Lol i was thinking why bring Manowar up and then I saw his user name

Written by RavenKing on 12.11.2011 at 20:14

I read an article about this album in the mainstream newspapers today. I've been surprised, considering that it is mainstream press and I thought they would praise the album as Metallica are involved. They gave it 0/5.

It seems that even actual Metallica fans have by and large, shunned the album. "Lulu" had first week sales of only 13,000... compare that with their last proper studio album "Death Magnetic" which sold 490,000 copies in just it's first 3 days of release. Maybe Metallica don't have as many blind fanboys as was previously thought.

Written by Angelic Storm on 17.11.2011 at 02:38

Written by Troy Killjoy on 16.11.2011 at 19:53
Actually that would probably be an improvement.

I don't agree... "Too Extreme!" is worse than anything on "Lulu" IMO. (even if as a whole, MA's latest is better by quite a margin)

I taker Too extreme over lule any day of the week for the rest of my life. That song is at least easy to laugh at... Lulu is just a plain fucking disaster without the funny factor at all.
Those videos you posted were horrible, I can't believe people just stood there without leaving.

Written by Fat & Sassy! on 13.11.2011 at 08:35

... cus part of me wants to like it.

The fuck did you smoke dude? Give me some... Or maybe not.. I would probably have the urges to listen to this piece of crap again.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 16:39
I taker Too extreme over lule any day of the week for the rest of my life. That song is at least easy to laugh at... Lulu is just a plain fucking disaster without the funny factor at all.
Those videos you posted were horrible, I can't believe people just stood there without leaving.

I feel the total opposite actually. Lulu at least, is amusing, whereas Too Extreme is just awful without the amusement factor that Lulu has. Then again, I do have a strong aversion to hardcore techno music, which could be why I view it like that...

Well, on Jools Holland, he has about 4 different artists on his show every week, so maybe the people stayed for the other acts.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 18:10

I feel the total opposite actually. Lulu at least, is amusing, whereas Too Extreme is just awful without the amusement factor that Lulu has. Then again, I do have a strong aversion to hardcore techno music, which could be why I view it like that...

There's absolutely nothing I can think of that helps me relate Lulu to the word "funny". what's funny about it? It's just a sad sad excuse of an album... Not to mention that Reed's voice piss me off to no end because I just can't stand people getting away with such an awful performance and how some people actually eat this shit up.
Too Extreme can at least be compared to the song "like to move it move it" Madagascar-style.

This is the only thing related to lulu that is funny... and not really because it's funny but because of how much better it sounds.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 18:16
This is the only thing related to lulu that is funny... and not really because it's funny but because of how much better it sounds.

What's really funny about that is, it sounds just as out of key and out of place with the music as Lou Reed's vocals, but is meant as a joke. Unlike Lou Reed's actual vocals on Lulu which are meant to be taken seriously.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 18:46
it sounds just as out of key and out of place with the music as Lou Reed's vocals, but is meant as a joke.

No shit!

Also, the quoting of the youtube video just above you, i like it... It's classy.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 18:57
No shit!

Also, the quoting of the youtube video just above you, i like it... It's classy.

"Classy"? I hardly think so...

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 19:04

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 18:57
No shit!

Also, the quoting of the youtube video just above you, i like it... It's classy.

"Classy"? I hardly think so...

Well, there's always people in a forum that for some reason quote the image as well... eve though it's right above their post.
Like giving strong emphasis on something that didn't need it, classic forum behavior.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 18:16

grampa rambling

fucking fantastic...

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 19:14
Well, there's always people in a forum that for some reason quote the image as well... eve though it's right above their post.
Like giving strong emphasis on something that didn't need it, classic forum behavior.

I never thought about it, or analysed it at all before doing it... And I didn't realise that I should have. I can't see why anyone would place any real significance on something that essentially doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter very much at all... You've certainly placed far more importance on such an insignificant issue than I myself did.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 19:21
You've certainly placed far more importance on such an insignificant issue than I myself did.

