U2: Rock stars or washed up old guys?

vetmed2012

Interested in the answers to the title of the thread...

P.S. How much would someone stick out as a tourist if they wore U2 tour shirts?

P.P.S. Who is absolutely psyched about them opening their new tour in Dublin March 2009?? (Just me?)

exiot

They put on a great live show, saw them on their Vertigo tour in Croke Park, not too keen on their new music though. The new album could be interesting with all the electronic sound they seem to have been going on about for the past while.

Ive seen them now so would probably never bother buying a ticket to one of their gigs again.

ShawnRaven

Rock stars, and legendary ones now at this stage. Regardless of what one thinks of Bono's political views, one member does not make a band. They still have it, Bono can still hit the notes he could 25 years ago (Evident in their last tour when he was still able to perform The Cry/The Electric co).

I do think it's time to pack it in for a bit. They're running out of ideas for good albums and coming out with mediocre ones instead. Incessant duets and bad cover versions aren't helping their case.

Saw them live at Slane in 2001, the second date (awesome show, ROI qualified for the World Cup that day to if i recall correctly), but am in no big hurry to see them again live. I've several live performances of theirs, but seen em once, seen em a hundred times at this stage.

(unless they're gonna perform The Unforgettable Fire album complete with b-sides etc, then i'll go!)

But they're about as Washed up as The Rolling Stones, and to no surprise, they're another band that still have it live too!

Mushy

For me, it just has to be: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=iSvEZdbBIyw&feature=related

I'm of the opinion they never had it. Have maybe a few decent tunes at most, but very over-rated musicians. Its funny how shocked some foreigners are when they hear of my hate for this band...they think everyone must love them. I tell them they getting mixed up with Thin Lizzy.

So in conclusion, they are nowhere near rock stars, but they not washed up, because, to take a quote from a song, "you ain't a has-been if you never was"

vetmed2012

i will admit that that video is funny, lol

Bubs101

ShawnRaven wrote: »

But they're about as Washed up as The Rolling Stones, and to no surprise, they're another band that still have it live too!

U2 aren't my type of band but this statement is ridiculous VR. McCartney and the Stones are washed up. When they release material nobody cares and when people go to see them they don't want to hear the new stuff. When U2 release new stuff they're all over the TV and they have post 2000 songs that people would be outraged if they didn't play (Vertigo, Beautiful Day, Stuck in a moment). They're old but not washed up

Xavi6

Been shite since 1991

Nolanger

Sad old men responsible for the dearth of successful Irish rock bands.
Wales and Scotland have many great new bands while just we have U2 who always were total sh*te.

Dave5

Mushy wrote: »

I'm of the opinion they never had it. Have maybe a few decent tunes at most, but very over-rated musicians.

Personally, i would listen to U2's music, but i wouldn't consider myself a big fan by any stretch of the imagination....

....but to say that U2 'never had it' have had a 'few decent tunes' and are 'over-rated musicians' is bull**** in my opinion. U2 have always had it, they've had a hell of a lot of bloody brilliant tunes, and they are deservedly-rated not over-rated.

Crikey, if you're looking for bands who are over-rated musicans, i've a list as long as my arm, you can start with the Artic Monkeys.

anonymous_joe

You don't get that popular by being overrated. They do what they do very well. Some of the more recent stuff isn't as good as their old stuff, but that doesn't make it bad.

Jessica4

Dave5 wrote: »

Personally, i would listen to U2's music, but i wouldn't consider myself a big fan by any stretch of the imagination....

....but to say that U2 'never had it' have had a 'few decent tunes' and are 'over-rated musicians' is bull**** in my opinion. U2 have always had it, they've had a hell of a lot of bloody brilliant tunes, and they are deservedly-rated not over-rated.

Crikey, if you're looking bands who are over-rated musicans, i've a list as long as my arm, you can start with the Artic Monkeys.

I'd agree with that.

It's amazing how many people are so jealous of U2's success that it manifests itself in slagging them off.

Some people have short memories and are mis-informed when it comes to U2's history. They've worked their way up since playing the ****ehole that was the Dandelion Market, back in the days they used to play to three people and a dog....some peoples ignorance of the band is astounding.

giddybootz

total rock GODS!!! I know its 'not cool' to be irish and love U2 but i don't care....i love them!!

only last night after coming back from pub my OH and myself were chatting about songs that are lyrically amazing....and i kept going "ooh you have to hear this U" song" and then another and then another! although my OH is not a big fan he can admit that there lyrics are clever and beautiful!

i think poor Bono is damned if he does and damned if he don't!! he may go on a bit but i think his heart is in the right place! i heart all four of them!! queued for 13 hours for a ticket last time and i'll do it again!!

