GEN
Active topics
  1. I know people are getting sick of this topic, and I do apologise. But its 4 in the morning and Im having one of those long nights, so I thought Id post some thoughts. (Winter is SO good btw, have it on all night).
    No Line on the Horizon is in a different league to both albums. ATYCLB and Bomb were U2 trying to be the biggest band in the world, not the best. Granted both albums have their moments (BD, Walk On, Miracle Drug, SYCMIOYO, COBL), but they don’t feel like complete albums. ATYCLB is hit and miss and Bomb starts really strongly only to drift off into mediocrity (apart from Species of course). These albums finish low on my list because of the likes of Wild Honey, Grace, A Man and a Woman, real mediocre songs, and don’t even get me started on Mercy being cut from Bomb!!!!!!!!
    NLOTH on the other hand, is complete. Simple as. It just feels right, it sustains its momentum throughout. The title track, Magnificent, MOS, Breathe, the daring Unknown Caller. This is U2 trying to be the best. And they are the best.... obviously.
  2. Originally posted by dferryachtungbaby:I know people are getting sick of this topic, and I do apologise. But its 4 in the morning and Im having one of those long nights, so I thought Id post some thoughts. (Winter is SO good btw, have it on all night).
    No Line on the Horizon is in a different league to both albums. ATYCLB and Bomb were U2 trying to be the biggest band in the world, not the best. Granted both albums have their moments (BD, Walk On, Miracle Drug, SYCMIOYO, COBL), but they don’t feel like complete albums. ATYCLB is hit and miss and Bomb starts really strongly only to drift off into mediocrity (apart from Species of course). These albums finish low on my list because of the likes of Wild Honey, Grace, A Man and a Woman, real mediocre songs, and don’t even get me started on Mercy being cut from Bomb!!!!!!!!
    NLOTH on the other hand, is complete. Simple as. It just feels right, it sustains its momentum throughout. The title track, Magnificent, MOS, Breathe, the daring Unknown Caller. This is U2 trying to be the best. And they are the best.... obviously.



    I don't think U2 ever made an album without hoping it's the best. Maybe not in the sense that "oh our album is the best, it's goign to be the best", but in the sense that they would reach out to as many people as they could.
    In respect to your argument however, you'd have to define "U2 trying to be their best". If they released Get On Your Boots with the intention of capturing the mass audiences around the world, than perhaps you're right, but I don't think that's what they were trying to do. I think they were saying "we're going somewhere, come with us if you want", but at hte same time saying "we hope a lot of people come". That didn't really happen, and it was evident on their reactions to the album sales / album appreciation worldwide. They said themselves it didn't do as well as they wanted / thought it would, which is a shame. In short, I agree that it's a complete album, but I still think the other two were more complete, and apparently so do a lot of people. Many will shoot me down for saying hte masses matter, but they do, just ask U2.
  3. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]

    I don't think U2 ever made an album without hoping it's the best. Maybe not in the sense that "oh our album is the best, it's goign to be the best", but in the sense that they would reach out to as many people as they could.
    In respect to your argument however, you'd have to define "U2 trying to be their best". If they released Get On Your Boots with the intention of capturing the mass audiences around the world, than perhaps you're right, but I don't think that's what they were trying to do. I think they were saying "we're going somewhere, come with us if you want", but at hte same time saying "we hope a lot of people come". That didn't really happen, and it was evident on their reactions to the album sales / album appreciation worldwide. They said themselves it didn't do as well as they wanted / thought it would, which is a shame. In short, I agree that it's a complete album, but I still think the other two were more complete, and apparently so do a lot of people. Many will shoot me down for saying hte masses matter, but they do, just ask U2.


    I relate it to these Facebook fan-pages circulating. Any members of Facebook on here might know what I'm talking about....people becoming fans of ridiculous things, like, "I hate it when my gas light goes on in my car!" Really? Cause I LOVE it when I realize I have to go buy something that's both expensive AND absolutely necessary for me to get around on a day to day basis!!

    It's the same with U2. "I'm pretty sure they're trying to be good" Well no shit. Great deduction. Because for a few years there, I kind of thought they were deliberately trying to SUCK. (This is sarcastic. Please don't take me seriously.

