Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

pman68 · Nov 21, 2004, 08:42 AM

Anyone tivo the show last night? I missed it.

I wonder if they lip synced

ReggieX · Nov 21, 2004, 10:03 AM

It was great! They did 2 new songs and then before the end credits they did "I Will Follow." Right after that they started up another song but the timeslot had ended so only the audience got to see that one.

wolfen · Nov 21, 2004, 10:33 AM

They lipsynced the 2nd song, but I don't think they did the other two. Not sure. They are awesome, though. Did a great job. Real pros.

ShortcutToMoncton · Nov 21, 2004, 11:44 AM

U2: Flogging a dead, unoriginal horse since 1991.

greg

pman68 · Nov 21, 2004, 11:52 AM

Are there any links to the performance?

CreepingDeth · Nov 21, 2004, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by ShortcutToMoncton:
U2: Flogging a dead, unoriginal horse since 1991.

greg

The pump's been dry for longer than that, captain.

ShortcutToMoncton · Nov 21, 2004, 12:26 PM

Nonsense! Achtung Baby was a great release, there's no doubt about it. And it all ended there....

greg

JHromadka · Nov 21, 2004, 07:01 PM

It was really good. They always put on a good performance on SNL or any live performance (have seen them twice). The new album is pretty good, but don't buy it expecting all the songs to be like Vertigo.

CreepingDeth · Nov 21, 2004, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by JHromadka:
It was really good. They always put on a good performance on SNL or any live performance (have seen them twice). The new album is pretty good, but don't buy it expecting all the songs to be like Vertigo.

All of the album can't suck that bad.

Kenneth · Nov 21, 2004, 07:42 PM

I watched part of the show last night. Did Bono emphasize the word 'Live' before performing the hit, Vertigo? I think he didn't lipsync.

JHromadka · Nov 21, 2004, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
All of the album can't suck that bad.

Hehe, I was speaking more in terms of the tempo and speed of the song. "Sometimes You Can't Make It on Your Own" and "All Because of You" are good as well. I'm still discovering the album.

CreepingDeth · Nov 21, 2004, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by JHromadka:
Hehe, I was speaking more in terms of the tempo and speed of the song. "Sometimes You Can't Make It on Your Own" and "All Because of You" are good as well. I'm still discovering the album.

You think Vertigo is fast?

U2 should have quit years ago.

nbnz · Nov 21, 2004, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
You think Vertigo is fast?

U2 should have quit years ago.

U2 remain (after 20+ years) one of the biggest selling bands around. They made $100+ million in their last tour, why on earth would/should they quit? If you're not a fan fine, but U2 still have more fans than most.

CreepingDeth · Nov 21, 2004, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by nbnz:
U2 remain (after 20+ years) one of the biggest selling bands around. They made $100+ million in their last tour, why on earth would/should they quit? If you're not a fan fine, but U2 still have more fans than most.

And we all know that money's going straight to AIDS funding, right?

nbnz · Nov 21, 2004, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
And we all know that money's going straight to AIDS funding, right?

I have no idea where the money's going, and don't care. The point is that a band that makes $100+ million on tour is not going to quit any time soon. Especially when their previous album (All That You Can't Leave Behind) was both critically acclaimed and sold by the millions.

demograph68 · Nov 22, 2004, 05:16 AM

Does U2 qualify as selling out?

pman68 · Nov 22, 2004, 08:27 AM

U2 is by far better than most of the crap out there now.

period.

ironknee · Nov 22, 2004, 01:02 PM

i was on broadway and 59th street today and U2 was filming their next video on the back of a truck!

i gave bono a peace sign and he gave one back...cool

ajprice · Nov 22, 2004, 01:41 PM

Well its a good job ironknee saw them and not Shortcut, if he had I think his 2 fingers would have been facing the other way

.

I like U2 up to a point... Vertigo is great, what I've heard of the new album is OK, and I've got they're Best Of album and a few singles. But they're not an 'I must own every album, b side and everything they've ever done' band, and not worth buying a black and red iPod for.

Brien · Nov 22, 2004, 02:14 PM

New U2 is okay, but their performance on SNL was pretty cool, considering they did 4 songs (although only 3 were on TV). The new album is decent, but Pop was the last 'good' one (although The Joshua Tree/Unforgettable Fire were the best ones IMHO).

Kenneth · Nov 22, 2004, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by pman68:
U2 is by far better than most of the crap out there now.

period.

Not Creed?

oh you meant 'now'.

Steve Bosell · Nov 22, 2004, 04:05 PM

U2 = Most overrated band of all time.

JHromadka · Nov 22, 2004, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by Steve Bosell:
U2 = Most overrated band of all time.

