U2start.com | E&I Tour - General topic

Originally posted by MoFoNYR15:[..]
Is this a joke? I can’t say that I feel u2 rushed this tour and because of that, the us and the beginning of Europe got the shaft setlist wise? What a condescending remark you made.

I remember a while ago you said something like you deserve money back because of setlists in US were shitty and second part of Europe gets better songs... that's why I said that. Btw. I was on two US shows (New Jersey and NY3) and those were great

RattleandHum1988

6 years

Just because I can't help jumping into a debate:

I saw the current tour in June in Montreal. If I had known how much of the setlist and production was the same from the 2015 shows - I wouldn't have bought a ticket. You could argue this is my own fault as I chose to go in blind, but...is it? Wouldn't U2 prefer that I do that? Why should I be informed to the point of being spoiled on a show to make a fair decision as a customer?

I'm super happy that they've changed the setlist now, and I'm super happy for those that get to see it, but yeah - I'm disappointed it wasn't like this when I saw them - but this is different from people getting disappointed in a setlist changing over the course of a tour.

Why? Because when U2 go out on a NEW tour and promise that it'll be "the same stage, but the experience show instead" - I'm expecting a change like what we're seeing in the setlists now. The shows back in June were kinda bullshit (for those that already paid to see the Innocence show) in that they were very similar, and while I'm not asking for my money back or anything, I wouldn't have hesitated at that time to tell U2 it was crappy of them to do that - to not change the setlist much at all, and to use the stage/screen the same way for so many of the songs as they had already done.

In my opinion, it did feel rushed, it did feel lazy, and there should have been more time taken to create a different show. The show as it is now (or as it's becoming as it still seems to be developing which is awesome) should have been the show that STARTED earlier this year. Guaranteed if this was the case, and if by now in Europe they were playing Pop tunes, people wouldn't be angry they weren't getting to see them. Sure they'd be sad they didn't get to hear them, but there's a difference between that and feeling like you were conned into paying to see a show you had already seen two years ago.

Now, some have made it clear they were perfectly happy with that, but enough people around here and who I personally know who saw both shows (and these people aren't setlist-grubbers, they're casual fans at best) were pretty disappointed about it.

Willie mentioned that U2 don't want any of the same songs in this DVD (being filmed at the END of the tour) as was on the Paris DVD. That should have been the mindset in creating this show from the beginning. Especially because they used the exact same stage setup.

CMIPalaeo

6 years

I can understand people being bothered by the similarity in setlist (I’m not that bothered by it, but that’s not the point here) but I don’t buy for a second that it was rushed. The innocence section was part of the rehearsals from the beginning - they clearly intended to maintain that narrative, and rearranged Iris, so they were definitely putting thought into it. U2 move in mysterious ways as we all know, so it’s anyones guess why they’ve changed the setlist now but I reckon it’s really just because they felt like it. I don’t think it has a thing to do with them being rushed to start the tour - if that was the case, why not change it during the pre-Europe break? Europe has more overlap in cities between 2015 and 2018 than America anyway. I think this is a case of U2 just feeling the spirit take them to do something different.

Additionally, the near-end changes make me suspect a brief jaunt through Australasia might be in order... a dozen or so more shows surely wouldn’t be that much more trouble, surely..?

deanallison

6 years

I’m not being critical but I really am trying to understand the logic behind people saying it was rushed. Any reason to suggest they couldn’t have done what they are doing now at the start of the tour if they had wished. Maybe the Setlist did seem deceptively lazy to some at the beginning of the tour but I agree with above that a lot of thought will have went into it. The songs they dropped hadn’t been played a lot in the grand scheme of things barring UTEOTW which they’d even worked on an arrangement closer to the album version. They were playing loads of new songs, a never before played song, SATS which hadn’t appeared at a tour show for a long time. Worked out an arrangement to desire when it could have easily been played acoustically again, a new arrangement of pride and iris also. All that doesn’t mean you’re going to like the show more but it also means the band did put the work in.

Blue_Room

6 years

Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:Just because I can't help jumping into a debate:

I saw the current tour in June in Montreal. If I had known how much of the setlist and production was the same from the 2015 shows - I wouldn't have bought a ticket. You could argue this is my own fault as I chose to go in blind, but...is it? Wouldn't U2 prefer that I do that? Why should I be informed to the point of being spoiled on a show to make a fair decision as a customer?

I'm super happy that they've changed the setlist now, and I'm super happy for those that get to see it, but yeah - I'm disappointed it wasn't like this when I saw them - but this is different from people getting disappointed in a setlist changing over the course of a tour.

Why? Because when U2 go out on a NEW tour and promise that it'll be "the same stage, but the experience show instead" - I'm expecting a change like what we're seeing in the setlists now. The shows back in June were kinda bullshit (for those that already paid to see the Innocence show) in that they were very similar, and while I'm not asking for my money back or anything, I wouldn't have hesitated at that time to tell U2 it was crappy of them to do that - to not change the setlist much at all, and to use the stage/screen the same way for so many of the songs as they had already done.

