Metallica
St. Anger


1.0
awful

Review

by pilumneer USER (6 Reviews)
April 21st, 2007 | 59 replies | 8,364 views


Release Date: 2003 | Tracklist

Review Summary: how to piss on your legacy

29 of 30 thought this review was well written


So it’s January of 2004, and a 14-year-old kid steps into his local MVC outlet and casts his eye upon the bargain bin. Sitting in there is an album he’s heard much about, by a group who have hung in the periphery of his naïve conscience for quite some time. So of course, he’s drawn to it, and, seeing it’s only £5 with a free DVD, he buys it right up. Yes, that’s right. My first ‘heavy’ album was ‘St. Anger’ by Metallica. The shame will hang over my head forever.

Since that time, I’ve listened to this album TWICE – the first time was straight after I’d bought it, the second being for the purpose of this review. Likely as not I’ll do what I should have done long ago and sell it once this is complete. Even at that innocent and unassuming age, I could tell something was very wrong with this record within seconds.

I’ve never had many problems with any other Metallica album I own – after the quality of ‘Kill ‘Em All’ through to the ‘Black Album’ (don’t piss and moan, it’s actually quite good), so re-visiting ‘St. Anger’ is particularly painful, largely due to the fact that you can quite clearly hear the sound of a band trying to recapture the glory of their thrash days – the problem is that they seem to have completely forgotten how to write a song even resembling their old sound, and have gone about executing it in every wrong way possible. The front cover artwork serves as a perfect metaphor for the content within – clearly trying to recreate some kind of gritty feeling but ultimately coming across as polished and false (a damn shame considering some of Pushead’s prior work)

Now, if I’m totally honest, the album is not totally 100% ***e (Barely). There are certainly a few interesting riffs floating around here and there, particularly in the likes of ‘Invisible Kid’ and ‘My World’, and the turn into angrier lyrical territory is perhaps more welcome compared to some of the sheer trash he’s come out with on ‘Load’ and ‘Reload’, but these are all meagre compensations when you consider the bigger picture – something that I’d really rather not do too often, so heinous are some of the flaws this record carries in abundance

Although it’s becoming a cliché to mention it, THAT snare drum sound was, is, and will remain the most irritating thing you will ever hear, with the possible exception of whatever spews out when Fred Durst decides to open his mouth again. There is one small way in which you can garner enjoyment from that awful 'BUNG BUNG BUNG' noise – simply lay back and imagine Lars ‘tubby tub-thumper’ Ulrich is beating himself around the face with a copper pipe. Go on, try it. Not getting much satisfaction from that thought? Well that might be because the crapiness of the rest of the album is distracting you.

Over the stuttering riff that opens up ‘Frantic’, James Hetfield’s vocals sound just…awful. While it might be a delight to some to hear his old gruff bark renewed in full, it says an awful lot about the rest of the record when his vocals don’t even seem to fit in with the timing and full body of the song – and barring a few exceptions, this is how it goes for the ENTIRE album. The bass, meanwhile, isn’t even worth wasting words on. Handled by “producer” Bob Rock after Jason Newsted quit, the bass sound is largely inaudible throughout, as though Rock is attempting to hide his ineptitude by pushing the clanging drums and turgid rhythm guitar to the fore (if this sounds like the mix of ‘…And Justice For All’, please remind yourself that Newsted wasn’t crap). If only the sorry bastard would piss off back to Bon Jovi and stop ***ing with Metallica!!!

But the worst and most terrible sin of all is without doubt what they’ve done to Kirk Hammett. Whether or not you like Metallica or not is a moot point when it comes to Hammett – it’s hard to deny that the man is a hugely talented player, and one of the best guitarists to emerge from the thrash scene in the 1980s. So with that in mind, the treatment given to him on this record is even more unforgivable. In the long and torturous time it takes for ‘St. Anger’ to finish, NOT A SINGLE SOLO IS PLAYED. EVER. And *** only knows why Metallica have simply forced Kirk to stifle the creative flair and skill he’s displayed on almost every album so far and have him simply play behind the crappy riffs thrown out by Hetfield – quite frankly it’s hard to see why they didn’t just double what Hetfield was playing in the first place, they certainly had the damn Pro Tools for it…

