Blogcritics Comments on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Comment by Flowers of Disgust on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Sun, 3 Aug 2008 14:01:54 EDT

"All Within My Hands" is a fucking awesome song!

Comment by yaytoast on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:38:42 EDT

cliff is turning in his grave. i under stand that they are in thier 40s and married, and james doesn't drink any more. but they need to change their approach to music if they want to keep 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of their fans. when i saw a picture of the metallica of 83, and the metallica of 03, i couldn't help but cry... P.S. (i didn't cry, i had something in my eye)

Comment by Jimmothy on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:21:19 EDT

In reponse to the title of the article: yes, they do now. But they're working on a new album, hopefully better than some of their latest sh*t.

Comment by Brian aka Guppusmaximus on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Thu, 22 May 2008 09:10:43 EDT

Also.. I think they just got weak on their instruments over the years. They never worked on mastering the skills they had & never progressed.

Comment by Brian aka Guppusmaximus on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Thu, 22 May 2008 09:07:58 EDT

Fubar... You've said it all,my friend! Even if Metallica wanted to make an album like Master... or Ride... I don't think it could ever happen. They lost the energy & focus,plus, they got so mixed up in the American metal scene that they also lost their frame of reference. Like o-3ks52 said,"James has evolved, he discovered the inner beauties in life and he cleansed that 'grain of sand'. He's not really angry or afraid anymore, so - why sing about anger or fear? Chuck Shuldiner(RIP) said it all: "Those that stood beside me I'm glad you understand Behind these written words I share the simple plan To hang on to the way that we feel"

Comment by FUBAR on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Thu, 22 May 2008 03:54:48 EDT

To be honest i don't care if they sound JUST like they did back in the day on this new, but not so new anymore, st. anger job. What i don't quite understand is how does INTENTIONALLY making music poorly make it good music?? Thats all i hear is.. "Its all good, they wanted it to sound that way". I hate to be called anything other than a true fan just because i think this album is downright awful. What makes a "TRUE" fan "TRUE" anyways? When music gets to a point where i have to force myself to listen to it in order to EVENTUALLY enjoy it... i stop calling it music. In fact i stop listen all together. I love metallica.... or what they used to be. Ive tried hard to make myself enjoy this album, but it just ain't happening... does that make me a poor fan? like i said, i could care less if they sound like they did back in 89'. But I would have liked to see them take there talent in a different direction. people are reading WAY too much into st. anger. so much so that they are pulling excuse after excuse for why this album is better than it really is. Just because Metallica is just about the best rock band ever to exist, doesn't mean they are incapable of releasing a shitty album.

Comment by o-3ks52 on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Sat, 29 Mar 2008 09:22:28 EDT

Have you seen the '1.5 year in the life of Metallica?' Kirk said there that 'it was all about the energy'. They had that energy, and they were 'the beast of a band' together. Like a grain of sand in a mushel produces a pearl, so did James' inner discomfort give him that edge in his voice and attitude, and so did the inner tensions in the band push them to seek honesty and energized them while they played. But now James has evolved, he discovered the inner beauties in life and he cleansed that 'grain of sand'. He's not really angry or afraid anymore, so - why sing about anger or fear? This ... effort that they're making since STanger, looks and sounds so .. wrong. Like Lars said in 'Some Kind of Monster' film, 'we proved that you can make angry music without negative energy.' WTFK is that? There is no 'positive' or 'negative' - there's just energy or lack of it. And you can easily see on their recent shows that that 'Metallica energy' is totally absent now. Question; WHY THEY CONTINUE TO COMPROMISE THE UNIQUE AND THE ONE AND ONLY METALLICA'S LEGACY? Oh, and that James' voice... He blew his vocal cords once while singing 'So What', he admitted it himself. His voice has NEVER sounded gritty since then. (See the 'Stunning Cunts' video of 1998 to hear how he squeaked sometimes, when he was just fresh from that vocal trauma.) I'd recommend Metallica to put those millions to a good use, discover meditation and a thousand more ways to discover the life and the world from the sides they have never seen. And stop trying to crawl back into the dry husk they have emerged from.

Comment by Brian aka Guppusmaximus on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Sat, 8 Mar 2008 13:13:03 EST

Metallica fans. "True" Metallica fans, especially. It's amazing how "fans" can cry and beg for a band to get back to being "heavy" again, then when they do and don't sound exactly, perfectly, precisely like they did in 1987 they will blubber about how it's a sellout.
See, but the problem here is that Tom, Mark & Mr. Olsen weren't fans during Metallica's heyday. It's real easy to lose perspective of what metal was like & what made them great back in the day. Most of the "real" Metallica fans already wrote them off when the Black album came out... [Tom, Load & Reload are not even worth mentioning nevermind trying to use them to justify such a lame ass POV!]
And Justice... was an excellent album but could have been a disaster if anyone would've figured out back then that Jason Newsted didn't play a single bass line on the album & for that matter, no one did. If they really wanted to progress as a band after Cliff died(RIP) then they would've hired Les Claypool. Shit! Atleast he would've been able to do some justice to And Justice but, I guess hindsight is 20/20. Hell, they had an opportunity to bring John Bush aboard as well. Grylls is 100% right! This album still sux major ass even after 4 years! It's a shame that Robert Trujillo is wasting his talent with these hacks..
WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO THE MIGHTY.... M E T A L L I C A

Comment by Grylls on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:55:23 EST

More than four years later, and this album still hasn't been tolerated. With most 'so-so' songs from other bands, one can eventually overcome their problems and learn to accept it and maybe even enjoy it. St. Anger isn't at all like that. You cannot, no matter how many times you listen to it, get over the ridiculously detuned, punchy guitars or the banging of tin trash cans that Lars calls a drum kit. I admit, I do like the rehearsal of Shoot Me Again which can be seen on their DVD that was included with the album. Makes me wonder: was the DVD added in there to help fans get over the obvious poor musicianship in St. Anger?

Comment by �yvind Mj�s on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:11:53 EST

This albums makes baby jesus cry. Atleast it makes me cry. I am a big fan of what metallica did in the 80`s, but since then as everyone know they have been going downhill. The atrocious St. Anger was the final blow for the band. They went out with a noisy annoying impossible to listen to album. RIP Metallica.

Comment by krang on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:54:40 EST

The dude before me (by a long while though) Said it well... And Justice For All was the last decent album. The black album was a turd, and it got worse and worse from there. St. Anger was even worse than Load...or RE-Load...damn, that's pretty bad. I did buy Garage Inc, and I liked it..Well, The second disc, at least, which was just a bunch of unreleased stuff they did in the 80's. No wonder i liked it. And yeah, I agree...Metallica pretty much went down with Cliff. And Justice For All was okay, but..it was their dying breath.

Comment by Frog on St. Anger Sucks That Bad?

Wed, 30 May 2007 00:04:36 EDT

Saw the Some Kind Of Monster DVD and didn't bother to listen to the album.