    U2 are always trying to make new music that INTERESTS them. Quote the PopMart DVD- "If it's not boring for us, then it's not bullshit to you". Nobody made you sign anything to be a U2 fan. If you don't like what they're putting out, all apologies, but quite frankly, it doesn't matter to them in the long run. Sure, they might be affected by sales, and somewhat concerned with popularity. But if they created something they were truly proud of, and worked long and hard on, and in the end THEY were happy with it...enough people are going to invest in their band to keep them living, so they're going to keep on trucking.

    So I'm sick of people dissing anything U2 has ever released. If you don't like it, listen to the stuff that floats your boat instead of wasting bandwidth complaining about it.
  4. Originally posted by EyesWithPrideB3:[..]

    I relate it to these Facebook fan-pages circulating. Any members of Facebook on here might know what I'm talking about....people becoming fans of ridiculous things, like, "I hate it when my gas light goes on in my car!" Really? Cause I LOVE it when I realize I have to go buy something that's both expensive AND absolutely necessary for me to get around on a day to day basis!!

    It's the same with U2. "I'm pretty sure they're trying to be good" Well no shit. Great deduction. Because for a few years there, I kind of thought they were deliberately trying to SUCK. (This is sarcastic. Please don't take me seriously.

    U2 are always trying to make new music that INTERESTS them. Quote the PopMart DVD- "If it's not boring for us, then it's not bullshit to you". Nobody made you sign anything to be a U2 fan. If you don't like what they're putting out, all apologies, but quite frankly, it doesn't matter to them in the long run. Sure, they might be affected by sales, and somewhat concerned with popularity. But if they created something they were truly proud of, and worked long and hard on, and in the end THEY were happy with it...enough people are going to invest in their band to keep them living, so they're going to keep on trucking.

    So I'm sick of people dissing anything U2 has ever released. If you don't like it, listen to the stuff that floats your boat instead of wasting bandwidth complaining about it.


    I hope that wasn't a reponse to me? I never "dissed" NLOTH there...I was just saying they seemed quite upset with the reaction to NLOTH, so perhaps in that situation, even it "wasn't boring for them", it might've been bullshit to some poeple, and they obviously noticed, and were disappointed. I didn't say I didn't like NLOTH, I was trying ot have an intelligent discussion about where they stand in terms of their album and past ones...Bottom line is, I think what they attempted with the last 2 albums was more successful than why they attempted with this new one. I'm NOT "dissing" it, I'm just stating what's already been stated and pointing out facts here and there.
    Sorry if I "wasted your bandwidth"...
  5. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]

    I don't think U2 ever made an album without hoping it's the best. Maybe not in the sense that "oh our album is the best, it's goign to be the best", but in the sense that they would reach out to as many people as they could.
    In respect to your argument however, you'd have to define "U2 trying to be their best". If they released Get On Your Boots with the intention of capturing the mass audiences around the world, than perhaps you're right, but I don't think that's what they were trying to do. I think they were saying "we're going somewhere, come with us if you want", but at hte same time saying "we hope a lot of people come". That didn't really happen, and it was evident on their reactions to the album sales / album appreciation worldwide. They said themselves it didn't do as well as they wanted / thought it would, which is a shame. In short, I agree that it's a complete album, but I still think the other two were more complete, and apparently so do a lot of people. Many will shoot me down for saying hte masses matter, but they do, just ask U2.


    I'm afraid you're right. The masses do matter. If they wouldn't matter, no band would ever sell any album. Same goes for stadium concerts.
    Aside from the fact that U2 doesn't really need huge album sales in the sense of making money.
    But they do need huge album sales in the sense of appreciation. That's only human.

    Anyway, I agree that U2 never made an album without the intention that it would be their best.

    I expect no less.

  6. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:These two albums beat NLOTH by far IMO. Sorry, but for me NLOTH just isn't that good. I still think that unless they come up with something REAL good in the future, they should've ended with Bomb. The energy, the maturity, the raw passion for back to basics rock, should've been the final note for the boys. NLOTH is basically a step away from that, not a step forward, which is unfortunate, because they promised a massive step forward. I like the songs, don't get me wrong, but to me its far over-rated amongst many U2 fans. I like Boots, Fez-Being Born, White As Snow, (2 that aren't even being played live...) and a couple of the songs from the first half of the album, but not nearly as much as I appreciate their others. There's just something about the whole thing that makes me say NO. It could be the lack of support and appreciation from the general public as well, it's hard to like something when plenty of others are shooting it down. At least Beautiful Day and Vertigo had plenty of fans, and also made many U2 fans. Get On Your Boots made people laugh (which pisses me off, that song is killer).

