Anyone else think Pearl Jam opening for U2 is lame?

pjrvm · July 2006

I mean come on. U2 hasn't made a good record in about 15 years. Sure they're "legendary" probably more so than Tom Petty. But what is with all these has been bands asking PJ to open. Obviously from PJ's point of view it's an honor, but I couldn't bare watching PJ rock out for an hour and a half and then have to sit through Bono asking us all the save the world. U2 has some great songs, but there day is done as far as I'm concerned, and I think Bono's gone off the deep end a little bit with all his self-righteous bullshit.

lowlight79 · July 2006

No offense, but your insane. ATYCLB was a great record. And U2 puts on a hell of a good show.

vsinjustice · July 2006

lol. I can understand your POV. I, for one, don't think it's lame at all. I saw U2 several times last year and they can still jam. I mean, U2 is still a great group to watch and to be able to see BOTH at one show... that's a treat! (for me at least).

leadbedr10 · July 2006

I DO!!!!
If its a respect thing then why cant u2 respect pj for they have done and open for them?

homeratbat · July 2006

leadbedr wrote:

I DO!!!!
If its a respect thing then why cant u2 respect pj for they have done and open for them?

because pearl jam would NEVER think of that! pearl jam respects the shit out of bands that meant a lot to them growing up! and mike has always said u2 meant a lot to him and eddie seems to be a huge fan of the unforgettable fire album! its like pearl jam opening for the stones! people can say the stones havent made a great record in years (i disagree about u2 and the stones) but honestly u2 at this point is the bigger band world wide and they are a true legendary band so if pj opens for u2 sit back enjoy the show and just be happy pearl jam is playing anywhere!

leadbedr10 · July 2006

oh well.
guess thats just a show ill have to miss.

zelda4ever · July 2006

pjrvm wrote:

I mean come on. U2 hasn't made a good record in about 15 years. Sure they're "legendary" probably more so than Tom Petty. But what is with all these has been bands asking PJ to open. Obviously from PJ's point of view it's an honor, but I couldn't bare watching PJ rock out for an hour and a half and then have to sit through Bono asking us all the save the world. U2 has some great songs, but there day is done as far as I'm concerned, and I think Bono's gone off the deep end a little bit with all his self-righteous bullshit.

well DDDUUHH!

Pearls&Stones · July 2006

Yeah, I kind of agree. But, I don't think U2 has had no good albums in the past 15 years. They've only had 5 or so good ones in that time.

slightofjeff · July 2006

pjrvm wrote:

I think Bono's gone off the deep end a little bit with all his self-righteous bullshit.

just out of curiosity ... did you see ed on storytellers?

Anyway ... I think if PJ wants to open for bands they idolize, more power to 'em. I'm not a huge U2 fan. I have some, but not a lot, of their stuff. but they are fairly legendary.

I swear, John and George could come back from the dead, we could have a Beatles reunion ... and people would say, "Pearl Jam shouldn't open for them. They haven't had a decent album in 40 years!"

I mean, I know we're all PJ fans here, but get some perspective.

gusturtle · July 2006

pjrvm wrote:

I couldn't bare watching PJ rock out for an hour and a half and then have to sit through Bono asking us all the save the world.

I guess you missed all the PJ shows where Ed Ved basically asks everyone to do the same thing. Maybe you could in fact benefit from attending this show.

Or maybe you should do everyone else a favor and stay home and rent "Point Break" instead...
"I will not fall... I will not fall..."

bootlegger10 · July 2006

leadbedr wrote:

I DO!!!!
If its a respect thing then why cant u2 respect pj for they have done and open for them?

Because U2 has done a shitload more. U2 is on a whole different plain from Pearl Jam.

JPinks · July 2006

...but PJ can do whatever the hell they want. I think it undermines thier position in the rock world, though. They shouldn't "open" for anyone, not anymore. They can co-headline if they feel the need to play with thier idols. But opening makes them look like (for lack of a better word) amatuers (seriously, I know there's a better word). It's not like the people at a U2 concert haven't heard of PJ yet, and if they haven't bought an album by now, I don't think they'll start. I'm sure half the U2 fans there will be bummed that they have to sit through Pearl Jam.

bobasfeet · July 2006

frogwater wrote:

I guess you missed all the PJ shows where Ed Ved basically asks everyone to do the same thing. Maybe you could in fact benefit from attending this show.

