GEN
Active topics

  2. So did I. I thought the one on the left was him 3 years ago and the one on the right was him currently.
  3. Lol is that Robin Williams? At the end of his stand up show "Weapons of Selfdestruction" he mentions his resemblance to Bono.
  4. hahaha

    A friend of mine was in NYC and saw Robin Williams at the subway...his first thought was: Why Bono's taking the subway?

    He took a picture and showed it to me...they really look like brothers or relatives...
  5. see now I'm just sad that Bono and U2 are getting old... </3
  6. http://www.atu2.com/news/column-off-the-record-vol-13-548.html

    I think this Off the Record accurately describes U2 now :X A part time band... If U2 and the boys wanted to be "relevant" they'd be in the fu***ng studio making MUSIC it's been 4 years since NLOTH and Bono said on New Year's eve that they only have "6 songs', how sad imo. I don't mind necessarily they can vacation all the want, but don't expect that time is on their side on being relevant (talking to you Bono). He better not start whining when they release a new song in 2016 and no one cares because it's been 5 years since anyone's seen them being a real band.
  7. Originally posted by Genaro92U2:http://www.atu2.com/news/column-off-the-record-vol-13-548.html

    I think this Off the Record accurately describes U2 now :X A part time band... If U2 and the boys wanted to be &quot;relevant&quot; they'd be in the fu***ng studio making MUSIC it's been 4 years since NLOTH and Bono said on New Year's eve that they only have &quot;6 songs', how sad imo. I don't mind necessarily they can vacation all the want, but don't expect that time is on their side on being relevant (talking to you Bono). He better not start whining when they release a new song in 2016 and no one cares because it's been 5 years since anyone's seen them being a real band.

    Sadly an excellent analysis.
    Let´s face it: U2 has at the most 4 more albums to give us. One this year, and then one every four years (like they have done since mid-90´s) with some solo/musical/best of stuff in between. When these four albums are released, the "boys" are closer to 70 than 60 (and Paul M is even older)... They are quickly growing old and probably about to planning their retirement soon. Hopefully they will go with four awesome albums, some 40 excellent songs and well over 4 000 000 great bonoistic oneliners!

    What really disturbs me, though, is that live they are more and more beginning to turn into those dinosaurs they never wanted to be. In a way I loved 360, but compared to, say Zoo TV, it was more great than good, more fat than feel, more impressive than inventional, more money than music. I don´t want the rest of their tours just becoming bigger, more money generating, record breaking in 105 different ways.
    But of course, the U2 I fell in love with in the mid 80´s doesn´t exist any longer - and hasn´t existed in decades. They are still great, though.
  8. Originally posted by AidanFormigoni:hahaha

    A friend of mine was in NYC and saw Robin Williams at the subway...his first thought was: Why Bono's taking the subway?

    He took a picture and showed it to me...they really look like brothers or relatives...

    and also why Robin Williams is taking the subway? hehehe
  9. The way I see it is that U2 is now what most would consider the "old guard." One thing people have mentioned is that the U2 of old doesn't exist anymore. This is absolutely right. In fact, if you listen to their albums, I'd say that U2 has gone through 3 distinctive phases. The first consists of all their post Achtung Baby material. The second would be Achtung Baby, Zooropa, and Pop. The final stage of their evolution is obviously ATYCLB, HTDAAB, and NLOTH. Even with U2's increasing age, they have still managed to set the bar when it comes to their live act. That to me is far more impressive than releasing an album full of top 40 hits (because honestly speaking top 40 or anything of that sort consists of overplayed, cliche songs that don't deserve to be listened to).

    The article is correct in that some fans are being terribly unreasonable. They are expecting the same U2 that released Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby when the reality is that that group no longer exists. My personal opinion is that they should release albums less frequently since they obviously won't be producing at the pace they were before. In addition, they should focus on what has always been their bread and butter; their live act. As long as U2 can get on a stage and sell out venues, they are still relevant in the world of music. Once they lose the ability or desire to tour, they should stop and retire.

    And for the record, if U2 retired at this very moment, it wouldn't be long before music enthusiasts would start lamenting their loss. Just from watching the various televised musical performances from other "rising groups," none of them even have remotely the same force of stage presence that U2 has. With profits from album sales decreasing due to various factors, I believe music artists will be forced to tour just to stay relevant. When that happens, U2 is going to be the gold standard all acts are compared to.
  10. The final stage of their evolution is obviously ATYCLB, HTDAAB, and NLOTH

    are we sure it's an evolution? obviously??? ohmy
    i don't think so at all
  12. Originally posted by clover68: The final stage of their evolution is obviously ATYCLB, HTDAAB, and NLOTH

    are we sure it's an evolution? obviously??? ohmy
    i don't think so at all

    If so, they should better stop, or stop with making albums. I wouldn't appreciate another ATYCLB or HTDAAB.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.