I've seen this before but I've got to be honest, I'm the slickest dresser on these god damned forums and I can hit a better metal solo on my ****ing accordion than the brutal-kids that act like that photo carries weight.

Hahaha! Right on, man. I just thought that picture was funny as hell. Get on witchya bad self.

I don't give a shit, wearing sandals and shorts into an Armani store is punk as hell.

I heard that g.

James doesn't really look like he's enjoying himself though, I mean who can honestly say they've enjoyed going clothing shopping with their girlfriends? Men do it for the simple fact that it avoids a long winded argument and a week of no sex.

So many ways to say, "You're absolutely right." Not one of them with enough emphasis.

In person it would be tough, so you want to do the following...



This.

I got here late... while I agree with some things the topic creator stated, those are silly reasons to not like a band regardless. You could respect them less for it, but in the end it comes down to the music.

The reason I don't like Metallica is I don't enjoy their music. That's about it.

Do you really have an accordion? I want to hear this.

I think if Metallica's musis had remained consistently awesome since the early nineties we wouldn't even be focussing on the sideline matters such as where they've been seen shopping, the napster thing etc...

The fact is their musical output has been of patchy quality at best... hence the focus on the distracting matters...

Haha, their music isn't worth talking about anymore so we go to other things.

I can agree to an extent, but I still think that people need to keep in mind that it's the music that matters, and focus on that. Which... from me anyway, would still leave negative things being said. =P

I hate them because they have failed to inspire or move me in 20 years which is a shame as they were one of my favourites growing up.

Death Magnetic is one of their best albums, obviously not up there with the black album and Master of Puppets but
The Day That Never Comes
All Nightmare Long
Cyanide
The Unforgiven III
all great songs

I wasn't aware Death Magnetic was actually a Metallica album. I'm pretty sure it's a tribute album done by a half-assed group of armani-wearing aging record label primadonnas. Some reviewer said it sounds like new Metallica playing old Metallica and that's exactly what it's like. Too bad new Metallica is terrible. Retire already. Newstead had the good grace to already.

Nope, its a Metallica album. You should do some research first.

Well yeah. That was the joke. I own it, I know it says Metallica on the cover.

Death Magnetic wasn't so bad. It gave me a surprise considering the album before was St. Anger. All Nightmare Long is an awesome tune.

Yeah, but as much as people slag off St. Anger, at least it dared to be a little different and not be a rehash of their earlier sound... some parts of St Anger don't work so well, but it was by no means a reason to ditch the whole sound and direction you were going in - and relaunch yourself as a rehash band aka AC/DC...

I even like Death Magnetic and I am saying this... as good as it sounds from time to time, it loses the sense of freedom to explore new ground that St Anger tried to introduce...

:thumb:

That's hillarious.

I'm like a lot of other people who like there first three albums.

I just think that Metallica were never really broad-spectrum musicians and even though they were willing to jump the thrash genre and experiment (load, reload, etc.) they were too afraid of losing the Metallica name. Guys like Josh Homme know when a band has done it's job (when it was time for Kyuss to end) and how to keep a band open in terms of potential to prevent it from being pigeonholed. Metallica as Metallica ended after 1991's Black Album, and they just didn't know when to quit and start anew. Anybody who bought St. Anger would also have bought the cd of a side project involved Hetfield and Ulrich. There is just so much good music out there that it makes it arrogant and ridiculous to believe you can rest on your laurels and continue to crank out regurgitations of your previous material. There is also no excuse for the terrible production quality on St. Anger, no matter how much of a "garage" sound they were going for. The ability to tune a snare is something I am not surprised Ulrich lacks.

I have little to no respect for Metallica anymore, or any of it's members save Jason who recently retired.

You respect Jason after the whole Supernova deal?

Hahaha, I couldn't bear to watch it. But I like Flotsam & Jetsam a lot, and I love watching his live performances with Metallica, especially the San Diego dvd... I think he just made a great bass player for the band and really suited them well, and I think he was a much better all-around musician in terms of scope and creativity than the other members. That one career hiccup with Supernova pales in comparison IMO to what Metallica has been doing lately.

Maybe after The Black Album their relevence in music has gone but they're at the point where they don't need to be in a band, they could quite happily put down the guitars and drums and not make another record, so why don't they? because they enjoy what they do. St. Anger was undoubtidly, for me anyway, one of the worst albums of the decade but they tried something, as you said, the "garage" sound and it didn't pay off, but at least they tried something and I believe that the latest record is excellent and it's a return to form from them.

yeah this is the logical response. I think its greedy, short-sighted, and foolish to demand of 40-year olds, the sounds they made when they were 20, with different members.

Albums are static. You can go listen to them again and again. If you self-identify with a band and you don't like the direction their going in, thats your issue. I tend to go with artists who's artisitc outlook is similar to what I'd do if I could paint/play guitar/act. Even if they bomb, I still find it entertaining at least.

Metallica like what their doing, and if they make another "Kill 'em all" I know I'll be bored. The assertion of a receeding amount of respect is curious, why would you lose respect for them? I'm guessing maybe you meant another word because what no one should respect is them doing whatever their childish fans scream at them to do.

I don't particularly agreee with the high art/coke days where Hammett and Ulrich wanted to reinvent the band like U2 did, but theres a reason I'm not in Metallica

Exactly, if you don't like their stuff after 1991. Listen and appreciate what they made before it rather than expecting new groundbreaking innovative stuff.

Do they? Didn't they have to hire a mediator during the recording of St. Anger because they hate each other so much? That doesn't sound like people who enjoy what they do.

its a tough call. I hate Adidasss and I still come here, right?

