User Score
Universal acclaim- based on 161 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 134 out of 161
-
Mixed: 13 out of 161
-
Negative: 14 out of 161
Review this album
-
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
- User score
- By date
- Most helpful
-
Nov 9, 2014
-
Nov 5, 2013
-
nicknMar 12, 2009The worst album in u2's career happens to be the best reviewed; then again magazines need to advertise big stories--if they don't kiss a little ass then what happens...? magazines and critics have been castrated by the advertisers and multi-billion dollar corporates.
-
-
AristonBOct 14, 2008It is better than the stuff what follows but worse than anything U2 did before. Never again Achtung Baby or The Joshua Tree. U2 should retire or eventually try one more time, but I think they are finished, especially Bono. Money ruins everything.
-
-
AndrewJan 27, 2005
-
Awards & Rankings
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.