Author Topic: U2 are for Teenagers  (Read 22459 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johnny Amsterdam

  • Desert Rose
  • **
  • Posts: 2,163
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #75 on: November 28, 2009, 05:00:06 AM »
Funny thing: I have the track flying form the E.T movie by spielberg playing on my Itunes. And what I remember of that movie that Spielberg wanted to make  childrens movie which actually resonated also to the adult moviegoers This was cause the movie itself was so damn good. same happend with star wars which was intended to be a childrens movie but adult liked it too.

But U2 are going the wrong way with this thinking children actually like get on your boots while there are better songs for teens to listen to these days most of these bands when tehy are serious are very dark and brooding. Just like us used to be.

Offline Aqua

  • Acrobat
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,454
  • adam for trlica 8^)
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #76 on: November 28, 2009, 05:26:43 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 actually want the teenagers.  They want them so bad is a sad sight to see.
Oh, hush.

If you hate U2 now, why are you still here?
I don't hate U2 dude. But how many time shave we heard from u2 that they want to resonate to the younger crowd. Why do you think they released Boots?
U2 want to appeal to a younger demographic because they don't want to be the Stones. One of your favorite bands is trying to be relevant- they aren't giving up and becoming a heritage act. I for one am proud of that.
IMO, Boots was the only song the initially thought would appeal to a younger audience. That song is not for young people. It is not a Pop song, nor is it easy to digest. It's gritty U2. I will say it again. U2 are not for teens.

Well U2 are not for teens? then why did I liked them when I was a teen? My older brothers and sisters liked them too and they weren't teens any more. because their music was good in the 80's (the latter half even better) and damn good in the 90's When I wasn't a teen anymore and they weren't even trying to connect to the teens but to the world in general. But this focus on teens is killing their creativity. it used to come naturally because trying to connect with teens wasn't in their vocabulary. Now that it is it feels waaaay to forced. and It gave Us Boots.
I think you're on to something in that it is killing their creativity and they are forcing it. I LOVE the past three albums, ATYCLB the most, but they did force the issue in Bomb and ATYCLB. I am a teen. But I look for different things than most in a song. U2 were never for teens, whether they tried to be or didn't.

Offline Johnny Amsterdam

  • Desert Rose
  • **
  • Posts: 2,163
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #77 on: November 28, 2009, 05:30:10 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
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
U2 actually want the teenagers.  They want them so bad is a sad sight to see.
Oh, hush.

If you hate U2 now, why are you still here?
I don't hate U2 dude. But how many time shave we heard from u2 that they want to resonate to the younger crowd. Why do you think they released Boots?
U2 want to appeal to a younger demographic because they don't want to be the Stones. One of your favorite bands is trying to be relevant- they aren't giving up and becoming a heritage act. I for one am proud of that.
IMO, Boots was the only song the initially thought would appeal to a younger audience. That song is not for young people. It is not a Pop song, nor is it easy to digest. It's gritty U2. I will say it again. U2 are not for teens.

Well U2 are not for teens? then why did I liked them when I was a teen? My older brothers and sisters liked them too and they weren't teens any more. because their music was good in the 80's (the latter half even better) and damn good in the 90's When I wasn't a teen anymore and they weren't even trying to connect to the teens but to the world in general. But this focus on teens is killing their creativity. it used to come naturally because trying to connect with teens wasn't in their vocabulary. Now that it is it feels waaaay to forced. and It gave Us Boots.
I think you're on to something in that it is killing their creativity and they are forcing it. I LOVE the past three albums, ATYCLB the most, but they did force the issue in Bomb and ATYCLB. I am a teen. But I look for different things than most in a song. U2 were never for teens, whether they tried to be or didn't.
When i was teen like 12 a lot of teens liked them but also an older generation loved them. So you're very right if you say that were never for teens They were making music for everybody. And It work very well. Till they tried to force connecting to teens.

Offline Aqua

  • Acrobat
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,454
  • adam for trlica 8^)
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #78 on: November 28, 2009, 05:38:48 AM »
They need to try harder to be popular amongst teens now because they are old. Back in the days of ZooTv U2 were young and as cool as they ever were. Teens were more attracted by that type of dynamic U2. U2 today is a lot less groundbreaking and a lot more old, and therefore teens that stray from straight out Pop won't find U2 like they did in the 90's.

