U2 DISCUSSION 2009 will they succeed or fail?

[C DUB YA]

Lots of options when you go to buy No Line on the Horizon today.

Ranging from 8.99 to 64.99

double gatefold vinyl was 18.99

[C DUB YA]

Night 2 of letterman

[C DUB YA]

[tootufftoo]

U2 is so bad, i mean hopefully this record proves its time to put it to rest.

[C DUB YA]

U2 is so bad, i mean hopefully this record proves its time to put it to rest.

You're a fucking retard. Go back to hugging your Times New Viking cd's.

[lickety_spit]

given "how to dismantle an atomic bomb," it will be their second fail this decade.

[C DUB YA]

just because every record isn't the fucking Joshua Tree doesn't mean it's a "fail" (I hate that fucking word)

god forbid they make a record that you have to listen to front to back in this day and age of the 10 second streaming review.

If U2 is not your cup of tea - I can buy that, but this crap of they are over, or they should stop making music or they are simply "so bad" - utter bullshit.

[TeamCoachellaHellYeah]

I love U2...and I put it to my wife this way....if the Killers or whoever made a record like this people would have said..."say this isn't that bad!" but because it is U2 and because they made records like Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby...their standards are very high....I think the new record is a disaster..but only for the reasons I mentioned...it isn't a bad record...I actually like Get Your Boots...but for U2 it sucks....that being said...I remember when Pop came out and everyone said it sucked....Pop is probably my 2nd favorite U2 album...

[C DUB YA]

Yeah Pop has aged pretty darn well over the years for me.

again - no Joshua Tree - but few things are.

[lickety_spit]

hey, "fail" was one of two options in the title, and i wasn't going to opt for "succeed." (even though U2 will always be successful whether they deserve it or not simply because they are U2)
for me, war was where it was at. everything else was just kind of like, "yeah, okay." (with the exception of a few songs)
and, yes. i know i wasn't even alive when war came out, but having a teenager for a mother guarantees you overexposure to popular music of your birth decade... during that decade AND FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.
i'm not going to say U2 are bad. they've given some of the greatest songs of all time. all i'm saying is they aren't giving them anymore. i didn't think songs came any more terrible than "vertigo." then i saw them perform "get on your boots" i don't even know where, i wanted to forget. it's the same song with worse lyrics.
you're probably thinking i should give the album a chance, but if that's the crap they put out as a first impression TWICE, they don't deserve to be taken a chance on.
oh, and what THEEEE fuck was with that "one" collaboration with mary j. blige? i love "one," and i even like old mary j. blige, but my god. i shit. i just shit.

[PotVsKtl]

just because every record isn't the fucking Joshua Tree doesn't mean it's a "fail" (I hate that fucking word)

god forbid they make a record that you have to listen to front to back in this day and age of the 10 second streaming review.

If U2 is not your cup of tea - I can buy that, but this crap of they are over, or they should stop making music or they are simply "so bad" - utter bullshit.

Look at how mad you're getting.

[C DUB YA]

Not mad - just saying it's bullshit.

Half the people spoutin off haven't even listened to the record anyways.

[C DUB YA]

hey, "fail" was one of two options in the title, and i wasn't going to opt for "succeed." (even though U2 will always be successful whether they deserve it or not simply because they are U2)
for me, war was where it was at. everything else was just kind of like, "yeah, okay." (with the exception of a few songs)
and, yes. i know i wasn't even alive when war came out, but having a teenager for a mother guarantees you overexposure to popular music of your birth decade... during that decade AND FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.
i'm not going to say U2 are bad. they've given some of the greatest songs of all time. all i'm saying is they aren't giving them anymore. i didn't think songs came any more terrible than "vertigo." then i saw them perform "get on your boots" i don't even know where, i wanted to forget. it's the same song with worse lyrics.
you're probably thinking i should give the album a chance, but if that's the crap they put out as a first impression TWICE, they don't deserve to be taken a chance on.
oh, and what THEEEE fuck was with that "one" collaboration with mary j. blige? i love "one," and i even like old mary j. blige, but my god. i shit. i just shit.

So according to you - your "fail" is based on Vertigo and Boots?

War is good record - but to say they fail based on 2 lead singles from ok to good records from them - is a quick undeserving judgement imo.

This is what I was talking about.

[PotVsKtl]

It's not bullshit to point out U2 have been making boring rehashed music for years.

[C DUB YA]

It's not bullshit to point out U2 have been making boring rehashed music for years.

it is bullshit to say they are bad, period.

that's what I was talking about.

Hey I find Asobi Seksu boring - but that doesn't mean they are bad.

[lickety_spit]

So according to you - your "fail" is based on Vertigo and Boots?

War is good record - but to say they fail based on 2 lead singles from ok to good records from them - is a quick undeserving judgement imo.

This is what I was talking about.

