Originally posted by ferrari:For me Zooropa is U2's worst album, so I can chose out of 5.
But SOI would be hard to beat.
November 22nd 1993
— Valerie (@U2Partygirl5) November 22, 2017
Stay (Faraway, so close!) was released
All these years later, Bono is pretending he is Frank Sinatra singing on the moon, during the chorus of Love Is All We Have Left pic.twitter.com/NuIXL6Hhs1
Originally posted by TheUglyOne:[..]
Zooropa is funny and was a welcome and non expected surprise. I know that you don't like Numb but I like it. Stay is a masterpiece (imo). SOI is a very average pop album with zero highlights and I bought it because it's U2.
It's a matter of taste
Originally posted by TheUglyOne:[..]
SOI is a very average pop album with zero highlights and I bought it because it's U2.
It's a matter of taste
Originally posted by ferrari:[..]
Indeed a matter of taste.
Altough Zooropa and Stay are the only very good songs on Zooropa.
Originally posted by ferrari:For me Zooropa is U2's worst album, so I can chose out of 5.
But SOI would be hard to beat.
Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
Yeah, Dirty Day, Lemon and The First Time are so mediocre, right?
#offtopic
Originally posted by TheRefugee:U2 (Bono especially) have way too much baggage at this stage of their existence for any review to be completely impartial. It is rare for a review to simply focus on the songs. I understand that reviewers want to contextualise the work, but the fact remains that the hatred is so great that all objectivity gets skewed. It's the same with other polarising artists, e.g. Morrissey. Notice the amount of column inches of a review that go into his latest pronouncements before discussing his songs. When reviewing U2, every UK and Irish broadsheet review will mention the paradise papers, the SoI/apple thing, U2's age, Bono's stature/obnoxiousness, etc. It's just the way things are now for U2. Very hard for reviewers competing for views, shares, likes, bantz, yadda, yadda, to maintain perspective regardless of whether the album is the best or worst thing since Bomb, Baby, Boy or Behind. U2 have made their bed, now they have to lie in it. Only through the prism of time will we know where the album truly ranks in the scheme of things. This is all obvious stuff, I know, but worth keeping in mind for fans when wading through the impending avalanche of reviews. We've all been here before, I guess. Plus it's an outlet for dealing with the anticipation til the album drops/leaks.
Originally posted by TheRefugee:U2 (Bono especially) have way too much baggage at this stage of their existence for any review to be completely impartial. It is rare for a review to simply focus on the songs. I understand that reviewers want to contextualise the work, but the fact remains that the hatred is so great that all objectivity gets skewed. It's the same with other polarising artists, e.g. Morrissey. Notice the amount of column inches of a review that go into his latest pronouncements before discussing his songs. When reviewing U2, every UK and Irish broadsheet review will mention the paradise papers, the SoI/apple thing, U2's age, Bono's stature/obnoxiousness, etc. It's just the way things are now for U2. Very hard for reviewers competing for views, shares, likes, bantz, yadda, yadda, to maintain perspective regardless of whether the album is the best or worst thing since Bomb, Baby, Boy or Behind. U2 have made their bed, now they have to lie in it. Only through the prism of time will we know where the album truly ranks in the scheme of things. This is all obvious stuff, I know, but worth keeping in mind for fans when wading through the impending avalanche of reviews. We've all been here before, I guess. Plus it's an outlet for dealing with the anticipation til the album drops/leaks.