Mushy

Dave5 wrote: »

Personally, i would listen to U2's music, but i wouldn't consider myself a big fan by any stretch of the imagination....

....but to say that U2 'never had it' have had a 'few decent tunes' and are 'over-rated musicians' is bull**** in my opinion. U2 have always had it, they've had a hell of a lot of bloody brilliant tunes, and they are deservedly-rated not over-rated.

Crikey, if you're looking bands who are over-rated musicans, i've a list as long as my arm, you can start with the Artic Monkeys.

Thats cool if its bull**** in your opinion, cos its mine that I think they over-rated etc.

I'm not looking for over-rated bands, I more think they find me cos they played everyday on the radio.

Matt3

Jessica4 wrote: »

It's amazing how many people are so jealous of U2's success that it manifests itself in slagging them off.

Some people have short memories and are mis-informed when it comes to U2's history.

100% correct...and you've hit the nail on the head with both points you make there.

Matt3

I GuanYin wrote: »

Been shite since 1991

This post is a perfect example of a posters ignorance regarding U2.

It's always easy to have a go off them, when you've no real knowledge of the band.

The mis-informed U2 haters are out there believe me, i can hear them itching to put the boot in, in this thread.:rolleyes:

Matt3

Nolanger wrote: »

Sad old men responsible for the dearth of successful Irish rock bands.
Wales and Scotland have many great new bands while just we have U2 who always were total sh*te.

This post is a classic, almost laughable.:rolleyes:

Dave5

Nolanger wrote: »

Sad old men responsible for the dearth of successful Irish rock bands.

Oh yeah, i forgot 48 years of age was over the hill.
What a nonsensical post. ffs.:rolleyes:

KrazeeEyezKilla

People always bring up that Bill Bailey sketch when talking about U2 but I don't see what difference it makes. If you took away all the effects there wouldn't be much left but the effects aren't being taken away so theres no point in talking about it. Some people use effects to cover the lack of ability but the Edge uses effects to write songs which isn't the same. U2 have a varied back catalogue and the Edge has a fairly unique sound which is why I think they are a great band even if they havent been that great since Zooropa.

the_syco

Matt3 wrote: »

It's always easy to have a go off them, when you've no real knowledge of the band.

I smell a fanboy...

=-=

U2 aren't my cup or tea, and apart from one or two good tunes (mainly all pre-2000), are generally sh|te. I don't need to know anything about the band to know I dislike their music. Give me Iron Maiden any day of the week.

Dave5

Nolanger wrote: »

Sad old men responsible for the dearth of successful Irish rock bands.

You've got that one the wrong way round. U2 are the Irish band who paved the way for other succesful Irish bands.

Dave5

the_syco wrote: »

I smell a fanboy...

=-=

U2 aren't my cup or tea, and apart from one or two good tunes (mainly all pre-2000), are generally sh|te. I don't need to know anything about the band to know I dislike their music. Give me Iron Maiden any day of the week.

Have you ever heard the expression...pot, kettle, black?
Are you a Maiden 'fanboy'?

Iron Maiden? They're sh*te and an assault on the eardrums.

vetmed2012

giddybootz wrote: »

total rock GODS!!! I know its 'not cool' to be irish and love U2 but i don't care....i love them!!

why is it 'not cool' to be irish and love U2?
I guess i don't really get it except for bono said once (and i'm paraphrasing here): In America, people look up at the rich guy living in his house on top of a hill and think 'someday i'm going to be just like him'. But in ireland, people look up at the rich guy living up on the hill and think, 'someday i'm going to get that bastard'."

is what he said really true?

Takestockholden

vetmed2012 wrote: »

why is it 'not cool' to be irish and love U2?
I guess i don't really get it except for bono said once (and i'm paraphrasing here): In America, people look up at the rich guy living in his house on top of a hill and think 'someday i'm going to be just like him'. But in ireland, people look up at the rich guy living up on the hill and think, 'someday i'm going to get that bastard'."

is what he said really true?

Never heard that quote but it's genius and very true.

