Now, I haven't heard the new album, but GOYB was pretty insulting to many fans, including myself, except for the "Let Me In The Sound" part. This isn't ground-breaking.
The fact is that Eno and Lanois let on that this was an incredible album and the band has suggested that this could be their best. So, it was reasonable to hope for something along the quality of JT and AB. If fans accept that the band's best days are truly behind it, then we'd be less interested in keeping up to date and even in buying albums. I KNOW the band can put out amazing work to rival those 2 best albums, but has been making many wrong decisions for commercial viability. The band hasn't pursued this with guts and ferocity of creativity as it had those 2 songs, based on GOYB, and that's a shame.
You posted this on March 9th, almost a week after the album's release - and you still haven't heard it?
It's difficult to accept any of your comments when you start out with that statement.
I like GOYB, don't love it, but like it. It's a fun rock song. More importantly, it really flows on the album. Without it, I think NLOTH would be missing something. Plus, GOYB is not at all representative of the album. I think this was showcased by U2's more recent performances of other NLOTH songs.
Is this their best? You know, U2 have said this for every single album - and that includes JT. I have an old JT era article where U2 members stated "this is our best to date". It's a catch phrase. They are not going to say, "Well, this is no 'Acthung Baby', but it's still pretty good." No one says that - especially after devoting several years of one's life to creating it.
I listened to UF along with NLOTH on Sunday - I had my CD player on random, so the two albums were merged. They flowed brilliantly. As UF is in my Top 2 for U2 albums, I really find myself loving NLOTH. Yet, as I write this, I don't want to give the impression this is a regression. It has elements of the past, but a fresh, modern sound - one that keeps them relevant (or one definition of relevant).
I also enjoyed HTDAAB. It had some weaknesses and I skip those. But I loved some of the more adventurous songs coupled with the "classic" sound - it flowed better than it did on ATYCLB. Barring a few songs, ATYCLB really seemed too "safe". I didn't feel that at the time, but seeing what they could do on HTDAAB and now NLOTH, I do feel it's true.
Regardless, at this point in time, U2 have nothing to prove. They will open at #1 around the world. Their tour will sell out. They've already had a Top 40 hit with GOYB around the world (and this includes the U.S.). All of this is just extra on a very illustrious career. The fact that NLOTH can sound like "old" U2, yet still sound current is what keeps me interested.
Ultraviolet is one of my favorite U2 songs....
I just hate it when people complain about Bono writing lyrics like "baby baby baby" and talk about the 90's or whatever, and how cheesy it all has become....I'm not trying to play the "gotcha" game...I just think the complaining about the bridge in Crazy Tonight is a bit ridiculous
I did not comment on that aspect of lyrics in this thread, but I admit to being guilty of doing so before. But I bring up those lyrics in defense of when someone zooms in on one line (e.g., "heavy as a truck") to dismiss an entire song. The example I just gave comes from a song that also has some outstanding lyrics, but people dismiss those to make some weak point.
I also bring up some weaker lyrics when people discuss how Bono's writing is "worse" now. It's not - he's a pop or pop/rock writer. At times, there will be this universal appeal to his words. At times, the words are very personal. And at times they are just fun or self-deprecating fun. It's a rock pop song! Should all of his songs be near Shakespearean?
So while I like "Ultraviolet" as well, that song is used as an example of a pop rock song that has some weaker lyrics, yet is still an outstanding song.