I wouldn't want that U2 again.
It was great in '93 because it was so different. Just a few years earlier - in 1990 - U2 was part of the "Red, Hot and Blue" collection. Their video for "Night and Day" fit very well into their JT era style. Hence, seeing U2 in their ZOO TV form was refreshing.
But now, it would be stale. U2 of today has the sincerity of the JT era but coupled with a wink in their eye of the ZOO era. And I think THIS is about as close to their real personalities as they are willing to show in public.
As for the future - who knows. They tend to surprise. I'd like to see the creation.
I disagree that the Night and Day video would fit in the JT era. It is one of the darkest videos they made (it was even censored due to a shot of a razorblade to the vein), the feel of the song and the creepy atmosphere of the video is more closer to what they did in the AB era. Well, maybe if there were more songs like Exit on JT, I'd agree with you.
I see absolutely nothing today that is reminiscent of the Zoo era unfortunately.
Have you ever actually though that you might not be an actual fan of the band? but rather a fan of the music the band made during that era?
Priceless.
How did you come to that conclusion?
You do know that U2 was making music almost 15 years before the ZooTV era started?
Sorry to hurt your feelings though.
you just come across as that was an era you favour more than any other, and everything else is rather pale in comparrison, thats all,
Oh and if band done an acceptance speech like that these days, people on this forum would be coming on saying how cringeworth it is etc etc.
*presses "like" button repeatedly.
djerdap: Maybe the "Night & Day" video is darker than the JT era, but it's about 100000x darker than the AB era too! How you could think that the N&D video blends more with the ZOO TV era is beyond my comprehension. ZOO TV was about color and flash and bright imagery. It wasn't this dark, brooding, black and white atmosphere. And when I say JT era, that includes R&H as I feel it is an extension of that time (just as "Zooropa" is part of the ZOO TV era). So perhaps N&D fits more with R&H, but it's still part of that whole long hair, ripped jeans, overly passionate, sincere image U2 had at that time.
But back to KUEFC09U2's post, I agree fully. If U2 today came on now dressed like that and acting like that, instead of people posting about how Larry ruined the fun, they'd all say how Larry saved this interview.
I actually quite like Larry's bubble busting, if only because they were doing something more for the environment than promoting increased oil development in Africa.
I don't think anyone would miss 1993 U2 if they weren't so tedious now. Still, at least they've grown and haven't been milking the same schtick for 20 years. It's just that they've done nothing since then that's half as good, which really is just fine because half as good is still pretty good, and how many bands have even done anything half as good or complete as Zoo TV era U2? They were doing everything right - clear, well executed tour concept, amazing songwriting, they were funny (and to me seemed more natural than they do now), the innovations musically and on the tour were amazing, the visual aesthetic was great and looked like the music sounded...every aspect of U2 was perfect.
Larry saved the pretentious act/yapping from the other three. The Zoo TV hype/nostalgia is boring.
U2girl, have you ever been out past 9pm?
djerdap: Maybe the "Night & Day" video is darker than the JT era, but it's about 100000x darker than the AB era too! How you could think that the N&D video blends more with the ZOO TV era is beyond my comprehension. ZOO TV was about color and flash and bright imagery. It wasn't this dark, brooding, black and white atmosphere. And when I say JT era, that includes R&H as I feel it is an extension of that time (just as "Zooropa" is part of the ZOO TV era). So perhaps N&D fits more with R&H, but it's still part of that whole long hair, ripped jeans, overly passionate, sincere image U2 had at that time.