about kissing butt to artists like Beyonce (who sucks!) to ingratiate themselves and get their help on DATA.
Listen to some of these interviews.
U2 Interview Archive � (1991-1994) Achtung-Zooropa
New U2 might consider them snobby, but it's so cool how The Edge attacks the mainstream US media for its superficiality and other artists. The old Edge would never have said, "I wish I wrote 'Wonderwall' by Oasis", simply because hugely popular, even if, at best, it's just nice enough. New U2 has crappy bands like Snow Patrol on tour? Yuk! The band did have the guts to play "TV on the Radio" over and over on the speakers before taking stage, but Bono only name-checks artists who are already successful to seem modest when it really isn't.
Oh, that's very possible. Oh, those pre-internet days of word-of-mouth circulation might not have gotten it right, huh? Then again, the other day my brother was telling me that he knew a guy who saw Bono publicly with Andrea Corr (inferring that they were having an affair). I had to squash that.Or rather, "What have WE done to deserve this?"
In any case, I don't think this was a big, ballsy, public put-down by Bono. Rather, it was a tongue in cheek comment about PSB covering U2 (and Bono replying with a reference to a PSB song title).
Yeah, but it's about degrees. You can't tell me that U2 hasn't gotten greedier. This isn't good change at all. I think it's preposterous to put on this snobbery about how I'm into the wrong band. It's also ridiculous to characterize U2's views of the past as all part of a marketing decision, when they obviously weren't, including the kind of music the band was willing to make. And this is especially in contrast to the very public statements that U2 has made this decade that one can easily characterize as far more profit-driven. This is undeniable.I think you might be into the wrong band, bro.
And I'm pretty familiar with interviews from the early nineties. Guess what? People change. And frankly, I see a lot of egotistical bullshit and marketing spirit from them around that time, too. Whatever you want to call it. U2 have always wanted money, always wanted to be big, all of that stuff. And Israel.
Ian McCulloch is a bitter bitch! as has been always will be.
You say it as if there is something wrong with that.