ShawnRaven

Bubs101 wrote: »

U2 aren't my type of band but this statement is ridiculous VR. McCartney and the Stones are washed up. When they release material nobody cares and when people go to see them they don't want to hear the new stuff. When U2 release new stuff they're all over the TV and they have post 2000 songs that people would be outraged if they didn't play (Vertigo, Beautiful Day, Stuck in a moment). They're old but not washed up

And can i ask what was the last Rolling Stones album you actually listened to, Bubs? Or have you listened to any at all? Because unless you've actually have, you (or anyone else) really are in no position to accuse a band if they are washed up or not. Voodoo Lounge, Bridges To Babylon and A Bigger Bang were all solid albums for a band that have been going in a studio since 1964!

McCartney however, i will agree with you on. Sad to see as well really. But it was all downhill from the frog chorus onwards, although Flowers In The Dirt is one of my guilty pleasures.

ShawnRaven

Nolanger wrote: »

Sad old men responsible for the dearth of successful Irish rock bands.
Wales and Scotland have many great new bands while just we have U2 who always were total sh*te.

Wales? Are you serious? Wales haven't given us anything since the 80s. Catatonia, Most of the Stereophonics albums and Space can f*ck right off if you ask me.

Scotland have given us some good bands, but not in recent years. Idlewild was probably the last good act to come out of there, and don't even get me started on that overrated pile of sh*te that go by the name of Mogwai. Same sh*te and different year formula that has been on the go for over ten years.

If anything U2 paved the way, especially for up and coming Irish bands in the mid to late 80s, none of which would probably not had a hope in hell of even getting a record out had it not been for U2s exposure and popularity. Bands like An Emotional Fish, Cactus World News, to name two out of a very long lists. Because if you think you can credit Horslips, Rory Gallagher and Moving Hearts for that, then think again.

Pft... kids today

Xavi6

Matt3 wrote: »

This post is a perfect example of a posters ignorance regarding U2.

It's always easy to have a go off them, when you've no real knowledge of the band.

The mis-informed U2 haters are out there believe me, i can hear them itching to put the boot in, in this thread.:rolleyes:

Really? It's pretty much impossible to have grown up in Ireland and to have not been exposed to U2's entire back catalogue so I'm pretty well up on their music thanks very much.

It's funny how U2 fans are too stubborn to admit that their productivity has gone steadily downhill since the release of the failed abortion that was the 'Pop' album.

The trend continued right the way through the 90s with drivel such as 'The Sweetest Thing' and is now with us in the 21st century thanks to aimless ramblings about moles digging in holes.

ShawnRaven

I GuanYin wrote: »

It's funny how U2 fans are too stubborn to admit that their productivity has gone steadily downhill since the release of the failed abortion that was the 'Pop' album.

Not true, being a fan, and in contact with several fans all share the same sentiment. Pop was a gutsy move, but it didn't pay off. It spawned a couple of really good songs from it, but it wasn't the success they hoped it would be. So please, i'd appreciate it if you didn't tar us all with the same brush.

The trend continued right the way through the 90s with drivel such as 'The Sweetest Thing' and is now with us in the 21st century thanks to aimless ramblings about moles digging in holes.

And you quote the one weak song from All That You Can't Leave Behind, of course, that album was a huge comeback from the weak period that you spoke of. Even Electrical Storm gave some hope for the album that would come, of couse, then we got How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb, which again, like pop had one or two good songs, but the rest was throwaway junk.

Which is why i said in a previous post that they need to step down for a little bit and come up with new ideas.

Mushy

the_syco wrote: »

I smell a fanboy...

=-=

U2 aren't my cup or tea, and apart from one or two good tunes (mainly all pre-2000), are generally sh|te. I don't need to know anything about the band to know I dislike their music. Give me Iron Maiden any day of the week.

ding ding ding...we have a winner(IMO so as not to get slated)

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote: »

People always bring up that Bill Bailey sketch when talking about U2 but I don't see what difference it makes. If you took away all the effects there wouldn't be much left but the effects aren't being taken away so theres no point in talking about it. Some people use effects to cover the lack of ability but the Edge uses effects to write songs which isn't the same. U2 have a varied back catalogue and the Edge has a fairly unique sound which is why I think they are a great band even if they havent been that great since Zooropa.

The Bill Bailey sketch was just a bit of a joke...its a joke by a comedian on what may happen if technical trouble happened. Yes the effects aren't being taken away, its just a little imagination on IF it did happen.

Dave5 wrote: »

Have you ever heard the expression...pot, kettle, black?
Are you a Maiden 'fanboy'?