No, that's Coldplay.

hayesk · Nov 22, 2004, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by Steve Bosell:
U2 = Most overrated band of all time.

I reserve that title for the Beatles.

hagheid · Nov 22, 2004, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by ajprice:
if he had I think his 2 fingers would have been facing the other way .

U2Fingers

Krusty · Nov 22, 2004, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Steve Bosell:
U2 = Most overrated band of all time.

How old are you ??

U2 has definitely gotten (been ??) been sounding pretty "middle aged" for a decade or more now. However, I remember back in the day when I got in to them (around age 13 right between War and The Unforgettable Fire). Man, their sound was just radical ... the differences and growth from one album to the next Boy->October->War-TUF->Joshua Tree -> Rattle and Hum -> Achtung Baby was just off the charts. Seriously, if you were listening to them at that time each and every new album was an almost flabbergasting departure from what they were before. It was just 3 short years between the punky, new wavy sound of "Boy" and the extremely rich, dreamy sounds of the The Unforgettable Fire.

Of course, for anyone who started listening to them AFTER their decade of growth, ALL of their music is old hat and not particularly impressive (because we've all heard it like 6 million times already ... it not "new" anymore). If I were coming of age in the mid 90s or later, I probably wouldn't think too highly of them based on Zooropa, Pop, and All That You Can't Leave Behind -- 3 "OK" albums that took years a piece to release. Sadly, the same is true for most rockers (who don't die prematurely) --- they maintain huge followings of people who really really like what they used to be even if their current offerings aren't quite so groundbreaking.

Steve Bosell · Nov 22, 2004, 07:20 PM

I have heard all of their stuff in the 80's and 90's, I am not saying that they are a crappy band, I am just saying that their music comes no where near their ego. Look up hype in the dictionary, and there is U2. Just like Henry Rollins said, The Clash is the band U2 wish they could be.

Kenneth · Nov 22, 2004, 10:02 PM

video linky

dlefebvre · Nov 22, 2004, 10:16 PM

I personaly lost interest in U2 in the late 80's, but I can't deny they're the biggest band in the world right now. A big following, lot's of credibility, no scandal. over 400 songs and at least they try to renew themselve.

wolfen · Nov 22, 2004, 10:40 PM

While I won't say U2 was the best band ever or anything, I think it's ridiculous to be pissing on them. How many bands have come out with as many platinum albums? Most of the bands people around here worship have MAYBE 1 gold or platinum album. And no, popularity isn't what it's all about, but U2 earned most of their sales IMHO.

So you can whine about how they're not so great, but if I had War, Boy, Joshua Tree, Unforgettable Fire, Achtung Baby under my belt -- I'd be pretty fukin' happy. You guys can take your Flaming Lips or Tupac and crazy closet bands and shove'em up yer ass.

And for anyone who thinks the Beatles were overrated -- you had to know their predecessors well before you could judge. Sure, the Beatles were only "above average" by today's standards but there would BE no today if it weren't for them. They kept evolving. If it weren't for Yoko, the sky remained the limit. Some of the White Album and Rubber Soul tracks rival modern releases. Think about it -- that's 30+ years ago. I'll put While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Dear Prudence, Happiness is a Warm Gun, and Helter Skelter against 9/10 of the contemporary crap that's released. I grew up with both parents in a rock band. I know what rocks and I'm telling you the Beatles were the sh*t.!

zl9600 · Nov 26, 2004, 04:30 PM

i was more irritated at the 'uno, dos, tres, CATORCE' line in the u2 song (and the ipod overplay commercial)... maybe the SNL audience got to hear bono count from four to 13 and the rest of us got skipped ahead to 14?

the beauty of rock n roll, art, music, whatever, is that it's subjective. you don't have to have parents in a rock band to be any more qualified than a c.p.a. to judge what's good or not. personally i think the beatles are teh most overplayed band of all time, and were supremely overrated (since a lot of their music was sort of ripped right from american music). but they had a permanent effect on rock, and for that i'm glad they were around.

i just wish rolling stone would not bother lionizing them every 18 months. because i'd read that rag if i knew the music critics and editors were anything more than graying losers in their 40's whose offices still smell like bongwater from 1974.

oops, that's subjective, isn't it

SafariX · Nov 26, 2004, 04:48 PM

Ive never been a fan of U2 (I'm not NOT a fan, just never really gone out of my way to listN), but this new album is pretty damn good.

spacefreak · Nov 26, 2004, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by Krusty:
If I were coming of age in the mid 90s or later, I probably wouldn't think too highly of them based on Zooropa, Pop, and All That You Can't Leave Behind -- 3 "OK" albums that took years a piece to release.

