U2 for Rock Band

[U2Phreak1969]

In an old interview with Bono, circa 1982, Rolling Stone magazine quoted Bono as saying "we want to the bigger than the Beatles, or the Who."
So how about after the Who album release, we do a U2 album release, my vote for Achtung Baby! But Joshua Tree or War would be fun too (others suggestions). What da ya say folks. . . Feedback?

[thklinge]

Bono talked to Ed Bradley on 60 minutes in 2006 (CBS News - 60 Minutes) and said the following:

"You know what would have happened – and I'm not making a comparison, because I don't feel worthy to touch their hem – but what would have happened if the Beatles lived, and didn't, you know, disappear up their own arses but actually stayed in contact with the world, were awake. Didn't let their money buy them off. You know I'm still hungry. I still want a lot out of music,"

As a response to Ed talking about how they still, 25 years later, make great music and sell out entire tours before the tour has even started. I believe, and it's hard to argue against, how they are bigger than both The Who and The Beatles. Hell, what band is better? I have a hard time understanding why there is no U2 in any of these music games.

[bricio]

Bono talked to Ed Bradley on 60 minutes in 2006 (CBS News - 60 Minutes) and said the following:

"You know what would have happened – and I'm not making a comparison, because I don't feel worthy to touch their hem – but what would have happened if the Beatles lived, and didn't, you know, disappear up their own arses but actually stayed in contact with the world, were awake. Didn't let their money buy them off. You know I'm still hungry. I still want a lot out of music,"

As a response to Ed talking about how they still, 25 years later, make great music and sell out entire tours before the tour has even started. I believe, and it's hard to argue against, how they are bigger than both The Who and The Beatles. Hell, what band is better? I have a hard time understanding why there is no U2 in any of these music games.

Preach it brother! I still have high hopes that one day we will be rockin' out to some U2 in RB

[U2Phreak1969]

To me they are the next Fab Four - Maybe the Fab Four - with consciense.

[Will-san]

It is an interesting parallel. I think some of U2's best work is earlier in their career, their early stuff is brilliant and Joshua tree is probably the greatest album ever recorded but then they have never been able to get anywhere close again. (don't get me wrong some of their more recent stuff is pretty good and none of it is horrible but its just not close to Joshua or even achtung baby).

the Beatles on the other hand started out fascicle and grew into a level of depth that is astounding and then burned out like a...a...uh champange super nova. I wonder what would have happened if the Beatles had been able to hold it together. would they have gone on to even greater things musically or would they (like U2) plateaued, and put their efforts into saving the world?

they are in my mind the two greatest bands of all time I just wonder if not imploding under the weight their own fame (and possibly the lack of a Yoko) should count for or against U2?

[jbrocker56]

any U2 album I`ll pay the 9:99 for!!

[U2Phreak1969]

Will-san,

Bono's ego may bring them ruin long before another "Pop" album. That said, I'd love some European input on this thread. . . I heard they loved that album.

I really think that half of the "pretentious" attitude they are accused of having is a bleed over from Bono's various appearances on TV news. For a long time. . . Zooropa through Pop, Bono wouldn't even talk to the press. He'd tell them to talk to Edge, "He's the bands spokesperson".

The famous Mirror-ball suit, "licensed to be an egomaniac" lead singer, had nothing to say. But in the last ten years he has totally made up for any silence in the 1990's. That has lead to the deconstruction of U2's mythos.
But yet, who else could have made a movie as cool as U23D? Anyone that just said Hannah Montana/Mylie Cyrus is about to get b*tch slapped!

I think they are a long way from done, but as they began their career on a highly political note and then toned it down during their peak years, I think you will see a second rising of the U2 conscience. Its already beginning to crest and as long as the world can deal with the world's preachiest singer U2's popularity should continue.

Note to non U2 fans that made it this far in my diatribe: The band almost broke up in their early days because of strong Christian fundamentalist attitudes that most of the members had (minus one Adam Clayton).

They saw a Rockstar's life as incompatible with Christ's teachings and were literally ready to walk away in the early days of the US October tour. It was everything Adam and manager Paul McGuiness could do to talk them out of it.

The story goes that Paul sold them on the idea that they could never do as much good in the world EXCEPT AS Rock stars. He made the point "How do you make a difference?" and that money really made "Making a difference" a lot easier. All they could do was affect themselves with their religious values as private citizens, but as a Rockband, they had the world's most captive audience. . . one that would listen to what they had to say from their "bully-pulpit".

So I ask you, does money matter to these guys any more? I think their Grandchildren's Grandchildren will have full ride scholarships! So what do you do with that money. . . Well, if you're U2 you continue to preach the issues that are important to you and you spread your version of God's word as far and wide as you can get it while people will listen.

You maybe stop AIDS in Africa and you work to get third world debts dropped. Nothing to hard for an aging rock star and his mates!

Okay, now who wants to play some U2?!?!?!?!?

I'm feeling Elevation right now!!!

[mooremwm]

I'm not a huge U2 fan and I'm pretty sure I won't be able to sing most songs at Bono's octave, but my girlfriend loves them so I'd download some U2 if only to get her to play more often.

[Will-san]

Will-san,


I think they are a long way from done, but as they began their career on a highly political note and then toned it down during their peak years, I think you will see a second rising of the U2 conscience. Its already beginning to crest and as long as the world can deal with the world's preachiest singer U2's popularity should continue.

I am a huge fan, but I had never allowed for the possibility that they could peak again. I am not sure why.pessimism i guess. I really hope you are right. U23D was amazing, a late career renaissance would be fantastic.

[U2Phreak1969]

I am a huge fan, but I had never allowed for the possibility that they could peak again. I am not sure why.pessimism i guess. I really hope you are right. U23D was amazing, a late career renaissance would be fantastic.

I'm not quite sure that I am suggesting a second peak. . . No one outside the Stones and Jimmy Buffett (why?) have done that, and then only on the concert circuit.

I'm just saying U2 should stay popular enough to remain in the public eye for a long time and more than likely remain relevant. . . They have managed it for 30 years, why not a second 30?

My only caveat there was that might not happen if Bono's politics become more central than the music. There has to be a symbiosis there, if they are to co-exist. The music can survive with out the politics, but you turn that around or their career is over.