Blogcritics Comments on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Comment by Just Sayin on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:58:21 EST

U2 were an 'OK' band up to the Joshua Tree, their finest moment. After that, with 'Rattle and Hype' it was SO obvious they were not musicians but 'rock stars'. Their music had a certain charm before, because the songwriting was good enough to make it unimportant that Edge couldn't really play guitar as such, and the rest of the group were similarly lackluster. Once they started pretending to be more than that, it really got ugly. Bizarrely, they morphed into 'the greatest rock band in the world' - what. the. hell.. These guys are so overrated it's ludicrous.

Comment by daryl d on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 3 Apr 2007 04:41:15 EDT

I listened to "Pop" this weekend. I don't understand why this album was criticized so much. I think the band deserved praise for taking such a risk.

Comment by Peter on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Fri, 9 Mar 2007 14:59:54 EST

I thought for a moment (one) that All That You Can't Leave Behind was going to be a return to form for the band on a go-forward. But that last one stunk and I am wondering if Rick Rubin will tell it like it is with them...? Nah. I guess there's no recovering from Disco Lemon Syndrome.

Comment by Margie on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:37:57 EST

I've always been dissapointed that U2 can be percieved as irrelevant, but I think this maybe really be the case: U2 is not irrelevant, they're unique--beacuse so many people don't get them means they are in such a different and special place that the general public finds hard to put a finger on. I'm not saying they're the future of music... timelessness if probably what it is, because they have always seemed relevant to me, and never at all to others. I'm not really sure about that statement, actually, but maybe it's better that way... mystery is a very important part of music to me.

Comment by Margie on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:16:35 EST

... please excuse the sarcasm-- I don't like a controlled music industry just as much as you... but it is necessary to acknowledge the fact that these are critics you're talking about, not the band themselves, who have no control over how the media interprets what they put out. I don't think u2 hasn't recieved their fair share of bad reviews anyway... this is one right here, and I've seen many other reviews who follow this selling out/commercialism is the devil example, especially when comes to reviewing u2 or any other successful band. Sometimes I can even see bad reviews as something good for u2, because it is important for rock bands to stir things up a bit, to be controversial, etc., as it adds to the passion of the music when a band questions/sings songs about ideas that can be hard to support and accept. For example, Bono exposes his own hypocrisies when he sings--something that is either interpreted very well, or very badly. If you do such a thing you will face both consequences, and fortunatley for u2 they have recieved alot of the prior-- but, in truth, that'd be worth nothing without the latter.

Comment by Margie on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:53:54 EST

Ah, thank god u2 got a bad review Now I can go back to loving them ;-)

Comment by zingzing on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:51:14 EST

maybe you would like to restate that...

Comment by inunenanon on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:02:41 EST

May I just state: You have no right to condemn Music Critics, as you are a relive nothing to them. They're critics for a reasons, and if you want to know some of those reasons, those are the opposite of why this article sucks.

Comment by Music143 on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Fri, 9 Feb 2007 20:08:45 EST

Of courses any "covers" concept is going to be rejected by the average status quo population, especially critics because it's played out to be banal. Artists/Bands who make their entire album (or majority of their album) of just renditions of cover songs won't be respected as an artist, whether they are amazing, great, ok, bad, terrible, i.e. vocally, because the average music user will see them as unoriginal, unless they are a radical fan of them. People like to hear new, original music. Something they haven't heard before. That is what sells. There are exceptions like when Whitney Houston covered "I Will Always Love You" by Dolly Parton or when Nirvana covered "The Man Who Sold The World" by David Bowie, as well as, a few others; but overall not a great idea. BTW, great blog. Keep up the good job. *hugs*

Comment by stones fan on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 02:54:18 EST

Daryl D, thanks for this great article. U2 fans live in an alternate reality where they actually believe the band is still relevant.

