Entertainment
U2 made a concert movie of its Sphere show. Sphere is the only place you can see it
Nine months after U2 wrapped its 40-date residency at Sphere, the veteran Irish rock band is back at the dome-shaped venue just off the Las Vegas Strip.
Well, sort of.
“V-U2” is a new concert movie that documents the group’s high-tech “U2:UV” show, in which singer Bono, guitarist the Edge, bassist Adam Clayton and drummer Bram van den Berg (filling in for Larry Mullen Jr.) revisited U2’s media-obsessed 1991 album “Achtung Baby” as they inaugurated the $2-billion building outfitted with the world’s highest-resolution LED screen. U2’s stay at Sphere was a critical and commercial success, blanketing social media with eye-popping video clips and raking in nearly $250 million, according to the trade journal Pollstar — and at a moment when the show’s stiff competition included Taylor Swift’s Eras tour and Beyoncé’s Renaissance tour.
So it’s no wonder that U2 followed Swift and Beyoncé in bringing its show to the screen. Unlike those pop superstars’ films, though, this one you can see only at the place where the band filmed it — at Sphere, that is, where “V-U2” plays on that massive wraparound screen on nights when the Eagles aren’t there for their residency. (Between U2 and the Eagles came gigs at Sphere by Phish and Dead & Company.) Directed by the Edge and his wife, Morleigh Steinberg, “V-U2” opened in September and was just extended through the end of February; tickets to see the movie are pricey, starting at around 100 bucks a pop.
Looking back at “U2:UV,” the Edge, 63, says a Sphere production is “its own distinct kind of art form — a new art form, I think, not just for music but for narrative film, for documentary, for all kinds of presentations. It’s the ability to translocate the audience to a new place, be it real or imaginary.” (Among the vignettes in U2’s show were ones that put the crowd in a pre-Strip desert landscape and amid a menagerie of endangered wildlife species.) “You can’t divorce the scale of the imagery from what you might want to do with it,” the Edge adds. As inspirations, the guitarist cites Christo and Jean-Claude’s 2021 wrapping of Paris’ Arc de Triomphe as well as Culver City’s Museum of Jurassic Technology, which he calls one of his favorite places in Los Angeles.
“All those tiny miniatures that fit on the head of a needle — I think it’s so beautiful,” he says in a Zoom call from his place in Malibu. “Again, it’s the scale that makes it unique.”
I get the desire to preserve an ambitious live show for posterity. And I get the impulse to sell tickets to folks who didn’t pay to catch the show in person. What was the creative opportunity you saw in making this movie?
You’ve got to understand that there was a huge amount of risk associated with signing on to be the first band [to play Sphere]. It’s all untried and untested technology, and the building — when we first went to see it, it was half-built, OK? So opening night arrives and we literally walk onstage, no idea if it’s going to work. It’s kind of a white-knuckle ride. Coming out of the first few shows, we realized that not only is it working, it’s like all our ideas have landed. That was such a relief.
Then we pivot quite quickly to the thought of filming it, and what does that mean? We go through a process of consideration and elimination as we realize the show is so bespoke to this venue that to try and capture it for a small screen just wouldn’t make any sense. So then we start thinking, Well, what about capturing it for the screen it happens to be on right now? What was here in potential was an immersive experience — maybe the first of its kind — where you can faithfully represent your live performance so that there’s only a few giveaways that it’s not actually happening live in front of you. That was the thrilling proposition.
U2 performs at Sphere in Las Vegas in September 2023.
(Kevin Mazur / Getty Images for Live Nation)
The goal was to get an audience member to buy the illusion that U2 is onstage.
Yes. The combination of visuals and the audio and the haptics of the seats — all of those things were brought to bear to try and basically turn on its head the whole idea of suspension of disbelief, so that you’re having to remind yourself that it’s not real, as opposed to pretending that it is.
There’s something very U2 about a concert film that you can see only in the place where the concert happened.
I’d love if [media theorist] Marshall McLuhan could see it. What would he think? Since the beginning of touring “Achtung Baby,” we were riffing on this idea of “even better than the real thing.” That wasn’t lost on us. And I have to say: Finally getting to see U2 live was genuinely shocking. It gave me goosebumps. We’re not half-bad.
The first few songs are shot from a steady position in the audience. Then the camera starts moving around.
You don’t want to give that up too soon. You want people to enjoy the show as it was first designed and imagined. Then you give them a tab of acid and it goes in a completely different direction. We wait until “One,” our fifth song [in the set] — that was a good moment to start deconstructing the show to some extent.
A good moment in an emotional sense?
I think that’s always the leading metric for us — the emotional connection. We had [director] Mark Pellington come in, and he was the one who suggested the close-up of Bono in “One,” which was a great call. It breaks the movie out of the conceit of it actually being a live show, and suddenly you shatter the fourth wall.
That close-up of Bono is startling to behold.
