How to Dismantle an Overrated Album?
I totally agree with Maddox! How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb may have won U2 five Grammy's, but definitely not qualified as Album of The Year. Not that I hate U2, the album is not all bad, but there's no experimentation and creation at all. Maybe due to the commercial success they found in recent years, they decided to make a pop album to appeal to the mass. Or they are just too 'old' and tired of experimenting new sounds, I know same said to Rolling Stones, at least they are still rocking at 60s and came out with the pretty good A Bigger Bang. A band like U2, if it's really as great as their fans claimed, should have come out with a album emulates its predecessor. In fact, How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb is nowhere near some of U2's best works like Achtung Baby or Joshua Tree. I still don't get how HTDAAB could win five Grammy's, in spite of the album being just another cookie cutter sound of rock music playing on air waves. Even if I don't listen to rap, i think Kanye West's Late Registration deserves better to win Album of the Year. U2 has been Grammy's favourite for years now, like last year, they won the best rock performance and music video for Vertigo. I think it's just the recent tradition of Grammy of paying respect to the 'older' or 'late' artists in the music industry by awarding them in some important categories. Last year was Ray Charles in Record of the Year and Album of the Year, 2003 saw Luther Vandross won Song of the Year. So this year they have U2. Guess we will just have to wait and see who's next on the list.
Second thought, I wonder why an album released way back in year 2004 won Album of the year 2005?
Mp3s of Grammy's winners:
The White Stripes - The Denial Twist (Best Alternative Album)
posted by yoongbing at 10:43 AM
9 Comments:
I did not thrash U2, dear. I was just making a claim that HTDAAB doesnt deserve to win so many awards, since there are plenty of great music in year 2005. yeah, I am glad that Rolling Stones are still keeping rock & roll music alive, apparently they are making the largest profit from concerts and tours, not some other bands. I'm not american, so I don't watch Superbowl. Just to revise, I don't hate U2, but this album is just average and not up to the standard. Maybe I expect more from such a great band?
And, this is my blog, I can write whatever I like. =)
Grammies are just the record industry's way of rewarding and re-promoting the acts that have made them the most money! Be glad they didn't give it to Arcade Fire or whoever, they would have been stamped forever more with the indelible mark of acceptance by The Man.
i am a u2-lover, but i agree with your sentiment that this is not one of their best. i was surprised, as were the band (i believe) that kanye did not win.
i would disagree that HTDAAB is cookie cutter, though. it has a lot of subtlety, but there are tunes on there that do not sound like anything this band has done before (fast cars, one step closer, sometimes you can't make it on your own, original of the species...). so to me, that's not cookie cutter. and if you release an album after nov. 1 in a calendar year, it is not eligible until the next calendar year - so that answers the 2004/2005 question.
anyway, i think anonymous commenter #1 needs to chill.
peace
Well...sort of true that How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb is not a great one. As there's no "rock-ness" in it that can lead anyone to go on frenzy. Maybe there's some but can be counted less than 10 fingers. The latest is kinda slow and full of repetition. Anyways, U2 is the band who started the idea of Live 8 if not mistaken. U2 contributed alot to the world like charitable event. Compared to other bands who just sit there and waiting money to drop into their pockets? So, U2 might not deserve to win the awards through musical judgement but as appreciation, I think they deserve it. Come on C, although its 2004 album, but heck it! Nice songs last forever!
* I might not be an aficionado for rock music or have to profound knowledge of it. But that's what I feel. No offece. Rock on!
where can giv ppl grammy jz becoz they contribute to charity..like that evrybody also oragnize concerts for africa lor..grammys should be awarded based on musical abilities only, so even i think what bono is doing for africa is applaudable, he shouldn't be given awards (5?!?) just for that.
Z.. the point is..Do u think franz is going to do the africa thingy? No rite... do u think Oasis is willing to spare his time to land his butt there? Btw, not going south africa for tour nor vacation,but for charity work." Sometimes you can't make it on your own" is nice okay!
dude, if one wants to get recognized for doing charity works, go after nobel peace prize, instead of music awards. there are some other celebrities doing charity too, why only U2? Just because they are famous? Does it mean Angelina Jolie is going to win an Oscar for that too?
Yeah, you were mistaken, it was Sir Bob Geldof who initiated the idea of live 8, a follow-up to the successful band-aid in 80s.
Chill, folks.
lol...arguing is fun..
yea, i like "sometimes you can't make it on your own"...though it sounds like good charlotte's "we believe"
I agree with yoong bing. Grammy awards are not that 'big' nowadays.
Post a Comment
<< Home