Comment by Kristen on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 23:25:43 EST

I'm a U2 fan -- always have been, always will be. This article is badly written bash on a great band. Even though I'll admit that How To Dismantle an Atomic Bomb was mediocre, that doesn't matter since the quality of music that U2 has made over the years (and All That You Can't Leave Behind is included, their 3rd masterpiece) makes up for it. They are and will always be talented beyond measure. Record sales mean nothing - U2 hasn't jumped the shark, sorry to spoil your hopes. Music critics don't give U2 bad reviews because U2 is the greatest band on earth. "Daryl" needs some prozac and a bottle of whiskey.

Comment by SharkGoddess on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 18:59:32 EST

*Yawns* This piece should be classified as fiction.

Comment by AA on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 18:31:12 EST

I bet with you that the new U2 Album won't come out this year. As usual they'll be late....very delayed. Aaaaaaand if you think nobody dares critising U2 you should visit the huge international U2 Fan-Forums. It's always like murder in there. Many U2 fans are highly critical but in a substancial manner. You've got no clue.

Comment by C on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 18:23:13 EST

I would appreciate if you could get your facts right. You assume so much and know so little. I like conspicacy theories but yours is pretty poor. Get some more infos if you want to critisize. The U218 Singles is a joke but that's actually what Bono himself called it. Just a compilation for young people to check the Band out. Nothing more and nothing less. If you want the 2 new tracks, just buy the Singles. Window In The Skies is a Song that only works with the Musicclip. The Video to that Song is one of the best I have ever seen in my live. A must to check out if you have any serious interest in music.

Comment by carrie on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:40:17 EST

I'm interested in hearing what you find to be relevant and "great" in today's music. The part that made me laugh the most was this: "To make matters worse, the song won "Song of The Year" at the 48th Annual Grammy Awards, the same organization that gave awards to Milli Vinilli and Jethro Tull. The sad part is that even though the awards achieved by these acts were laughable, their material, at the time, had far more substance than anything U2 has done recently." As if Milli Vanilli ever had substance??! You lost instant credibility in whatever you were trying to say.

Comment by zingzing on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:29:28 EST

for an alternate history of u2: u2 started out grandly with boy, making a kind of innocent stab at mixing guitar rock with an ethereal, spiritual quality. october went all religious and strange, war was political and strange (but at least it had fantastic songs). the unforgetable fire, their first work with eno/lanois was half great space pop (bad, sort of a homecoming) and half crap earnest junk (pride, indian summer sky or whatever). joshua tree kept the earnest, but replaced the junk with a kind of spaced out americana, which fit the band wonderfully. ditching eno, the band then released rattle and hum... which is more like ego and strum. figuring out that eno was what made them great, they released achtung baby, one of the great early 90s rock albums. all of their ego and earnesty was shunted off for crunchy rock and a nice dose of sex (which wasn't as strange as it sounds coming out of boner.) zooropa followed, and sound-wise, was very much a step up from a.b. unfortunately, the band only wrote 5 songs, but the album had 10... pop was such a failure (it's not horrible... but it's not good) that u2 got frightened and went back on all their changes, forgetting how they made good music, but remembering how it made people feel... and released more of the earnest crap as all that you can't leave behind... then followed it up with more crap and more crap and...

Comment by Mike Roberts on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:03:27 EST

U2 is a good whipping post for the shallow music that surrounds us today not because they're the most egregious violators. Come on, we've survived boy bands. They win because of how much they've changed. U2's first album, "Boy," was pretty sparse. It sounded like it was recorded in a garage, Bono's vocal range approached a single octive and everyone in the band sounded frightened. Each successive album showed dramatic growth in musicianship, vocals, and songwriting. By "October" their lyrics already meant something. Anyone who listened to U2 when their albums came out could see this. It made a new album release something to anticipate because you had to wonder how this album would be better than the last. This kept happening right up until "The Joshua Tree." This wasn't my favorite album ("Unforgettable Fire" is), but there's no denying that you're listening to masters of rock when you hear that album. It's beautiful. "Rattle and Hum" is still pretty good, but it was obvious at this point that U2 had stopped focusing on being musicians and instead worked on being Rock Stars. I shudder whenever I picture Bono as "The Fly." Brrrrr! Or should that be "Bzzzzz?" The albums that came out after that sold because U2 made them, not because they were good. Now, U2 is just the retail brand of the band that started in the 70's. They somehow remind me of Aerosmith which isn't known for its music anymore. It's known simply because it's... Aerosmith.

