What do the hardcore U2 fans think?

[ThomThomDrum]

So you don't think that he could possibly "remains an uncharismatic performer" because the Glasto performance was as uncharismatic as his performances always are? I don't know if they always are, I've not seen U2 before. But Glastonbury, to me at least, was defo uncharismatic. It made watching them dull.

Is the writer having a pop just cos Bonio is an easy target, or because he's deserving of it in that writer's eyes? You don't know any more than I do - but you've taken a view of why he's written what he has all the same, as your words just above get to show.

Which is, funnily enough, exactly what I've done. I've taken it as honest, no less than you've taken it as being dishonest.

You dismiss anything negative as the worthless words of a Bono-hater. So which of us is the one who's lost their honest perspective here?

The simple fact is - as the sales of newspapers have been proving every day for 200+ years - that we humans like to read things which we feel endorse our existing opinions. And that's simply the reason why we're now having the discussion that we are, because you're looking to refute anything that doesn't match the view that you want all people to have, while I'm simply defending my right to my own view.

you've got an overly high opinion of yourself if you think I need to show you things which back my honest opinion - particularly when you're already showing that you won't accept the honesty of my opinion, nor the honesty (or, perhaps, dishonesty - but you're guessing that it is just so that it conforms with your pre-decided view) of the writer of that Indie piece.

I went re-looking for that Indie piece *ONLY* because I was originally under the mistaken view that I'd read that in the Guardian when I hadn't - after someone had pointed out to me that I was wrong in saying The Guardian review was negative.

It's been put before your eyes, and you find 'reasons' to dismiss it as worthless evidence despite it matching what I'd said - a review with an opinion that's in the same ball park as what I'd said. How f**king stupid are you if you're thinking you'd accept any better anything else I presented to you?

I'm not that stupid myself. I can see the immovable brick wall that is your own opinion.

Edited July 7, 2011 by ThomThomDrum

[Wooderson]

I think you two funboys need to get a room. Bring the camera Neil, etc.

[eFestivals]

My opinion from being at the gig, from most of comments from others on this thread before it turned into a pile of shite and from most of the reviews I have read is that the gig was above average and not dull.

you read a bunch of reviews that more or less mirror your view and you're happy. I read a bunch of reviews which more or less mirror my view and I'm happy.

(Perhaps some of those are actually the same reviews. People pick up on the parts which endorse their own thinking with things like this, as I've already said)

But you're not happy for me to state something on the exact same basis as you. To your mind, I *HAVE TO BE* wrong, because I've dared to have a different view to you.

It's laughable. But it seems that you're determined to keep up the laughter.

I am willing to accept my view is in the minority in favour of other views that agree with yours if those views look to be the majority,

I'm willing to accept that my view is in the minority. Full stop. Spot the difference?

The difference is that you won't accept the right of others to their opinion. It matters not a f**k who has the majority on their side. No opinion is less valid than any other opinion. Your right of comment on my opinion starts and ends only with the words "I disagree", something you're more than welcome to do. You are not welcome to tell me that my opinion cannot be right as you're trying to do. That makes you a stupid arse, nothing less.

I had an opinion on what I thought of U2. The reviews I've read are in the same ball park enough for me to feel that I've not called it wrong.

My interest ended with that. I wanted to know if what I saw with the few songs I did was how it was overall, or whether I missed out on a magical moment later on which might have changed my view if I'd stayed - and there defo wasn't that magical moment. So my view is good for my own mind: I don't give a f**k if you happen to think I'm off my mind because you happened to enjoy it more than I did.

however there does not seem to be the evidence to back this up. (And of course it never will because a.) Im too blind to see it! and b.) You actually will not present it.......

How many f**king times? The bit of evidence that has been presented to you you refuse to accept as valid, on the basis that you think everyone should agree with you and nothing else. Why the f**k would I bother with anything else which will get the same response?

I simply asked you to present it and you have hidden under your rock of bull!

I'll present it to you when you present to me all the words that you read on ... I dunno ... 15th May this year. Can you even do it if you wanted to? I doubt it. Funnily enough, I'm in the same situation. Plus I can see an arse when it's in front of me, and I can see a bottomless argument from your refusal to accept the negativity of words about Bono at Glastonbury in the Indie piece that has been in front of your eyes.

