Author Topic: U2 are Over!  (Read 15765 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tumbling Dice

  • Drowning Man/Woman
  • ***
  • Posts: 22,131
  • I won't pay the usual fee
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #15 on: March 26, 2011, 07:42:25 PM »


U2 are not over by any means.

U2 have not been a full time working band since the end of Zoo TV.

I don't think their side-projects affect U2's productivity.  (unless one assumes that without their side-projects the members of U2 would spend their off time working on specifically U2 projects.  I don't.)

I think we have to separate their future in terms of their concert tours and their studio albums.  Yes, they will keep touring because that's where the lion's share of their future income stream is; and yes, I think they will continue recording and releasing albums at a rate of one every four years or so, which for a band of their age seems reasonable to me.

Their future concert tours will be playing largely back catalogue tours with lots of hits and a few new songs thrown in, much like Vertigo and 360.  They will probably sound the same as they have done on 360, Vertigo, and Elevation, because like the Stones they have now firmly established their live sound.  They will continue to sell out venues which on future tours are likely to be arenas or a mixture of arenas and stadiums.  I doubt they will ever put together another Zoo TV or PopMart type show ever again.

Their future albums will (I hope) be focussed on making more original and innovative sounding music like much of NLOTH, and the band will be less concerned with commerciality because they know the day of mega album sales are well and truly over.  The Crazy/Boots/SUC trio on NLOTH was the last throw of the dice and they lost.  

I don't think that we'll ever see another Achtung Baby, Joshua Tree or Zooropa quality album ever again but they'll be good enough to keep their fans reasonably happy.
For those who hark back to the golden age- nobody can take their back catalogue away from you.

« Last Edit: March 26, 2011, 08:09:01 PM by Tumbling Dice »

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #16 on: March 26, 2011, 08:13:22 PM »
Many glorify U2's past and talk about it as if it were a precedent for things to come from the band.

But you have to realize this:

-U2 are not as young as before, they are all past 50, are no longer hungry and are financially stable.

-The music industry has changed dramatically over the past decade.

When you add those two elements together, you will more or less figure out that it is over for all intents and purposes for U2.  That is why it is more important for them to be plotting their graceful exit.

Cheers,

J

Offline Tumbling Dice

  • Drowning Man/Woman
  • ***
  • Posts: 22,131
  • I won't pay the usual fee
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #17 on: March 26, 2011, 08:18:26 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Many glorify U2's past and talk about it as if it were a precedent for things to come from the band.

So you wished they retired after Pop, then?

If that had happened you would have been deprived of your beloved ATYCLB.

If they had retired after HTDAAB, I would have been deprived of NLOTH- my 6th favourite U2 album.


« Last Edit: March 26, 2011, 08:27:53 PM by Tumbling Dice »

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #18 on: March 26, 2011, 09:04:49 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Many glorify U2's past and talk about it as if it were a precedent for things to come from the band.

So you wished they retired after Pop, then?

If that had happened you would have been deprived of your beloved ATYCLB.

If they had retired after HTDAAB, I would have been deprived of NLOTH- my 6th favourite U2 album.




Pretty generous there.  NLOTH is my 12th favourite U2 album.

I think with the music industry now, the days of making a real "album" are over.  With the short attention span of the music listening public, they all want singles and no albums to be listened to from start to finish anymore.

Unless U2 will go and take this path, they are virtually over for all intents and purposes.

Cheers,

J


Offline Tumbling Dice

  • Drowning Man/Woman
  • ***
  • Posts: 22,131
  • I won't pay the usual fee
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #19 on: March 26, 2011, 09:58:41 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Many glorify U2's past and talk about it as if it were a precedent for things to come from the band.

So you wished they retired after Pop, then?

If that had happened you would have been deprived of your beloved ATYCLB.

If they had retired after HTDAAB, I would have been deprived of NLOTH- my 6th favourite U2 album.






I think with the music industry now, the days of making a real "album" are over.  With the short attention span of the music listening public, they all want singles and no albums to be listened to from start to finish anymore.




Nobody seems to be telling that to all the artists who keep on releasing albums such as R.E.M or Radiohead, among many many others.


hurricane hugo

  • Guest
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2011, 10:40:23 PM »
U2 are OVER




in South America right now rockin' like bastards!

