I say do it.

Yep. Though I really have no big problems with the album as is. If they made it better, though, I'd be down with it.

I'd be interested in hearing what they do with this as well. Staring at the Sun is fucking killer song, but I never got too into that album.

U2 needs to redo their last two albums instead because they are both so disappointing for the most part...

Not if they're going to make it sound like the last two albums. Pop is the last good U2 album in my opinion. Probably the last good one they'll ever make.

Wow, who woulda thought that a gas leak would happen at the same time in INdiana and Hawaii?

Quite a few of the changes are already made and you can witness the results on the Best of 1990-2000. I think the results are lightyears ahead of what Pop as it is sounds like now.

U2 are not a good band.

i love posts that say:

A. nothing on topic

B. are just used as a vehicle to voice negative opinions

Brilliant!

Plain and simple, huh? I think they are a good band, but not the great [sic] band that the media has tried to annoint them to. I keep thinking that they have a really great PR machine paired with decent music.

I actually heard them compared to the Beatles & the Stones the other day. WTF is that.

I'm guessing that gas leak in INdiana was going strong around the andy/haq household. You guys should look into that, as yr. parents may still have some legal recourse.

v2.0, for Yail: "Pop" is an album released by a bad band, U2. On the plus side, Bono sometimes tours Africa, during which time he is not recording bad albums.

this sounds like bono talking out of his butt.
they won't redo pop.

though it might be cool if they did.

so, im curious:

whats your problem with U2?

is it a certain era? the melodies,lyrics,rythm section,vocals or songwriting?

or did your indie overseeres just tell you not to?

just curious. I mean, its ok not to like someone, but U2 has a huge and divergent catalog to not like and im just curious as to your reasons. For me, baby, for me.

I believe U2 started the leak when they 'dismantled an atomic bomb.'

Actually, I used to be an enormous U2 fan and still consider everything pre-All That You Can't Leave Behind to be really good. I am more forgiving of Bono than I am most other artists that say the kinds of things he does or acts like he does. My only problem with U2 now is that their last two albums were really boring, feel-good and uninventive. Before that, I thought they always made a point to tweak their sound a little, experiement, whatever. That's what I like about Pop, it's totally not anything U2 did on any other album.

Achtung Baby is still one of my top-5 albums of all time.

Yep, got to agree with this, and I ain't no gas huffer neither!

See, I didn't really like the direction they took after Achtung, and think that both of the 00s albums are pretty fucking qual. I can see where one could argue with that, and to each their own and shit....

For Yail, baby, my considered opinion on U2.

I never really liked them. Throughout my life, people who I like and agree with on music have liked or loved U2, and pursuant to no prejudice that I can identify, I was lukewarm at best on them. Looking back with a more critical eye and attempting to explain their success, I would say that U2 are a band that was playing rock at a time when keytars reigned, and had a semi-political message (albeit a digestible, inoffensive one) when most of what you heard related only to love or fashion. For these reasons, they had more appeal than they might have in a less crappy popular musical milieu, because some people were just thirsty for rock, and its curious absence made U2 seem almost subversive. And the Edge had a pretty unique guitar sound, which caused some to inappropriately label him brilliant (his inability to forge a new sound in the intervening decades, I think, belies this claim).

Then U2 got bored playing the music they were good at playing, because everybody was playing rock. They experimented and lost the broad base of their fans, who just wanted "Joshua Tree II." Some hardcore afficionados hung on, and even believed these new forays were in fact MORE brilliant because they were weird. But U2, recognizing that the money and their only real talent lay in MOTS, they gave the fans what they wanted, supplanting the politics with self-help messages and constructing a heart-shaped stage. They reclaimed all their popularity and more, but none of what could be called originality. Having once been a benign, overrated Catholic rock band, they are now a towering monolith of selloutness.

well said, even though i happen to disagree.

Besides not liking their music (which, like i said earlier, is fine) i think you are almost offended that people might actually like a rock band and that a rock band might actually enjoy playing rock music.

i mean, what is wrong with wanting to be good, working really hard, and then, enjoying the success of your hard work?

And then using that success to reinvent yourself, fans and critics be damned?

I'm a huge U2 fan, I didnt really like "Atomic Bomb" (though i do quite enjoy "All that You Can't.....") and I will testify that U2 can still kick ass live. That is a pretty important mark in a band to me. Too many of these alleged good bands these days are all salt and no substance, they simply cant cut the mustard live.

Saying U2 is a "sellout" is foolish and misguided. Sorry.

Did I say I dislike rock music? I think it's kind of sad that people who loved U2 when they were ok still fawn over them now that they're churning out crappy albums and ipod promos, but if I thought that their albums weren't crappy, I wouldn't care if people liked them. I don't think that statement has any basis in all in what I've said, but I do think you're dead sure that I dislike anything popular. I do think that probably most of what is popular in music, film, what have you, is crappy, but not because it's popular, just because it's crappy. I'm sure it sometimes frustrates you when our culture in general praises crappy art, now take that and apply it to people you'd expect better from.

i didnt say you disliked rock music, i said that I thought that you were offended by people (en masse) liking a rock band. Just my opinion. I mean, like them or not, you are definitely offended by U2 doing a promotion for Ipod, but I dont see a problem in that either.....just a difference of opinion i suppose.

And yes, I do hold everyone to incredibly high standards. I just happen to enjoy what I enjoy. Personally, I would (and do) listen to All that you Can't Leave Behind more than Boy, October, or War.

I mean, I expect U2 to capitalise on their position as the "biggest band in the world" (sic) Why wouldn't you?

Well they can capitalize on it, but I've got to remark again on the apparent difference between GA dictionaries and those elsewhere. I mean, what DO you have to do to "sell out" as opposed to simply "capitalize"? I would think something like this:


[img][650:406]http://images.apple.com/ipod/u2/gallery/images/u2front20041026.jpg[/img]

I see myself feeling more like Aaron in regards to their more recent output, but I damn well enjoy most of the 80s stuff, particularly The Unforgettable Fire. Yeah, their music has become pretty benign at this point and there's a lot to hate about Bono, but I still hold some like for them.

U2 made nothing off of their Ipod-related antics last year. They simply did it to do it. It was a smart move, IMO - they got their name associated with one of the most "important" electronic items in the modern world right now. "Sell out" would indicate some monetary gain in exchange for the band's integrity - I see no such thing in this case.