Subscriber jaanakulo 12 Posted January 15, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 15, 2017 Amrit: exactly. Love Joshua Tree and the band but definitely NOT going to see a gig of milking joshua tree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber jaanakulo 12 Posted January 15, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 15, 2017 PS. Joshua Tree tour was the first one I managed to see U2 live. Then Zoo TV. My best U2 gig I suppose. During the last tour made a mistake to do the same place to see the band when 1992. And now Joshua in 1987 no, I do not want to see it again, no way. It was my 1st ever band gig abroad far from perfect cos we did not get close to the stage but however, the time and the vibe with thousands of people humming how long to sing this song walking from the arena. Last time when I saw them I was alone on the bridge of Stockholm, in 92 there were thousands. And of course, now there will be thousands but for me U2 is too precious to feel the sadness I could not go to a Joshua Tree with an image in my mind of young bono and a band broken through nowadays it is only like bourgeois millionaires doing the job to keep their mansions no. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber Amrit 16 Posted January 15, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 15, 2017 (edited) Commercially U2 have to top the Joshua Tree, not try to regrow it. They are striving to leave a legacy and creative pile of music against which they will be judged. I don't see how 2017's Joshua Tree tour can be a "creative" success. Life is short - why are they wasting it with pushing out stuff done before. No matter how you dress up the stage, the songs have been sang before (albeit we want to hear one or two they haven't played live). The more I think about it, the more I am feeling it is a mistake. When you remember any prior album or tour, it's firmly framed in your mind from that part of your life. Now it will be a case of "Joshua Tree? Oh yeah which tour do you mean? The old one or the one they did again in 2017". The U2 I know and love used to reinvent itself. Challenge the norms and push the boundaries of what is possible. I don't want them to become a heritage act - they need to hang their guitars before that happens. What you do guys think? Releasing a 30 year anniversary box set with "new" material is fine but not touring it makes no creative sense at all. I don't believe any of the hype. Yes it is a U2 tour and we are going to like it. But wouldn't you rather hear new material that is relevant now? It's too late now as the tour is booked, If I could have a word with them I'd say "please get back in that Studio and make SOE poignant and reflective of the troubled times we find ourselves . Don't replant the Joshua Tree! You spent the 90s chopping it down. Leave it well alone. We love it and it will always be remembered..." Edited January 15, 2017 by Amrit Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber Countingbackwards 0 Posted January 15, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 15, 2017 Something that can get lost in these existential analyses of whether the tour should be...most people under ~45 years old were too young to have seen the original Joshua Tree tour. Probably at least half the people in attendance will be in this age category, including myself (Popmart was my first show). I'm thrilled to get to see a Joshua Tree tour, cause I never got to see one before, and the tour was the stuff of legends. I'll be happy to see what it was all about, even if Bono can't hit some of those notes anymore. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber Grande 3:16 39 Posted January 15, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 15, 2017 But wouldn't you rather hear new material that is relevant now?Normally I would say yes. At this stage of U2's career I'd rather hear great songs that haven't been played live in decades (or ever) than the "new" songs which will never get played again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber a321doc 0 Posted January 17, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 17, 2017 Achtung Tour in 2021 please. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber zootvboy 1 Posted January 17, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 17, 2017 You glorify the past....when the future dries up........? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Subscriber joshthetree 115 Posted January 17, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted January 17, 2017 You glorify the past....when the future dries up........? Good quote! plus "peeling off those dollar bills ..." Yes they chopped the tree down in the 90s - and weren't very fkattering about it in From the Sky Down to boot. Perhaps it might be a big publicity stunt to unveil Songs of Experience in the second set? I love U2 and I love the joshua tree, but would I prefer to hear new material and have a new album? You bet! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sigma957 2 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I think they should make an exception and play a full band version of "When I Look At the World" at each show. Its sound is classic Joshua Tree in the intro. I always felt it should have been the first track on 'All That You Can't Leave Behind'. Also "Deep In the Heart" should get some genuine live full band version. Joshua Tree 1987 is where I began and hopefully Joshua Tree tour 2017 is not where I end. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sigma957 2 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Commercially U2 have to top the Joshua Tree, not try to regrow it. They are striving to leave a legacy and creative pile of music against which they will be judged. I don't see how 2017's Joshua Tree tour can be a "creative" success. Life is short - why are they wasting it with pushing out stuff done before. No matter how you dress up the stage, the songs have been sang before (albeit we want to hear one or two they haven't played live). The more I think about it, the more I am feeling it is a mistake. When you remember any prior album or tour, it's firmly framed in your mind from that part of your life. Now it will be a case of "Joshua Tree? Oh yeah which tour do you mean? The old one or the one they did again in 2017". The U2 I know and love used to reinvent itself. Challenge the norms and push the boundaries of what is possible. I don't want them to become a heritage act - they need to hang their guitars before that happens. What you do guys think? Releasing a 30 year anniversary box set with "new" material is fine but not touring it makes no creative sense at all. I don't believe any of the hype. Yes it is a U2 tour and we are going to like it. But wouldn't you rather hear new material that is relevant now? It's too late now as the tour is booked, If I could have a word with them I'd say "please get back in that Studio and make SOE poignant and reflective of the troubled times we find ourselves . Don't replant the Joshua Tree! You spent the 90s chopping it down. Leave it well alone. We love it and it will always be remembered..." I disagree with your entire post. U2 are not relevant in music anymore whether you want to believe it or not. They should just make great music and play it all live. WHICH THEY DON'T. This tour (if they actually keep their promise) will be the first time EVER that they actually played an entire album at one show. For U2, that's new territory. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.