Revisionist history -- The U2 Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 21:44:28 10/31/00 Tue
Author: Michael
Subject: Revisionist history

I've noticed a disturbing trend (at least to me) in the numerous new album reviews I've been reading through over the past week: almost every single review, within the first two or three paragraphs, mentions what a "flop" Pop was, and how silly it was for U2 to head in the direction.

I happened to enjoy the album, and personally think these critics are confusing their own disappointment with the Popmart tour for disappointment with the album itself. Why do I say this? I remember reading several reviews at the time and noticing Pop got several excellent reviews, including 4 stars from Rolling Stone (the same rating given the new album).

Unfortunately, the tour -- which was below par in some regards, but still fun I thought -- seems to have lowered people's hindsight on this period of U2, and much like with Rattle & Hum, critics feel compelled to "explain" or ponder the "backlash" against U2. So now a little bit of Pop-bashing seems to be in vogue.

I do not bring this up because I think U2 is beyond critism. I attended the opening Popmart show in Las Vegas and was disappointed by the obvious lack of prepartion (at this show, the band tried to perform "Staring at the Sun" as a four piece arrangement, realized it wasn't working, and later scrapped it for an acoustic rendition). I only bring this up because I feel many critics are being inconsistent, having praised Pop, but now they scorn the album.

oh well, maybe it's just me.

Mike

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Revisionist history -- Natasa, 02:59:35 11/05/00 Sun