Comment by zhon on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 12:48:43 EST

U2 have become so irrelevant. This is a great article. A little harsh and I question some of the content, but a good read.

Comment by ldg on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 12:46:08 EST

i find the title of the piece funny. clearly everyone -- including yourself, the music critic -- is "pathetic"

Comment by Dono on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 11:24:33 EST

1. U2's involvement with Apple and the iPod went to charity. 2. They have been selling out shows for 20+ years. 3. Bono has used his stardom to benefit many, maybe not solve every person in the world's problems, but he has helped many and brought to light many issues. 4. Yes, Pop sucked, the videos were repulsive, I just left it out of my CD collection. 5. "The Edge" is a cool name for anybody. 6.They have been Rock Gods for 20+ years and still remained faithful to their core vaules and beliefs. I grow tired of coming to their defense. La-di-da-da-do!

Comment by bOB spelled backwards on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 09:30:08 EST

everyone's entitled to his/her opinion, but i will always buy into U2's bizness ... the job of any good performer is to sell out ... if someone can't fill a stadium or arena, then they aren't a success anymore ... look at the facts, U2's VERTIGO tour was sold out nearly every night ... in my Bono book, they are still doing their job ... GOD bless U2 !!!

Comment by DJRadiohead on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 08:35:25 EST

I hate going at something like this, but I feel a need to say it. You have questioned the objectivity and credibility of other reviewers as part of your platform to attack U2. I think we should make it abundantly clear to everyone that the guy who says U2 jumped the shark put Jewel's "Foolish Games" into his Hall of Fame. We're all allowed to like what we like, no problem there. I like U2. I think Jewel is atrocious at her best. Just as you dismiss critics who continue to heap on praise for a band you so clearly don't like anymore, if you ever liked them at all, I am choosing to similarly dismiss the opinion who puts Jewel songs in the Hall of Fame. It should probably also be noted that in the case of "Window in the Sky," a song I am not crazy about, it falls into the category of many, many songs added to Greatest Hits package that did not become a hit on its own. The "Mary Jane's Last Dance" phenomenon is a bowl of rare. It is rare that an artist puts a new song on a hits package and sees it become a hit on its own. It's not uncommon for bands to stick a throwaway on a compilation because they hate having to give up a song that would be great on an album as a one-off for the package. In other words, "Window in the Sky" and its performance on the charts is not a fair barometer in and of itself. Going into a U2 fanboard to criticize U2 is akin to walking into the Democratic National Committee HQ wearing a "W" t-shirt. Of course you're going to get a negative response. You have plenty of venues, BC Magazine, for instance, where you can empty your spleen about U2. What I find particularly galling here, though, is you can't just come out and say "I don't like U2 (anymore)." You have to turn it into a crusade. You have to turn yourself into some sort of martyr for the truth, you and other right-thinking people having been oppressed, fired, or censored for expressing your beliefs. Come off it.

Comment by U2Fan on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 08:32:34 EST

You cannot argue with the facts. people are not stupid and dont buy music just because its U2. They buy it because it is good and they are talented. In any walk of life people are jealous and claim a dislike of the best. Its ok not too like someone but keep your small minded blog to yourself!

Comment by Marty Dodge on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 07:01:11 EST

Well U2s early stuff was badly played, I mean the Edge could not even play by his own admission, yet critics lauded them in extremis. Why? Because they were cheeky chappies from Ireland and that counted for a lot especially in the US. I am soon to be related to a U2. She say them in Dublin a few years back and was not impressed partly due to the fact Bono did a 20 minute rant instead of bloody singing. (Tickets weren't cheap either.) 'Vertigo' was not a bad song but the rest of the new stuff...is a bit blah.

Comment by daryl d on U2, Music Critics, and The Music Industry: As Pathetic as You Can Get

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 04:11:52 EST

Marcia, you sound like a great person. I'm sure you are kind, sweet, loving, and fun to be with. BUT WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY IN YOUR POSTS?????????