Or maybe you should do everyone else a favor and stay home and rent "Point Break" instead...
"I will not fall... I will not fall..."

"No one puts PJ in a corner!!"

Damn...Wrong Swayze.

vsinjustice · July 2006

JPinks wrote:

...but PJ can do whatever the hell they want. I think it undermines thier position in the rock world, though. They shouldn't "open" for anyone, not anymore. They can co-headline if they feel the need to play with thier idols. But opening makes them look like (for lack of a better word) amatuers (seriously, I know there's a better word). It's not like the people at a U2 concert haven't heard of PJ yet, and if they haven't bought an album by now, I don't think they'll start. I'm sure half the U2 fans there will be bummed that they have to sit through Pearl Jam.

I don't think it undermines PJ's positions at all.. nor does opening for another huge band make them look amateurish. That's like saying the CEO of a major company shouldn't do hard labor work and should leave it up to his "servants" because he's CEO and doing otherwise would be way below him/her. Opening up for another band means nothing. Openers are just guests who have agreed to join the party and partake in the music. I don't understand this negative stereotype of the "opener."

Astird · July 2006

Not a show I would want to attend and now that U2 is involved I probably couldn't even get in anyways. I've experienced trying to get tickets to see U2 before and it's SO different from PJ. It made me really appreciate PJ and their fans. I have no problem with them opening for U2, but I hate any comparison or mention of influence because I don't see how any part of U2 rubbed off on PJ.

homeratbat · July 2006

JPinks wrote:

...but PJ can do whatever the hell they want. I think it undermines thier position in the rock world, though. They shouldn't "open" for anyone, not anymore. They can co-headline if they feel the need to play with thier idols. But opening makes them look like (for lack of a better word) amatuers (seriously, I know there's a better word). It's not like the people at a U2 concert haven't heard of PJ yet, and if they haven't bought an album by now, I don't think they'll start. I'm sure half the U2 fans there will be bummed that they have to sit through Pearl Jam.

every u2 fan i know (and i know quite a bit!! im in their fan club also) LOVES pearl jam! dont assume things

JPinks · July 2006

A CEO doing the job of someone below him or her would be wasting a considerable amout of money. It is below them to open for another band. Besides, shouldn't U2 be giving some unknown or new group a shot at building it's fan base. That's really what opening bands are all about, right?

JaneNY · July 2006

Not lame necessarily, but I feel a little ambivalent. I saw U2 last year - it was a good show, but it didn't make me want to follow them around the way I want to with PJ (and do when I can). I knew there was a rumor of PJ in Hawaii, and if it was just them I'd been thinking about it, but I probably won't try now. It would be too far and too much expense for an opening set. But it will probably be a great show - they will probably be so pumped to be playing with U2.

homeratbat · July 2006

JPinks wrote:

A CEO doing the job of someone below him or her would be wasting a considerable amout of money. It is below them to open for another band. Besides, shouldn't U2 be giving some unknown or new group a shot at building it's fan base. That's really what opening bands are all about, right?

actually what u2 is doing is having a final BLOW OUT show cause it might be the last time there are touring for a bit! if you dont like u2 thats fine but you have to be honest u2 is a bigger band in terms of fans, record sales etc...thats not an insult to pearl jam and either is opening for u2, the stones, the who, neil young or any band that the boys respect! thats the key pearl jam respects u2 and always has! hence why they opened for them in the early 90s! dont worry about it this much it will be a very fun show and thats all that matters!

InsaneSoup · July 2006

what EVER!

I saw U2 on the Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby tours and they were a good show, no doubt, really good stuff, genius even...even had a good time watching Rattle and Hum full blast at the movie theatre I worked at in high school after hours (talk about no booze and pot repercusssions)... but to even try to compare it to a PJ show...that's just retarded.

A PJ show is penultimate.

CHANGEinWAVES · July 2006

I wanna see pj play....not have to see a short set and then sit thru U2.

justam · July 2006

It seems to me that there are at least three positive things about them playing with these other bands like The Rolling Stones, Tom Petty and U2:

1)They like these bands and they enjoy it

2)These bands have a lot of fans who probably haven't realised how good PJ is live...and now they'll know...

3)PJ fans get to hear another band that has survived a long time...

(Don't be so worried about your own egos, that you can't stand to see your favorite band in an opening position.)

CHANGEinWAVES · July 2006

"3)PJ fans get to hear another band that has survived a long time..."
not at this concert....good luck getting tickets for it!

nukeboot · July 2006

pjrvm wrote:

I mean come on. U2 hasn't made a good record in about 15 years.... what is with all these has been bands asking PJ to open?