Im sure no one else on these boards wants to read this continuing drivel so if you must have the last attack please do so and be nice and make it simple for me to understand! Im really fragile and dont understand big words!!

OK, here you go....

Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one, and they're all full of shit.

Yes, even yours. Especially yours. Now get over it.

Or if you would like to show me up, more than I have done so myself by engaging with you in this manner, you may even post links to all those reviews that prove your view point of the gig to be the general consensus.....That would really shut me up..Some how Nelly I dont think you will! Will you?

Care to show me where I've said my view is "the general consensus"? I've said something entirely different.

And we're back yet again to you having to make things up to try and sustain a pointless argument where you're trying to say I have no right to hold the opinion I do.

[ThomThomDrum]

you read a bunch of reviews that more or less ...............blah blah blah....still not offering up reviews....waffle waffle......

[eFestivals]

The End.

Thank God!

Yep, thank god. You've finally accepted my right to my opinion.

Shame it took you so long.

[dingbat2]

This reminds me of the weather thread.....

[MEGABOWL]

This is like the worlds shittest Statler and Waldorf routine

[chris northwest]

I feel that since Glastonbury I may have been influenced by stuff I've read reviewing the gig. I'd started to convince myself it wasn't great.

I've just watched it in earnest for the first time on TV and it took me right back to the 24th.

I've now remembered how I felt on the night, the next morning and until I got home. I've remembered how I felt during Stay. How I felt when Bad kicked in. Hell, even how I felt during Moment of Surrender. I've remembered what I said to the young lad I was camped by the next morning.

It was f**king brilliant.

Edited July 7, 2011 by chris northwest

[dingbat2]

This is like the worlds shittest Statler and Waldorf routine

[Bobser]

personally i've waited for nearly 20 years for the band i grew up on to grace that stage! admittedly, it could have been better, but the feeling of it finally happening is something that will stick in my mind for years to come

[port]

for what its worth, last time i saw u2 was at the barrowlands early 80's . i have never been to a stadium gig and never will.

honestly thought that this had the potential to be amazing , it wasnt. If i'm honest they were nothing special.

now its over and I have had time to think, it would not benefit U2 to do a brilliant gig on a proper stage in a traditional setting. Had they done this with the right attitude to the audience and lets face it a professional should be trying to give their all on every performance, then their future stadium gigs would have been compared to their fantastic Glastonbury performance. which would undermine their own gigs.

this is the reason why I think they didnt blow the place away and in my opinion they missed an opportunity to show the world their capabilities.

I think U2 gave exactly the performance they intended and got the sense that it wasnt 100% real u2 fans so why give 100% performance.

it was u2 playing u2 songs with no passion bar out of control

Edited July 7, 2011 by port

[Aarron B]

Bonos a bellend. But they were class, proper headline band.

[wbarenno]

I think some people are forgeting what tour u2 are doing at the moment.theve been touring for 3 years all over the world.its a non stop stadium tour that only u2 can do out of any music act. Heres the stats for the biggest tour of all time

GROSS: $659,302,701 (RECORD)

ATTENDANCE: 6,471,795 (RECORD)

Average Gross: $6,727,579

Average Attendance: 66,039

Average Ticket Price: $101.87

Shows: 98

Sellouts: 98

Nobody in the world can produce stats like that!

Not bad for a so called dull band

[Wooderson]

I think some people are forgeting what tour u2 are doing at the moment.theve been touring for 3 years all over the world.its a non stop stadium tour that only u2 can do out of any music act. Heres the stats for the biggest tour of all time

GROSS: $659,302,701 (RECORD)

ATTENDANCE: 6,471,795 (RECORD)

Average Gross: $6,727,579

Average Attendance: 66,039

Average Ticket Price: $101.87

Shows: 98

Sellouts: 98

Nobody in the world can produce stats like that!

Not bad for a so called dull band

[MEGABOWL]

I think some people are forgeting what tour u2 are doing at the moment.theve been touring for 3 years all over the world.its a non stop stadium tour that only u2 can do out of any music act. Heres the stats for the biggest tour of all time

GROSS: $659,302,701 (RECORD)

ATTENDANCE: 6,471,795 (RECORD)

Average Gross: $6,727,579

Average Attendance: 66,039

Average Ticket Price: $101.87

Shows: 98

Sellouts: 98

Nobody in the world can produce stats like that!

