All That You Can't Leave Behind
by U2
  • Record Label: PolyGram
  • Release Date: Oct 31, 2000
User Score
8.2

Universal acclaim- based on 161 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 134 out of 161
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 161
  3. Negative: 14 out of 161

Review this album

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Daniel
    Feb 24, 2005
    0
    Most overrated album ever
  2. mariamaria
    Feb 8, 2005
    0
    it sucks
  3. JonathanH
    Mar 9, 2007
    0
    U2 can do better than this, POP was their last great album - it could of been even better had they not rushed it because of scheduling. How to dismantle an atomic bomb is even worse though. Can only hope for better things this year - please don't make it 2009!
  4. ComfortablyNumb
    Feb 24, 2005
    0
    U2 sold out by recording such hypocritical, capitalist, disposable, absolutely empty, easy, commercial, sobreexposed, liar and temporary crap. This is just poor dull stuff from a former great band. For the first time The band sounded tired, old, uncreative, lazy, the tunes have run out, the zest is gone. Even the packaging looked bland. LISTEN TO POP INSTEAND, AND AVOID THIS SOUNDTRACK U2 sold out by recording such hypocritical, capitalist, disposable, absolutely empty, easy, commercial, sobreexposed, liar and temporary crap. This is just poor dull stuff from a former great band. For the first time The band sounded tired, old, uncreative, lazy, the tunes have run out, the zest is gone. Even the packaging looked bland. LISTEN TO POP INSTEAND, AND AVOID THIS SOUNDTRACK FOR SISSIES… Expand
  5. ChrisC
    Feb 24, 2005
    0
    U2 sold out with this corporate garbage. This dull album is just atrocious. This awful record deserves to be played for silly MTV and Grammy reunions. But if you try to sit down and devote the entirety of your attention to the songs, it's disgustingly clear how predictable and disposable the songs really are. It's just a collection of overused, unndderwarmed, midtempo U2 U2 sold out with this corporate garbage. This dull album is just atrocious. This awful record deserves to be played for silly MTV and Grammy reunions. But if you try to sit down and devote the entirety of your attention to the songs, it's disgustingly clear how predictable and disposable the songs really are. It's just a collection of overused, unndderwarmed, midtempo U2 cliches, nowhere near Unforgettable Fire or Joshua Tree. The long-awaited reunion was their worst ever comeback, and their most overhyped. They were 40 years old, but they tried hard to remain young by making the well-known singalongable mainstream anthems that the songs end up having no substance at all. Just disgustingly predictable happy chord sequences that you're supposed to smile and bang your fist at, but you're more likely to want to run and brush your teeth to get the stench of mediocrity out of your brain. Even the song titles are horrendous: 'Beautiful Day', 'Grace', 'Wild Honey', 'Peace On Earth', etc. Listen to those hideous choruses! Pure, unadulterated money grubbing. It was a real shame to saw them go out on such a low note. Everything in U2 since 2000 has been going steadily downhill. This album was just a pretty dirty way of conducting bussiness and shows a lack of respect to their loyal fans, who they obviously believe are a horde of silly persons who will believe anything. U2 sold out with this album. Case closed.… Expand
  6. PhilM
    Feb 24, 2005
    1
    I can't understand what people like about this disc. It has almost no redeeming qualities. If you're a U2 worshipper you will like this album, simply because you will force yourself to pretend it's good, even though any clear minded listener will know that the opposite is true. This is the most lame attempt at music ever done. Songs are just horrible, pointless, silly, I can't understand what people like about this disc. It has almost no redeeming qualities. If you're a U2 worshipper you will like this album, simply because you will force yourself to pretend it's good, even though any clear minded listener will know that the opposite is true. This is the most lame attempt at music ever done. Songs are just horrible, pointless, silly, superficial and commercial. For worse, Bono's vocal range isn't there anymore. It's absolutely painful to listen to Bono straining to hit the high notes; there's nothing artful about it. As much as I like U2, I wanted to like ATYCLB. But to me, ATYCLB is inescapably disappointing. This is total sellout time for U2.… Expand
  7. Rick
    Feb 24, 2005
    3
    U2 enter the 2000, rocking and a rolling but with Bono's stupid long hair. Bono roars vocally through the opening song but the musical backing is unimaginative, to say the least. A power rock reasonably faced paced ballad, if that makes sense. But, without a single inventive guitar line, with absolutely nothing new and also without much of a pop edge, either. Beautiful day is U2 enter the 2000, rocking and a rolling but with Bono's stupid long hair. Bono roars vocally through the opening song but the musical backing is unimaginative, to say the least. A power rock reasonably faced paced ballad, if that makes sense. But, without a single inventive guitar line, with absolutely nothing new and also without much of a pop edge, either. Beautiful day is reasonably catchy, but Bono sounds raw. ATYCLB it's just so - commercial. So ordinary in it's commercial intent. They play it safe, everywhere. That's about it. This is a fairly unremarkable album, all told. It lacks direction, generally, there seems to be a general laziness surrounding the album. The lyrics are nothing at all, just mere words that mean nothing - just listen to Elevation - there aren't enough ideas in any of these 11 commercials. I say that. U2 can now be classified as a 'veteran' group… Expand
  8. PamelaV
    Feb 24, 2005
    0
    On ATYCLB I skip over Beautiful Day, Stuck in a Moment, Elevation, Walk On, Kite, In a Little While, Wild Honey, Peace on Earth, When I Look at the World, New York and Grace. Deal with it, it's their worst ever U2 crap. Period.
  9. RichardC
    Feb 24, 2005
    0