    Over and out.




    I couldn't disagree more with this....

    As Casper says, opinions, opinions, opinions.....
  7. Exactly, and isn't that what it's all about? Sharing opinions is what people do: agreeing, diagreeing.
    Nothing wrong with that, right?
  8. Originally posted by EyesWithPrideB3:[..]

    I relate it to these Facebook fan-pages circulating. Any members of Facebook on here might know what I'm talking about....people becoming fans of ridiculous things, like, "I hate it when my gas light goes on in my car!" Really? Cause I LOVE it when I realize I have to go buy something that's both expensive AND absolutely necessary for me to get around on a day to day basis!!

    It's the same with U2. "I'm pretty sure they're trying to be good" Well no shit. Great deduction. Because for a few years there, I kind of thought they were deliberately trying to SUCK. (This is sarcastic. Please don't take me seriously.

    U2 are always trying to make new music that INTERESTS them. Quote the PopMart DVD- "If it's not boring for us, then it's not bullshit to you". Nobody made you sign anything to be a U2 fan. If you don't like what they're putting out, all apologies, but quite frankly, it doesn't matter to them in the long run. Sure, they might be affected by sales, and somewhat concerned with popularity. But if they created something they were truly proud of, and worked long and hard on, and in the end THEY were happy with it...enough people are going to invest in their band to keep them living, so they're going to keep on trucking.

    So I'm sick of people dissing anything U2 has ever released. If you don't like it, listen to the stuff that floats your boat instead of wasting bandwidth complaining about it.


    if you look at No Line it seemed they werent focusing on popular singles (BD, Vertigo) but more a album full of great songs. Amen on your facebook point too, hate those silly groups.



  9. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]

    I hope that wasn't a reponse to me? I never "dissed" NLOTH there...I was just saying they seemed quite upset with the reaction to NLOTH, so perhaps in that situation, even it "wasn't boring for them", it might've been bullshit to some poeple, and they obviously noticed, and were disappointed. I didn't say I didn't like NLOTH, I was trying ot have an intelligent discussion about where they stand in terms of their album and past ones...Bottom line is, I think what they attempted with the last 2 albums was more successful than why they attempted with this new one. I'm NOT "dissing" it, I'm just stating what's already been stated and pointing out facts here and there.
    Sorry if I "wasted your bandwidth"...


    No no no, not at all...I just agreed with what you said about them always trying, and was sort of sparked by the idea that some people out there probably think they're just sort of half-assing it along these days. It was in no way directed at you- in fact, we see eye to eye on more things than not, I believe.

    Except for the views on NLOTH not being as good as Bomb. Gotta disagree there
  10. Originally posted by EyesWithPrideB3:[..]

    No no no, not at all...I just agreed with what you said about them always trying, and was sort of sparked by the idea that some people out there probably think they're just sort of half-assing it along these days. It was in no way directed at you- in fact, we see eye to eye on more things than not, I believe.

    Except for the views on NLOTH not being as good as Bomb. Gotta disagree there


    Good to know! And yeah I find myself agreeing with you quite frequently. But yeah, fair enough. I actually gave it another listen today and it was really good, I just think Bomb was more....I don't really know how to say it lol. It was just themed well, it was very mature and I like that about it, it was good to see middle-aged rockers writing about being middle-aged. If they replaced Miracle Drug with Mercy, and maybe either One Step Closer or A Man and a Woman with Fast Cars, the album would've been a masterpiece.

    Alex
  11. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]

    Good to know! And yeah I find myself agreeing with you quite frequently. But yeah, fair enough. I actually gave it another listen today and it was really good, I just think Bomb was more....I don't really know how to say it lol. It was just themed well, it was very mature and I like that about it, it was good to see middle-aged rockers writing about being middle-aged. If they replaced Miracle Drug with Mercy, and maybe either One Step Closer or A Man and a Woman with Fast Cars, the album would've been a masterpiece.

    Alex


    Miricle Drug is a great song, u could get ridda man and a women for mercy, that would be nice.


  12. A Man And A Woman is a great song!!! Mercy should not take it's place - I'd swap it out for Vertigo.
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.