Zooropa was written and recorded during a 3-month break in U2's ZooTV World Tour, so it wasn't like they spent years on that album.

Pop, on the other hand, was completed awkwardly. They made the mistake of booking their world tour before they had finished working on the album. U2 ended up cramming all-night sessions in order to finish the album before their subsequent phases (promotion, tour rehearsals, etc.) began.

Regardless, I still dig Pop.

ATYCLB - they have their routine down at this point. See, I always consider U2 as more than a band. They are more like a global corporation. From the album completion, promotion, tour sets, design, rehearsing, bookings, videos, and external sales (selling instrumental versions of their songs to the likes of TV networks, NFL, NBA, etc.)... it all worked like clockwork during this 3-year period. So much so that in 2001, all 5 members (4+ their manager - Paul McGuiness - who all get an equal cut) cleared $91 million EACH. Not too shabby, especially when one considers that "artists" who live in Ireland do not have to pay any income tax.

The key achievement IMHO with ATYCLB was the tour. They shifted to more intimate settings (arenas instead of stadiums) and delivered awesome shows.

It's fine to criticize U2 albums. I'm just trying to point out that, at this point in their stellar careers, the album is just the tip of the iceberg when considering the entire operation. For me, I have fun watching the 2-2.5 year period after an album of theirs is produced, for that's when one can notice the genious and beauty of the U2 machine.

spacefreak · 06:32 PM

Originally posted by zl9600:
i was more irritated at the 'uno, dos, tres, CATORCE' line in the u2 song (and the ipod overplay commercial)... maybe the SNL audience got to hear bono count from four to 13 and the rest of us got skipped ahead to 14?

Just an FYI: It's a shout out to their producer, Paul Lillywhite, who got to produce this album (their 14th release). He had previously produced U2's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd albums.

{quote]i just wish rolling stone would not bother lionizing them every 18 months.[/quote]. Due to the fact that U2 is biggest band in the world, how could anyone expect a world-leading Rock/Pop publication to not cover them?

That would be akin to Sports Ilustrated not covering the Yankees, or Newsweek not covering George W Bush. When you're the biggest game in town, you're going to get coverage and headlines. It's always been that way.

BTW, the offices stinking like bongwater from 1974 bit was pretty damn funny.

ShortcutToMoncton · Nov 27, 2004, 02:59 AM

Hey, I just wish they'd put out a decent album.

Let's face it, Bono is the wankiest wanker ever to grace the big stage in the past couple years. Without him and his embarrassing lyrics, All That You Can't Leave Behind might have actually been worth of pre-Achtung Baby work.

Meh...it's all good. Some people like the overproduced, generic, adult-contempory, radio-friendly, innocuous sound. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. I like to think I'm a little better than that, but then again I'm a self-absorbed co�ky sonovabeeootch in any case.

greg

Superchicken · Nov 27, 2004, 01:52 PM

I never get why so many people love U2... I prefer stuff like... well... the stuff I listen to... go figure. I like having nobody listen to my stuff, means nobody can say they suck and have a clue what they're talking about.

SafariX · Nov 27, 2004, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Superchicken:
I never get why so many people love U2... I prefer stuff like... well... the stuff I listen to... go figure. I like having nobody listen to my stuff, means nobody can say they suck and have a clue what they're talking about.

http://www.ubersite.com/m/51652

hayesk · Nov 27, 2004, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by Superchicken:
I never get why so many people love U2... I prefer stuff like... well... the stuff I listen to... go figure. I like having nobody listen to my stuff, means nobody can say they suck and have a clue what they're talking about.

That's a stupid reason to listen to an artist. Listen to music you like, and don't give a sh*t what other people think.

paully dub · Nov 27, 2004, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by Superchicken:
I never get why so many people love U2... I prefer stuff like... well... the stuff I listen to... go figure. I like having nobody listen to my stuff, means nobody can say they suck and have a clue what they're talking about.

Well, smart guy, who the hell do you listen to? I promise I won't listen to it.

Sherwin · Nov 27, 2004, 04:14 PM

A girlfriend dragged me to see Rattle and Hum about 40 times... ...which put me off them for life.

zl9600 · Nov 30, 2004, 11:15 AM

thanks for the insight on that 'catorce' thing. i had read somewhere that it was in reference to bible verses because the album references the bible here and there i'm told. of course i wondered what would happen if i played it backwards... except that button on my ipod does not work.

i was speaking about the beatles, not u2, when i mentioned rolling stone lionizing them every 18 months. that was why i was spouting off about stinky offices that smell like dead bands.

golly ,i knew i had a mac issue to write about somewhere...!