I don't intend to make new friends with this one, but I seriously think that the last two U2 albums are absolutely overrated("All That You..." and "How To Dismantle..."). They won album of the year! I know the comercial success of those was very big, but are they really good? NO.
We hear a lot about them(from radio songs or Bono-politics), U2, U2, U2... but they don't rock well anymore.

I guess... but they still had about a 10 year run of excellent albums, which is more than I can say about most bands. After 25 years, I don't think anybody expects their stuff to have the same impact it once did. They're not going to make another Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby. But, when compared with a lot of stuff on commercial radio, I'd have to say you could do a lot worse than U2. Even as old fogies, they can bang out a decent single every now and then. Give the guys a break though. They've made their mark, but they're still having fun, so they're going to keep riding the train until somebody kicks them off.

Shit, they're 10X better than the Stones were after a quarter century.

I never really figured out the u2 appeal, probably just really loyal fans and radio-friendly songs. Maybe they used to be good, but IMO theyre pretty mediocre right now. And what is the deal with that uno, dos, tres, catorce (1, 2, 3, 14) thing? I mean, c'mon, hire a translator or something

quote:

Originally posted by LordSmoogsbottomIII:
I never really figured out the u2 appeal, probably just really loyal fans and radio-friendly songs. Maybe they used to be good, but IMO theyre pretty mediocre right now. And what is the deal with that uno, dos, tres, catorce (1, 2, 3, 14) thing? I mean, c'mon, hire a translator or something

Theyve had 14 albums I think..

I can definitely agree that the last two U2 albums are horrendously overrated (escpecially ATYCLB), however the most troubling thing about U2 is the regression in their last two albums, after spending the entire decade of the 90's trying to change things up a bit. My point being, that you can listen to The Joshua Tree, Rattle and Hum, ATYCLB, and HTDAAB in a row and not know that there was a 13 year gap between the first two and the last two.

They've settled into a comfort zone. I definitely enjoy the last 2 above Pop though they are way overrated, but I think now they are just trying to give their fans what they want. I don't expect any groundbreaking stuff like another Achtung Baby. They're becoming the new Rolling Stones. They can go on the rest of their lives selling out stadiums simply because people want to see them perform their classics. A new album is simply a reminder to the world that they are still around and it's time to go see them on another blockbuster tour.

I don't get this thread. What does "commerically overrated" mean? That more people buy the album than should? U2 has always been popular with critics and the masses. You seem to be slagging their two most recent records because they "won album of the year." (From who? Grammys? Brits?) I'm not sure what "they don't rock well anymore" means, either. There's stuff on ATYCLB and HTDAAB that rocks just as hard as anything from their early years.

I get that U2 is always gonna be a target. Hipsters don't like them because they play arenas. Indie kids don't like Bono's bigger than big persona. Rockers think they're soft. The fact that they're still making interesting and relevant music after 25 years is enough to sell me on the fact that they're not "commercially overrated." Instead of remaking Joshua Tree over and over, they try new things (Pop, Zooropa) and I find that to be a good trait. And they're still one of the best live bands going...I haven't missed a U2 tour since '87.

"comercially overrated" makes little sense. maybe what we should be discussing is whether u2 are critically overrated. the last two albums have shown that they have willingly foresaken music experimentation, something which they have always prided themselves in, to reaffirm their popularity around the world. the last two albums do have some great songs on them, but they hardly constitute great albums. what's most impressive about them in the last 10 years, is that they have remained the most popular band on the whole planet for such a long time, while retaining a certain critical acclaim. i think they still have one great album in them left, but they should hurry up, cause it's been a long time since achtung baby

I don't get upset with a store that sells things I don't want. I just buy what I need. I currently have about 20 U2 songs on my jukebox from numerous albums. They can release a rap song in arabic and I will be busy listening to "Seconds" and "New Years Day".

I would agree with the term commercially overrated as well, I believe the term we are looking for is artistically overrated. And I must admit my two favorite U2 albums are Pop and Zooropa.

quote:

They can release a rap song in arabic and I will be busy listening to "Seconds" and "New Years Day".

I agree...War and The Joshua Tree will always have a prominent place in my cd collection.

I said they don't rock well ANYMORE(since their last two albums). This topic is about U2 vs the last 5-6 years up to the present time.
I still listen to what they've recorded before 2000. They were a great band, now rolling stones full of dust elevated by this commercial wave that support each and every move/record the band(or Bono) make.

Personally I've always found U2's style kind of self conscious and forced. Like, they're trying too hard to write the type of music that will be widely accepted to be 'great'.

Sometimes it works. They've got a handful of really great songs. But more than not for me it doesn't.

U2 is the greatest mainstream rock band of the past 20 years, bar none. I welcome all challenges to this claim.

As you can tell, I'm a huge U2 fan. No band has more heart or soul in them. U2 has made me a better person, so you'll excuse me if I take this argument a teeny, tiny bit personally. U2, as dedicated to God and Catholicism as they are, are somewhat of a unifying force themselves.

"All That You Can't Leave Behind" is U2's 2nd or 3rd best record, in my opinion. It's not front-to-back awesome but its damn close. Considering its cultural, and personal emotional, significance pre- and post-9/11, U2's power was reborn in my mind.

Half of "How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb" is really, really good. The rest is pretty much expendable. After all, any record with "Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own," one of the greatest songs U2's ever recorded and a song I can't get through without crying, is not entirely dismissable.

I think it really comes down to this: Do you buy into Bono's bullshit or not? Like Chuck Klosterman said in Spin in his big U2 cover story, "Is this guy for real, or is he full of shit?" He said Bono's responses in their one-on-one interviews seemed "completely spontaneous and completely rehearsed all at the same time."

So hey... If you drink the Kool Aid, you're in for one helluva ride that many others have gone on. That's all I'm saying.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Yay!,

Having listened to U2 almost from the day Boy was released, I guess I drank the Kool-Aid, but sometimes it doesn't work as well as others.

Don't know about the rest of the self-agrandizingly named 'Dismantle', but the 'Vertigo' single seems awfully forced to me..

All That You Can't Leave Behind had a few songs I liked for a while but then sort of lost me. The only U2 song I can really say I've consistantly enjoyed is 'Mysterious Ways'. Of course, I haven't heard all of their really early stuff. But 'With or Without You' has always struck me as extremely forced.

I'm sure Bono believes everything he says, but he strikes me as the sort of person who practices his gestures in the mirror.

Edit: Of course, they're leagues better than the vast majority of the stuff on the radio.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Bobthespirit,

quote:

Originally posted by Yay!:
U2 is the greatest mainstream rock band of the past 20 years, bar none. I welcome all challenges to this claim.

I'd have to say Metallica is the superior "mainstream rock" band of the past 20 years. Of course, I can't stand their more recent stuff. But I think their first 4 albums are better than anything U2 has ever done. Just my opinion of course.

Metallica is a good contestor, but Metallica are SO viciously hated by most of the metal community for their betrayal, it isn't funny.

Besides, Lars Ulrich is a dick for pulling that Napster bullshit. At least U2 embraced mp3 technology with their iPod commercials.

Wasn't greatly impressed with their last album and thought it was a bit overrated. I think they have die hard fans that love anything they put out. I was into their older stuff but had a hard time getting into the new album. Having that one song in the Apple commercial also kinda turned me off.