GEN
Active topics
  1. IMHO, the problem with post-2000 U2 is that they've become too calculated, when it's not their strength. They're trying to come up with new versions of what's worked for them in the past, instead of recognising that what worked in the past was not a repetition of past successes. I don't think they're being as good as they could be, probably because the relative lack of success of Pop rattled them and made them scuttle back to familiar ground. You've only got to look at what Edge and Adam said to Rolling Stone recently regarding the tour setlists and the lack of NLOTH. The fans "weren't getting it" (in reality because the release and marketing were botched pretty badly and the majority weren't familiar with the tracks at the gigs) so they've just stopped playing them. There's a lot gone wrong with post-2000 U2, but I don't think any of the problems lie where the band think they do.

    I'd really like it if the next release of post-2000 material was written, produced and released to be something U2 were happy with and proud of, and not just something calculated to be popular or radio-friendly. I'd really like it if they stopped being afraid.

  2. The argument of the material being too circulated really only applies to ATYCLB and within that album, it really only applies to Elevation, Beautiful Day, In A Little While, Stuck In A Moment, and Walk On. The only other songs that work live, and they work very, very well live, are Kite, New York, Peace On Earth, and Wild Honey. While Kite had some very powerful showings in the Vertigo Tour, these other beauties have been essentially packed away. HTDAAB was full of gems that I feel are totally overlooked by fans, but most notably, Original Of The Species, Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own, Miracle Drug, Yahweh, and Fast Cars. Many fans seem to think that Vertigo and CoBL are the representatives of the album, but I think the real gems are one I listed earlier.

    While I do like Pop, when compared to all the other albums, including the band's post 2000 material, most of the Pop songs seem like anachronisms. I don't really know how to explain it well, but all the other albums have that genuine U2 feel.

    However, the band has mentioned before that Pop was an album rushed to its completion. That being said, it is very possible that the Pop we hear now is not the Pop the band was hoping to hear. Additionally, this could explain its rather limited appearances in the live setting.
  3. Originally posted by ahn1991: most notably, Original Of The Species, Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own, Miracle Drug, Yahweh, and Fast Cars. Many fans seem to think that Vertigo and CoBL are the representatives of the album, but I think the real gems are one I listed earlier.

    it is very possible that the Pop we hear now is not the Pop the band was hoping to hear. Additionally, this could explain its rather limited appearances in the live setting.


    apparently U2 think that also, they have only played two songs from that album since that tour, they've only done this with Pop and Zooropa

    and Pop live performances always sound much better than the recorded version
  4. Originally posted by ASortOfDesire:[..]

    apparently U2 think that also, they have only played two songs from that album since that tour, they've only done this with Pop and Zooropa

    and Pop live performances always sound much better than the recorded version


    Yeah, but that's true for pretty much all their recorded versions. There aren't a lot of studio versions I can think of that aren't outshone by the live ones.

    I really think if Pop had sold better, they'd play songs from it all the time.
  5. Originally posted by sonia_lastrega:
    I'd really like it if the next release of post-2000 material was written, produced and released to be something U2 were happy with and proud of, and not just something calculated to be popular or radio-friendly. I'd really like it if they stopped being afraid.


    this is the point of post-2000 ... they're following the market and afraid of it
    they seemed to come back of what they were with No line but they stopped at half the road .. again afraid of the public reaction .. this is not what U2 were pre-2000.
    like i said times ago they used to make the market (and fans) follow them, not viceversa like they're doing in last years.
    like Yogi said somewhere else .. they pushed music boundaries to the limit .. with No line they're wanting to but .. there's a but
    the "Suitcase" and the "Bomb" can be very good album, comparing to most of the stuff of 00's .. but can be only "good" album comparing to .. U2 .. going to the bottom of relative U2 chart.
    about the three albums i prefer No line by far for what i said before .. they were releasing their genius (but they pulled a bit the brake) .. then far after comes All the you can't leave behind .. for the naturalness (is it the right word in english? ) .. and last How to dismantle which has some good points but not in U2ness ...
    i don't want to be pedant .. but sometimes i wish they spend more time with someone like Eddie Vedder .. who they know quite well (having played with him ) and who always recognized the greatness of U2 .. not like some one "who's playing cold" and think they're U2 not doing a crumb of what U2 did yet...
    anyway i wish they follow what Eddie has done lately .. he has an idea for a strange album .. for a bet .. and he did it .. and for what i know he got number 4 in the chart .. not bad for an ukulele album.
    i'm always hoping that they come back to such these things and the fact they have realized that working with redone is shit is a good thing in this direction.
    i understand that lots of young people recognize themselves with the last U2 (and i'm really happy that the Band i grew up can still make them loved by younger people) but .. U2 are U2 for what they did pre-2000 (not only concerning the albums).

    ps: don't know if this post is undestandable .. due to my lack of language
  6. The post 2000 material is good, but no where near the 80's or the 90's. ATYCLB has some good songs with Walk On, Beautiful Day, Stuck (CD version), Kite and WILATW but also some shit material like Grace, Wild Honey and IALW. The same goes for HTDAAB with SYCMIOYO, Vertigo, COBL and Miracle Drug as good ones but most of the other songs really suck imo I think that HTDAAB is one of the weakest U2 albums.
    NLOTH is a good album but songs like Stand Up Comedy, Boots and Crazy are horrible.

    If you look at especially the 90's the three albums didnt really had weak points, I meand Achtung Baby is great from start to end and Zooropa has some kind of vibe which gets me everytime. Pop isnt as good as those two but still good. The same goes for most of the 80's albums.

