Originally posted by Faceman2000:[..]
Admittedly biased here, since I love The Best Thing, but how much of a risk do they really risk of losing their canvases? I mean, you just said yourself, you spend hours reading U2 fan opinions over ten years - don't think you're going anywhere. And I think that's true for most of us. They might lose a few here and there, but that's it.
I mean developing a certain detachment, disregard or dislike towards the newer U2 material. That happened a lot in 2000 and believe me, LOTS of fans are still stuck in 1999 and have been unable to enjoy anything after Pop. We all know many of them. If The Best Thing is a harbinger of the general album's style, I'm afraid SOE might be a similar turning point for many, many of us. Originally posted by cesar_garza01:[..]
Little Things or Best Thing?
Originally posted by ahn1991:People are acting like U2 are the first major band to undergo some sort of drastic change in musical direction (it's not that drastic, by the way). If you look at the band's perspective, it really doesn't matter if fans leave so long as new ones come. In fact, the fans don't even matter so long as the band is happy with what they are producing.
Take Coldplay as an example. There are Old players who clearly stopped following the band when MX released, but that really didn't hamper their spirits. In fact, most of their interviews suggest the band feels more artistically free now than they did before. People are obviously entitled to disagree, but as far as Coldplay is concerned those people are on the outside looking in.
People shouldn't be worried about U2 if they decide to change direction because new fans will quickly fill your place when you leave. When the stadiums are half full and they can't sell 8 days of MSG anymore, then it's time to get worried. Also ironic is the idea that the band shouldn't cater to popular trends, just to the tastes of a self-proclaimed elite group of diehard fans. How about the band does what they want and if you don't like it, there's the door?
Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
If you think they have the same ability to regenerate their fanbase that they had in 1991 or in 2001 then you're definitely out of the loop.
PS. Please don't mention the Wanker Band in this sacred thread again
Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]
Hahaha you beat me to it.
What happened with Coldplay is EXACTLY what I don't want to see happen with U2 at this point in their career. It's a completely different situation, but at the same time, not so much.
And Sergio is right, it's not just on U2Start, I've seen a TON of comments on more recent U2 videos or on Pop-era videos of people saying "last time U2 was good", etc - in regards to pre-2000.
Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
I'd say it's actually mostly out of U2start. We are a bit on the 2000-positive side of the fanbase. But oh man you should see the mob of Spanish U2 fans that are absolutely stuck in Johannesburgh '98 and hate everything, everything, every little thing the band has done since then. And I'm not talking about a small couple of half arsed fans. I'm talking about dozens and dozens of hardcore fans that consider everything post-Pop like shit.
Similar to what happened in 1991, when they lost thousands of fans in their cowboy hats and leather vests, absolutely alienated in their Joshua Tree & Rattle And Hum obsessions, that couldn't proccess Achtung Baby's sonic madness. (Many of them returned when the bunch described above left, btw).
