12 of 20 people found the following review helpful
Who is this, because this isn't the same U2 that I grew to like!,
This review is from: No Line On The Horizon (Audio CD)This isn't the same U2 anymore! They keep trying to change with the times & they keep getting worse with every attempt. This album is a prime example of that. There isn't one good song on it! They drag out some of the songs as long as 6 1/2 to over 7 minutes. This album isn't worth buying at all in my opinion. Stick to the old U2 albums.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: May 11, 2009 12:34:22 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 11, 2009 12:35:47 PM PDT
True, this isnt a great u2 album. But they are not trying to change to keep up with the times. If they were simply trying to keep up with the times, they would have done a gangsta rap album. What they were attempting to do was do something different but still maintain a u2 sound. They succeeded in spots and didnt quite succeed in some other spots. If you actually were a u2 fan, I dont think you would honestly give it 1 star. Thats simply a knee jerk over-reaction. 3 stars is fair: not a complete failure, but not a classic either. I honestly believe their last great album was Pop. Though there have been a few good songs on their last three albums, the last three have seemed like more than anything an excuse to tour.
In reply to an earlier post on May 14, 2009 3:03:20 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Jun 3, 2009 4:15:33 AM PDT]
In reply to an earlier post on May 22, 2009 10:19:23 PM PDT
Torman Grant says:
Well Franz, you are exactly right. The negative reviews are usually from people who don't even like the band in the first place. For that reason, I don't put much stock in the rating this album is given on Amazon. And though I always respect Da Brando Chipper's opinion, I disagree with him in this instance. I do think this is a GREAT U2 release. The last two albums catered to the U2 base; these are the people who think Joshua Tree is the greatest album ever produced. NLOTH is geared more towards the folks who consider Achtung Baby and Zooropa as the band's greatest successes. Just like Zooropa, NLOTH sees the band rebelling against the sound that made them successful in the first place. In terms of commercial success, the album POP was a failure. ATYCLB and HTDAAB were considered comeback albums for the band; a return to form if you will. Even though I love both of these albums, I was wondering if U2 had finally sold out in order to appease their most loyal fans. Then comes NLOTH. Once again, U2 proves that they are not just going through the motions. As with Zooropa and POP, they are challenging their fans to embrace a completely new direction. I can't help but respect them for going out on a limb and releasing an experimental album like NLOTH. Let's face it, U2 is the biggest band in the world. They could have easily put out a HTDAAB clone and had a sure hit, but instead, they seek out a completely new sound. At this point in their career, that takes a lot of guts. I remember buying Zooropa way back in 93 (on cassette!) when I was in high school and feeling like I had discovered something revolutionary. That album completely altered my perception of what music could be. Without Zooropa I would have never embraced amazing bands such as Sonic Youth and Radiohead. I get the same feeling when I listen to NLOTH. It is anything but mainstream, which can only be good for a populace raised on mediocrity. I am almost 33 years old. I got into U2 when I was 17. To think that these "old" guys are still relevant in 2009 is quite amazing.
Posted on May 23, 2009 7:02:38 PM PDT
New Dreams says:
Disagree with the idea that if you are a long-term fan of the band, you are going to love this album. I've been a fan over 20 years of U2. They are still probably my most favorite group. If you asked me what era of the band is my favorite, I'd say all of them. To me, this album is much softer, almost listless, and missing a lot of their earlier drive. The mood takes a dive around the middle of the album and just doesn't recover well.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2009 5:21:36 PM PDT
Khårn Jääb™ says:
Torman Grant says:
"In terms of commercial success, the album POP was a failure."
In terms of commercial success, "Pop", which sold millions, was actually quite successful. It just didn't reach the bar set by albums like "the Joshua Tree" and "Achtung Baby". That may have disappointed U2, but many artists would be very pleased to have an album as "unsuccessful" as "Pop".
‹ Previous 1 Next ›