Karine Maucourt ([email protected])
Wed, 01 Jul 1998 13:52 +0200 (MET)
I think i can reply because i've seen U2 shows since 1989.
>I have heard people say that ZooTV had more "genius", "immediacy" and
>"intimacy" than Popmart. I have
>also heard that Popmart arguably lost a little of it's "feel", possibly due
to >the huge screen behind the band.
Waou !!! I totally disagree with these people who said there is more
intimacy in ZOOTV and that Pomart lost a little of its feel. Because i think
(it's my own feeling) that Popmart was largely more emotional than
ZOOTV/ZOOROPA...And remember the deep connections between the band and the
crowd during Popmart. About this, i think U2 were always deeply connected
with their fans, i mean more deeply connected than many others bands. BTW,
according to a U2 interview last year, it was their aim. U2 wanted to get
more feelings, more fun and more emotion in Popmart tour because they said
ZOOTV/ZOOROPA... Tours were too rigid, U2 and especially Bono couldn't
improvise as much as during Popmart shows, they felt less free to do what
they wanted than during Popmart. And if you remember all the Popmart shows
where we've seen Bono crying during a song, i think Popmart Tour was more
emotional, for him at least...and for me too.
About their past Tours, i've only seen Love to town Tour, so i only
can compare about this one. Because they didn't use technology during their
past shows, they seemed to be more connected to their fans. But i don't
think so, i think it just was an appearance, i mean a biaised impression.
Maybe because i always was on the floor (and i'm european, so you know what
this means ;-) ), i always felt the same emotion, the same
connection,...And i think it's a great merit for them to success to keep
this deep connections when they used screen and technology.
Just my thoughts...
In the name of love
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Wed Jul 01 1998 - 04:39:22 PDT