I haven’t actually had it measured, but it must be the size of a building.
Did Bono get to approve such a revealing shot of his own face?
Oh, yeah [laughs]. His word to us was: “It can’t be just spectacle — you’ve got to capture the humanity of what’s happening.” So, like, mistakes: Bono stumbled over some of his banter in the introductions, and he wanted to keep that in. This is not overly polished.
U2’s concert movie is scheduled to play at Sphere through the end of February.
(Sphere Entertainment)
My instinct is to scoff at that idea. The whole point of Sphere is polish! But there actually is something kind of raw about the movie.
Part of that is practical. With modern post-production, it’s super simple to alter 35-mill format. But since this is such a massive amount of data, to really do anything too fancy would take months and an eye-watering amount of computer processing to achieve. I’m sure future projects will be able to make that possible. But for us, it was kind of straightforward. We knew there wasn’t an awful lot we could do beyond just make cuts and showcase the moments that we thought were the best representations of the show.
Does this movie pose a threat to live music in any way? You think about this or you think about ABBA’s hologram show in London — both enable bands to offer fans a concert-like experience without having to be there in person.
I don’t see it as a threat — no more of a threat than any concert film. The ABBA thing, which I’ve seen, was really fun, given the fact that no one’s seen ABBA perform in the flesh for generations. But I don’t think any of this negates what exists in live concerts — it’s in addition to those offerings.
How did the Sphere experience shape U2’s live ambitions going forward?
I wouldn’t rule out doing something for the Sphere in the future. But we’re itching to get back to regular concerts. Next thing we have to do is a new record, of course. This project was a celebration of “Achtung Baby,” so we’re anxious to do something that’s about new work. We’re already actively developing new material for what will become a U2 album in the future, and we’ll be back to touring. As much as we loved being able to rely on the sound being great every night, there’s a great momentum to being on the road. And seeing local fans, as opposed to relying on them coming to us — it’s different. We miss it.
Movie Reviews
Dan Webster reviews “WTO/99”
DAN WEBSTER:
It may now seem like ancient history, especially to younger listeners, but it was only 26 years ago when the streets of Seattle were filled with protesters, police and—ultimately—scenes of what ended up looking like pure chaos.
It is those scenes—put together to form a portrait of what would become known as the “Battle of Seattle” —that documentary filmmaker Ian Bell captures in his powerful documentary feature WTO/99.
We’ve seen any number of documentaries over the decades that report on every kind of social and cultural event from rock concerts to war. And the majority of them follow a typical format: archival footage blended with interviews, both with participants and with experts who provide an informational, often intellectual, perspective.
WTO/99 is something different. Like The Perfect Neighbor, a 2026 Oscar-nominated documentary feature, Bell’s film consists of what could be called found footage. What he has done is amass a series of news reports and personal video recordings into an hour-and-42-minute collection of individual scenes, mostly focused on a several-block area of downtown Seattle.
That is where a meeting of the WTO, the World Trade Organization, was set to be held between Nov. 30 and Dec. 3, 1999. Delegates from around the world planned to negotiate trade agreements (what else?) at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center.
Months before the meeting, however, a loose coalition of groups—including NGOs, labor unions, student organizations and various others—began their own series of meetings. Their objective was to form ways to protest not just the WTO but, to some of them, the whole idea of a world order they saw as a threat to the economic independence of individual countries.
Bell’s film doesn’t provide much context for all this. What we mostly see are individuals arguing their points of view as they prepare to stop the delegates from even entering the convention center. Meanwhile, Seattle authorities such as then-Mayor Paul Schell and then-Police Chief Norm Stamper—with brief appearances by Gov. Gary Locke and King County Executive Ron Sims—discuss counter measures, with Schell eventually imposing a curfew.
That decision comes, though, after what Bell’s film shows is a peaceful protest evolving into a street fight between people parading and chanting, others chained together and splinter groups intent on smashing the storefronts of businesses owned by what they see as corporate criminals. One intense scene involves a young woman begging those breaking windows to stop and asking them why they’re resorting to violence. In response a lone voice yells their reasoning: “Self-defense.”
Even more intense, though, are the actions of the Seattle police. We see officers using pepper spray, tear gas, flash grenades and other “non-lethal” means such as firing rubber pellets into the crowd. In one scene, a uniformed guy—not identified as a police officer but definitely part of the security crowd, which included National Guardsmen—is shown kicking a guy in the crotch.
The media, too, can’t avoid criticism. Though we see broadcast reporters trying to capture what was happening—with some affected like everybody else by the tear gas that filled the streets like a winter fog—the reports they air seem sketchy, as if they’re doctors trying to diagnose a serious illness by focusing on individual cells. And the images they capture tend to highlight the violence over the well-meaning actions of the vast majority of protesters.
