All things Metallica

I'm not one to jump on boats, but I'm not even bothering with this one. I'm having too much fun listening to everything else going on music-wise. Metallica will pick right back up after this all blows over. Of course there will be many of those who will never let this rest and bring it up in every Metallica thread until the day Hetfield dies. Or becomes a table. One of the two.....

Actually i agree with coverkillernation, for once Metallica are the best part of this album.

http://www.metalhammer.co.uk/news/loutallica-dom-lawson-reviews-lulu/ (video)

"Well, to be honest, couldn't we write some songs? Couldn't we just write some proper songs and then you could, like, sing?"

Alex Dee Rokket wrote:

For anyone saying Lou Reed is a brilliant lyricist, how does thst opinion sit along side 'I would cut off my tits'

Brilliant still?

Yes

Here's writer Malcolm Dome's short take on the album:

Words: Malcolm Dome

It appears to have become a habit to slag off the Lou Reed and Metallica collaboration, even before hearing a note of Lulu (Vertigo). Metallica fans seem to hate the very idea of their faves working with Reed. And this isn’t recognisable as a Metallica album. But why should it be? It’s something separate. Perhaps if a project name had been used instead of the various protagonists being so readily identified, then people would have more of an open mind. The truth is that the album is interesting and arresting. Far from being instant, there’s enough here to keep you returning. What does it sound like? It’s Lou Reed with a heavy, progressively atmospheric rock approach. In some respects, not far removed from Opeth taking on board a Peter Gabriel influence. Not the disaster some believe. And if you want to listen to the whole album before buying a copy, it’s being streamed at

Metalheads love to get their panties in a wad anytime a band tries something different, I'm still holding any judgment on this until I hear the full album.

I just rocked Kill 'Em All and it sounded so darned good. Haven't heard it in a while. I was playing air guitar in my office.

ultmetal wrote:

I just rocked Kill 'Em All and it sounded so darned good. Haven't heard it in a while. I was playing air guitar in my office.

manny wrote:

Here's writer Malcolm Dome's short take on the album:

Words: Malcolm Dome

It appears to have become a habit to slag off the Lou Reed and Metallica collaboration, even before hearing a note of Lulu (Vertigo). Metallica fans seem to hate the very idea of their faves working with Reed. And this isn’t recognisable as a Metallica album. But why should it be? It’s something separate. Perhaps if a project name had been used instead of the various protagonists being so readily identified, then people would have more of an open mind. The truth is that the album is interesting and arresting. Far from being instant, there’s enough here to keep you returning. What does it sound like? It’s Lou Reed with a heavy, progressively atmospheric rock approach. In some respects, not far removed from Opeth taking on board a Peter Gabriel influence. Not the disaster some believe. And if you want to listen to the whole album before buying a copy, it’s being streamed at

Yeah, that guy has never heard Opeth.

Eyesore wrote:

manny wrote:

Here's writer Malcolm Dome's short take on the album:

Words: Malcolm Dome

It appears to have become a habit to slag off the Lou Reed and Metallica collaboration, even before hearing a note of Lulu (Vertigo). Metallica fans seem to hate the very idea of their faves working with Reed. And this isn’t recognisable as a Metallica album. But why should it be? It’s something separate. Perhaps if a project name had been used instead of the various protagonists being so readily identified, then people would have more of an open mind. The truth is that the album is interesting and arresting. Far from being instant, there’s enough here to keep you returning. What does it sound like? It’s Lou Reed with a heavy, progressively atmospheric rock approach. In some respects, not far removed from Opeth taking on board a Peter Gabriel influence. Not the disaster some believe. And if you want to listen to the whole album before buying a copy, it’s being streamed at

Yeah, that guy has never heard Opeth.

Exactly what I was thinking.

Chairman_Smith wrote:

It's so close to reality it's hardly parody...

I honestly think it is unfair and a bit force fed that we need to 'tolerate' everything Metallica does or for that matter any big band does. There is always this attitude that fans of certain big bands have (especially Metallica) where their favorite band releases a polarizing album and everyone comes in the band's defense, somehow as though they owe the band something by defending every mediocre release they have.

Heck I have been guilty of doing the same at times and also with Metallica in the past. However, the reason I was doing that is because (apart from liking the band) I had a certain insecurity and vulnerability about saying bad things about a band that meant so much to me, that helped introduce me to metal. I felt like I owed them something even though they knew nothing of my existence. You get this slanted perception that Metallica (or any other big band you're into) are the be all end all of things - no other band can touch them and in the process ignore and discard every other act you may potentially like as much or more than say, Metallica.

For a long time I thought I was alone in that mindset but I noticed that to this day, there are many Metallica fans who think alike and do not want to release grip on their favorite band.

I think those attitudes have given rise to the very polarizing opinions Metallica receives of their post-Black Album records these days. There are people who jealously guard this band, and everything they release, not because they genuinely believe in what the band is doing but I think more because they do not want to accept and cannot accept that there are better bands than Metallica, that the metal scene is not centered around Metallica and that indeed Metallica is not the reason metal music exists. Whenever I hear a Metallica fan justifying why the band changed in the post-Black Album period I instantly recognize myself when I was 15 - 16 years old and thought Metallica were the equivalent of God.

I won't deny that for what it's worth, Metallica even in the post-Black Album period wrote some decent songs but it was painfully clear, even to the band (as was later revealed by James in interviews over the last decade), that Load/Reload was an experiment gone a bit too far. It is equally as clear that the sort of unity fans believed existed in Metallica had started showing obvious cracks in the writing and recording of Load, with each member fighting for the band's stylistic direction.

