GibsonGirl said:Passengers is incredible. Remove Elvis Ate America and it would be incredible from start to finish.
hahahahah =)gareth brown said:8/10 - If U2's next album was Original Soundtracks 2, i would not complain.
Screwtape2 said:
1. OS1 has a production that puts ATYCLB and HTDAAB to shame.
2. OS1 is cinematic while ATYCLB and HTDAAB are pretty bland in that department.
3. OS1 is experimental while ATYCLB and HTDAAB lack creativity.
4. OS1 is lyrically stronger than ATYCLB and HTDAAB.
5. OS1 has better songs.
6. OS1 is a more complete album.
7. Adam sings on OS1!
Axver said:
Ever since I deleted EAA from my computer, Passengers has become even better. I don't even remember where it belongs on the tracklisting any more (as I never use my CDs). It just doesn't seem to fit.
Yahweh said:Passengers is a very good album and it will always provide good fodder for the elitists that think U2 would have been better as an underground club band. The reality is that U2 can do any form of music and do it well and make it sound good, thats what makes U2 special, open your mind to all the different styles and tones of U2 and you will be much better for it.
Would I like to see a Passengers Volume 2 yes but I dont think it is going to happen in the near future anyway. And yes HTDAAB and ATYCLB are great albums and so is Passengers.
U2girl said:1995.
The band was involved in recording but due to the bigger role of Brian Eno and some others working on it (Howie B, Pavarotti) it was not released under the name U2.
Zootlesque said:
If there weren't any differing opinions, there wouldn't be a message board.
i always loved EEA, because its so cool and is full of black sense of humor. OST 1 is brilliant and just perfect for the foggy days to come here in central europe. i have it on my stereo while driving on the winding roads of our narrow valleys on late autumn afternoons.GibsonGirl: Passengers is incredible. Remove Elvis Ate America and it would be incredible from start to finish.
U2girl said:1995.
The band was involved in recording but due to the bigger role of Brian Eno and some others working on it (Howie B, Pavarotti) it was not released under the name U2.
angelordevil said:After years of study, crazed appreciation, and recent exposure to bands that inspired U2, I've come to the following conclusion: Zooropa, Pop...and, yes, Passengers, are the most original albums of U2's career.
angelordevil said:After years of study, crazed appreciation, and recent exposure to bands that inspired U2, I've come to the following conclusion: Zooropa, Pop...and, yes, Passengers, are the most original albums of U2's career.
An Cat Gav said:I know that Brian Eno had a massive input into OS1 but to be fair, he and Daniel lanois have a huge input in the making of all the U2 records they produced, they could reasonably becalled the fifth and sixth members of the band, contributing probably more than the rhythem section themselves maybe.
So, the same is true of OS1, an album with ENo as an "equal" member, not the most significant one. This album is about him, Bono and The Edge, Hollie, Pavarotto and howie b only appear on one track each.
If U2 want to say that OS1 is in no way a U2 record, then why is track 7 on the U2 best of??
I love this record very much and its a bit annoying when people dismiss it as a non U2 album, when clearly it is more of a U2 album then the band like to admit.
Michael Griffiths said:
I agree with you, but by the same token one can apply the same logic to The Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack as well. Would you agree that the MDH sountrack is also a U2 album? For it has Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois omnipresent throughout as well and, not including the original version of 'The First Time', Bono is involved in 9 of the tracks, while at least one member of the rest of the band appear in 6 of them. Plus there are two new U2 songs with all members of the band.
In the end, it can become a little grey as to what defines a proper U2 album, but if Passengers makes the cut, I think there's a strong case for the MDH soundtrack as well. By the same token, if you don't agree that the MDH soundtrack is a proper U2 album, then it is hard to argue that Passengers should be without being inconsistent with the points made above (in the quoted post).
Michael Griffiths said:
I agree with you, but by the same token one can apply the same logic to The Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack as well. Would you agree that the MDH sountrack is also a U2 album? For it has Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois omnipresent throughout as well and, not including the original version of 'The First Time', Bono is involved in 9 of the tracks, while at least one member of the rest of the band appear in 6 of them. Plus there are two new U2 songs with all members of the band.
In the end, it can become a little grey as to what defines a proper U2 album, but if Passengers makes the cut, I think there's a strong case for the MDH soundtrack as well. By the same token, if you don't agree that the MDH soundtrack is a proper U2 album, then it is hard to argue that Passengers should be without being inconsistent with the points made above (in the quoted post).
An Cat Gav said:
I know what you're saying U2girl, but I get a little annoyed when U2 try to distance themselves from certain albums. In particular I absolutely detested when Adam used to go on about how he only counts U2 albums from The Joshua Tree onwards, the stuff before were just demos....That's a bit of a slap in the face for those fans who were really into all of those albums before, he was quite happy for eveybody to go out and buy them,
Ah, now these are different reasons than you originally gave! The MDH sountrack does comply with your original post's album criteria (ie, Eno and Lanois as unofficial members of the band, 3 songs with all members of U2, 9 songs with at least one U2 member, etc). Now, as for these new reasons for it not being a proper U2 album, I can see your point. However, I disagree that it being a soundtrack album should have anything to do with whether it should be considered a proper U2 album or not. Let's not forget, 'Stay' was a soundtrack song, and written specifically for a movie. Would you not consider 'Stay' a proper U2 song? What if every song on Zooropa was written for that same movie? Would it no longer be a proper U2 album? If not, then it is hard to argue that 'Stay' is a proper U2 song, as the same logic should apply. Also, many artists have written albums for soundtracks, but they are still considered albums by the artist who wrote them. Tom Petty comes to mind.An Cat Gav said:
I dont think that the same applies to MDH for a few reasons. Firstly it is a propper soundtrack not a proper album, although it pretended to be OS1 was not a soundtrack album. MDH features mood music etc but isn't full of 14 individual tunes like Passengers. Secondly there are a few cover versions, Anarchy in whatever it was and a few versions of Satellite of Love, these covers detatch U2 a bit from the overall creative process as they didnt write them. Next, I would say that its not really a U2 album because most songs on it feature artists thar arent in U2, Passengers has a couple of guest stars, but thats all they are, guests.
Also, the MDH Soundtrack features the MDH band more than U2. Only a handful of the songs(albeit the best ones) are written by members of U2.
I think MDH can't be treated as a U2 album as it is a genuine collaboration of loads of artists, using covers and new music not all written by U2.
Passengers does count in my book, as it features U2 and their long term producers as the only real music collaborators.
The fact that they distance themselves from OS1 and labelled themselves Passengers is more because they are embarassed about any negative media reaction to it, not because they dont see it as a U2 record.
That's just my opinion anyway.