LIV
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by yeah:[..]

    I wonder how many times you've met Hamish to say so. I also don't see how he's not capable of doing his job or how he's leading to general negativity.

    It's personal taste if you like his work but getting personal seems a little over the top.



    How many times I've met him, or how many times I've met him to give him my feedback and opinion? Zero. A great director takes criticism and if they can't, they shouldn't be there. They take the criticism and improve on the next time.


    I'll clarify what I meant:

    He can do his job, sure - maybe it's not an inability to do your job properly. Just like any director can. But to me, the concert films he's done just don't seem that exciting to me. Maybe I'm just picky, but seeing that backstage video of the Boston show, where he's in the camera room, just seemed cocky to me and slowly became irritating.

    The film from Chicago is probably the worst. Three zoom-in shots in less than two seconds - and I counted - the vocals-but-no-movement-of-the-mouth in Zoo Station, the obvious cuts to each song, the messed-up audio soundtrack (I know it's not his fault but it annoys me), etc, etc, etc. Why can't they just leave it as is and give us a great film? In fact, I'd have no issues with that, and I'd like his direction, but as it stands, his previous efforts aren't that interesting.

    Maybe it's just me feeling a little bit off these past few weeks but for whatever reason, I just don't enjoy his direction. Seriously, whatever happened to those old shows back in the 70s and 80s where the bands did their shows but didn't have all this fancy-arse direction?
  2. I just wondered how many times you talked to him, since you called him arrogant. Hard to tell if you don't know someone personally, imho.
    I'm not the biggest fan of the DVDs he directed either, but that's more due to the tours and sets than to his directing work., Of course there are some obvious problems with the editing. That's his responsibility, granted - but the concept of editing 2 nights together comes from the Band/management. So he's not the only one to blame. Apart from that, U2 seems to like his work.

    But we're far off topic now.
  3. Originally posted by yeah:I just wondered how many times you talked to him, since you called him arrogant. Hard to tell if you don't know someone personally, imho.
    I'm not the biggest fan of the DVDs he directed either, but that's more due to the tours and sets than to his directing work., Of course there are some obvious problems with the editing. That's his responsibility, granted - but the concept of editing 2 nights together comes from the Band/management. So he's not the only one to blame. Apart from that, U2 seems to like his work.

    But we're far off topic now.


    Ah well, we'll wait and see what the 360 film is like, then I'll make a true judgement considering how much of a better set it is than the last two.
  4. Catherine Owens had some of those out-of-sync moments in U23D too...I think the director/editor is forced to use them sometimes, sadly.
  5. the Boston video is by far the best, its got the best camera moves and its edited just great. Considering Rattle and Hum is 1988 its got great shots too. I havent seen the Chicago show but the worst is the one from Slane Castle 2001 (speaking of camera and directing quality) and i really hate the Mexico City too.
  6. use the U2 DVD topic for rants
  8. Go Toronto!!!
  9. Originally posted by Shimitz:the Boston video is by far the best, its got the best camera moves and its edited just great. Considering Rattle and Hum is 1988 its got great shots too. I havent seen the Chicago show but the worst is the one from Slane Castle 2001 (speaking of camera and directing quality) and i really hate the Mexico City too.

    Boston's as bad as any DVD where editing's concerned, the setlist never existed and there's so many dud shots with regard to say Edge using 4-5 guitars in one song (Gone springs to mind) but I do think it's a great DVD. But anyway;

    Indeed.

    I was going through the U2.com tour schematics for each stadium on the US leg and I could only find one where the Claw was genuinely plum-centre, can't remember which though
  11. When did we know for show they were filming in Chicago/Boston etc? That might give a clue? Or did people just show up there and learn they were filming?

    I'd really like it to be Toronto though. I could have my first time seeing the boys live on DVD!
  12. why not new york??
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.