:nono:

Well in your case it's obvious that you're just doing it for the money.

I just think that the Black Album was sort of the final chapter in the life of Metallica before they began to make big changes in terms of their sound, their production, their lineup, their relationships with each other and etc. I think after that it became a different band that should have been something other than Metallica, which I daresay would have been healthier for them musicially/creatively if they mixed it up with some other musicians. It's almost at the point where you have to identify yourself as an "old" fan or a "new" fan, because the demographic of people who listen to Metallica's modern music as opposed to the kind of people who would have gone to see them play songs off Kill 'Em All is radically different. I didn't expect "new groundbreaking innovative stuff", although that's how high the bar is set for other musicians... I just didn't expect albums like Load to be attributed to the Metallica of Ride The Lightning days. IMO, it sounds like Theory of a Deadman covering Venom or something ridiculous.

I fail to understand how it's greedy or short-sighted "to demand of 40-year olds, the sounds they made when they were 20, with different members"... Many bands are perfectly capable of that, and I think it's an indication of Metallica's limitations as musicians that they apparently aren't capable of that (in your estimation). I'm also kind of offended to be called "greedy". But it's irrelevant, because I don't expect them to make music like they did in their 20s - that was the problem with Death Magnetic, to me. It sounds exactly like 40-year-old Metallica covering 20-year-old Metallica, which is not what I expect from a band with 20 years experience. To use Josh Homme as an example again, he's been making music in bands for 20 years and if anything he's become a better and more creative musician than he was in Kyuss (as much as I goddamn love Kyuss and hate Era Vulgaris). I have no doubt that he will keep making amazing music until he dies, because that's who he is, and he doesn't need billions in merchandising or blanketing radio play to do it either. Another example would be Bolt Thrower... Around since 1986, releasing nine albums in that time with their final one, Those Once Loyal, released in 2005. Again, 20 years later, great music at least as good as their first album (if not better), and in this case, they are going on an indefinite recording haitus as they feel they have released "the perfect Bolt Thrower album" and don't have to keep creating in that vein. In comparison, Metallica kicked ass from 1981 to 1990 (nine years) and released only five studio albums in that time before starting to suck hard - much less improving in the areas of creativity or technical skill. I don't think artists should pander to their fans in the slightest, but there is a difference between releasing material that is a departure from previous works and releasing material that is technically less complex, less creative, rather derivative, and bland and naming it the same in the hope that the brand identity will carry a shiitty record.

Metallica died to me after 1991, and nothing made that more clear than attending their recent show at GM Place on the Death Magnetic tour. It was fun to sing along and watch the pyrotechnics, but the performance and new tunes were lacklustre (Lamb of God put them to shame), not to mention how 1 in 10 of people attending were wearing shirts they hadn't bought at the show or the day before. Real metal fans know where the good stuff is, and it wasn't there that day. No amount of discussion is going to dissuade me otherwise.

Metallica has better musicians in their ranks than most bands.

At this point I'm done arguing. You like Lamb of God. We're not on the same page.

IMO, that's a laughable assertion. Cliff was by far the most creative member, and Hetfield after that; Kirk's solos, while classic, are not especially groundbreaking, and Lars is probably the least skilled and least creative drummer in metal today (and I play drums and was strongly inspired by him). Coming together, they made some AMAZING albums, but I wouldn't go so far as to say they are particularly good musicians. You name a bunch of drummers or guitar players from the metal scene and more than likely they can play or write more complex/creative riffs than Metallica's members have/could.

We are obviously not (on the same page), so let's not argue - I'm just "expressing my opinion", to euphemise. I think experience in the metal genre is relevant to judging how innovative and skilled Metallica are, which I'm not saying you don't have... But Lamb of God is arguably the biggest metal band out there today, and for good reason. I guarantee that almost anyone in that band can outplay Metallica, and I think from a technical and creative perspective they outdo them as well. I'm not discounting Metallica's early material - it remains some of my favourite music in my entire library - but metal has evolved since, even as Metallica had a hand in leading it's evolution.

I too hated Metallica for the whole napster thing. Then last month I went to see them and man! when they played the old stuff... it gave me goosebumps. So I realized it's really all about the music... and nothing else matters.

Most of my "hate" towards Metallica comes from their absolutely retarded die-hard fans who still havent realised their band has been taking a turn into ****sville ever since Cliff died.

Oh, and Ride the Lightning was their only good album, I guess thats why I dislike them aswell.

/braces self for Metallicafans rage.

Hey man. We're in the same boat. Let's tag team 'em :bringit:

I'll need some backup when all the raging fanboy hordes unleash their wrath in this thread.

:bringit:

Actually I don't think those guys know how to type, so I doubt they're on MB :p:

You know, I honestly expected you to be a douche about this. Perhaps I misjudged you friend.

I think the distinction to make here is you're arguing Metal, and I'm saying music in general. In my argument, Metallica wins. Given my overall musical influence, I'd be more inclined to the diversified band.

Metallica drew influence for their greatest album from, among other acts, Rush. For them to come that distance says to me their taking in influences and making it their own. Modern Metal bores me because its all the same concept. Only if you immerse yourself in only metal do they start to sound reasonably different. I think thats where I am, and probably the reason we're so far apart musically.

:bringit:I think this band has had their prime back in the 80s. They need to just fade away. They blow so much ass. It's crazy all I hear on the radio nowadays is Metallica. GOD I HATE THEM.

I bet if we took every post in this thread that says basically what Crabby did, we coulg get 5 pages of the exact same thign over and over again.