EXP
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by spartacus070:[..]
    Regardless of NLOTH not being a commercial success, their song "Magnificent" is the stand out and should be played in this tour. They did "Stay" here and there on the 360 tour, so its not like they haven't done any pop in a while.
    I'd prefer NLOTH material over Pop.

    The truth is that I like all their albums, and I don't think there's any song I really hate, so I'm happy no matter what they play (I guess I'm a fucking dog... I'm very easy to please). So if they include stuff from October, Zooropa, Pop or No Line, that'd be great. Or from the rest of the albums.

    From NLOTH, I'd prefer No Line, Breathe or the album version of Crazy Tonight, (I'm fine with MOS appearing every now and then in long snippet form) but Magnificent and Boots sounded very good live, so it would be really nice if any of those showed up on the e-stage.
  2. Originally posted by Bloodraven:[..]
    I'd prefer NLOTH material over Pop.

    The truth is that I like all their albums, and I don't think there's any song I really hate, so I'm happy no matter what they play (I guess I'm a fucking dog... I'm very easy to please). So if they include stuff from October, Zooropa, Pop or No Line, that'd be great. Or from the rest of the albums.

    From NLOTH, I'd prefer No Line, Breathe or the album version of Crazy Tonight, (I'm fine with MOS appearing every now and then in long snippet form) but Magnificent and Boots sounded very good live, so it would be really nice if any of those showed up on the e-stage.
    The truth is that I like all their albums, and I don't think there's any song I really hate, so I'm happy no matter what they play (I guess I'm a fucking dog... I'm very easy to please). So if they include stuff from October, Zooropa, Pop or No Line, that'd be great. Or from the rest of the albums.

  3. The band's fixation on the production of the show comes at the expense of this weak setlist. And why do they assume the general fans will reject their old stuff?

    Also I'd like to add that, the fact they've always played a relatively fixed set list, doesn't mean that they should keep doing that. I mean, how many big tours do they still have in them after this one? One, two maybe? If they wanna revisit old material, now would be a good time.
  4. "weak" according to who? Most of the general fans will agree that it's not a weak setlist, and if they think there's somethig weak, it's the new stuff, certainly not the war horses.

    They don't. They're assuming that the general fans love the old stuff that they're currently playing, they are hoping (not assuming) that the general fans will accept the new stuff.
    I think they're assuming that if they decided to play old non conventional stuff, the general fans would accept it or even love it, but they can't see a reason why they should do it.

    Originally posted by blink:Also I'd like to add that, the fact they've always played a relatively fixed set list, doesn't mean that they should keep doing that. I mean, how many big tours do they still have in them after this one? One, two maybe? If they wanna revisit old material, now would be a good time.
    Why would they do that? why would they find that interesting? why some people is assuming that that would be a good thing?
  5. Weak according to me obviously.

    They do, the setlist is the evidence.

    The question is not whether they find it interesting.
  7. Originally posted by blink:Weak according to me obviously.

    They do, the setlist is the evidence.

    The question is not whether they find it interesting.
    Considering this is a little over a month into a tour, they usually build up steam before making changed, like the 360 tour they had gotten into the setlist blues quickly and knew they had to mix it up once they did Glastonbury and promoted "Achtung Baby's" 20th, and started throwing more of those earlier songs into the mix, most notably 'Even better than the Real Thing" to boost the second half of the show. Lets give them some time to work it out more, still a solid list for the time. Hopefully they do another leg in the U.S.A. next year.
  8. Originally posted by blink:Weak according to me obviously.

    They do, the setlist is the evidence.

    The question is not whether they find it interesting.
    You're dangerous 'cause you're honest...
  9. Originally posted by blink:The band's fixation on the production of the show comes at the expense of this weak setlist. And why do they assume the general fans will reject their old stuff?

    Also I'd like to add that, the fact they've always played a relatively fixed set list, doesn't mean that they should keep doing that. I mean, how many big tours do they still have in them after this one? One, two maybe? If they wanna revisit old material, now would be a good time.
    Actually is argue that the strongest parts of the show are the the most structured parts. All of the new songs with the animation stuff are the best bits.
  10. U2 are slaves to technology. THAT LED screen hinders spontaneity. I hope it fails to work properly at a lot of shows so they can't use it as a crutch for "concepts".

    Until Bono says something like "Fuck the screen, this is Rejoice!" this will not even compare to the Elevation tour's energy for me.

    This will probably upset a few of you, maybe. I feel that their Glastonbury performance sucked.

    I had seen them in Denver only a month before and that 360 show totally blew Glastonbury away. They really didn't use Glastonbury to full effect. Editors and Coldplay the year before had better sets. And MUSE the year before outshone U2 in a big way. I saw U2 the next day after Glastonbury at East Lansing and that show again blew Glastonbury away. Glastonbury had a HUGE screen that AGAIN made them slaves to the technology. The songs must match up to the visuals, oh yes.

    I might ditch any future shows on this tour and just dedicate it to working for JAMES (if they'll have me).

  12. Originally posted by INCA:U2 are slaves to technology. THAT LED screen hinders spontaneity. I hope it fails to work properly at a lot of shows so they can't use it as a crutch for "concepts".

    Until Bono says something like "Fuck the screen, this is Rejoice!" this will not even compare to the Elevation tour's energy for me.

    This will probably upset a few of you, maybe. I feel that their Glastonbury performance sucked.

    I had seen them in Denver only a month before and that 360 show totally blew Glastonbury away. They really didn't use Glastonbury to full effect. Editors and Coldplay the year before had better sets. And MUSE the year before outshone U2 in a big way. I saw U2 the next day after Glastonbury at East Lansing and that show again blew Glastonbury away. Glastonbury had a HUGE screen that AGAIN made them slaves to the technology. The songs must match up to the visuals, oh yes.

    I might ditch any future shows on this tour and just dedicate it to working for JAMES (if they'll have me).

    Good luck with James, one of the most underrated greatest bands ever!

    ---

    About U2... well, only a few people values spontaneity and variation that much (or over technology) and the band definitely is not among them.

    So, while we can still hope for some malfunction, other than that, you either try to enjoy it the way it is or you'll be upset with them all the time, because as long as they continue to be successful doing the things the way they like to do it, don't expect any changes.
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.