#@!

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #21 on: March 26, 2011, 10:47:17 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Nobody seems to be telling that to all the artists who keep on releasing albums such as R.E.M or Radiohead, among many many others.



REM and Radiohead are precisely the "has-beens" U2 are trying to avoid becoming.  They release albums with little fanfare, no one caring, little sales, and they would be lucky to even fill an arena at their prices.  If they charge U2 ticket prices, no one would even bother.  These are acts who used to be U2's peers but have gone on to irrelevance.

U2 have still managed to have a decent debut for NLOTH and are embarking on the biggest stadium tour in history now.  Apples and oranges.  To compare U2 to these "has-been" artists is an insult to them.  That is precisely why U2 probably will never release an album anytime in the near future.  They need to carefully plot their marketing, distribution, and selling methods to ensure they still are within their high standards and parameters.  They will never stoop down to the level of the two artists you just mentioned.

Cheers,

J

Offline The Exile

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,245
  • It's all ball bearings nowadays.
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #22 on: March 26, 2011, 11:50:19 PM »
Just to set the record straight, I didn't "pull rank" on UC, I just wanted to point out that a 20 year-old fan isn't really able to see with the same perspective as someone who has been following the band for more than 20 years. I enjoy hearing from the younger fans, but I do get cranky when I sense that they appear dismissive of the vantage point from which some of us can see things (and I am much younger than a lot of the veterans here).

That said, UC is a good bloke, and when we clash he's certainly a worthy opponent!
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 12:04:04 AM by The Exile »

An Cat Dubh

  • Guest
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2011, 12:58:55 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Nobody seems to be telling that to all the artists who keep on releasing albums such as R.E.M or Radiohead, among many many others.



REM and Radiohead are precisely the "has-beens" U2 are trying to avoid becoming.  They release albums with little fanfare, no one caring, little sales, and they would be lucky to even fill an arena at their prices.  If they charge U2 ticket prices, no one would even bother.  These are acts who used to be U2's peers but have gone on to irrelevance.

U2 have still managed to have a decent debut for NLOTH and are embarking on the biggest stadium tour in history now.  Apples and oranges.  To compare U2 to these "has-been" artists is an insult to them.  That is precisely why U2 probably will never release an album anytime in the near future.  They need to carefully plot their marketing, distribution, and selling methods to ensure they still are within their high standards and parameters.  They will never stoop down to the level of the two artists you just mentioned.

Cheers,

J

This coming from someone who regards his favorite artist, Justin Bieber, as an artist who's career is mirroring that of U2.

Jick my friend, REM and Radiohead are not has-beens, and U2 regard both bands EXTREMELY highly. I know this for a fact, because when I met Bono I discussed these 2 artists with him as I am a big fan of both of them! Right now, I'm sure U2 would like to be where Radiohead and REM are at, able to record exciting new albums and release them quickly.

Offline lasteno

  • Stranger in a Strange Land
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #24 on: March 27, 2011, 01:24:26 AM »
I agree 100% sice 2000 U2 is gone no more experimental sounds...  they are making more money than they did before 1999
I think that's the only reason that is keeping u2 toguether MONEYˇˇˇˇ

u2 360 is so boring it doesn't has a concept at allˇ it's like a circus but worst ...
Staring with beatifull day???? jajajaja it's so ridiculousˇˇˇ  sorry about my english I'm from mexico..... anyway

Bono Once said If we make 3 bad albums we are out.... well bono.... this is itˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇ

the last good thing they did risking their "everything" was POP 1997 after that everything is B.S....
money money more moneyˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇˇ

I'm going to the 360 shows in mexico city ... And I'm gonna take a flag that says "U2 PLEASE PLEASE RETIRED" ...

