UZI Suicide Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 While I hate U2, I can admit that they are quite popular - but THIS popular? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051004/ap_en_tv/tv_o_brien_u2 NEW YORK - In his 12 years in charge of booking musical guests on Conan O'Brien's "Late Night," Jim Pitt always listed U2 and Johnny Cash as the dream artists he'd tried but never succeeded in getting. He lost his chance with the late Cash, but the U2 dream is coming true Thursday in a major way. O'Brien will turn over his entire show to the band, which is in New York for seven sold-out engagements at Madison Square Garden. "We were able to offer them something to feel enough like an event for them to do the show," Pitt said. "It's basically `Late Night with Conan O'Brien,' the U2 edition." The NBC show has never before devoted itself entirely to a musical guest, although it gave major time a few years back to a holiday appearance by bandleader Max Weinberg's other employer, Bruce Springsteen. O'Brien's a big U2 fan, and made a personal connection by talking at length with Bono during breaks in rehearsals for the band's "Saturday Night Live" appearance last season, Pitt said. It may be a nervous time for Bono, who is nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in trying to ease Third World poverty. People who watch the Nobel closely list the lead singer as one of the favorites. The winner is expected to be named Friday. The band is expected to perform three songs and be interviewed by O'Brien. Pitt is not pushing for any material in particular. "When U2 decides they want to come on the show for an hour, you don't get too picky about what they play," he said.
bob_barron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 Yea, U2 is pretty big. I figure they'll do one classic song (I Will Follow, One or Streets) and two newer songs (Vertigo, Sometimes... or City of Blinding Lights)
Giuseppe Zangara Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 Given their respective periods of time, both bands were/are big, but the similarity begins and ends there. The context of their popularity differs completely.
bob_barron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 Yea, you can't really compare the two. I'm seeing them on Saturday, should be a great show, even though I hope they don't play Stuck In A Moment like they did at their show last night.
Edwin MacPhisto Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 U2 on Conan would have been much bigger 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. But they're still pretty big--I don't think you can find a bigger band worldwide with such mainstream appeal. No Beatles, though. No one has ever really approached that sort of popularity.
UseTheSledgehammerUh Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 "We hafta save this food for all the starvin' children!" "I was just makin' sure it tasted good for all the starvin' children!" I thought the U2 cameo thing on Entourage was cool. Some of their music is alright, if not severely dated. I don't think their stuff today is very good. "Beautiful Day" reminds me of Triple H juicing, "Stuck in a Moment" is awful, "Vertigo" is embarassing, IMO. I'm sure I'm forgetting a bunch. "I Will Follow" is a cool song and reminds me of "The Last American Virgin", however, so it scores points.
Red Baron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 There hasn't been a band in a while that have two real big peaks in their music career after having a near decade long decline.
Dobbs 3K Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 U2 is amazing live. I saw them last Sunday in Milwaukee, and I doubt I'll ever see a better show, ever. No kidding, they were that good.
Annabelle Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 They're big because BONO rears his ugly irish mug into every political & social event in the world. he's somehow manipulated the masses into thinking he's a vital figure in world affairs, thus people think his & his band's music is epic. like beatles epic. which is false. plus, there'll never be another beatles, so why even the comparison?
bobobrazil1984 Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 i think its the double whammy of having a strong 2nd run of success thats more than just 'nostalgia', makes them feel like an institution, being that they been popular since what, the mid-80s? their last two albums were pretty good but nothing comared to achtung baby, joshua tree, and unforgettable fire.
KTID Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 Surely "Are U2 really this big?" rather than "Is U2 really this big?" In answer to the question, yes. They're the biggest band in the world. Have been for over 20 years, despite a shocking dip in quality in the '90s.
Mystery Eskimo Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 Actually, "is" is technically correct when referring to a band itself. We just use the plural in Britain. Grammar aside, I actually rather liked some of their early 90s stuff.
bob_barron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I love Zooropa and Pop. I know I'm in the minority, but those are two of my favourite albums by them. Then again, I like almost everything they do so I am quite biased.
Black Lushus Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I wouldn't say as big as the Beatles, but they're certainly at least on a top 10 All-Time list, and no lower than 5 or 6...
Guest Damn You Helmsley Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I used to be a big fan of U2 until All That You Can't Leave Behind. That killed my interest in one quick swoop. I also used to be a big defender of Pop but having recently listened to the album for the first time in years; it has dated really badly. Except Wake Up Dead Man, that's still good.
