what the f*ck has happened to metallica??

Former Member

i mean, cmon their new album is an utter crock of shit. nothing compared to their other classics. not one solo on the full thing!! wtf?!?!

and why is james hetfield becoming more like a cheesy sweedish pornstar in every video? (or is that just me? ) just the way he makes all these mad faces to the camera and his huuuuge teeth and scary beardy thing. tis a wee bitty disturbing.

what has happened to metallica??? it brings a tear to my eye to think of it......

Former Member

Bah , I reckon their next album will be closer to their roots , St Anger was disappointing , the lack of Kirk Hammet guitar solos and its nu-metal style especially.

But you have to remember , with each 'Tallica album their music has changed and evolved , Ride the Lightning was more musically complex than Kill Em All , then Master of Puppets (their masterpiece) more complex still.

Justive for all was the most complex.

I dunno bout their new bassist though , hes like some sort of mutated crab or summit..

Former Member

well it seems to evolved into crap this time around. as you said though, hopefully their next will be better.

lol, i know what you mean about their new bassist. you ever saw him live? kirk and james are playing all serious and metal-hardcore, then hes at the left of the stage jiving about with these big 4-foot long braids, and doing that russian dance where u squat really low and kick your legs!!

fucking hilarious!!

Former Member

yeh its pretty bad state

Load & Re-Load are much much better. the drumming sounds like Lars is using metal bins, songs have crap lyrics & are too repetitative (frantic-tic-tic-tock - WTF?!?)

it's ironic that metallica now is what Jason Newstead wanted it to be.

Former Member

As a band, their sound has evolved from the trash metal of their youth, past the sell out period, and now, is more hard rock rather than metal. I for one like their sound, comparing it to what they produced in 91-99.

I do agree that their tracks are a bit repetetive lyrically (and long), but for a come back album, and breaking in a new bassist, it's not all bad. Not withstanding, are the less than admirable drumming talents of Lars, and the poorly directed vids so far.

And finally, not forgetting, all the bands that were playing thrash in their youth, have either broken up, or mellowed out as they aged. Most of Metallica are pushing 40, and in metal terms, thats more than a lifetime. So comparing their current sound to that of their past, from my point of view is slightly biased and unfair.

Former Member

Originally posted by Dreamer3k


And finally, not forgetting, all the bands that were playing thrash in their youth, have either broken up, or mellowed out as they aged. Most of Metallica are pushing 40, and in metal terms, thats more than a lifetime. So comparing their current sound to that of their past, from my point of view is slightly biased and unfair.

Yeh, I'll agree with that. I don't know a lot about metal But the likes of Megadeth and Pantera have all split up or lost the plot while Metallica have managed to keep on pleasing the fans. A few of my mates were down in Dublin last week for a Metallica gig and they said it was brilliant. At least they're not making some sad old attempt to recapture their youth, like a musical mid life crisis!

Former Member

They are dire and laughable. They used to be so good and made wonderful music. Thair latest attempt at music is just noise. Plain old crappy noise.

Former Member

It's the toll of the pop bands.

Former Member

I've grown to quite like the latest one. Apart from the slow, crappy bits in "St. Anger".

I prefer Load, though, which is still very heavy.

I'd like the older ones more if they sounded less thin.
Hetfields voice has got much better over the years.

Former Member

to all the people bitching about st. anger i'd like to tell you to LISTEN to the fucking album and at least try and overlook something as irrelevant as a shoddy snare-drum sound and all-round not-so-good production. Out of context, St Anger is average, but when you take into account the history surrounding the album, with the line-up changes and James Hetfield's drink problem, and the fact that he was suffering from a lot of pent-up anger and stuff, then you'll find it easier to 'figure out' the album. If you were pissed off like James was during the album's production, would you try and surpress your feelings and try to churn out another shoddy version of "Load" in the hope of selling another 6 milion copies, or would you channel all your anger into making an album which perfectly suits your and your band's mood? Metallica havent 'gone crap' or whatever, theyve just made an album which differs slightly from what you, the cry-baby 'tallica fans, expect. Just because a band fucks off and does something different does not mean theyve changed direction completely never-to-return, it just means theyve decided to go off on one for a bit. Oh, and when your really angry, do you want to hit things really hard, or do you want to take time to construct something nice and pretty? Hence why there arent any solos on St. Anger.