Offline happyme

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 309
  • Wow sexy & friends rocked sydney 13&14 2010
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2011, 03:45:42 AM »
Really ( i know I'm going to cop it but) alot of u people seam nuts you call your self fans of u2 but then spend a lot of your time bagging them out.yes it Is frustrating about the albums & it is doing all our heads in,& yes thay Are getting older. (but aren't we all?) I agree thay take to long but as others have said at least their not like has beens Rem & that Radiohead were never that much of a big thing in oz(maybe 4 a little while but not now), at least there not acdc who just keep releasing the same album with a few new words every now & again then tour doing the same songs since the 80's & looking half dead.I love u2 no matter what & will continue to wait impatonaly, cause unlike a lot of you as here in oz have no live shows to look forward 2, we have a few years wait at best at least u get news were lucky to get any thing,I think that's why there so wormly received when they get here cause we know it will be along wait till that come back.that's just my opinion.be happy u don't have major has beens Bon jovi forced down your throat that's all we seam to be getting at the moment thay Are even do the ads for our national football Wich is very annoying (& there so ugly & taltent less)

Offline The Unknown Caller

  • Holy Joe
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,894
  • TORIIIIIINOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2011, 04:06:07 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
E-Bow, you're a funny and obviously a passionate U2 fan.  I commend you.  I'm not sure it's entirely fair for Exile to pull rank on you as an (older) U2 fan, but at the same time he raises a good point.

There are some of us fans who, because we are +/- five or so years apart from the ages of most of the members of the band, were "there" right from the start.  Because of this, our "U2 experience" is obviously much different than fans born in later years.

The problem I have with this thesis, Professor, is really this one; while I hate doing this because it feels like trying to 'pull rank' on someone else's behalf, part of the reason that I'm a huge U2 fan i because my parents are. And my dad saw U2 in Dublin in 1978 when they were nobodies playing support for other nobodies, from tiny venue to tiny cramped venue- and including their famous first 'big' gig at The Stadium in Dublin. He's seen them every tour ever since, gotten every album- so his 'U2 experience' is greater even than that of 99% of U2 fans, greater even than those who have been there since Boy.  And he doesn't remotely share the sentiments of most people - including of the Exile and yourself- on this forum. His favourite songs are I Will Follow, 11 O'Clock Tick Tock and Bad, and he was disappointed to see them *not* play those- even though two of them are the much derided 'greatest hits' we hear so much about. And he had hoped for an album soon but is fine with not getting one, since we're still probably getting one faster than normal.

And to be honest, I think he's probably much more typical of long-term U2 fans than people on this forum. I think the vast majority of U2's oldest fans, of their most devoted fans, for that matter, probably don't go on forums and talk about them- or at least not much. I've spoken to lots of people in GA lines, too, who have been fans of U2 for decades, but have never felt the need to subscribe to a forum. People who have gone to dozens of concerts and want to see them play 'Beautiful Day' again because it's their favourite, or who think the 360 tour is better than, say, the ZooTV Tour, or whatever. I think that this false notion that because a lot of people on some forums want it, it MUST represent U2 fans, or even the hardcore of U2 fans, is a bit self-important of us. And the notion that 'I've seen more U2 concerts, so I better understand U2' or 'I've seen more tours, so I know U2 better'- or anything like that- is just attempts by people to make their own opinions seem more legitimate- much as mine may well be by invoking my dad. But I really don't think that The Exile is typical of most- or even many- of U2's most devoted fans. (Sorry Exile, I respect you a lot and like you despite our disagreements!) But that's okay- I know I'm not either, and neither are you, or satellitedog, or my dad, for that matter. We try and dress it up in high-minded arguments and try to present our opinions as based in evidence and fact, but ultimately, it's the simplest thing ever; we all want U2 to make lots of music that we like, and play lots of music that we like. And that's FAR more important than our individual 'U2 experience' or 'flexible setlists' or anything like that.

Quote
Anyway, E-Bow, while I commend your passion for the band, I think that YOU miss some key points that others are making on all of these threads, and it's simply this: U2 doesn't seem to be embracing its own spirit of "U2-ness" these days.

Well, I didn't really *want* to start this debate here, to be honest. I think this is a very important and worthy discussion, but it's happening on lots of threads across the forum. What I was doing on this thread wasn't mocking the people with real, legitimate concerns here like The Exile- of which there are many - but satirising some of what I consider to be incredibly overblown hyperbole about something which isn't really all that surprising or new. It was intended to be alight break from the intensity around here these days, not the cause of more!

Quote

One thing I'm curious about: how do you have so much time to participate in what seems to be EVERY forum thread on @U2?  You should be writing your own novels and making your own music instead (or at least in addition) instead of just spending time reading what others wrote about a band who has already had many years in the spotlight.

