GEN
Active topics
  1. I have been reading all these posts and im thinking our expectations of the band need to change. Then I thought, maybe Bono's do. There lie's the real problem.
    We want new material, you cant sell the same old thing to the crowd forever. Im feeling numb!
  2. Originally posted by Hole:[..]

    Sadly an excellent analysis.


    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.


    I totally agree with you. I am also a fan from the mid 80's and that band doesn't exist any more. I think instead of it becoming bigger and more extravagant, why not smaller? Or do the arena gigs and smaller theaters instead of the big outdoor shows. I don't know. I didn't see 360 but as a returning fan I thought 360--they've come full circle. I would rather the band be about the music and not the money, the celebrity, the glitz and the hype. I still do believe they can give rock and roll the kick that it needs. Don't get me wrong, tho~if and when they tour I'm going but I know I can't expect another JT or ZooTV tour.
  3. If we're looking for tours in which the band was "all about the music," the ones to look at are Elevation and Vertigo, in my opinion the best arena tours from all regards. 360 toppled ZooTV and PopMart in nearly every aspect as well.

    So from a studio perspective, the general consensus (but not mine) is that the band was better off in the 80s and 90s than they were in the 2000s. From the perspective of their live performances, it's fairly obvious that with each progressive tour, the band has gotten better and better at commanding whatever stage they happen to be playing on.
  4. Originally posted by Penelope:[..]


    I totally agree with you. I am also a fan from the mid 80's and that band doesn't exist any more. I think instead of it becoming bigger and more extravagant, why not smaller? Or do the arena gigs and smaller theaters instead of the big outdoor shows. I don't know. I didn't see 360 but as a returning fan I thought 360--they've come full circle. I would rather the band be about the music and not the money, the celebrity, the glitz and the hype. I still do believe they can give rock and roll the kick that it needs. Don't get me wrong, tho~if and when they tour I'm going but I know I can't expect another JT or ZooTV tour.

    Sorry, but apart from the lack of a big spectacle what was the JT tour other than playing their hits? Nothing about it was inventive at all, it was them simply bashing out hit after hit as a culmination of the band they were in the 80's. It became even moreso with the Lovetown tour. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was a bad show (wasn't even alive back then, but from bootlegs) in fact they were amazing, but in terms of expecting another JT tour, you're basically looking for the 360 tour without the stage. The 360 show wasn't solely intended to make millions of dollars. Obviously from a financial point of view that was a huge benefit, but I honestly believe the band started with the idea of wanting to play stadiums again with the idea of a 360 stage, and it just went crazy from there (check out From The Ground Up, it's all in there). I really don't think it has much to do with them musically, many long-time U2 fans have come out and said that the last tour was their best ever, even better than ZooTV. It all comes down to opinion, but the point is apart from ZooTV and it's creative show U2 has always played shows that were essentially greatest hits sets accompanied by a number of songs from their latest album. U2 WANT to be the biggest and the best, they always have wanted to. ZooTV didn't start out the way most of us remember it, the first leg was really scaled down and it was a trial run. You think they would've run along with it for as long as they had if it wasn't a success? Doubt it. It was the first tour where they could really do whatever they wanted in terms of scale, and they went all out, same as 360. The theme came with experimentation, and that has to do with more than just the show. It had to do with their new musical style, and perhaps more importantly their public image.

    Basically what I'm trying to say is while the band who is willing to take risks for the sake of art may not be any longer, their ability as musicians has only increased and the 360 show was great. I didn't spot one U2 fan in the audience at any of the shows I went to who was scratching their chin and saying "Yeah but ZooTV had a theme and was experimental, this is just a show with a big stage". No, every single person at those shows enjoyed the hell out of them, it was a great show for what it was.

    On THAT note, the band have said in the not too distant past that they foresee the next tour being indoors and being more intimate, both in interviews and in the new book (which I just finished - awesome), So as far as what U2 might do next, I don't want another JT show or a ZooTV show, or even a 360 show for that matter. I want something different, and I honestly think we're in for that. I think if you really read between the lines of what U2 have been saying lately, it really seems like they know they need to change. "We need a great reason to put another U2 record out", and all of things they had going into Glastonbury about being a relevant act and staying relevant in the recording industry. Whether or not it's something they can actually achieve is a different discussion, whether or not they try is what's up for speculation. I really hope they do. I think they had it in their hands with NLOTH but chickened out and reverted back to the Bomb sound a bit. But the songs that ARE experimental aren't really energetic and catchy, they're just interesting pieces that are good to listen to with headphones, but not at a rock concert.

    What they need to do is come up with a new sound that has enough of the U2 stamp on it but enough of something new and interesting, AND enough of what gets people excited at a U2 show. I think if they release another Beautiful Day or Vertigo it would fall completely flat. I think they need to release a song/album that will have a teenagers going "Who is this? U2? no way.."
  5. U2 may not be the most relevant band anymore, but imo they r still the best live act going round. Nothing can match the feeling you get when u hear the start of Streets, or the ending of WOWY. Aslong as i still get the goosebumps, then they r doing their job well.
  7. Dont know if its true or a joke from somebody?
  9. C'mon guys: U2, Bono, everyone, we all have a lot to learn from David Bowie, who pulls out an album, a single, a video, out of the hat, taking everything by surprise. And what a single
  10. Originally posted by JuJuman:C'mon guys: U2, Bono, everyone, we all have a lot to learn from David Bowie, who pulls out an album, a single, a video, out of the hat, taking everything by surprise. And what a single

    AMEN!
  11. Everybody knows that no matter which venue U2 decides to tour, it's going to be a big show. They won't do anything more simplistic than their Elevation tour setup.
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.