Have you ever heard the songs from St Anger played live? if you havent then dont bother replying. I saw them at Leeds on friday and St. Anger and Frantic sounded brilliant next to the other songs like Blackened and No Remorse.

My Point: St Anger is an album about anger. The clue is in the title. James and co. have done everything they can to make the album sound meaner and harder (James' voice is straining through all 70 minutes. Would you rather he just sat down and wrote pretty country music like on Load?)

When metallica get round to making a new album it wont be anything like the drop-tuned chunga chucka stuff, so quit being a whining git.

Former Member

Mabye , but there is no way in hell that St Anger is as good as their first 4 albums.

Former Member

Meh, their new album sucks in comparison to the classic stuff. But it's still alright.

Former Member

why do people hate Load & Re-Load anyway, ok they changed their style, but some of the songs are still good on them (Hero of the Day, Unforgiven II, Memory Remains, Fuel). for any other band, these would be consider great albums, whereas St Anger wouldnt be.

Tool are a far better band anyway.

Former Member

In comparison to the old stuff, the new stuff is really quite bad.

However my brother said they were amazing at Leeds and played all old stuff and only the two latest singles...he hates the new stuff but says it was amazing live because they played it so hard and fast.

His best friend got James Hetfield's pick. (Shortly to be on e-bay lol)

Former Member

Originally posted by ElysiumUnknown

However my brother said they were amazing at Leeds

I didn't enjoy their set. Listening to the new material caused me so much pain that I left before hearing Nothing Else Matters and Enter Sandman. I could hear it from the campsite though so I didn't mind.

Former Member

Originally posted by BumbleBee
I didn't enjoy their set. Listening to the new material caused me so much pain that I left before hearing Nothing Else Matters and Enter Sandman. I could hear it from the campsite though so I didn't mind.

You left?! :eek2:

The new stuff isn't that bad.

Former Member

Originally posted by ElysiumUnknown
You left?! :eek2:

The new stuff isn't that bad.

Yeah I left! I like songs with melody and the new Metallica stuff has no melody and the lyrics offer no insight into anything at all, they don't even make sense!

Fran-tick-tock-tick-tock

Wow, how inspiring! Lol

Former Member

Originally posted by BumbleBee
Yeah I left! I like songs with melody and the new Metallica stuff has no melody and the lyrics offer no insight into anything at all, they don't even make sense!

Fran-tick-tock-tick-tock

Wow, how inspiring! Lol

Lol I know! At least they didn't play the whole new album.

However it's Metallica and you don't get many chances to see them live!

Former Member

Didnt Lars Ulrich say something about a UK indoor tour in December at the end of the set?

Former Member

Originally posted by Blackout
to all the people bitching about st. anger i'd like to tell you to LISTEN to the fucking album and at least try and overlook something as irrelevant as a shoddy snare-drum sound and all-round not-so-good production. Out of context, St Anger is average, but when you take into account the history surrounding the album, with the line-up changes and James Hetfield's drink problem, and the fact that he was suffering from a lot of pent-up anger and stuff, then you'll find it easier to 'figure out' the album. If you were pissed off like James was during the album's production, would you try and surpress your feelings and try to churn out another shoddy version of "Load" in the hope of selling another 6 milion copies, or would you channel all your anger into making an album which perfectly suits your and your band's mood? Metallica havent 'gone crap' or whatever, theyve just made an album which differs slightly from what you, the cry-baby 'tallica fans, expect. Just because a band fucks off and does something different does not mean theyve changed direction completely never-to-return, it just means theyve decided to go off on one for a bit. Oh, and when your really angry, do you want to hit things really hard, or do you want to take time to construct something nice and pretty? Hence why there arent any solos on St. Anger.

Have you ever heard the songs from St Anger played live? if you havent then dont bother replying. I saw them at Leeds on friday and St. Anger and Frantic sounded brilliant next to the other songs like Blackened and No Remorse.

My Point: St Anger is an album about anger. The clue is in the title. James and co. have done everything they can to make the album sound meaner and harder (James' voice is straining through all 70 minutes. Would you rather he just sat down and wrote pretty country music like on Load?)

