Bono: Stories of Surrender

As "Bono: Stories of Surrender" (2025 release; 86 min.) opens, Bono is telling the audience about his heart problem around Christmas 2016, which leads him to bring a highly reworked "Vertigo". Bono then goes back in time, to what things were like growing up in Ireland between himself and his dad. At this point we are less than 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is directed by Australian director Andrew Dominik ("The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford). First there was the book "Surrender: 40 Songs, One Story", then the book tour, then the New York one man show "Stories of Surrender: An Evening of Words, Music and Some Mischief...". And now we get the film version of the one man shows, taped at the Beacon Theater in New York. Please note that I did not read the memoir, or catch the book tour, or see the one man show, so I watched this documentary as a stand-alone. It is important to understand that this is not a traditional Bono bio-pic. Instead it is Bono reflecting on his life and work. Check out the Pavarotti stories he shares with his dad (Bono playing both himself and his dad). This also is very much a Performance, not some off the cuff remarks. I quite enjoyed it for what it was, nothing more, nothing less. Bono is now in his mid-60's and brimming with energy. He will not be held back! The U2 songs that Bono performs (backed by some strings and drums) are all heavily reworked. But in the end this is quite enjoyable, and with a running time of not even an hour and a half, this flew by in no time. Please note that Brad Pitt is a co-producer.

"Bono - Stories of Surrender" premiered at the Cannes film festival a few weeks ago, and now is streaming on Apple TV. It is currently rated 71% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, which sounds about right to me. If you are a fan of Bono or of U2, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

Bono's Stories of Surrender is not just a documentary - it's a masterclass in artistry, authenticity, and emotional depth. In an era dominated by flashy spectacle and often superficial lyricism, this intimate journey with a quarter of U2 reminds us what real storytelling looks like.

Through his spoken word, stripped-down performances, and candid reflections, Bono proves that experience, vulnerability, and soul still matter in music. He doesn't rely on trends or gimmicks - he relies on truth, and that makes all the difference.

This show effortlessly eclipses what many of today's top-charting artists offer. Unlike Taylor Swift's meticulously marketed personas or Drake's algorithm-friendly sound, Bono invites us into something far more enduring: a life lived through art, love, conflict, and purpose. Stories of Surrender is proof that depth will always outshine hype.

If you're tired of the music industry's noise and hungry for something real, meaningful, and deeply human - this documentary is a must-watch. Bono's voice may be weathered, but it carries the weight of history, heartache, and hope like few others can.

Ok first things first .

I'm Irish but I've never been a huge fan of U2 or Bono.

I don't mind their music but I've never bought a U2 album or gone to a U2 Gig.

I was expecting much from this film.

To be brutally honest I was going to switch it off after the first few minutes .

I've now idea why Andrew Dominick allowed such a pretentious egotistical into to the show .

Having said that , from what I know of Bono he probably gave Andrew little say as to what way it was going to start.

I advise any future viewers to skip past the pretentious start and get straight into the show .

It's actually really good and very entertaining .

He uses U2's music to create a story and does the songs proud .

I really enjoyed it and would recommend watching it to anyone whether a fan or not .

Well done Bono.

I'm sure it took a lot of balls to put this out.

It worked .

Bono and U2 released The Joshua Tree with Bullet the Blue Sky on it in 1987. The song had to do with El Salvador and was a musically and lyrically compelling statement turning the spotlight on US military intervention and its consequences for the people there. It was also a reflection on ordinary people -- especially Christians -- in America and their support for what would be considered war crimes in any other÷way-around situation. Over a quarter of a century later, it took the same Bono about 20 months of wholesale live-streamed murder of civilians and 5,000 children aged five and under killed to open his mouth about Gaza and deliver one of the most disingenuous utterances possible...

That's pretty much all one needs to know to see this high-end cinematic depiction of a relatable version of Bono neatly interspersed for authenticity with lower-key moments for what it is. At some point on stage, our rock star takes a glass of beer and turns it upside down so that it's revealed to be a prop. "Show business", Bono says. Which inadvertently becomes the perfect visual summary for his perfectly staged exercise in sincerity. Now, don't get it wrong. It's not that some of those personal stories told in the film couldn't be interesting and actually relatable. And we'll get back to them in due course. It's not that the work doesn't feature some moderately interesting technical ideas and creative choices. It's just that when someone attains such sky-high levels of hypocrisy as our glorious "quater-man" storyteller, nothing they say can really be taken seriously anymore. So, instead of discussing the technicalities -- which will be properly done by many others anyway -- let's try a little substance oriented tangent here...

Let's give Mr Hewson the benefit of the doubt. Let's try to see him how he'd like to be seen. As a humanitarian, as a speaker for the poor and oppressed, as a spiritual seeker (I'm sorry but, given the band's output over the course of two and a half decades, trying to see him as an interesting musician would hardly be possible today even as an abstract thought experiment). OK, what was the great Marcus Aurelius' main rule? "Look things in the face and know them for what they are?" It totally makes sense, doesn't it? So let's do it...

