All critical, "professional" reviews of SOI here, Pt. 2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

nicely stated

As for what he thinks of it musically, Joe adds: “Me and the wife listened to it the other day and really liked it. The street names and the references to their childhood; it’s a really gorgeous, personal record. Of course it’s not The Joshua Tree, like the new Def Leppard album - all fully recorded and out next April hopefully - won’t be Hysteria. You move on and address the next part of your life.”
 
Well said Joe Elliott :rockon:

as for this ...

Took me awhile to read through it, but there is nothing new in it that the author is saying
which I already know. Everything from Bowie, the stage theatrics to the Leni "Triumph of the Will" film
and its impact on society. It´s all been written before in other books and magazines. Nothing new.

As for the Iggy Pop speech, that one is like 1 hour and half, but I must admit, Iggy has a way of
telling a cool story and a way of communicating to the audience that no one else can, and after all these years
he still has not changed one bit. Except now he is a little more wiser and a little more conservative.
What he says about the music industry - its past and its future, is very true. He has been through it all
and he has survived. He is a survivor. Almost the last of his kind.
He is one tuff dude to break down. More power to you Iggy! :rockon:
 
The U2/Def Leppard connection goes back years. I forgot where I read it.. But I read a story/article about Bono and Adam hitchhiking in California and someone picked them up and had a Def Leopard cassette in the car and they listened to it and Bono remarked how great it sounded in the car stereo system and said U2 albums never sounded like that.
 
The U2/Def Leppard connection goes back years. I forgot where I read it.. But I read a story/article about Bono and Adam hitchhiking in California and someone picked them up and had a Def Leopard cassette in the car and they listened to it and Bono remarked how great it sounded in the car stereo system and said U2 albums never sounded like that.

I think it was the U2 At the End of the World book.
 
yeah it was! :up:

--

someone buy this man a pint :lol:

FeOwJ0s.png


xkHmjB8.png
 
rennowba, you will know as well as I do, the NME despise U2. There was a little respite when they had two decent album reviews with Pop & ATYCLB, received the god like genius award, but its been downhill from there. I know there have been various posts before on the subject, but the review for SOI was pathetic. Absolutely no interest in the actual music, just the usual U2 bashing. Good to see so many posts below the review having a go back !. I was tempted myself, but could not bear to register with the pile of s***e !
 
Uncut awards SOI at it's latest issue with 6/10. What's funny though is that the review comes from the same writer (Andy Gill), who awarded SOI with 3 out of 5 stars in the Independent. I can't find any reason for the same writer to review the same record at two different publications.
 
Because no one else was willing to?

Or because Uncut's new editor John Mulvey is not very fond of U2. And i suppose he is the one that assigns the reviews. Another indication of the way Uncut handles u2 nowadays is the fact that SOI review is one paragraph only, whereas both HTDAAB and NLOTH reviews were 2 pages each.
 

That's hardly a professional review. Someone using words as "crapiness" and "fart" to describe songs or albums can not be taken seriously. The ranking is debatable. Ranking SOI and NLOTH last is insane, but hey, that's the internet for you. Everyone can make up a personal list and present it as a professional review.
 

The author actually makes some valid points. Bomb was "U2 resting on their laurels" - spot-on. GOYB "worst U2 song" - not far off. SOI has the "sheen of corporate rock" - well, I certainly find the Epworth/Tedder tracks are shiny and efficient and strangely cold and calculating. That could pass as "corporate rock", sure. Fans don't like people being brutally honest with their beloved band. This guy was being just that, not sugar-coating his opinions, and that's OK.
 
Having opinions and being a critic are two different things.
I don't need to know much or anything about a topic to have an opinion.

I have opinions about some posters here.
If I would sit around waiting for an opportunity to ram those opinions down everyone's throat that wouldn't make me a critic.
It would, however, make me an arsehole.
 
I motion that we ban the term "Corporate Rock", which while not as bad as "Dad Rock", it's still ridiculous!

Hmmm.....what happens if you're a dad who works for a corporation but you also play in a Clash cover band???????

Would that be "Corporate Punk Dad Rock"?




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
The author actually makes some valid points. Bomb was "U2 resting on their laurels" - spot-on. GOYB "worst U2 song" - not far off. SOI has the "sheen of corporate rock" - well, I certainly find the Epworth/Tedder tracks are shiny and efficient and strangely cold and calculating. That could pass as "corporate rock", sure. Fans don't like people being brutally honest with their beloved band. This guy was being just that, not sugar-coating his opinions, and that's OK.

I dunno. There's not sugar-coating and then there's letting your mind be made up by the "atmosphere" already surrounding a piece of work, and not thinking about it objectively.

Corporate rock?? Ok, so to me that would mean sanitized, and calculated and not something that carries any actual artistic honestly from the creators.

California is out of U2's box. It's shiny, but definitely not corporate feeling to me. EBW has been a project of theirs for years, and really harkens back to a classic U2 structure, so not seeing it be calculated. SFS, ugh. I'll give you that one.

beyond that, when was the last time you heard "corporate rock" about the Ramones, car bombings, priest molestations, and domestic violence?

I think that some of these reviewers hear U2 actually creating music that fits into the modern rock landscape and they write it off as them trying to be corporate and something they're not. When any person with a real knowledge of the bands history knows that they are nothing if not ever-changing.
 
What the bloody hell's Corporate rock?? So is every rock song thats been used on a tv advert corporate rock? Its the stupidest term ive ever heard to label a band.
 
The reality is that U2 have a great discography so people find it easy to write-off new albums. If a person has War, TUF, TJT, AB, ATYCLB they are probably done with the band. U2 are competing against their legacy. Bono asking "why do we need another U2 record?", does resonate for the casual fans. Hardcore fans like us just want more and more albums because we are greedy like that. Every album has at least 5 good to great songs. For some of us every album has more than that.
 
Back
Top Bottom