I'M saying they should stop putting out shit singles if they want to be taken seriously. if you mean to tell me there are really decent tracks on "...atomic bomb" and this new record, then WHY DON'T THEY RELEASE THOSE SONGS AS SINGLES?
is it because the people want catchy? dancey? mindless?
you *know what that smells like...

[scoop49er]

1980-1989: u2 was one of the most powerful bands in the history of rock and roll. if you watch any of those shows back in that day on vhs or dvd or any bootleg: paris 1987, red rocks 1983, they were powerful, emotional, and amazing live.

u2 from the 80's would hate the u2 of the present....

i would go see u2 now like i will go to see def leppard. nostalgia reasons and to hear the past, cuz their present sucks.

[C DUB YA]

I'M saying they should stop putting out shit singles if they want to be taken seriously. if you mean to tell me there are really decent tracks on "...atomic bomb" and this new record, then WHY DON'T THEY RELEASE THOSE SONGS AS SINGLES?
is it because the people want catchy? dancey? mindless?
you *know what that smells like...

Because not every band is a "singles" band. In fact it's hard to be that when you have Eno working on your shit.

Just because a song is a single doesn't mean it's good. if you can't get past a single then you'll end up with a shitty record collection.

Case in point...
Zooropa. Lemon and Numb are kinda shitty in the context of that ALBUM as a whole. Guess what, those were the lead singles. Songs like Stay, Zooropa, and The First Time are far, far better.

Want another example? Okey dokey...
Take Rattle and Hum - Desire was the lead single and while that's hardly a bad one - tracks like All I Want is You, God Part II, Silver and Gold, Heartland all top it with ease in my book.

another? alrighty!
All that You Can't Leave Behind had Beautiful Day as a lead single - again not a bad single at all, but that record has a lot (ton) more to offer than everybody's mom's favorite U2 song. Stuck in a Moment You Can't Get Out Of, Elevation, Walk On, and Kite are waaaaay superior.

To bring things into the here and now...
How about No Line on the Horizon - to me, Boots is just ok, hardly as bad as the blogger world wants to label it, BUT, Cedars of Lebanon, Snow and Magnificent are far far better.

[C DUB YA]

i would go see u2 now like i will go to see def leppard. nostalgia reasons and to hear the past, cuz their present sucks.

Now you are just being silly.

[TeamCoachellaHellYeah]

Yeah Pop has aged pretty darn well over the years for me.

again - no Joshua Tree - but few things are.

Mofo is probably my favorite U2 song ever...

[lickety_spit]

Want another example? Okey dokey...
Take Rattle and Hum - Desire was the lead single and while that's hardly a bad one - tracks like All I Want is You, God Part II, Silver and Gold, Heartland all top it with ease in my book.

not that i don't want to stop discussing this, but if "desire" is hardly a bad song (agreed, i'd listen to "desire" a hundred times in a row before i'd listen to "vertigo" or "get on your boots"), then that album's not in the same category as the last two. it's true that there are albums with much better tracks than the big single, but we're talking about big singles that suck. "desire" was not disposable garbage that was forgotten 6-12 months after being released.

[C DUB YA]

Mofo is probably my favorite U2 song ever...

I like it - although it sticks out as an odd U2 song.

I lean more toward
If God Will Send His Angels, Gone, If You Wear That Velvet Dress, and Please

[TeamCoachellaHellYeah]

Miami is killer too....

[C DUB YA]

not that i don't want to stop discussing this, but if "desire" is hardly a bad song (agreed, i'd listen to "desire" a hundred times in a row before i'd listen to "vertigo" or "get on your boots"), then that album's not in the same category as the last two. it's true that there are albums with much better tracks than the big single, but we're talking about big singles that suck. "desire" was not disposable garbage that was forgotten 6-12 months after being released.

but you do see a problem with your reasoning i hope.

Listen to this - if you don't automatically like it more than Boots - then I'll shut up... and it's better on the album (longer)

[C DUB YA]

Miami is killer too....

yes

[C DUB YA]

oh, and what THEEEE fuck was with that "one" collaboration with mary j. blige? i love "one," and i even like old mary j. blige, but my god. i shit. i just shit.

It was done for charity.

[lickety_spit]

but you do see a problem with your reasoning i hope.

Listen to this - if you don't automatically like it more than Boots - then I'll shut up... and it's better on the album (longer)

for me, U2 is in the same vain as Aerosmith, Metallica, the Rolling Stones... in their prime, incomparable. now? very comparable.

i definitely liked that song more than "get on your boots," but it's not something i would even download illegally, let alone pay for. that song wouldn't make me want to immediately reach for the tuner on the fm dial, but it's not necessarily something i need, or even want, to hear again.

[lickety_spit]

It was done for charity.

must have been for NAD or Association for the Hearing Impaired.

[C DUB YA]

give it rest - you don't like them anymore - move on.

[ThomThom]

The new album is one of the worst albums I have heard in a few years.