Not bad for a so called dull band

[Bobs]

For me i enjoyed it, but it's clear there was a sound difficulty, and quite blatent nervousness amongst the band, seeing as obviously the rumours of protests, the no never gonna be as amazing as in their own shows in their comfort zone, and i think it showed.. regardless i enjoyed seeing them!

[Lubic]

Anyway...

This was awesome - really glad they played it!

[wbarenno]

I know its late but i just wanted to add my two pence worth into the debate

I was at the festvial for the fourth time and i love the place , id always dreamed of seeing U2 there and it finally happened.

Just a few thoughts on the gig itself i was about 5 people deep from the front barrier so i was in a prime postion.

The first song didnt go down too well for me , the edges guitar was really low and i could barely hear Bono's voice not a great start in my eyes. I love the remix of the song but i couldnt make it out at all.

Then they ripped into the fly and my worries ended. U2 had landed at glastonbury. The next few songs were great sound wise. Then the start of streets was very dodgy and killed the full impact of the song.

Going into the last third of the gig bonos mike went really low again , to the point where i could just about make out what he was singing. Like i said i was 5 people deep from the front barrier so the sound at the back couldnt of been too good.

I really dont think it was at u2's standards it was great but it wont go down as a legendary glastonbury set.

The pyramid stages sound just didnt do the band justice to make it epic in my opinion.

The sound at a 360 show is the best sound ive ever heard at a gig and is head and shoulders above the glastonbury show.I wouldnt class the glastonbury on par with croke or cardiff on the 360 tour.

Why did the band put themselves under so much pressure for the show , f**k me there the best band on the planet did they doubt themselves.

From other forums[non u2] ive been on the set went down quite well but alot of people didnt like it [70/30 in u2's favour id say] people have complained about the sound and stated that the rain beat them!

All in all it was great but ive seen better [cardiff and dublin 360]

U2 should have been the best glastonbury headline set ever but i dont think they did themselves enough justice to claim that!

After watching it back on dvd and downloading the bootleg i thought the sound came across loads better on cd and dvd. The bad sounds in places werent picked up [apart from ebttrt and wtshnn]

[efcfanwirral]

totally forgot to mention this before, but did anyone else notice the people with their umbrellas up about 10 people in front of sound desk, pretty central but maybe a tad to the right? We were stood behind them for the first song and basically they just wouldnt put their big brolly down. obviously being just behind we coudlnt see, but i figured pretty much anyone nearby behind them wouldnt be able to either!

if you were in that area - we were the people who asked them to take it down as nobody could see, and got told in no uncertain terms where to go. so we just pushed in front of them (of course they werent happy about this).

I know it was raining but basically I couldnt see ANY of the pyramid because of the proximity. I feel sorry for those who ended up stood behind them....

[angelofharlem]

Anyway...

This was awesome - really glad they played it!

[budvar]

In the Glasto scorecard U2 got an average score of 7.26 out of 10 from the 139 people who rated them.

That's not at all bad (certainly much better than Gorrilaz got last year). I was also surprised that they got more votes than anyone else, suggesting they attracted the biggest audience (in terms of efesters)

Full results here: /index.php?showtopic=165313">http://www.efestivals.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=165313

[The Roses]

Watching it on BBC it was amazing, I think people are saying it was poor because it wasn't the best glasto gig ever but its certainly an awesome gig in general!

Its good to see three headliners at a festival who are generally proud to be there, not there for the money...you could tell it was the best experience for those three acts

[wbarenno]

Watching it on BBC it was amazing, I think people are saying it was poor because it wasn't the best glasto gig ever but its certainly an awesome gig in general!

Its good to see three headliners at a festival who are generally proud to be there, not there for the money...you could tell it was the best experience for those three acts

[milly16]

Lets have the sure bets of coldplay and radiohead every flaming year...bored with it. I bloody loved u2 and i thought they had a hard gig.

We sung at the top of our lungs.They're not used to this sort of setting,it was a hard gig to put forward,it was either hard core u2 fans or people liking their stuff or just people who were never going to enjoy it and just want a slag off and moan........if you don't like it go and sing yellow or street spirit and the same old that's been heard for years.

U2 WERE BRILLIANT AND THAT'S THE END OF IT.

[Digi]

Digi, where are you?!