Overall… oh *** it; frankly I’m sick of writing about this pile of cow ***, I’d have thought you would have all got the message from the rest of this review. Now I’m off to find an axe, ‘St. Anger’ is about to get what’s coming to it…



Recent reviews by this author
The Phantom of the Opera The Phantom of the Opera(Original 1986)Isengard Høstmørke
Mayhem De Mysteriis Dom SathanasMayhem Grand Declaration Of War
Summoning Dol Guldur
user ratings (4337)
Chart.
2
poor
other reviews of this album
1 of

Comments:Add a Comment 
pilumneer
April 21st 2007



41 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

what do you all think of my first review?

Angmar
April 25th 2007



2689 Comments

Album Rating: 1.5

Heh, just noticed this. Your review was ok, you seem to like to bash it a lot though. But for a first this was solid.

NeverFading14
April 29th 2007



380 Comments


Thiisss was actually a pretty great review, gave me a good idea of what the album sounds like

AmericnZero02
April 29th 2007



3305 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

I think this was my first metal album. Not considering nu-metal. Pretty good 1st review, better than my first. Kind of a lot of extraneous rambling though.

Digging: Architects - Lost Forever // Lost Together

Monticello
April 29th 2007



805 Comments


Nice review. The censors went mad though.

pilumneer
May 11th 2007



41 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

yeah i know i get real rambly and mad when i talk about this piss poor excuse for an album.

Inflames
May 15th 2007



635 Comments

Album Rating: 2.0

ok review. this album does suck

WARPATH_88
May 16th 2007



514 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

People need to quit reviewing Metallica. Holy Schnikes.

metalhead17
May 16th 2007



234 Comments


I still haven't bought this.


wakeupdead
May 16th 2007



2196 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

i like this album, but their older stuff takes a shit on this album

mynameischan
Staff Reviewer
May 16th 2007



17914 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

People need to quit reviewing Metallica. Holy Schnikes.

People can review whatever the fuck they want to. So why don't you shut the fuck up and leave the reviewer alone.This Message Edited On 05.16.07

LifeInABox
May 16th 2007



3707 Comments


Geez, a little hostile there, Chan. I agree, the review wasn't necessary, but it was pretty good for a first none-the-less.

711
May 16th 2007



1342 Comments


A 2.2 average with almost 800 votes
Can anything be that bad?

Angmar
May 20th 2007



2689 Comments

Album Rating: 1.5

Actually, he is the only one who has reviewed this with a 1 range rating so all the more power to him.

Cravinov13
May 20th 2007



3854 Comments


Yes, 711, it is THAT bad.

Bfhurricane
May 20th 2007



6194 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

Its not THAT bad. Judging by the quality of the music and effort this straight up isn't good music, but theres a few really good songs on here that keep this at a bland 2.5 for me.
and those songs I like are St. Anger, Shoot Me Again, and Sweet Amber. The vocals and riffs in those songs are really catchy imo.

mynameischan
Staff Reviewer
May 20th 2007



17914 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

SAAAAAAAINT ANGER ROUND MAH NEEECKkK

Sound
May 20th 2007



3838 Comments

Album Rating: 2.0

i always liked the song St. Anger; never get tired of that chorus.

hope Lars has some speed-drumming like this on the next album.

wakeupdead
May 20th 2007



2196 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

hope Lars has some speed-drumming like this on the next album.
But with no ping on the snare drum this time. And maybe some solos.......OOOH! And some on key vocals would be nice too! lol but i liked this album.

dudeinthepassinglane
May 20th 2007



192 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

The album is not that bad. There I said it. Yes, Hetfield's vocals are terrible. It's hard to listen to the album the whole way through. And there are no solos. And the bass sucks. But people should look at this for what it is: A jam album. The Grateful Dead if they played metal. If the songs seem to lack something, remember, they were not even written!



You have to be logged in to post a comment. Login | Create a Profile





FAQ // STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // SITE FORUM // CONTACT US

Bands: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z


Site Copyright 2005-2013 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Privacy Policy