Iron Maiden? They're sh*te and an assault on the eardrums.

I'm no Maiden fanboy, but hell, give me Dave Murry, Nicko McBrain, Bruce Dickenson and Steve Harris any day of my life over U2.

no need to slate us for not liking them...do we have to? Non-U2 fans here aren't slagging of your taste, we're slagging band off, which is gonna happen on anything when its a subjective matter.

I remember Bono was at my school a few years back(have since left), was asked did I meet him when I was here. The shock on the principles face when I said "No, thank god!". REalisation dawned that not everyone likes them.

shane86

I was in town about a year ago and they were doing some by ticket/invite only book signing in Easons. There was a crowd of maybe 150 outside trying to peer through the shutters for a look, and I swear I dont think one of them was Irish Mostly Chinese, I think U2 burnt their bridges with me by moving their tax interests to Holland when our economy was showing signs it would soon badly need their earnings.

Music hasnt been up to much in recent years either.

Saruman

Its all down to popularity at the end of the day and if U2 can sell out croke park in minutes with people sacrificing new borns for tickets then they are hardly washed up and still are in the Rock god Category.

When they can no longer sell out big venues around the world then you can call them washed up.

Oh never saw the bill bailey thing. Just looked it up, that is brilliant actually!

Mushy

Saruman wrote: »

Its all down to popularity at the end of the day and if U2 can sell out croke park in minutes with people sacrificing new borns for tickets then they are hardly washed up and still are in the Rock god Category.

When they can no longer sell out big venues around the world then you can call them washed up.

As much as I accept that[popularity](not just in this case), I always take it with a pinch of salt. Most popular doesn't necessarily mean best.

For U2, yes, they are starts...I just don't like them.

And even if they don't sell out, I wouldn't call them washed up per sé, but will do once any of them appear on reality tv(no matter what the cause).

Nolanger

Dave5 wrote: »

You've got that one the wrong way round. U2 are the Irish band who paved the way for other succesful Irish bands.

What successful Irish bands?
There's been none in the last decade unless you count The Thrills and The Script.
U2 are an '80s band who should have been put of their misery 15 years ago.
We need new talent not the same boring old overrated farts.

rowlandbrowner

when politicians stop answering their on stage phone calls, then it’s over.

Saruman

Nolanger wrote: »

What successful Irish bands?
There's been none in the last decade unless you count The Thrills and The Script.
U2 are an '80s band who should have been put of their misery 15 years ago.
We need new talent not the same boring old overrated farts.

The Cranberries were pretty successful in their time. Bell X 1 are doing pretty well, have been touring the US (not easy to break that market). Even got a slot on Letterman!
the Corrs had and maybe still have to some degree a good career.
We could claim Snow patrol but to be honest they are Northern Ireland and Scotland, neither of which are in this country
At least U2 formed here even if half of them are not Irish.
Thin Lizzy???

OK not all this last decade of course.

overexcitedaj

I am an insanely massive u2 fan but i must admit that ever since pop ( Gone is one of the best songs ever) they haven't been top of their game. I am really looking forward to the possible gigs next year and the new material

ShawnRaven

overexcitedaj wrote: »

I am an insanely massive u2 fan but i must admit that ever since pop ( Gone is one of the best songs ever) they haven't been top of their game. I am really looking forward to the possible gigs next year and the new material

You reading this, Xavi6?
Most of us won't deny that they haven't been theirselves since then. We can't! The proof is in the pudding really.

overexcitedaj

ShawnRaven wrote: »

You reading this, Xavi6?
Most of us won't deny that they haven't been theirselves since then. We can't! The proof is in the pudding really.

What does this have to do with Xavi6? ( curiosity did kill the cat :P)

tech77

U2 need to bring out another Achtung Baby- then they'll be decent again.
Love that album.

ShawnRaven

overexcitedaj wrote: »

What does this have to do with Xavi6? ( curiosity did kill the cat :P)

He changed his name recently.

ShawnRaven

tech77 wrote: »

U2 need to bring out another Achtung Baby- then they'll be decent again.
Love that album.

That will never happen though, you know it, everyone knows it, and more importantly, they know it.

Which is why it hasn't even been contemplated, never mind tried.

DublinWriter

I GuanYin wrote: »

Been shite since 1991 1978

Fixed it for you.

