Top Comments
All Comments (16)
-
Production was too full, needed space for the desolation of the song and vocal to work, BV's on the chorus too over-powering - its not easy to cover a U2 song but Mary did very well all considering
-
I must say that I really didn't like this the first time I saw it - she had RUINED a classic song with this dance/electronica beat.
But, I listened to it a few times, and now I can see the power that she has as a singer. And, I'll admit that she did a really good job covering the song.
It shows just how good a singer she is, as she conveyed the message of the song, as well or better than Bono, and she did it without Adam's help.
-
can't stand U2..but love mary's version....
-
great version from mary, as you'd expect.
-
YOU SUCK
-
I have this song on white label, so much better but not main stream i guess.
I will upload it soon as it is one of my favs.
-
I heard this years ago and couldnt find it anywhere...thanks for posting this!!!
-
This cover was released in 1997!
-
It's ok as a lite dance anthem version of a familiar song, which is legitimate enough to do, but isn't amazing (probably because it's hard to be both sad and dancy).
As a standalone piece it would come a distant third behind the U2 and Hamish Cowan versions.
She's beautiful and has a great voice, so should just try with a different song.
Its a nice modern version of the classic, but I'm still not 100% in opinion about it. What made the original so powerful was the melody, the bass, guitar and drums combined was virtually chilling. I miss that here, so not sure if I should like it or not...I'll definitely listen to it more times, see if I can get into it or not.
emileklos 5 years ago 7
You can still feel the emotion thanks to Mary's powerful vocal. LOL i'm just biased cos i love her to bits!
missdeirdrehalliwell 5 years ago 2