What I have learned with Metallica is that their 80s albums are classics, it goes without saying, and everything else is to be taken with a grain of salt. The band hit their creative peek, I would venture saying, with Justice For All. It was the last representation of what Metallica was about. The Black Album was the sign of what Metallica would come to be for the next two decades at least and it was a signal call: you either stick with us or you find a different band.

For anyone who chose to stay for the ride, I say the knew what they were to expect from this band's future releases. Definitely not a return to 'form' but further left-field experimentation.

Ultimately, I don't owe them anything and the band doesn't owe their listeners anything. I would qualify the latter statement - there is some responsibility towards the fans but not to the extent that the band must cater to what the fans demand to listen. I think the responsibility has more to do with how the band treats those who genuinely like their music, in terms of delivering a complete audio and visual package and behaving appropriately at live show (i.e. at least turn up on time and put on a good show for the fans).

No one said you had to tolerate everything Metallica releases, most people on this board agree with you and think this album will be cancer to the ears, I happen to not agree with that opinion.

I agree with your last paragraph, you don't owe Metallica or any other band your loyalty and visa versa , except that try to show up on time and put on a good performance.

manny wrote:

No one said you had to tolerate everything Metallica releases, most people on this board agree with you and think this album will be cancer to the ears, I happen to not agree with that opinion.

I agree with your last paragraph, you don't owe Metallica or any other band your loyalty and visa versa , except that try to show up on time and put on a good performance.

I know that no one is forcing anyone to tolerate everything Metallica releases, but my point was that I felt like I was once in that boat when I was younger and less knowledgeable about music and metal in general. I guess the term for what I was describing is being a fanboy but for some reason, in the case of Metallica that term takes on a whole new life.

I wonder if this is because Metallica despite having been around for 3 decades is still a band that influences peoples tastes and introduces them to heavier music more than any other band of similar caliber (e.g. Maiden, AC/DC, KISS etc.). I think what still sets Metallica apart is that their music sounds fresh to this day, even though most of their classic albums were released many years ago. Their music has a certain youthful energy, something to which all generation of music listeners but especially the young can relate to.

The times I have attended Metallica's concerts, I've always seen a mix of different generation of fans including fans that were very much infants as recent as when Metallica had released Reload. In a way I am surprised but at the same time I am not because I feel Metallica's older albums especially still come across as unadulterated as they did back in the early-mid 80s. That is perhaps another reason why many fans refuse to see Metallica grow beyond the age of 18 - 20.

What do you think?

manny wrote:

No one said you had to tolerate everything Metallica releases, most people on this board agree with you and think this album will be cancer to the ears, I happen to not agree with that opinion.

I agree with your last paragraph, you don't owe Metallica or any other band your loyalty and visa versa , except that try to show up on time and put on a good performance.

I am actually with you Manny!

I personally am not looking at this as a Metallica album, but a Lou Reed album with Metallica as his background music band. Personally, I think it's awesome that they are trying something new and different and trying to stretch themselves. If the fail, so what, they tried and failed.

I have to agree with you to a certain extent, I think when it comes to Metallica, for some reason they just provoke some strong reaction especially older fans, when they changed styles some of these fans acted like their wives left them for some cooler hotter guy.

I am 41 and for me personally this band, along with Venom and Slayer introduced me to heavier bands then what I was listening to back in 1984, and from their I picked up heavier bands etc.

Metallica have most definitely picked up fans of all generations, but then Alex that is not surprising since our music will die and a new generation after generation keep discovering bands such as Metallica and others you mentioned.

i like what i've heard of it, so i guess i am the table.

Chairman_Smith wrote:

Haha oh man that was actually awesome

mc666 wrote:

i like what i've heard of it, so i guess i am the table.

Cool I was tired of drinking alone, first rounds on me

One of the youngsters on the paver crew was listening to this at the campground last week-end. I heard the majority of it and it is interesting, at least to a point. I'd a rather heard Lou doing spoken word along to some 80's Metalllica than what this is to my ears (IMHO) a Lou Reed album with a hard edged pop band backing me up. Yes it's different and they tried...But if this was the first thing out of the gate for them, obscurity perhaps ? Does it work cause of who it is rather than what it is ? That is pretty much where I stand....on who

Didn't see this mentioned yet... METALLICA Planning New 3D Feature Film?

arachnoplasma wrote:

Didn't see this mentioned yet... METALLICA Planning New 3D Feature Film?

Yeah, I read that last night on Blabbermouth. They didn't really expound on too much...

I listened to 3 full songs and half of a 4th before I had to bail out. This new album is just not for me at all.

Anyone here familiar with Danko Jones?

Take a look at what happened after he heard Lulu...
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=165083

Canadian rocker Danko Jones has slammed METALLICA's collaboration with Lou Reed, claiming to have put his entire METALLICA collection up for sale after hearing the controversial "Lulu" project.

In a series of tweets over the weekend, Danko offered his opinion on "Lulu", calling it the "Ishtar", "Waterworld" and "Battlefield Earth" of rock 'n' roll. ("Ishtar", "Waterworld" and "Battlefield Earth" are widely considered to be three of the biggest cinematic train wrecks.) His final tweet on the subject reads, "Good morning! Heard METALLICA/Lou Reed album last night. METALLICA collection now for sale. Tweet your $$$."