How many wars of choice aka illegal military interventions in other sovereign nations mostly composed of direct violatios of international law and oftentimes outright war crimes started by Western powers in this century was our humanitarian vocal about? There's been no shortage of those lately. Did he have anything to say about the invasion in Iraq, for example? Or the destruction of Libya? All of them proved to be illegal actions in pursuit of hidden agendas based on lies and fabrications -- which was kind of evident from the get-go -- and resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and pretty much complete destruction of civilian infrastructures of entire regions. Sadly, none of them were of much concern to Bono. Nor did he have a lot to say about the genocide in Yemen or thousands of Palestinians killed even before the ongoing slaughter. He was too busy making friends with the George W. Bush and Madeleine Albright types who probably see Agent Orange in their wet dreams. So much for our great humanitarian and man of peace...

A speaker for the poor and working folks? Has Bono been spotted once near the real deals like Chris Smalls? Or Chris Hedges? Kshama Sawant? Any union rank-and-file? Actually helping actual people to actually organize so that they could have a chance to stand up for their rights, for their right to simply survive? Meaning as opposed to be thrown an occasional bone through the efforts of some golden hearted philanthropist? Not really. Bono was too busy dicking around the WEF types who probably see unionizing in their nightmares. And that's when he wasn't devising another clever tax evading scheme. Or referring to the wild idea of properly paying said taxes in his homeland to ensure that those less fortunate have some semblance of social safety nets in place along the lines of "if you are rich, it doesn't mean you should be stupid". So much for our working-class hero...

Everyone knows Bono's dictum, "We work with everybody". Well, first, this "everybody" seems to be weirdly selective and manifesting an obvious elitist slant. And second, how's it going? What are the practical outcomes of Bono's cozying up to every major oligarch and war criminal on the planet? Releasing the Collateral Murder video by WikiLeaks in 2010 became a resonant event, was covered by major mainstream media outlets, and produced serious consequences. Dozens of even more horrible videos involving children and coming in from Gaza on a daily basis produced 52 standing ovations with which one of the main perpetrators of those crimes was welcomed on the floor of the Congress by Bono's partners in making the world a better place. So how is this approach working out? ...

For the sake of brevity, we aren't even going to start on spiritual seeking. Rather, let's get back to the film. Given everything mentioned above, one question is likely to haunt you if you choose to watch it. In this situation, in this world of today with all those things happening as business as usual, doesn't someone of Bono's stature (no pun intended) with all their financial independence, creative freedom, platform (no pun...really), army of followers as well as knowledge and experience have any other topic to focus on apart from...Themselves -- like as in Bono, not God? Again, don't get it wrong. If we were talking about some sort of reclusive artist carefully eschewing any social contexts, we could opine on their general outlook but such a choice on their part should be deemed natural. Talking about someone who has spent decades presenting themselves as the greatest social activist on this planet, however... No tales to tell except those that the fans already know and everyone else ain't necessarily that interested in? No events that happened or unfolding to draw attention to? No other person or their work to highlight? No subject to delve into? Now? In that position? If you do care? Come on...

So, long story short, the film may be expected to polarize the audience. Those who comprise the fanbase, still consider what U2 has been releasing for more than 25 years real music and are prepared to take anything its frontman has to offer at face value will probably see it as a stylishly arranged, maybe a bit redundant but still interesting, portrayal of Bono's introspective self bringing up his childhood, relationships with his parents, and the origins of the band. And may totally enjoy themselves. But those who tend to have a hard time trying to dismiss the obvious systemic contradictions in Bono's declarations and activities, which we touched on here and courtesy of which he found himself largely -- and quite understandably -- disowned by his people, will probably see it as yet another instance of posing done by the rock star persona and nicely illuminated from all sorts of artsy angles, but, at the end of the day, offering zero actual genuineness. And may have not such a good time...

But even if you happen to be in the second camp, examining the story of Bono and the band -- which is indeed fascinating in its own way -- may be helpful. And this documentary is a valuable contribution in this sense. Bono himself isn't likely to go for this kind of soul-searching. But others probably should. Because it's almost impossible to believe that the very people who had enough vision, artistic potential, and personal integrity to create the magic that is U2's early albums could somehow mutate into their current incarnations -- both as artists and human beings. So there is a great lesson there. It looks like even if you are OK and you gain success at the level where the whole world is yours, it's not the end of it. It very much looks like it's only the beginning...

I love U2, my favourite band for long time, but I have been developing an (I don't know how else to call it) rejection towards Bono that is growing more and more with time. This a very beautiful pice, only surpassed by its ego driven and pretentious story. Bono is too self-righteous, the authenticity he tries to force while telling this story end up being -ironically- a little overacted. Still a great singer, still great composer and I don't doubt he is a good person with good intentions, but this comes across... he is coming across more and more as the years pass, as fake. Interestingly he does mention at the beginning this can come in that way, self-centered, but that warning doesn't save it from being what it indeed is, a pretentious piece.