There were a lot better bands around in the late 70's. I think the only reason U2 broke out at the time was because they had looks, a lot of attitude, weren't particularly heavy drinkers/druggers, worked hard and had Paul McGuinness working for them.

I like the way they seem to be constantly re-inventing themselves. I remember thinking to myself "where else can they go?" in 1984 after the Joshua Tree album.

The essence of their latter success is their ability to pull a 'Bowie' by tapping into the tropes of the zeitgeist de jour, repackaging it, and selling it back to us in a way that makes us believe that they taught of it first.

Sadly, there's nothing sadder in this world than watching middle-aged white-men jiggle it on a stage. God bless 'em.

Nolanger

The only reason U2 broke out was because they did well in the States initially whereas better British bands of the time couldn't be bothered.

ShawnRaven

Nolanger wrote: »

The only reason U2 broke out was because they did well in the States initially whereas better British bands of the time couldn't be bothered.

Hah! Like Who? ABC? Duran Duran? Spandau Ballet?
Where are they all now?

Dig up, kid. UP!

ShawnRaven

DublinWriter wrote: »

Fixed it for you.


I like the way they seem to be constantly re-inventing themselves. I remember thinking to myself "where else can they go?" in 1984 after the Joshua Tree album.

Given how you think that The Joshua Tree was before 1986, I don't think you're in any position to fix anything, pal!

Nolanger

Anyone else think in 2018 we'll still have U2 going strong and no other commercially successful rock bands?

grumpytrousers

ShawnRaven wrote: »

And can i ask what was the last Rolling Stones album you actually listened to, Bubs? Or have you listened to any at all? Because unless you've actually have, you (or anyone else) really are in no position to accuse a band if they are washed up or not. Voodoo Lounge, Bridges To Babylon and A Bigger Bang were all solid albums for a band that have been going in a studio since 1964!

McCartney however, i will agree with you on. Sad to see as well really. But it was all downhill from the frog chorus onwards, although Flowers In The Dirt is one of my guilty pleasures.

flowers in the dirt a guilty pleasure?!?!? :eek: it's a fine album on its own merits. he'd finally learned what people wanted of him and tried to supply it. No bagpipes, and no fookin' frogs. The last few haven't been bad either, but his problem, along with the Stones, along with U2, Oasis...any of the behemoth bands is that quite frankly once you 'make it' you lose the hunger. You're surrounded by people who aren't objective about what you do and it gets a bit ego-trippy.

I think myself Achtung Baby was U2s highpoint; it was futuristic, it was trippy, it had a tour that pretty much re-defined spectacle. After that, i'm not saying they went downhill, but they certainly took their foot off the gas. They can still write brilliant anthems, Bono can still sing his heart out, they're not a bad band and they still put on a good show, but they're *not* IMHO hitting the highmark they did back in '91.

It happens all bands. Not so much where it's a solo artist, but inevitably in a band, the creative juices will *tend* to dry up in the latter stages of the career. That's not to say that U2s 'weak' work wouldn't still piss all over 95% of the musical landfill we're getting now anyway, but it's still, kinda like Viz magazine, not as good as it used be!

ShawnRaven

Nolanger wrote: »

Anyone else think in 2018 we'll still have U2 going strong and no other commercially successful rock bands?

Sure, because we've had that problem since 1978, haven't we?
Seriously, when you come out of cryogenic suspension, then maybe, just maybe some of your posts might be taken seriously.

DublinWriter

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Given how you think that The Joshua Tree was before 1986, I don't think you're in any position to fix anything, pal!

Sorry, I meant The Unforgettable Fire.

Listen, I'm 39 and have done more recreational drugs than you've had skinny lattès. It has long term effects on the memory. Cut me some slack dude.

D-FENS

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Wales? Are you serious? Wales haven't given us anything since the 80s. Catatonia, Most of the Stereophonics albums and Space can f*ck right off if you ask me.

Space aren’t Welsh

ShawnRaven

DublinWriter wrote: »

Sorry, I meant The Unforgettable Fire.

Listen, I'm 39 and have done more recreational drugs than you've had skinny lattès. It has long term effects on the memory. Cut me some slack dude.

Yeah, well I'm 33 in a couple of weeks, so i'm not far behind you. Drugs might explain but they don't excuse.

And don't patronise me with the skinny latte comment, i'm a mocha man and proud of it! :P

ShawnRaven

D-FENS wrote: »

Space aren’t Welsh

Sh*t, you're right, they were scousers weren't they?
I stand corrected.