When metallica get round to making a new album it wont be anything like the drop-tuned chunga chucka stuff, so quit being a whining git.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Bravo!

Originally posted by BumbleBee
Fran-tick-tock-tick-tock

It's Fran-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tock

Former Member

Originally posted by The Matadore
Didnt Lars Ulrich say something about a UK indoor tour in December at the end of the set?

Ugh! I hate arena tours!! Why oh why would they want to do something as souless and boring as an arena tour?!

Steps were an arena tour band, Metallica are not. I really hope they don't do it to be honest.

Former Member

Originally posted by Tim the Enchanter
Ugh! I hate arena tours!! Why oh why would they want to do something as souless and boring as an arena tour?!

Steps were an arena tour band, Metallica are not. I really hope they don't do it to be honest.

All the greats have done arena tours. Alice Cooper, Alice in Chains, Motorhead, Iron Maiden, and Metallica in the past. Can't go wrong if all the big metal names have suceeded :O

Former Member

Originally posted by Dreamer3k
All the greats have done arena tours. Alice Cooper, Alice in Chains, Motorhead, Iron Maiden, and Metallica in the past. Can't go wrong if all the big metal names have suceeded :O

I just think arenas are never as good as smaller venues for bands in general. Like I saw Radiohead in a big arena two years ago and although it was good, it was ruined by the fact it was in a place that was cold and impersonal. I then saw Radiohead a few months ago in a much smaller venue and although the setlist wasn't as good, it was a lot better because they were much closer and talked to the crowd more. I think it would equate the same way for metal bands.

Former Member

Originally posted by Dreamer3k
All the greats have done arena tours. Alice Cooper, Alice in Chains, Motorhead, Iron Maiden, and Metallica in the past. Can't go wrong if all the big metal names have suceeded :O

I've only ever seen Motorhead in small places...couldn't imagine them in an arena :eek2:

Former Member

so what sort of band are metallica? taking into account the amount of roadies, equiptment and stage props they take with them, there wouldnt be enough room for a crowd if they played a small venue

oh, and the cieling would catch fire after the first pyro

Former Member

Originally posted by Blackout
so what sort of band are metallica? taking into account the amount of roadies, equiptment and stage props they take with them, there wouldnt be enough room for a crowd if they played a small venue

oh, and the cieling would catch fire after the first pyro

Exactly! If they played a small venue it would give about 500 fans a chance to see them. They play an arena and over 10,000 get the chance. I actually think bands like Metallica owe it to their fans to play big venues. Stadium rock rocks!

Former Member

well i saw mettalica on last night of reading, and ye htheir classics got everyone going more, okay i prefer system of a down myself cause they got the crowd revving but mettalicas precense done it in reading, and yeh the new stuff seemed to osund the same, possibly coz i was near the back and stuff, and could hardly see the front

but mettalica can still play, sounded like a studio quality when the yplayed enter sandman yet you knew it werent so that hasnt changed!

Former Member

Metallica are shite, have always been shite, and will continue to be shite brainless metallers. Anyone with any sense on Sunday at Reading was in the Carling Tent with me going crazy to British Sea Power's brand of peculiar rock. They gave me KENDAL MINTCAKE!

Former Member

Originally posted by Simbelyne
Metallica are shite, have always been shite, and will continue to be shite brainless metallers.

thats just not true dude, Metallica are one of the few thrash bands with a genuine intellectual gravitas. They also rock. Hard. And have brilliant songs

hence why they arent shit. Where are British Sea Power gonna be in 22 years?

Former Member

yeh but guns n' roses are so much better.
they have individual character as well as a band. A few things are pretty good with metallica, a couple insane solos but slash is just slash.
metallica now sound as if they actually feel sorry for themselves!

Former Member

St Anger is a good album, it's good to know a band is playing the songs they want to rather than just jumping through hoops for their fans. It sounds to me like a lot of you are just gutted at Metallica's recent popularity and general mainstream awareness so you feel the need to prove you liked them when it wasn't cool to. Which is fine. But if you are a true fan you have to appreciate and respect when a band goes in a new direction.