REM or U2

[noddin0ff]

Pointless poll #752.
U2 or REM?
Why?

[dean_martin]

I voted for REM. When I went off to college in 1986, both bands were doing great things, but I lost interest in U2 after Joshua Tree. I continued to follow REM and still listen to them today.

[Mr Peabody]

Neither band has albums I can listen to all the way through without skipping tracks, it just so happens U2 has more songs in their catalog i like. Not really a big fan of either but do have a bit of each in my collection.

[MasterCylinder]

Also not a big fan of either but I voted for REM because STAND is a cool tune.

[Finch Platte]

I voted for Ewe Too. Never got into REM (sh!tty recordings, mumbled lyrics, etc.), but I did get into You To for a while when they first came out. Boy was a pretty fun disc, as were October & War.

Got dragged to one of their later concerts, and was pretty much blown away by the spectacle. Still don't care for them now, tho.

And the best part? They sold SO many frickin' discs that you can find almost all of them in the cutout bins for pretty darn cheap.

[ForeverAutumn]

REM. I've never liked U2. And I freakin' HATE Bono. Quit trying to tell my government how they should be spending MY tax dollars. *******.

[Finch Platte]

REM. I've never liked U2. And I freakin' HATE Bono. Quit trying to tell my government how they should be spending MY tax dollars. *******.

How come you can say '@sshole' and I can't say it, or 'sh!t'?

I'd much rather look at sh!t than an @sshole. Unless it was Kate Upton's. :^)

[Feanor]

REM. I've never liked U2. And I freakin' HATE Bono. Quit trying to tell my government how they should be spending MY tax dollars. *******.
OK, so I guess Bono is connected with a music group called "U2" -- who knew? :Yawn:

Actually I know Bono better from the news items about his philanthropy and advocacy for the poor of the worlds. Strikes me that most of the problem people have with him is that he is the conscience they don't have or would rather ignore.

If he were a Canadian and could for for Stephan Harper, I'm sure he wouldn't.

[ForeverAutumn]

OK, so I guess Bono is connected with a music group called "U2" -- who knew? :Yawn:

Actually I know Bono better from the news items about his philanthropy and advocacy for the poor of the worlds. Strikes me that most of the problem people have with him is that he is the conscience they don't have or would rather ignore.

If he were a Canadian and could for for Stephan Harper, I'm sure he wouldn't.

Yeah, good on him for his philanthropy, I'll give him that. But he shouldn't be peddling his agenda with my money. But that's a whole other topic and one I'd rather not get into here...as no doubt I would eventually have to shut it down. ;)

[ForeverAutumn]

How come you can say '@sshole' and I can't say it, or 'sh!t'?

I'd much rather look at sh!t than an @sshole. Unless it was Kate Upton's. :^)

Just highlight a letter in the word, any letter, and change the font colour to black... even though it's already black. By changing the font colour, it somehow over rides the censor programming. :)

*******. See how easy it is?

P.S. It doesn't work if you choose "Automatic" as your colour, you have to click on the little black coloured square.

[MAF]

I voted REM, because their first 4 albums were a huge part of my life during my college years.

But the question for me is U2 or Echo & the Bunnymen. The two bands came on the scene at the same time, one much hyped the other more underground but still critically acclaimed. One was the can't miss superstars, the other the underground hipster band. I bought both bands first albums, and though I do enjoy I Will Follow, the rest of Boy left me bored, while Bunnymen's first album was new and exciting and didn't leave my turntable for months. I grew to resent the success that came U2s way. Why U2, why not Bunnymen? Ian McCulloch was every bit the frontman that Bono was, better more powerful voice in fact. Will Sargeant played a much more interesting guitar and the bass and drums of Bunnymen were far superior (all IMHO of course). But fame and riches went the way of U2. Why? Why? Why?

I'm older and wiser now and have come to understand that there is no justice in the music business and that there are evil forces at work here the power of which few comprehend.

Sorry for the rant - but it feels good to vent.

[ForeverAutumn]

Hey MAF, nice to see you back here. :)

[Traveller]

While I love them both U2 got my vote for their ability to totally energize a large (we're talking stadium) venue. Having said that, I could easily live with Automatic for the People in lieu of, oh, Achtung Baby, as one of my 10 desert island albums. A good question and a tough choice.

[noddin0ff]

I'm still on the fence. REM is more interesting overall; U2 seems to be passing the test of time. Both have reinvented their sounds. Both get a little preachy. U2 can fill a stadium and is more readily identified with. Probably have to give the nod (heh) to REM on the strength of Automatic for the People. Everybody Hurts, Man on the Moon, Drive, Try not to Breath, Sweetness Follows...all the other tracks.