Offline Trillian

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 122
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #79 on: November 28, 2009, 07:16:18 AM »
Quote
"But I can't see mature people or kids, who are looking for something, something deep -- something that you just know it's art and it's going to change your life -- caring.

Is that Ian calling U2 fans immature? He needs to take a look in the mirror some time. I got into U2 as a teenager about 6 years ago - in between ATYCLB and HTDAAB - but not because I was looking for throwaway pop songs, I was looking for the opposite. Of course there were songs on those albums that were universally liked, but I think that's where the mistake is made that well-liked = lowest common denominator music = immature = teenagers. Among Beautiful Day and Elevation you have songs like Kite, When I Look At The World, Peace on Earth; songs that in no way pander to the more 'immature' audiences Ian is suggesting. They still make music that all age groups can associate with, which is why they're still relevant among teenagers, those in their twenties, thirties and all across the board. You can see it when you attend a concert, seeing people from all walks of life and age groups in attendance. It's not difficult to see that Ian's jealous of this, and, as a result, their continued relevance in pop culture. I do agree Boots was a mis-step in terms of releasing it first, but I wouldn't call its existence a mistake. It, Crazy and Stand Up Comedy fit nicely to counterbalance the bleakness of White As Snow and Cedars of Lebanon with a joy that Bono has himself said can put people off their music. Whether it's Where The Streets Have No Name or I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight, though, to me it's as cherished a part of their music as the unflinching honesty of One or Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own and the grit of Acrobat or Gone. 

Offline Johnny Amsterdam

  • Desert Rose
  • **
  • Posts: 2,163
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #80 on: November 28, 2009, 12:27:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They need to try harder to be popular amongst teens now because they are old. Back in the days of ZooTv U2 were young and as cool as they ever were. Teens were more attracted by that type of dynamic U2. U2 today is a lot less groundbreaking and a lot more old, and therefore teens that stray from straight out Pop won't find U2 like they did in the 90's.
They can be groundbreaking if they want. They just need to make good music and go really deep again and don't worry so much about selling records. the moment they stop doing that they'll suddenly come of with something and by surprise sell a lot of records because it's good not because it sound commercially safe.

Offline Joe G (Love You Like Mad Magazine)

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,777
  • 2 souls 2 cool 2 B in the realm of certainty
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #81 on: November 28, 2009, 12:57:15 PM »
U2 doesn't have to play one more note of music ever and their legacy is secure. U2 could make an album with William Hung and the Jonas Brothers and their legacy is secure. U2 could stick up both middle fingers while mooning the crowd at Glastonbury and their legacy is secure. In other words, U2 doesn't have to, or need to, do a damn thing.  Even with a completely secure legacy, NLOTH and 360 challenged their audience to expand their perception of what U2 could accomplish both musically and theatrically. Some liked it, some hated it. Either way, U2 has earned their spot in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. U2 has earned all of their awards. U2 has broken concert attendance records time after time. Like Ian Mcculloch, the haters can find a way to deal with it. They always do.

Offline Johnny Amsterdam

  • Desert Rose
  • **
  • Posts: 2,163
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #82 on: November 28, 2009, 01:11:45 PM »
U2 needs to play the better songs from the 90's and before that if they want to kick butt at this festival. It's a great chance to show how good they can be. Bono should not preach a word cause that's what puts people off. And Adam should turn the volume of his base up to eleven.

Offline Aqua

  • Acrobat
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,454
  • adam for trlica 8^)
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #83 on: November 28, 2009, 06:27:59 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 needs to play the better songs from the 90's and before that if they want to kick butt at this festival. It's a great chance to show how good they can be. Bono should not preach a word cause that's what puts people off. And Adam should turn the volume of his base up to eleven.
I agree.

Offline Mr. T

  • Staring at the Sun
  • **
  • Posts: 1,277
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #84 on: November 28, 2009, 08:05:41 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
echo are musically better that U2.