Reactions to what Bell has put on the screen are bound to vary, based on each viewer’s personal politics. Bell revels his own stance by choosing selectively from among thousands of hours of video coverage to form the narrative he feels best captures what happened those two decades-and-change ago.
If nothing else, WTO/99 does reveal a more comprehensive picture of what happened than we got at the time. And, too, it should prepare us for the future. The way this country is going, we’re bound to see a lot more of the same.
Call it the “Battle for America.”
For Spokane Public Radio, I’m Dan Webster.
——
Movies 101 host Dan Webster is the senior film critic for Spokane Public Radio.
Entertainment
Tommy DeCarlo, Boston fan who became the band’s lead singer, dies at 60
Tommy DeCarlo, a longtime fan of Boston who became the classic rock band’s lead singer in the late 2000s, has died. He was 60.
DeCarlo died Monday following a battle with brain cancer, his family announced on Facebook.
“[H]e fought with incredible strength and courage right up until the very end,” the family’s statement said. “During this difficult time, we kindly ask that friends and fans respect our family’s privacy as we grieve and support one another.”
Born April 23, 1965, in Utica, N.Y., DeCarlo said he first started listening to Boston — the 1970s rock band known for its instrumental overtures and hits including “More Than a Feeling,” “Don’t Look Back” and “Peace of Mind” — as a young teenager, according to the group’s website. The vocalist credited his love for Boston’s original frontman Brad Delp and his desire to sing along with him on the radio for helping to develop his own singing voice.
After Delp’s death in 2007, DeCarlo, then a manager at a Home Depot, sent a link to his MySpace page filled with Boston covers as well as an original song in tribute to Delp to the Boston camp, hoping for a chance to participate in a tribute show for the singer. They kindly turned down his offer.
But eventually, Boston founder and lead songwriter Tom Scholz heard DeCarlo’s cover of “Don’t Look Back” and invited the singer to perform a few songs with the band at the tribute. That tribute show would be DeCarlo’s first time ever performing with any band in front of a crowd, but it wouldn’t be his last. He continued to perform with the band at live shows for years, and even joined them on some tracks for their 2013 album, “Life, Love & Hope.”
DeCarlo also formed the band Decarlo with his son, guitarist Tommy DeCarlo Jr. In October, the singer announced he was stepping away from performing due to “unexpected health issues.”
“[P]erforming and sharing music with all of you around the world has been one of the greatest joys of my life,” DeCarlo wrote in his Facebook post. “I can’t thank you all enough for the incredible love, support, and understanding you’ve shown me and my family during this time. It truly means the world to us.”
Movie Reviews
Movie Review: ‘Scream 7’ – Catholic Review
NEW YORK (OSV News) – As its title suggests, “Scream 7” (Paramount) is the latest extension of a long-lived horror franchise, one that’s currently approaching its 30th anniversary on screen. Since each chapter of this slasher saga has been a bloodsoaked mess, the series’ longevity will strike moviegoers of sense as inexplicable.
Yet the slog continues. While the previous film in the sequence shifted the action from California to New York, this second installment, following a 2022 quasi-reboot, settles on a Midwestern locale and reintroduces us to the series’ original protagonist, Sidney Evans, nee Prescott (Neve Campbell).
Having aged out of the adolescent demographic on whom the various murderers who have donned the Ghostface mask that serves as these films’ dubious trademark over the years seem to prefer to prey, Sidney comes equipped with a teen daughter, Tatum (Isabel May). Will Tatum prove as resourceful in evading the unwanted attentions of Ghostface as Mom has?
On the way to answering that question, a clutch of colorless minor characters fall victim to the killer, who sometimes gets — according to his or her lights — creative. Thus one is quite literally made to spill her guts, while another ends up skewered on a barroom’s pointy beer tap.
Through it all, director Kevin Williamson and his co-writer Guy Busick try to peddle a theme of female empowerment in the face of mortal danger. They also take a stab, as it were, at constructing a plotline about intergenerational family tensions. When not jarring viewers with grisly images, however, they’re only likely to lull them into a stupor.
The film contains excessive gory violence, including disembowelment and impaling, underage drinking, mature topics, a couple of profanities, several milder oaths, pervasive rough and considerable crude language and occasional crass expressions. The OSV News classification is O — morally offensive. The Motion Picture Association rating is R — restricted. Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian.
Read More Movie & TV Reviews
Copyright © 2026 OSV News
-
Wisconsin1 week agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Massachusetts7 days agoMassachusetts man awaits word from family in Iran after attacks
-
Maryland1 week agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Florida1 week agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Pennsylvania5 days agoPa. man found guilty of raping teen girl who he took to Mexico
-
News1 week ago2 Survivors Describe the Terror and Tragedy of the Tahoe Avalanche
-
Sports5 days agoKeith Olbermann under fire for calling Lou Holtz a ‘scumbag’ after legendary coach’s death
-
Virginia6 days agoGiants will hold 2026 training camp in West Virginia