SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

davulture U2 Rattle and Hum focused on the Irish Band's 1987 Joshua Tree Tour in America. There is little plot in the movie, but pretty much "the band tries to figure out America." The movie starts with a nice (some may say egotistical rendition) of the Beatles "Helter Skelter" where Bono tells the crowd "Charles Manson stole this from the Beatles and were stealing it back." The film does have it's low moments such as a Church-inspired rendition of "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" which sounds like a total mess and features very minimal vocal interpretation from Bono. We are paying to see U2 sing lead!! Not the Church. Despite this the inspired rendition of "Angel of Harlem" is very exciting, as is "Exit", "Bullet in the Blue Sky" (One of the tracks features in Color), "Pride In the Name of Love", "Desire", "Bad", "Sunday Bloody Sunday" a haunting "With or Without You", "Where The Streets Have No Name", "Silver and Gold" and a nice collaboration with BB King called "When love comes to town" where even BB King even admits that he is amazed at Bono's ability to write songs. As a concert the movie is great but as a movie, it literally follows no sequence but showing the band perform songs with very little transition and sort of makes them look more idiotic as they "Try and Look For America" rather then the rebellious figures of change in the mid 1980's. Still though the songs are probably better then most of the U2 albums and Bono's voice is at a level I don't think it's ever been since which is great for a U2 purist. In a way I feel bad for the band because this was a big budget picture (really a concert) and after this U2 soon lost their puritanical edge of the 1980's as they shifted into a more of darker and deeper sound featured in their next album Achtung Baby. Which is a benefit of this movie being made, but overall it's a great concert flick but not so great as an actual feature length motion picture.

gaea I've owned this movie for 12 years now and it still can give me chills, make me laugh and make me cry! I really enjoyed U2 before I saw this movie, but after watching it, I absolutely fell in love with them & have loved them ever since. Granted, Bono has his periods of ranting, but that's just part of what makes them U2. As I said in the summary, the opening of "Where the Streets Have No Name", filmed in Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe is absolutely breath-taking...truly incredible cinematography! I still get goosebumps every time I see it. And the live version of "With or Without You", with an extra beautiful verse added in is the best version of the song I've ever heard. "Sunday Bloody Sunday" has always brought tears to my eyes, but to actually SEE it and see the passion Bono has as he's singing it makes it just that much better. Probably one of my favorite parts of the film though, is at the very beginning when the Edge sings "Van Diemen's Land". It's a beautiful song and I really enjoyed hearing him sing solo. If you're a true fan, this movie is an absolute must-have. If you're not, you probably won't be able to enjoy or truly appreciate it.

triple8 I have been a U2 fan since the days of "Boy" and "October". I was very excited to see this movie about the band when it first came out but after viewing it I left the theatre feeling strangely flat. And wishing I had seen alot more.The footage was different then what I was expecting and maybe I just had different expectations of what I was seeing. The film, in my eyes, lacked depth. I wanted to hear about the band themselves but U2 the band came across as almost feeling a little awkward-that was my interpretation anyway. I had no problem with the black and white footage, that sort of reinforces the band's haunting brooding qualities anyway, but the movie didn't TELL me anything and thats what I was looking for.The best CONCERT footage of U2 I've ever seen is U2 at The Red Rocks which blew me away and which I guerentee the same response from any fan who may not have seen that. Rattle and Hum wasn't a bad effort, I had no problem sitting through it and staying focused. After all it was about a talented and brillient group of individuals. But the film lacked the soul I was looking for. I wouldn't call this truely great. It didn't give me the feeling I knew anything more of U2 the people and likewise didn't give me any musical enrichment I hadn't already gotton TRIPLE from watching U2 at Red Rocks. I'd give this 6.5 of 10.

stu9003 If you're expecting some sort of meaning in a documentary sense, you'll be disappointed. The movie reveals very little about the band, their thoughts or what life on the road is really like. At one point the interviewer asks the band about what's been going on lately and they all respond, "I don't know". The rest of the interviews don't get much better. Having been a U2 fan for years, I'm not sure why the band members seemed so shy in this film. They sure don't seem that way now. Oh well, who watches this movie because they want to hear interviews? The music is what matters and this movie is long on music and short on talk. And the music is great. Basically, Rattle and Hum is a really well-shot concert movie with great cinematography and some outstanding live performances. U2 fans will love it.