    A dumb sell out men in dark glasses screaming during all the video "Beautiful day"... as well all the other videos they've done since that one, including "Electrical Storm", "Vertigo", "All Because Of You", "Elevation", etc, etc. That's what All That You Can't Leave Behind is. Emtpyness, brand name, trademarks, commercials, action-movie previews, cash, cliche, media, A dumb sell out men in dark glasses screaming during all the video "Beautiful day"... as well all the other videos they've done since that one, including "Electrical Storm", "Vertigo", "All Because Of You", "Elevation", etc, etc. That's what All That You Can't Leave Behind is. Emtpyness, brand name, trademarks, commercials, action-movie previews, cash, cliche, media, expensive tickets, September 11th, etc... is exactly All that They Can't Leave Behind. Today I still can't believe they won more Grammies than "Joshua Tree", "Achtung Baby" or "Pop" with this undeniably crap. THE POWER OF IMAGE, THE POWER OF MONEY. That's the answer. U2 has so much power that every magazine, every radio, every TV channel must promote any lastest U2 crap as an outstanding event, as well every new album they release. Just go to Rolling Stone, Mojo, Time, etc. All media must be a part of the U2 game, they know that's good for their pockets. Fans aren't part of the game, indeed. Their wallets are that part of the game. U2 don't care whether you like or dislike this mainstream direction, they know they will sell as many album as they want. Despite How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb is getting the worst ever U2 rating here, just take a look to those men, they're happy, ready to tour again, no matter Bono's damaged voice, no matter Edge's limited creativity, no matter Adam and Larry's filler contributions, etc. U2 are the game, not their music. The same situation happened by 1966 with The Beatles ( unlike this sell out U2, The Beatles in those days were reaching their creativity peak 1966-1967 ). People attended to their concerts just because they were BEATLES IN CONCERT. The same situation will happen with this stupid Atomic Tour. It's time to do something new again, by stopping this mainstream fame. At least, that's what I do if I were U2. But they won't do it, they don't even want to do it, because they're afraid to take any risk. They prefer cash and silly fans whom buy any U2 stuff, because "It's U2 !!!!" If you were attended to their early concerts, you'd hate this sell out band, I bet you.… Expand
  10. Henry
    Feb 24, 2005
    1
    This album is their second worst ever. A plenty filler mainstream. Bono is getting worse and worse - In A Little While, When I Look At The World, Kite, Wild Honey - , the music is ordinary and thick, full of clichés and "classic" Edge guitars. My 14 years old brother can write a better tune than Wild Honey. The used production doesn't works, it makes the album even weaker. A This album is their second worst ever. A plenty filler mainstream. Bono is getting worse and worse - In A Little While, When I Look At The World, Kite, Wild Honey - , the music is ordinary and thick, full of clichés and "classic" Edge guitars. My 14 years old brother can write a better tune than Wild Honey. The used production doesn't works, it makes the album even weaker. A simplistic effort, quickie, pointless and dull. I bet you by 2010 yet people will be listening to 90's and 80's classics, but they will have forgot all that hyped stuff as Beautiful Day, Elevation, etc. "Back to our roots" do you know what does mean ? "we are lost, we don't know how to create something new this time, it's easier to copy ourselves, let's do it !!" Stuck In A Moment They Can't Get Out Of, as long as they have mindless fans who let them rest on their glory past, as they've doing since 2000 so far. Surely they'll always have those freaks ...… Expand
  11. LarryM
    Feb 24, 2005
    0
    Someone told me U2 made this album. I cannot quite believe that. To me, U2 are those who made some of the best music of the 80s and the 90s. They were surely among the best musicians during those years. And now what? Is this the best that they can do? Aren't they ashamed of themselves? And what about you, U2 fans? I've been checking out some of the reviews here, and I sit in Someone told me U2 made this album. I cannot quite believe that. To me, U2 are those who made some of the best music of the 80s and the 90s. They were surely among the best musicians during those years. And now what? Is this the best that they can do? Aren't they ashamed of themselves? And what about you, U2 fans? I've been checking out some of the reviews here, and I sit in disbelief as I read lines like "back at their best", "beautiful album": what are you talking about? Can you compare this stuff to Achtung Baby or The Joshua Tree? Do you really believe this stuff is good? Maybe the one reviewer who seems to agree with me is right, you are trying to persuade yourself it is. Because it's not. Firstly, it's too commercial, and that's proved by the huge financial investment on videos, aimed to target those persons who form their music culture by watching MTV (the same ones who think Britney Spears and Ricky Martin are the best musicians around). Secondly, they lack ideas and inspiration, as shown by the fact that forgotten b-sides are suddenly resuscitated and thrown in a CD, Best-ofs and Remixes compilations are released as regularly as the yearly migration of seagulls, and new electronic music experiments are carried out with disappointing results. But, more importantly, the quality of their music has so clearly decreased, because songs like "Beautiful day" and "Elevation" do NOT have the "sound that made them one of the worlds biggest bands in the eighties", dear "music fan from Molesey, Surrey, UK", as you stated in your review (how can you say that 'Kite' is the 'One' or 'With Or Without You' of this collection, that is almost criminal). Who are the greatest artists of history? Those who retired at their peak. Those who realised that success and glory made them shine like stars, but also that, like stars, they were destined to die, so they decided to leave while they were still shining. Those who were never forgotten because they took such decision. But maybe Mr Bono is too busy trying to solve the world's problems by himself to understand that...… Expand

