U2:UV Achtung Baby at the Sphere
Legs (1): 2023-2024
Shows: 40
Tickets:
  1. I understand where you're coming from and am critical of some aspects of this show, too. But I think for the band they are looking at this as the most "relevant" thing they could possibly do - being the openers for the next big thing in terms of live entertainment, as they see it.

    Also don't think the comparison with Nirvana works...totally different kind of ethos as a band from U2 in their rejection of fame. For the Clash, sure U2 was inspired by punk rock bands musically but their desire to be live music innovators on the biggest possible scale is very different, too.

    As for Elvis and Vegas...Bono has fully noted that connection already in the Zane Lowe interview so they aren't shying away from that. As Edge noted once, too: "right in the middle of a contradiction - that's the place to be." They've been living that tension since the beginning.


    These are all valid points. I was getting a bit carried away in my rhetorical flourishes. Your phrase that interests me most is "biggest possible scale."

    You're right that that has been part of their ambition since very early on (or part of Bono's ambition--I doubt any of the other three cared that much, and I suspect Larry always looked at bigness for bigness' sake with very skeptical eyes).

    It could be that exact ambition has resulted in certain moves that alienate some: this Vegas thing and the SOI iTunes debacle, for instance. Then there's the Popmart tv special...the release of Rattle and Hum as a "major motion picture" rather than as a humble rock doc...etc?
  2. Originally posted by dstankie:[..]


    These are all valid points. I was getting a bit carried away in my rhetorical flourishes. Your phrase that interests me most is "biggest possible scale."

    You're right that that has been part of their ambition since very early on (or part of Bono's ambition--I doubt any of the other three cared that much, and I suspect Larry always looked at bigness for bigness' sake with very skeptical eyes).

    It could be that exact ambition has resulted in certain moves that alienate some: this Vegas thing and the SOI iTunes debacle, for instance. Then there's the Popmart tv special...the release of Rattle and Hum as a "major motion picture" rather than as a humble rock doc...etc?
    No worries. Your examples of their ambition carrying them away sometimes are good ones and also part of what I meant when referring to them as embracing contradictions from the start. That's why even though I hate that Larry isn't playing I still don't necessarily see the Sphere shows as all that different from previous decisions they've made, for better or for worse.
  3. My take on this has always been that they can do whatever the hell they want.
    It's their job, not mine.
    If they want to play in North Korea for the dictator, I can say that I do not support it, yet it won't change the fact that if they want to do it, they will.

    Same with this, if they want to become a legacy band and do a residency without one of their founding members, I can choose to be ok with that or not. It won't change the fact that they will still do it.

    What many people forget is that this should not affect them on a personal level. It is a rock and roll band, they are not your parents or your spouses or whatever. I get that they have given us hours of entertainment and I for one am grateful for that. But still I can separate my feelings from that
  4. What many people forget is that this should not affect them on a personal level.


    A little judgy, no? Telling others how they should feel?
  5. The thing is, many of us have followed and loved the band and their music they kind of can feel like family, and some of their positions and actions are bound to be taken personally- or at least strongly
  6. Well, from a mental health perspective it is not healthy to put so much weight of your well being in what some people that have never met you do or do not do

    But hey, if that's being judgy to you, go for it
  7. Well, from a mental health perspective it is not healthy to put so much weight of your well being in what some people that have never met you do or do not do

    But hey, if that's being judgy to you, go for it.


    Now that's quality judging!

    I'm just messing, but really, what gives you the right to decide what someone else should or shouldn't feel?

    I don't think my well-being is tied up with what U2 does or doesn't do. However, as a very serious, very long time listener, I still have feelings and opinions (sometimes strong ones) about their music and their decisions.

    Don't you? Doesn't everybody who would take the time to post here?

    And if we didn't have strong feelings and opinions, wouldn't that mean the band and their music didn't actually mean anything to us?

    To use your earlier example, are you telling me you wouldn't feel some sort of shock/betrayal if U2 played a gig in support of Kim Jong-un?
  8. Does anyone know if GA is just one general area or is there a left and right side which you cant inter-change from once inside ?
  9. Hmm, just saw this quote that seems relevant again... "If one of the band members isn't feeling well, they're not gonna say hard luck mate, we're carrying on." - Brian Eno, From The Sky Down

    I'm not looking to start the whole Larry debate again, just an observation.
  10. Originally posted by Timk68:Does anyone know if GA is just one general area or is there a left and right side which you cant inter-change from once inside ?
    Looks like one area.