The Czech Republic Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I wouldn't say as big as the Beatles, but they're certainly at least on a top 10 All-Time list, and no lower than 5 or 6... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 6 or 7 Their stuff holds up well, and it's nice to listen to, but it's kinda uncompelling and same-y a lot of the time.
bob_barron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I agree with Czech that a lot of their stuff does sound the same. ATYLCB is overrated, but it still has some really good stuff on it. I had never listened to all of Pop until last summer, and I found myself loving it, and I now play it almost every day. Please has become one of my favourite songs.
The Czech Republic Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I agree with Czech that a lot of their stuff does sound the same. ATYLCB is overrated, but it still has some really good stuff on it. I had never listened to all of Pop until last summer, and I found myself loving it, and I now play it almost every day. Please has become one of my favourite songs. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I enjoyed ATYCLB too, but HTDAAB is trying to recapture it too much, and I'm so fucking sick of Vertigo. So damn overplayed. SO DAMN OVERPLAYED. "Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own" was good, but a lot of it was just uncompelling and same-y.
bob_barron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 I know we've disagreed on HTD before, I absolutely love it. There are a lot of similiarities with ATYLCB, I always believe HTDAAB to be a much better version of ATYLCB. Vertigo did get overplayed, so for a while I was just listening to Native Son. I've gone back to Vertigo now, and I really do enjoy it, even though it's not one of the top songs. I absolutely love City of Blinding Lights though, it's become my favourite U2 song.
The Decemberists Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 They're definatly the biggest band in the world, I can't really see any argument against that, but there's not exactly much stern competition these days though. But they, and no one else, can touch the Beatles in terms of global "bigness".
The Czech Republic Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 They're definatly the biggest band in the world, I can't really see any argument against that, but there's not exactly much stern competition these days though. Radiohead and Coldplay? Coldplay is the next U2. Pleasantly bland.
The Decemberists Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 They're definatly the biggest band in the world, I can't really see any argument against that, but there's not exactly much stern competition these days though. Radiohead and Coldplay? Coldplay is the next U2. Pleasantly bland. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My plan is to pretend that Coldplay don't exist, and then maybe, just maybe, one day I'll wake up and it'll be true. Plus they've only done two albums, I think, which I wouldn't class as being enough to really be up there with U2. I'll grant you Radiohead though.
haVoc Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 O'Brien will turn over his entire show to the band, which is in New York for seven sold-out engagements at Madison Square Garden. Those have to be over a period of time. No way can those shows be back to back nights.
The Decemberists Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 07th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 08th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 10th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 11th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 14th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 21st November, New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Patti Smith 22nd November, New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Patti Smith U2 and Keane... it's like a nightmere I once had.
The Czech Republic Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 My plan is to pretend that Coldplay don't exist, and then maybe, just maybe, one day I'll wake up and it'll be true. Plus they've only done two albums, I think, which I wouldn't class as being enough to really be up there with U2. 1. That's my plan too! 2. Yeah but everybody releases albums at a slower clip these days, it seems. What's gonna hold Radiohead back when everyone tries to evaluate their "best-ever?" status is that their hiatuses are too long. What IS Thom Yorke so debilitatingly depressed about, anyway? Roger Waters lost his dad in the war and his best friend to drugs. Morrissey was a gawky awkward sexually ambiguous loser who lived with his mother collecting dole because he wasn't really good enough at anything to get a job. Ian Curtis had epilepsy. Thom Yorke went to prep school and graduated from Exeter. Don't tell me he's still on the eye thing. If he didn't write such good music, I'd like him a lot less. His whole act seems so artificial.
haVoc Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 BTW, a better comparison would be the Rolling Stones. Success wise.
bob_barron Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 07th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 08th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 10th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 11th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 14th October New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Keane 21st November, New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Patti Smith 22nd November, New York - Madison Square Garden, Sold Out Support Act: Patti Smith U2 and Keane... it's like a nightmere I once had. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yea, I hate that they keep saying 7, when they are in town for 5 and then come back for two. But getting to here City of Blinding Lights and Miss Sarajevo...awesomeness
The Czech Republic Posted October 6, 2005 Report Posted October 6, 2005 BTW, a better comparison would be the Rolling Stones. Success wise. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, good call.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now