No. That's simply wrong.

Offline TheFlyingLemon

  • Traffic Cop (Rue du Marais)
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,692
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #85 on: November 28, 2009, 10:58:09 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
"But I can't see mature people or kids, who are looking for something, something deep -- something that you just know it's art and it's going to change your life -- caring.

Is that Ian calling U2 fans immature? He needs to take a look in the mirror some time. I got into U2 as a teenager about 6 years ago - in between ATYCLB and HTDAAB - but not because I was looking for throwaway pop songs, I was looking for the opposite. Of course there were songs on those albums that were universally liked, but I think that's where the mistake is made that well-liked = lowest common denominator music = immature = teenagers. Among Beautiful Day and Elevation you have songs like Kite, When I Look At The World, Peace on Earth; songs that in no way pander to the more 'immature' audiences Ian is suggesting. They still make music that all age groups can associate with, which is why they're still relevant among teenagers, those in their twenties, thirties and all across the board. You can see it when you attend a concert, seeing people from all walks of life and age groups in attendance. It's not difficult to see that Ian's jealous of this, and, as a result, their continued relevance in pop culture. I do agree Boots was a mis-step in terms of releasing it first, but I wouldn't call its existence a mistake. It, Crazy and Stand Up Comedy fit nicely to counterbalance the bleakness of White As Snow and Cedars of Lebanon with a joy that Bono has himself said can put people off their music. Whether it's Where The Streets Have No Name or I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight, though, to me it's as cherished a part of their music as the unflinching honesty of One or Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own and the grit of Acrobat or Gone. 

Great post.

Offline Johnny Amsterdam

  • Desert Rose
  • **
  • Posts: 2,163
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #86 on: November 29, 2009, 03:06:45 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
echo are musically better that U2.

No. That's simply wrong.
No that's the truth. Just listen to the stuff Echo did in the 80's Ocean rain beats any of U2's 80's albums. It's that good.

deco20

  • Guest
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #87 on: November 29, 2009, 07:20:40 AM »
Ian, Ian, Ian...as much as I adore Echo, I really think you are a closet U2 fan.

To diss U2 that much means you listen to them that much and think of the witty remarks to discuss U2.

"u2 are for teenagers" Ian says while secretly humming Lemon...lol

Offline Dream Out Loud

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,554
  • I'm Wide Awake....I'm Not Sleeping
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #88 on: November 29, 2009, 08:31:38 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 doesn't have to play one more note of music ever and their legacy is secure. U2 could make an album with William Hung and the Jonas Brothers and their legacy is secure. U2 could stick up both middle fingers while mooning the crowd at Glastonbury and their legacy is secure. In other words, U2 doesn't have to, or need to, do a damn thing.  Even with a completely secure legacy, NLOTH and 360 challenged their audience to expand their perception of what U2 could accomplish both musically and theatrically. Some liked it, some hated it. Either way, U2 has earned their spot in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. U2 has earned all of their awards. U2 has broken concert attendance records time after time. Like Ian Mcculloch, the haters can find a way to deal with it. They always do.


i totally agree.  I also believe that Teenagers = Pop Music; and Pop Music = fleeting attention; pop music from 5 years ago is already out of fashion.  They day they even strive for the teen audience, let alone reel in the teen audience, is the day they put their interest in album sales over their interest in making good music. 

Offline dudette

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,451
Re: U2 are for Teenagers
« Reply #89 on: November 29, 2009, 10:51:26 AM »
Quote
U2 doesn't have to play one more note of music ever and their legacy is secure. U2 could make an album with William Hung and the Jonas Brothers and their legacy is secure. U2 could stick up both middle fingers while mooning the crowd at Glastonbury and their legacy is secure. In other words, U2 doesn't have to, or need to, do a damn thing.  Even with a completely secure legacy, NLOTH and 360 challenged their audience to expand their perception of what U2 could accomplish both musically and theatrically. Some liked it, some hated it. Either way, U2 has earned their spot in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. U2 has earned all of their awards. U2 has broken concert attendance records time after time. Like Ian Mcculloch, the haters can find a way to deal with it. They always do.

That is put so well. I am in awe.