U2start.com | Mercy ?

ahn1991

Originally posted by EyesWithPrideB3:[..]
It was written at the time of How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb, and could have saved that record from being an almost complete disaster.

The only U2 album that fits in the category of being "almost a complete disaster" is Pop. And maybe Zooropa as the band has constantly admitted they were under a lot of pressure to get it done in time while also being on tour. Some old school fans will never be able to admit it, but HTDAAB is one of the main reasons U2 is still relevant today.

Technically, people should be praising ATYCLB as the album that allowed U2 to remain successful post-2000, but most people would detest giving ATYCLB that much credit, so they reluctantly settle for what they consider to be the lesser of two evils.

drewhiggins

10 years

^ Well you *do* have ATYCLB in your avatar, so that's to be expected.

There's three songs I can think of that are good on ATYCLB. There's a few more on HTDAAB but it shouldn't be recognised (and neither should ATYCLB) as the album that 'kept U2 being great'. Commercially successfully, maybe - otherwise, no.

It was only with NLOTH that they took a slight risk and went back to something interesting.

ahn1991

10 years

The fact that ATYCLB and HTDAAB kept U2 commercially successful is practically confirmed beyond any sort of reasonable doubt. The numbers don't lie. Plus, if you look at the band members' thoughts during the production and release of ATYCLB, it's plainly obvious that they were very discouraged after Pop and were taking quite a gamble with ATYCLB. If that album didn't do as well as it did, that could have easily been U2's last album.

Alvin

10 years

Commercially succesful doesn't mean good. Look at top charts and you'll see a lot of commercially succesful shit there... Commercial succes isn't measurement of the quality.
To the topic: I hope Mercy will be on SOE, and I'm glad it didn't make HTDAAB. It's a great song and would be lost on poor album. And the latter version from 360 is better than 2004 demo.

andypow

10 years

ATYCLB was not exactly a gamble. Playing safe and broad would be my thoughts on that album

drewhiggins

10 years

Originally posted by ahn1991:The fact that ATYCLB and HTDAAB kept U2 commercially successful is practically confirmed beyond any sort of reasonable doubt. The numbers don't lie. Plus, if you look at the band members' thoughts during the production and release of ATYCLB, it's plainly obvious that they were very discouraged after Pop and were taking quite a gamble with ATYCLB. If that album didn't do as well as it did, that could have easily been U2's last album.

Sure, anything can be the last of something. U2 weren't exactly a small band - it's not like they suddenly had to give up. Remember Bono's quote 'two crap albums and you're out'.

If they found their way out during 1990-1991, they could easily survive 1999 - 2000. Depends on his definition of 'crap'. If the first half of ATYCLB and HTDAAB combined, there's one crap album.

Commercially succesful doesn't mean good. Look at top charts and you'll see a lot of commercially succesful shit there... Commercial succes isn't measurement of the quality.
To the topic: I hope Mercy will be on SOE, and I'm glad it didn't make HTDAAB. It's a great song and would be lost on poor album. And the latter version from 360 is better than 2004 demo.

If 'commercial success' meant 'quality', why is mysognistic and knuckle-dragging 'rap' always scoring high? It's not 'quality'. Mercy would be good to hear in a different iteration but closer to the 2004 version than the 2010 one.

Alvin

10 years

You probably didn't read my post properly. I've said almost exactly the same as you. Commercially succesful doesn't mean good was in my post...

drewhiggins

10 years

I was only quoting the second bit of your post, not the first - but ended up quoting the entire lot.

BelgianBono

10 years