  

Don't worry, I'm doing plenty of other stuff as well!  :D I've just had a LOT of time this week having not been all that active here for a while and I'm making up for it! But I'm flattered by that- and also, incidentally, want to thank you. That was a much more thoughtful and interesting post than many here- and most posts here are already very thoughtful AND interesting so that's very high praise!
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 07:02:50 AM by E-Bow The Unknown Caller »

Offline boom boom

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,195
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2011, 07:21:10 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Many glorify U2's past and talk about it as if it were a precedent for things to come from the band.

So you wished they retired after Pop, then?

If that had happened you would have been deprived of your beloved ATYCLB.

If they had retired after HTDAAB, I would have been deprived of NLOTH- my 6th favourite U2 album.





Pretty generous there.  NLOTH is my 12th favourite U2 album.

I think with the music industry now, the days of making a real "album" are over.  With the short attention span of the music listening public, they all want singles and no albums to be listened to from start to finish anymore.

Unless U2 will go and take this path, they are virtually over for all intents and purposes.

Cheers,

J



Wow, 12th favorite?  I'm a hardcore fan who got into U2 in the early 80's and first got to see them live in '84-UF Tour and seen every tour since, multiple times.   I think NLOTH is easily top 5(AB,JT,UF,War,NLOTH).  Easily better than at least POP and Zooropa.  As for making albums,  U2 are in a no win situation just because of the stage in their career they are in.   No matter what they do they will be criticized by critics and fans.  If they try to do something more experimental, people will just say it's sounds like AB or POP and they trying to compete and sound like some of these younger new bands.  A band who have been around for as long as they have will eventually start to sound like themselves and there is nothing wrong with that.  U2 should do what they want to and not what they think the public wants them to make.  If they want to experiment go for it or if they want to make an album of just straight up rock tunes like elevation and vertigo, go for it, because like you said the days of the "album" are over.  It's the era of hit singles and if  U2 want to try to make an album with singles, which I think is the direction they are heading as stated in past interviews by Bono, well that's okay with me too.  I like when U2 experiments but I also like the straight up rock tunes also like Vertigo, Elevation, ABY, SUC.  But it's safe to say, they are far from over.

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2011, 09:24:04 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

This coming from someone who regards his favorite artist, Justin Bieber, as an artist who's career is mirroring that of U2.

Jick my friend, REM and Radiohead are not has-beens, and U2 regard both bands EXTREMELY highly. I know this for a fact, because when I met Bono I discussed these 2 artists with him as I am a big fan of both of them! Right now, I'm sure U2 would like to be where Radiohead and REM are at, able to record exciting new albums and release them quickly.

I never made declarations of Justin Bieber being my favorite artist. 

REM and Radiohead are has-beens.  Just because U2's opinion of them is high - that doesn't mean they still have clout, influence, or relevance in the music industry.  U2 still do have theirs but slowly slipping and fading.

So in summary, yes U2 are over and its time for them to plot a graceful exit without cheapening the brand they have built over the years or tarnishing their legacy.

Cheers,

J

satellitedog01

  • Guest
Re: U2 are Over!
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2011, 09:47:29 AM »
I'm sorry, but I think U2 deliberately position themselves outside of the current rock music scene, so they cannot be compared to any trends and bands, to avoid criticism and thus be labelled living legends instead of has beens. To be honest, Radiohead's artistic and career-building influence on other bands is likely much greater than that of U2, whether one likes their music or not.

REM are truly has beens commercially, but that is only because they took the chance when the pop-savvy and minded Bill Berry left to explore some new ideas. They refused to become what U2 have (creating classic sounding records for 3 more albums). They did not want to shackle themselves to hit singles, world tours and constantly comparing sizes with peers. I don't think they stand a chance anymore, or that their last three albums are game changing or career defining,  but they did what THEY wanted to do.

U2 probably did what the brand demanded them to do, and that was not measured in creativity and free musical expression, but their supposed mastery of pop songwriting. That didn't work out as well as they hoped, so I'm eager to hear where they go from here. They might even give up some more of the U2 sound to chase chart success. I'm waiting...