How fucked is their legacy

u2 used to be fucking huge but it's clear that they carried on for way too long and did some lame records and now they're almost more 'boomer' than actual boomer bands. even their eighties output has been tarnished by the tedium that washes over me whenever bono pops up with a smug face telling me to make the world a better place, so fart-huffingly comfy as the elder statesman he always vied to be. sitting down and listening to their post-joshua tree catalog just conjures up tar-black dread of monumental proportions. thankfully no one has done that since they were released, but close your eyes and imagine all those endless cd-era mid-tempo albums with tasteful electronica flourishes. an ocean of charity shop compact discs.

there's nothing sexy or dangerous about u2., no not even paul david hewson who busted his ass virtue signaling for thirty fucking years but at the end of the day was just irish dylan. it's four guys who like to rock and made it big via honest and hard work. the only noteworthy incident in their entire career is when they forced an album down everyones throat with itunes.

they did a decent job salvaging achtung baby a while back but how will they hold up to future generations? r.e.m, radiohead, nirvana, smiths, even fucking coldplay will (like it or not) carry on forever but outside of the four or five big hits i feel like u2 is dead and nothing can save them

Attached: U2r&h.jpg (300x298, 55.94K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=7hgwOTK2xN4
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

The problem is that their music is too safe and inoffensive and outright soulless for anyone to give a shit about them. They've sold hundreds of millions of records so I'm sure people will remember them.

Big acts reach a point where it doesn't matter what the haters say and all their misteps are breezed over, like paul mccartney. Like I would see him he had a concert in my town probably, even though he had a song with the lyrics 'dance dance all night we're gonna dance allright'

OP, you could have said all this in 2004 and it would be more relevant, now it's just great they're stilll going, (or are they?)

youtube.com/watch?v=7hgwOTK2xN4

Attached: 289826911_1741108319570876_4311037301124667914_n.jpg (1080x1349, 195.98K)

U2 are so big that their genre is called big music

Boy and War definitely aren't safe and inoffensive

just rambling for a sec

i wonder how they would sound nowadays if pop didn't bomb, i feel it really got them beat up. their 90s output was, certainly compared to now, lot more experimental, don't forget passengers, their most experimental. it kinda was how radiohead did switch after ok computer. if U2 wanted to, they could have walked the same path along after the 90s, maybe even try out nigel godrich or other producers instead of ryan tedder, lol.

they suddenly had to make bland pop rock after pop, and even now, they still want to be successful in the charts. point is, they won't. but even as of last year, bono and the edge released that crappy song with martin garrix. their newest album apparently? reworks of old songs. or songs of ascent, maybe. they have teased that since 2008?

it depends how gen z and onwards will view them. i'm a zoomer, grew up with their music. and i still hold a dear spot in my heart for them, got into lots of other music thanks to them. love their 80s/90s output. but will others around my age view the same? i believe most not. the greatest hits will be the ones they'll be known for. but i do remember the south park episode with bono, or how they fucked up the apple thing, or their feature with kendrick lamar on xxx. it's not unthinkable their legacy will exist of jokes of them.

thing is, u2 is a legacy act at this point, they're all 60 and rich. they don't have to prove anything anymore. they still fill up stadions. they rather believe they still got the relevance to score big in the charts, but they don't, they should make whatever they like.

and honestly, it's what lots of 80s acts do. look at simple minds or duran duran.

Depeche Mode's output has been really mediocre in the last 20 years as well yet they are remembered way more fondly because Gore and Gahan were way less annoying frontmen

Hate and love are so close together aren't they?

Attached: thephj.jpg (912x528, 147.04K)

Their legacy is spearheading the "big music" pseudo-genre on rym

that as well. plus, personal jesus and enjoy the silence will be remembered lot more fondly than with or without you and one.

U2's legacy isn't fucked. They were the biggest and most influential band in the world in the late 80s, and most people don't pay any attention to anything they did after the early 90s. Yeah, they're lame and safe, but they helped define rock music in the late 80s, and that's what they'll always be remembered for. The Joshua Tree and maybe War. Their cultural impact in the late 80s is more important than the actual music, and that's what they'll be remembered for.

*puts on Where The Streets Have No Name at full volume in a locked stereo cabinet with a built in power source that can't be removed*

Attached: flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.png (4096x5461, 3.09M)

I saw U2 against my will and they were actually amazing

AMERICA IS AN IDEA. AMERICA IS WHAT I STRIVE FOR. EVERYONE LOOKS UP TO AMERICA. THE IRISH BULT AMERICA. OH AMERICA I LOVE YOU!!!! AMERICA DONT LEAVE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!
OH!!!! NEW YORK!!!!!!
AMERICAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!IM GONNA COOOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Attached: bono wants da biddy.jpg (617x409, 59.55K)

Foreigners still shit themselves over u2 I think Europe and the states stopped caring awhile ago

Bono killed U2. If it wasn’t for him they would still be a viable band

>just Irish Dylan
Based

>paul david hewson
Who?

That’s Bono, dig

>Who?
Bobo,Bozo,Bonzo,Bongo,Boner,Bolo, O`knob etc...

their legacy is just fine if you stopped listening at Under a Blood Red Sky