    Like Sonia said U2 should return to making songs they really like and not songs which they think could go high at the charts. They have enough money and if they want more they could go and play all across the world for sold out stadiums.
  7. Originally posted by sonia_lastrega:IMHO, the problem with post-2000 U2 is that they've become too calculated, when it's not their strength. They're trying to come up with new versions of what's worked for them in the past, instead of recognising that what worked in the past was not a repetition of past successes. I don't think they're being as good as they could be, probably because the relative lack of success of Pop rattled them and made them scuttle back to familiar ground. You've only got to look at what Edge and Adam said to Rolling Stone recently regarding the tour setlists and the lack of NLOTH. The fans "weren't getting it" (in reality because the release and marketing were botched pretty badly and the majority weren't familiar with the tracks at the gigs) so they've just stopped playing them. There's a lot gone wrong with post-2000 U2, but I don't think any of the problems lie where the band think they do.

    I'd really like it if the next release of post-2000 material was written, produced and released to be something U2 were happy with and proud of, and not just something calculated to be popular or radio-friendly. I'd really like it if they stopped being afraid.



    Bingo! It is easier to be successful than it is to be relevant, as Bono would put it.
  8. ATYCLB has some good songs with Walk On, Beautiful Day, Stuck (CD version), Kite and WILATW but also some shit material like IALW.

    WHAT??!! IALW is amazing! Bono's voice is just perfect for that song.
  9. Originally posted by kezman:ATYCLB has some good songs with Walk On, Beautiful Day, Stuck (CD version), Kite and WILATW but also some shit material like IALW.

    WHAT??!! IALW is amazing! Bono's voice is just perfect for that song.



    I cant stand IALW Maybe because of the way it has been played during this tour, but also the CD version doesnt do it for me.
  11. Originally posted by clover68:[..]

    this is the point of post-2000 ... they're following the market and afraid of it
    they seemed to come back of what they were with No line but they stopped at half the road .. again afraid of the public reaction .. this is not what U2 were pre-2000.
    like i said times ago they used to make the market (and fans) follow them, not viceversa like they're doing in last years.
    like Yogi said somewhere else .. they pushed music boundaries to the limit .. with No line they're wanting to but .. there's a but
    the "Suitcase" and the "Bomb" can be very good album, comparing to most of the stuff of 00's .. but can be only "good" album comparing to .. U2 .. going to the bottom of relative U2 chart.
    about the three albums i prefer No line by far for what i said before .. they were releasing their genius (but they pulled a bit the brake) .. then far after comes All the you can't leave behind .. for the naturalness (is it the right word in english? ) .. and last How to dismantle which has some good points but not in U2ness ...
    i don't want to be pedant .. but sometimes i wish they spend more time with someone like Eddie Vedder .. who they know quite well (having played with him ) and who always recognized the greatness of U2 .. not like some one "who's playing cold" and think they're U2 not doing a crumb of what U2 did yet...
    anyway i wish they follow what Eddie has done lately .. he has an idea for a strange album .. for a bet .. and he did it .. and for what i know he got number 4 in the chart .. not bad for an ukulele album.
    i'm always hoping that they come back to such these things and the fact they have realized that working with redone is shit is a good thing in this direction.
    i understand that lots of young people recognize themselves with the last U2 (and i'm really happy that the Band i grew up can still make them loved by younger people) but .. U2 are U2 for what they did pre-2000 (not only concerning the albums).

    ps: don't know if this post is undestandable .. due to my lack of language



    Dude...your English is a lot better than my Italian (molto male!).

    I sometimes think, regarding collaborators, that they mostly get 2 kinds: the ones that think U2 are fabulous and can do no wrong, and the ones that think U2 would be fabulous if only they did what the collaborator thinks they should. I don't think either is really working for them any more.

    I feel like there's an element missing from the newer songs, and I'm probably not alone with that. Do you (plural you, all you guys, stupid English) think that the band are now so removed from the difficulties of life that they can no longer write lyrics that really touch people? If pain creates art, then where is their pain now that their lives are so comfortable and happy? (Not that I would wish them otherwise of course). Could they produce another One or AIWIY now? Is the comparative failure of the post-2000 material down to a lack of resonance and relatability in the lyrics?
  12. Originally posted by sonia_lastrega:[..]


    I feel like there's an element missing from the newer songs, and I'm probably not alone with that. Do you (plural you, all you guys, stupid English) think that the band are now so removed from the difficulties of life that they can no longer write lyrics that really touch people? If pain creates art, then where is their pain now that their lives are so comfortable and happy? (Not that I would wish them otherwise of course). Could they produce another One or AIWIY now? Is the comparative failure of the post-2000 material down to a lack of resonance and relatability in the lyrics?


    You kinda hit the nail on the head right there i think. It's not just U2 either, look at almost any band and you find that this is usually the case. Alot of times it coincides with getting older as well but I think what you're saying has alot of truth in it. The songs from this decade in my opinion musically are really good, especially No Line. I almost feel like Bono's lyric writing is holding the band back at this point. He's writing from such a different place now a days then he was in 1987 or 1991.

    My opinion is that Achtung Baby is U2's best album lyrically and thematically. The context in which that album was written and recorded is unique and cannot be recreated. With U2 achieving success and relative comfort at this point, it's tough to write songs like the ones we all love and expect out of them. I'm not making excuses for them, i just think that it's how it works.
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.