Awards & Rankings

39
#39 Best Album of 2000
6
#6 Most Discussed Album of 2000
22
#22 Most Shared Album of 2000

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
79

Generally favorable reviews - based on 17 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 17
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 17
  3. Negative: 0 out of 17
  1. Q Magazine
    80
    Stepping outside of their natural environment ensured their longevity in the '90s, stepping back in seems to have given them a fresh boost. For all Zooropa and Pop's pushing of the envelope, limiting themselves to rock's core ingredients has given the band a new challenge. Certainly, not since The Joshua Tree have U2 sounded so like U2 but, with songs of this startling calibre, right now being U2 is no bad thing.
    Read full review
  2. AllMusic
    80
    All That You Can't Leave Behind is a rock record from a band that absorbed all the elastic experimentation, studio trickery, dance flirtations, and genre bending of Achtung, Zooropa, and Pop -- all they've shed is the irony. U2 also chooses not to delve as darkly personal as they did on Achtung or Zooropa, yet they also avoid the alienating archness of Pop, choosing to return to the generous spirit that flowed through their best '80s records.
    Read full review
  3. Dot Music
    60
    Despite the almost universal hyperbole that has greeted 'All That You Can't Leave Behind', this is no masterpiece. Certainly not by U2's stratospheric standards.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »