Editing Rattle and Hum (section)

==Reception==
===Album===
{{Music ratings
| title = Professional album ratings (1988)
| rev1 = ''[[The Arizona Republic]]''
| rev1score = {{rating|3|5}}<ref name="az-rep"/>
| rev2 = ''[[Austin American-Statesman]]''
| rev2score = {{rating|5|5}}<ref>{{cite news|title=U2 twice as good on double album|newspaper=[[Austin American-Statesman]]|first=Michael|last=MacCambridge|date=20 October 1988|page=C3}}</ref> 
| rev3= ''[[Chicago Sun-Times]]''
| rev3score = {{Rating|3|4}}<ref>{{cite news|last=McLeese|first=Don|date=17 October 1988|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3909656.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180214202808/https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3909656.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=14 February 2018|title=Story of U2 album incomplete without film|newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]]|access-date=14 February 2018|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
| rev4 = ''[[The Cincinnati Enquirer]]''
| rev4score = {{rating|4.5|5}}<ref name="cin-enq"/>
| rev5 = [[Knight Ridder|Knight-Ridder News]]
| rev5score = {{rating|2|4}}<ref name="kn-rid-rev"/>
| rev6 = ''[[Los Angeles Times]]''
| rev6score = {{Rating|4|4}}<ref name="latimes"/>
| rev7 = ''[[New York Daily News]]''
| rev7score = {{rating|2.5|4}}<ref name="nydn-rev"/>
| rev8 = ''[[NME]]''
| rev8score = 8/10<ref name="Jobling"/>
| rev9 = ''[[Rolling Stone]]''
| rev9score = {{Rating|3.5|5}}<ref name="RS-rev"/>
| rev10 = ''[[The Village Voice]]''
| rev10score = B+<ref name="Christgau"/>
}}
The album divided critics when it was released in 1988.<ref>{{cite news|last=Hilburn|first=Robert|date=20 November 1988|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-11-20-ca-441-story.html|title=The First Temptation of U2|newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]]|at=sec. Calendar, pp. 80, 86|access-date=27 August 2015}}</ref> Some reviewers panned it, feeling that U2 were making a deliberate and pretentious attempt at rock and roll renown.<ref name="Jobling"/> [[Jon Pareles]] of ''[[The New York Times]]'' called it a "mess" that exuded "sincere egomania", and said the "band's self-importance got in the way" of their ambition for the album. He said it was plagued by the group's "attempts to grab every mantle in the [[Rock and Roll Hall of Fame|Rock-and-Roll Hall of Fame]]" and that each one was "embarrassing in a different way".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/16/arts/recordings-when-self-importance-interferes-with-the-music.html|title=When Self-Importance Interferes With the Music|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|first=Jon|last=Pareles|author-link=Jon Pareles|date=16 October 1988|page=H31|access-date=22 March 2021}}</ref> [[David Stubbs]] of ''[[Melody Maker]]'' said that ''Rattle and Hum'' "lacks cohesion" and "is musically, stylistically confused". He criticised Bono's "reverential nods to the great white heroes of rock" and the band's "homages to the bluesmen and gospel greats".<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/u2-irattle-and-humi-island|title=The Lord's Prayer|magazine=[[Melody Maker]]|first=David|last=Stubbs|author-link=David Stubbs|date=15 October 1988|volume=64|issue=42|page=37|access-date=23 March 2021}}</ref> Thom Duffy of the ''[[Orlando Sentinel]]'' said that ''Rattle and Hum'' is "greatly in need of a focal point" and "often sounds like an over-reaching attempt to claim chunks of pop history as [U2's] own story". He believed the group had "merely celebrated its own ascension into the pop history books... and little more".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-xpm-1988-11-04-0080120227-story.html|title=U2's sprawling 'Rattle and Hum' buzzes with self-congratulation|newspaper=[[Orlando Sentinel]]|first=Thom|last=Duffy|date=4 November 1988|page=E-8|access-date=23 March 2021}}</ref> Tom Carson from ''[[The Village Voice]]'' called it an "awful record" by "almost any rock-and-roll fan's standards", and said the group's failure did not "sound attributable to pretensions so much as to monumental know-nothingism".<ref>{{cite news|title=Elvis is Alive!?|newspaper=[[The Village Voice]]|first=Tom|last=Carson|date=15 November 1988|volume=33|issue=46|page=75}}</ref> Fellow ''Village Voice'' critic [[Robert Christgau]] was more complimentary, calling the record "looser and faster than anything they've recorded since their first live mini-LP".<ref name="Christgau">{{cite news|last=Christgau|first=Robert|author-link=Robert Christgau|date=22 November 1988|url=http://www.robertchristgau.com/xg/cg/cgv1188-88.php|title=Christgau's Consumer Guide|newspaper=[[The Village Voice]]|location=New York|access-date=27 August 2015}}</ref> [[David Browne (journalist)|David Browne]] of the ''[[New York Daily News]]'' said the album's "scope and disjointedness" recalled double albums such as ''[[Exile on Main St.]]'' or ''[[The Beatles (album)|The Beatles]]'', but that until it aged as well as those records, "'Rattle and Hum' just prattles and numbs".<ref name="nydn-rev">{{cite news|title=U2 Prattles On|newspaper=[[New York Daily News]]|first=David|last=Browne|author-link=David Browne (journalist)|date=9 October 1988|at=sec. City Lights, p. 27}}</ref> Andrew Means of ''[[The Arizona Republic]]'' thought the album was "no substitute" for the "exhilaration and conviction" of the Joshua Tree Tour. He believed that Bono's passion on record was not "quite as mesmerizing as it is on stage" and that the group's new material did not "add significantly" to their message or image.<ref name="az-rep">{{cite news|title=Overshadowed by 'The Joshua Tree'|newspaper=[[The Arizona Republic]]|first=Andrew|last=Means|date=25 October 1988|pages=B6–B7}}</ref> Lynden Barber of ''[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]'' called it "an ambitious project, and the result is almost inevitably a mixed bag". He lamented the songs that presented the band's Christianity "as a fait accompli", as well as their proclivity for "jams around a couple of chords substituting themselves for considered song-writing".<ref>{{cite news|title=Lost amid the certainties|newspaper=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]|first=Lynden|last=Barber|date=25 October 1988|page=22}}</ref> A reviewer for [[Knight Ridder|Knight-Ridder News]] said, "this double-album boondoggle manages to make the band sound like quintessential overreachers".<ref name="kn-rid-rev">{{cite news|title=In the Record Store|newspaper=[[Daily Times-Advocate|Times-Advocate]]|agency=[[Knight Ridder|Knight-Ridder News]]|date=3 November 1988|at=sec. North County magazine, p. 27}}</ref>

Writing in ''[[Rolling Stone]]'', [[Anthony DeCurtis]] said that the record succeeded at capping U2's rise to stardom "on a raucous, celebratory note", finding it to be "most enjoyable when the band relaxes and allows itself to stretch without self-consciously reaching for the stars". DeCurtis ultimately deemed it a "tad calculated in its supposed spontaneity" and said it demonstrated "U2's force but devot[ed] too little attention to the band's vision".<ref name="RS-rev">{{cite magazine|url=https://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/rattle-and-hum-19881117|title=U2's American Curtain Call|magazine=[[Rolling Stone]]|last=DeCurtis|first=Anthony|author-link=Anthony DeCurtis|date=17 November 1988|access-date=10 August 2011|issue=539|page=149}}</ref> In a rave review for the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', [[Robert Hilburn]] called ''Rattle and Hum'' a "frequently remarkable album" that more than matched ''The Joshua Tree'', and he credited U2 for reviving the "idealism and craft of [rock's] finest moments".<ref name="latimes">{{cite news|last=Hilburn|first=Robert|author-link=Robert Hilburn|date=9 October 1988|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-10-09-ca-5251-story.html|title=U2 Embraces the Roots of Rock|newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]]|at=sec. Calendar, pp. 66, 68|access-date=30 August 2015}}</ref> [[J. D. Considine]] of ''[[The Baltimore Sun]]'' said that the album's songs "draw upon every musical strength U2 has developed over the years" and that the "sheer muscular physicality of its sound" set ''Rattle and Hum'' apart from its predecessors. He said that despite the record being "occasionally pretentious", the group "never seems out of its depth" amongst the guest artists.<ref>{{cite news|title='Rattle and Hum': The Gospel According to U2|newspaper=[[The Baltimore Sun]]|first=J. D.|last=Considine|author-link=J. D. Considine|date=16 October 1988|pages=1M, 8M}}</ref> [[Jay Cocks]] of ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' said, "U2 has never sounded better or bolder", calling ''Rattle and Hum'': "the best live rock album ever made. The record, in every sense, of their lives".<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,968983,00.html|title=Music: U2 Explores America|magazine=[[Time (magazine)|Time]]|first=Jay|last=Cocks|author-link=Jay Cocks|date=21 November 1988|volume=132|issue=21|pages=146+|access-date=23 March 2021}}</ref> ''[[Hot Press]]'' reviewer [[Bill Graham (author)|Bill Graham]] said it was U2's "most ambitious record" yet,<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.hotpress.com/music/rattle-and-hum-551874|title=Shake, Rattle and Hum|magazine=[[Hot Press]]|first=Bill|last=Graham|author-link=Bill Graham (author)|volume=12|issue=20|date=20 October 1988|access-date=23 March 2021}}</ref> while John Mackie of ''[[The Vancouver Sun]]'' said it "should consolidate the band's stature as [[the Beatles]] of the late '80s".<ref>{{cite news|title=U2's new album confirms them as Beatles of the '80s|newspaper=[[The Vancouver Sun]]|first=John|last=Mackie|date=8 October 1988|page=E12}}</ref> Cliff Radel of ''[[The Cincinnati Enquirer]]'' said that ''Rattle and Hum'' "proves the achievements of the band's previous album... were no accident", and that it demonstrated the group's ability to create "highly charged songs in the studio and on stage".<ref name="cin-enq">{{cite news|title=U2 settling score for Lennon|newspaper=[[The Cincinnati Enquirer]]|first=Cliff|last=Radel|date=8 October 1988|page=D1}}</ref> In the UK, Robin Denselow of ''[[The Guardian]]'' said that "the whole sounds far greater than the sum of the decidedly variable parts". The review found the cover songs to be the weakest material but judged ''Rattle and Hum'' overall to be a "solid, versatile piece of work" that "leaves much of the best until last".<ref>{{cite news|title=A claim to the Hall of Fame|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|first=Robin|last=Denselow|date=7 October 1988|page=33}}</ref> Stuart Baillie of ''[[NME]]'' gave it a positive 8/10 review.<ref name="Jobling">{{cite book|last=Jobling|first=John|year=2014|pages=195–197|title=U2: The Definitive Biography|publisher=[[Macmillan Publishers]]|isbn=978-1-250-02790-0|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xKFzAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA196|access-date=30 August 2015}}</ref> Contentiously, his review replaced a much more negative 4/10 review by Mark Sinker, in which he described it as "the worst album by a major band in years". It was pulled by ''NME'' editor Alan Lewis, as it was feared that criticism of U2 would affect the magazine's circulation;<ref name="NMEreview">{{cite magazine|title=How the West Was Won|magazine=[[Uncut (magazine)|Uncut]] |first=Stephen|last=Dalton|date=October 2003|issue=77}}</ref> Sinker resigned in protest.<ref name="Jobling"/>

At the end of 1988, ''Rattle and Hum'' was voted the 21st-best album of the year in the [[Pazz & Jop]], an annual poll of American critics published by ''The Village Voice''.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.robertchristgau.com/xg/pnj/pjres88.php|title=1988 Pazz & Jop: Dancing on a Logjam: Singles rool in a world up for grabs: The 15th (or 16th) annual Pazz & Jop Critics Poll|newspaper=[[The Village Voice]]|date=28 February 1989|first=Robert|last=Christgau|author-link=Robert Christgau|access-date=23 March 2021}}</ref> In other critics' lists of the year's top albums, it was ranked number one by ''[[HUMO]]'', second by the ''Los Angeles Times'' and ''Hot Press'', 17th by ''[[OOR]]'', 23rd by ''[[NME]]'', and 47th by ''[[Sounds (magazine)|Sounds]]''.{{Citation needed|date=December 2023}}

===Film===
{{Quote box|width=25em|quote="But I wasn't prepared for the difference in the size of the movie campaign and the average record campaign ... how all across America for a couple of weeks, you couldn't turn on your TV without getting U2 in your face. That's not the way records are marketed. It's much more subtle and I think a lot of the band's old fans found it distasteful. The aftermath I think, quite honestly, was that no one wanted to hear about U2 for a while."|source=&nbsp;—Paul McGuinness<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-03-01-ca-5308-story.html|title=U2's U-Turn|newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]]|first=Robert|last=Hilburn|author-link=Robert Hilburn|date=1 March 1992|access-date=2 February 2017|at=sec. Calendar, pp. 6–7, 76–77}}</ref>}}
According to a ''[[USA Today]]'' survey of reviews at the time of the film's release, ''Rattle and Hum'' had an average review score of 64/100.<ref>{{cite news|title=The Movie Poll|newspaper=[[USA Today]]|date=11 November 1988|page=4D}}</ref> According to [[Review aggregator|review aggregation]] website [[Rotten Tomatoes]], the film has a rating of 62%.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/u2_rattle_and_hum/|title=U2: Rattle and Hum (1988)|work=[[Rotten Tomatoes]]|access-date=28 August 2015}}</ref> [[Roger Ebert]] panned the film as a "mess", saying the concert footage was poorly lit and did not show the audience enough, and that the band being "deliberately inarticulate" in interview segments was "not cute". His review partner [[Gene Siskel]] was more complimentary, praising the group's performance with the Harlem gospel choir as "powerful and emotional" and calling Bono's statements during "Sunday Bloody Sunday" the film's highlight.<ref>{{cite episode|url=https://siskelebert.org/?p=5757|title=Show 308|series=Siskel & Ebert|series-link=At the Movies (1986 TV program)|number=308|author1=[[Gene Siskel|Siskel, Gene]] (host)|author2=[[Roger Ebert|Ebert, Roger]] (host)|date=5 November 1988|publisher=[[Buena Vista Television]]|access-date=24 March 2021|via=siskelebert.org}}</ref> [[Hal Hinson]] of ''[[The Washington Post]]'' called the film "an exercise in rock 'n' roll hagiography" and "a fanzine on celluloid", and said that despite its "stunning look", the film came across as "stagy and overproduced". He said that the band's "attempts to place themselves in the rock continuum are fairly strenuous and more than a little presumptuous".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1988/11/04/u2-for-serious-fans-only/95432a56-772b-4b37-9807-661466cb745b/|title='U2': For Serious Fans Only|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|first=Hal|last=Hinson|author-link=Hal Hinson|date=4 November 1988|page=B7|access-date=24 March 2021}}</ref> [[Joyce Millman]] of the ''[[San Francisco Examiner]]'' described it as a "tediously pious and self-important" film that "successfully captured everything the faithful love, and we pagans loathe, about the biggest band of the '80s". She said the film "does nothing to pierce the band's vagueness" and that they were upstaged by King and the Harlem gospel choir. Millman judged that the cinematography's "gargantuan pomposity... perhaps unintentionally" personified "the essence of U2".<ref>{{cite news|title=Oh, God|newspaper=[[San Francisco Examiner]]|first=Joyce|last=Millman|author-link=Joyce Millman|date=4 November 1988|pages=C-1, C-9}}</ref> [[Gary Graff]] of the ''[[Detroit Free Press]]'' called the film "a conceptual mess that lacks focus and flow", and said that it neither chronicles the band's breakout success of 1987 adequately nor offers additional insight into the band. He said that "many of the individual components of [the film] are excellent" but that Joanou failed to tie them together.<ref>{{cite news|title='U2: Rattle and Hum'|newspaper=[[Detroit Free Press]]|first=Gary|last=Graff|author-link=Gary Graff|date=4 November 1988|pages=1C, 4C}}</ref> [[Carrie Rickey]] of ''[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]]'' said, "Self-indulgent to the point of absurdity, ''U2 Rattle and Hum'' might be the silliest concert film ever made." She said it compared unfavourably to other concert movies due to its lack of narrative, and that Joanou's reverence for U2 bordered on "unintentional hilarity", adding, "[[Rob Reiner]] and company couldn't do a ''[[This Is Spinal Tap|Spinal Tap]]'' on this; ''Rattle and Hum'' is already a parody."<ref>{{cite news|title=Paying homage to the Irish band U2 on its recent tour|newspaper=[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]]|first=Carrie|last=Rickey|author-link=Carrie Rickey|date=4 November 1988|at=sec. Weekend, p. 16}}</ref> Joanou himself called the picture "pretentious".<ref>Gardner (1994)</ref>

Michael MacCambridge of the ''[[Austin American-Statesman]]'' disagreed with the film's detractors, calling it a "very good and at times excellent concert movie" whose "studied avoidance of drifting into self-parody" distinguished it from predecessors and headed off comparisons to ''This Is Spinal Tap''. MacCambridge enjoyed the black-and-white footage of the band "in the middle of becoming legend" and their scenes with King and the Harlem gospel choir, but thought the switch to colour footage interrupted the film's "pace and momentum".<ref>{{cite news|title=Becoming a legend|newspaper=[[Austin American-Statesman]]|first=Michael|last=MacCambridge|date=4 November 1988|page=F5}}</ref> David Silverman of the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' said that Joanou "steadily brings the viewer into a relationship with the band and brings an understanding to the new music", while "provid[ing] an innovative, fast-paced insight" to U2. Silverman praised the documentary scenes with the individual band members and the "beautiful artistic" performance footage, and said the director "succeeded in bringing U2 to the screen in a creative, introspective and exciting film that will add to the legend and preserve the integrity of the decade's most influential contribution to rock".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1988-11-04-8802130045-story.html|title='Rattle and Hum' Introduces Personal Side of U2|newspaper=[[Chicago Tribune]]|first=David|last=Silverman|date=4 November 1988|at=sec. 7, p. A|access-date=22 March 2021}}</ref> Barbara Jaeger of ''[[The Record (North Jersey)|The Record]]'' called it a "moving, beautifully photographed look at the group" that properly captured the energy of their live performances. She said, "If there is to be a standard against which future rock movies will be judged, 'U2 Rattle and Hum' is it."<ref>{{cite news|title=U2's power and intensity is captured on celluloid|newspaper=[[The Record (North Jersey)|The Record]]|first=Barbara|last=Jaeger|date=4 November 1988|at=sec. Previews, p. 29}}</ref> Mackie of ''The Vancouver Sun'' said that despite the film offering "few insights into the individual members, the live footage is nothing short of brilliant." He described Bono's speech during "Sunday Bloody Sunday" as a "raw, emotional moment, a spontaneous outburst that crystalizes the powerful message of peace and love that U2 preach".<ref>{{cite news|title=U2 film catches live magic|newspaper=[[The Vancouver Sun]]|first=John|last=Mackie|date=4 November 1988|page=C1}}</ref> Michael Wilmington of the ''Los Angeles Times'' said the film "records some savagely compelling live performances" and offers proof of why "this unlikely band... are often ranked by critics as the world's best". He thought that despite Joanou not setting the proper context for the film or conducting an engaging interview with U2, "he matches the impassioned sounds with spectacular visuals".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-11-04-ca-1284-story.html|title=Movie Reviews: 'Rattle and Hum' Catches U2's Music and Message|newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]]|first=Michael|last=Wilmington|date=4 November 1988|at=sec. Calendar, p. 6}}</ref>

===Commercial performance===
Despite the criticism, the ''Rattle and Hum'' album was a strong seller, continuing U2's burgeoning commercial success. It hit number one on the US [[Billboard 200|''Billboard'' 200]] albums chart, remaining at the top spot for six weeks; it was the first number-one double album in the US since [[Bruce Springsteen]]'s ''[[The River (Bruce Springsteen album)|The River]]'' in 1980.<ref>McGee (2008), p. 120</ref> ''Rattle and Hum'' also reached number one in the UK and Australian charts. In the UK, it sold 360,000 copies in its first week, making it the fastest-selling album at that point (a record it held until the release of [[Oasis (band)|Oasis]]'s ''[[Be Here Now (album)|Be Here Now]]'' in 1997).<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.virginmedia.com/music/features/fastest-selling-albums.php?page=11|title=10. U2: Rattle And Hum|year=2010|publisher=[[Virgin Media]]|access-date=31 January 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304092630/http://www.virginmedia.com/music/features/fastest-selling-albums.php?page=11|archive-date=4 March 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.musicweek.com/analysis/read/charts-analysis-sam-smith-surges-to-albums-summit/070778|title=Charts Analysis: Sam Smith surges to albums summit|work=[[Music Week]]|first=Alan|last=Jones|date=8 December 2017|access-date=9 December 2017|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Lifetime sales for the album have surpassed 14&nbsp;million copies.<ref>Stokes (2005), p. 78</ref>