Yeah, Pearl Jam must be hard up for cash to accept a piece of crap gig like this. I think they should change their minds and let my band take the spot.

JPinks · July 2006

Bonopalooza it is then? That's fine they want to be there for that. I just don't like the words "support" and "open." It sounds like U2 is doing them a favor. Like Pearl Jam couldn't sell out a show on thier own.

JOEJOEJOE · July 2006

JPinks wrote:

Bonopalooza it is then? That's fine they want to be there for that. I just don't like the words "support" and "open." It sounds like U2 is doing them a favor. Like Pearl Jam couldn't sell out a show on thier own.

This is not attack on the poster.

Actually, the venue is bigger then the one in Pittsburgh (stones gig).....it is a football stadium that holds over 60,000 people.

PJ obviously agreed to to this show, and I simehow doubt they were under any duress.

PJ is secure enough to take second billing, so I don;t see why so many people are so against it.

If someone is too cool to go and see U2, perhaps they should realize that the band they worship so much actually is just as uncool as those who go to see u2!

leadbedr10 · July 2006

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

This is not attack on the poster.

Actually, the venue is bigger then the one in Pittsburgh (stones gig).....it is a football stadium that holds over 60,000 people.

PJ obviously agreed to to this show, and I simehow doubt they were under any duress.

PJ is secure enough to take second billing, so I don;t see why so many people are so against it.

If someone is too cool to go and see U2, perhaps they should realize that the band they worship so much actually is just as uncool as those who go to see u2!

Its not about being too cool to see u2. its about spending 1500-2000 g's to see pj play for 90 minutes at most.

JOEJOEJOE · July 2006

leadbedr wrote:

Its not about being too cool to see u2. its about spending 1500-2000 g's to see pj play for 90 minutes at most.

You make it sound like you don't have a choice!

lukin2006 · July 2006

pjrvm wrote:

I mean come on. U2 hasn't made a good record in about 15 years. Sure they're "legendary" probably more so than Tom Petty. But what is with all these has been bands asking PJ to open. Obviously from PJ's point of view it's an honor, but I couldn't bare watching PJ rock out for an hour and a half and then have to sit through Bono asking us all the save the world. U2 has some great songs, but there day is done as far as I'm concerned, and I think Bono's gone off the deep end a little bit with all his self-righteous bullshit.

If there day is done someone forgot to notify the thousands of fans world wide who attended sold out shows. I mean you could not get a ticket through ticketmaster 30 minutes after the tickets went on sale and it was like that every where. Plus U2 puts on a great show, and their last CD was very good.

99% of the bands out there can only hope to reach the heights of U2, and U2 might very well be the last Rock act to dominate the box office.

It's no secret that U2 and PJ are good friends, so it seems like a natural fit.

I also think thats what makes PJ unique is that they will open for U2 or the Stones or share the stage TP, there atre not to many bands like them that just enjoy jamming with other musicians and not worrying about the money.

We should appreciate the fact thay they do these sort of things, because they are truely in a league of there own.

lukin2006 · July 2006

slightofjeff wrote:

just out of curiosity ... did you see ed on storytellers?

Anyway ... I think if PJ wants to open for bands they idolize, more power to 'em. I'm not a huge U2 fan. I have some, but not a lot, of their stuff. but they are fairly legendary.

I swear, John and George could come back from the dead, we could have a Beatles reunion ... and people would say, "Pearl Jam shouldn't open for them. They haven't had a decent album in 40 years!"

I mean, I know we're all PJ fans here, but get some perspective.

LMAO

lukin2006 · July 2006

vsinjustice wrote:

I don't think it undermines PJ's positions at all.. nor does opening for another huge band make them look amateurish. That's like saying the CEO of a major company shouldn't do hard labor work and should leave it up to his "servants" because he's CEO and doing otherwise would be way below him/her. Opening up for another band means nothing. Openers are just guests who have agreed to join the party and partake in the music. I don't understand this negative stereotype of the "opener."

How does it make them look amateurish? I mean Metallica opened for the Stones last year, I was at a large all day concert in Toronto a few years back when Rush followed by AC/DC opened for the Stones and AC/DC is lengendary and they out performed the Stones. Nothing amateur about that.

Anyone else think Pearl Jam opening for U2 is lame?

Comments