In my opinion, it did feel rushed, it did feel lazy, and there should have been more time taken to create a different show. The show as it is now (or as it's becoming as it still seems to be developing which is awesome) should have been the show that STARTED earlier this year. Guaranteed if this was the case, and if by now in Europe they were playing Pop tunes, people wouldn't be angry they weren't getting to see them. Sure they'd be sad they didn't get to hear them, but there's a difference between that and feeling like you were conned into paying to see a show you had already seen two years ago.

Now, some have made it clear they were perfectly happy with that, but enough people around here and who I personally know who saw both shows (and these people aren't setlist-grubbers, they're casual fans at best) were pretty disappointed about it.

Willie mentioned that U2 don't want any of the same songs in this DVD (being filmed at the END of the tour) as was on the Paris DVD. That should have been the mindset in creating this show from the beginning. Especially because they used the exact same stage setup.

They were not rushed and I have not heard anything even resembling that from anyone within the crew or organization. That type of info would typically leak out or be implied by someone that would be in the know. Not the case and never even implied by anyone other than "fans" that I'm aware of anyway.

Just because you did not like the setlist or what they did, does not make it rushed. I understand if you did not care for it, but to say it was rushed because of that is not correct.

U2's mindset? Again, understand you did not like it, but to say they should change their art because you did not like the original is ridiculous. Willie's comment was just what we were talking about. Each tour evolves based on the flow and what U2 are feeling. That is what has happened as it normally does.

Hell, I like the new changes but I do not think the entire setlist is better than the N. American leg. Saying you wanted your money back is odd coming from a U2 fan. You got to see one of the greatest if not the greatest rock bands in the world, possibly on one of their last tours and you are bitching about it wanting money back. Really???? Ask the Australian's how they feel about that.

Alvin

6 years

Originally posted by Blue_Room:
Hell, I like the new changes but I do not think the entire setlist is better than the N. American leg. Saying you wanted your money back is odd coming from a U2 fan. You got to see one of the greatest if not the greatest rock bands in the world, possibly on one of their last tours and you are bitching about it wanting money back. Really???? Ask the Australian's how they feel about that.

This...

peatiedog

6 years

I am hoping for DIRTY DAY!!!!!! COMe on guys!!!

u2joost

6 years

Originally posted by peatiedog:I am hoping for DIRTY DAY!!!!!! COMe on guys!!!

Dublin!

popmarter

6 years

Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:Just because I can't help jumping into a debate:

I saw the current tour in June in Montreal. If I had known how much of the setlist and production was the same from the 2015 shows - I wouldn't have bought a ticket. You could argue this is my own fault as I chose to go in blind, but...is it? Wouldn't U2 prefer that I do that? Why should I be informed to the point of being spoiled on a show to make a fair decision as a customer?

I'm super happy that they've changed the setlist now, and I'm super happy for those that get to see it, but yeah - I'm disappointed it wasn't like this when I saw them - but this is different from people getting disappointed in a setlist changing over the course of a tour.

Why? Because when U2 go out on a NEW tour and promise that it'll be "the same stage, but the experience show instead" - I'm expecting a change like what we're seeing in the setlists now. The shows back in June were kinda bullshit (for those that already paid to see the Innocence show) in that they were very similar, and while I'm not asking for my money back or anything, I wouldn't have hesitated at that time to tell U2 it was crappy of them to do that - to not change the setlist much at all, and to use the stage/screen the same way for so many of the songs as they had already done.

In my opinion, it did feel rushed, it did feel lazy, and there should have been more time taken to create a different show. The show as it is now (or as it's becoming as it still seems to be developing which is awesome) should have been the show that STARTED earlier this year. Guaranteed if this was the case, and if by now in Europe they were playing Pop tunes, people wouldn't be angry they weren't getting to see them. Sure they'd be sad they didn't get to hear them, but there's a difference between that and feeling like you were conned into paying to see a show you had already seen two years ago.

Now, some have made it clear they were perfectly happy with that, but enough people around here and who I personally know who saw both shows (and these people aren't setlist-grubbers, they're casual fans at best) were pretty disappointed about it.

Willie mentioned that U2 don't want any of the same songs in this DVD (being filmed at the END of the tour) as was on the Paris DVD. That should have been the mindset in creating this show from the beginning. Especially because they used the exact same stage setup.

They shouldn't have played the US at all on this tour they've overplayed that market over the last few years Eastern Europe and Aus,NZ should have been toured instead.Everyone knew what they were buying a ticket for the tour was part 2 of I&E they didn't pretend otherwise the people moaning about the U.S. setlist sound like a bunch of jealous kids at Christmas who weren't satisfied with their lot when they saw what their mates got.