Album Rating: 2.0
I applaud your courage in pushing this forward, but giving this a 5.0 isn't really representative of your honest valuation of this album (which should be 1 or 1.5 stars, right?). If you feel ST. ANGER is truly that bad, then give it the badge of dishonor it deserves as it stands alongside albums like LULU and METAL MACHINE MUSIC on the bottom of the list. Turning the ratings system upside down doesn't really achieve that.
IMO, ST. ANGER isn't quite that bad, but when you get down below 2.5 stars, any album rated this low is probably going to be either annoying or hysterically bad. Metallica was definitely lost when they made this album and Lars' snare does irritate the piss out of me.
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
i mean when people review an album with a 5 it is because they think its SOUND is a classic
|
| |
This is the kind of reviews worth reading LOL 9/10
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.0
It's not like Metallica is some infallible band with a perfect history. To me their best album is the self titled and that's only a 3/5
Also this album wasn't a sell out, it was just bad.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
I just feel like this is a pointless review.
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.0
Doesn't make much sense to me either. If it was by smaller band it would be just unnoticed piece of shit and this review wouldn't exist. But yeah, Metallica or Morbid Angel putting such a terrible quality albums out definitely gets a whole lot of attention
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
"I just feel like this is a pointless review."
Completely disagree, this is actual one of the more original concept reviews I can think of and views music through a different lens. We should be encouraging this type of creativity, not stifling it.
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.0
Yeah this was a really cool concept, it just needed to have been better executed.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
Loads of tense problems and grammatical issues. Pls proofread again OP.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
This is only a 5 if its compared to the nu metal of the time they were obviously trying to emulate. Still shitty music but at least it's a semi-competent band doing it.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
If this was cut by maybe half an hour instead of being as bloated as it is, it'd be a lot better
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
If it didn't exist at all it would be a lot better.
|
| |
Ummm interesting review, but I have to disagree. A 5 is good, a 1 is bad. Even if it is so bad that becomes a classic, it is a solid 1. But like Ed said in the last page, I am up for encouraging new ways of reviewing, even if they fall out of the norm and risk to be wrong.
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
this review made me kill myself irl
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
RIP shitty way to go
|
| |
lol don't die budg
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
This is a pretty silly review, sorry.
1. Based on this rating system, Corey Feldman's Angelic 2 The Core would've been one of the best albums last year based on the widespread talk it received. A classic is defined by the music.
2. It ends so abruptly. When I read the ending, all I'm left wondering is if that's really it. Try to add more information.
3. Your point is barely even discussed. How is a classic defined by its lasting effect in talk rather than music?
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
So, It's so notoriously shit that it's a classic?
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
Angelic 2 the Core is a classic tho
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
Madly in anger with this review
|
| |
|
|