That kind of stuff is like pigeons... You never really notice them and you are cool with it but when someone tells you too look at them for a minute... You notice that there are many and you can't stop noticing them... Far too many and you get mad.
Same with the classic quote-diarrhea.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 19:35
That kind of stuff is like pigeons... You never really notice them and you are cool with it but when someone tells you too look at them for a minute... You notice that there are many and you can't stop noticing them... Far too many and you get mad.
Same with the classic quote-diarrhea.

Hmm... personally, it seems to me like a very petty thing to even notice, let alone make you mad. The only time anything to do with quoting annoys me, is when someone has about 10 multiquotes in one post, or has quoted a massive post (in full, quoting part of it is of course fine) that takes up about quarter of the page. But generally speaking, I don't even think about stuff like that, let alone place any importance on it. To me, what I did was totally insignificant, and certainly wouldn't have thought any more about it if you hadn't have made an issue out of it. Making an issue out of something that should be a non-issue seems a bit counter-productive to me.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 19:46
big comment

Woah, way to take my words to the extreme. We really need to make the [not that serious] [/not that serious] thing work.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 19:57
Woah, way to take my words to the extreme.

Taking issue with that post at all was extreme in itself I think. Too Extreme, in fact.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 20:00
Taking issue with that post at all was extreme in itself I think. Too Extreme, in fact.

Well, analysing my post with the word "mad" as if I'm really mad (despite the obvious not so serious spirit of the comment, read: pigeon comment) with a serious post isn't exactly better.

PS: Quote diarrhea is exactly the thing you described btw in case it wasn't clear. Quote itself is harmless and I do it a lot because I want to have a conversation.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 20:03
Well, over analysing my post with the word "mad" as if I'm really mad (despite the obvious not so serious spirit of the comment, read: pigeon comment) isn't exactly better.

PS: Quote diarrhea is exactly the thing you described btw in case it wasn't clear. Quote itself is harmless and I do it a lot because I want to have a conversation.

I only used the word "mad", because you yourself used it in the message I quoted. And to be fair, I wasn't to know that the comment "wasn't so serious". On the internet it can be very difficult to tell when someone is being serious, and when they aren't, unless they make it blindingly obvious. Without things like facial expressions and tone of voice to go on, it can be hard to tell sometimes when someone is being serious on the net and when they're not. *sighs*

Well, yes, I do find that ("quote diarrehea") equally annoying, and it is an abuse of the quote function. I also quote a lot, as it is easier to have a proper conversation by using them. Especially if it is a busy thread with lots of comments from different people. As this one most certainly is.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 20:13
Without things like facial expressions

I try not to use too many emoticons.. I used them way too much a few years back and I got mad.







...xD

Written by X-Ray Rod on 18.11.2011 at 20:21
I try not to use too many emoticons.. I used them way too much a few years back and I got mad.

Well, here is a classic catch-22 situation... I myself use emoticons, but have tried to use them less as I've seen some people complaining about other's use of them. However, use of emoticons is really the best way to get around the issue of misunderstandings on the net that I described in my previous post.

This is undoubtedly the most derailed thread in the history of Metal Storm.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 18.11.2011 at 20:48

This is undoubtedly the most derailed thread in the history of Metal Storm.

And very predictably so.

Written by Angelic Storm on 18.11.2011 at 15:21

Written by RavenKing on 12.11.2011 at 20:14

I read an article about this album in the mainstream newspapers today. I've been surprised, considering that it is mainstream press and I thought they would praise the album as Metallica are involved. They gave it 0/5.

It seems that even actual Metallica fans have by and large, shunned the album. "Lulu" had first week sales of only 13,000... compare that with their last proper studio album "Death Magnetic" which sold 490,000 copies in just it's first 3 days of release. Maybe Metallica don't have as many blind fanboys as was previously thought.

Perhaps, indeed.

Can't believe 101 people (so far) have bought this. Or is it couse people hear how bad its supposed to be and want to hear for themselves?

Written by M C Vice on 21.11.2011 at 10:02
Can't believe 101 people (so far) have bought this. Or is it couse people hear how bad its supposed to be and want to hear for themselves?

Well something like 13,000 bought it in the first week. Those 101 here probably just added it to their collection after downloading anyway.

ROFL!!!!!!!

Best Metallica release of 2011

Worst crap ever, yet people are buying it still :/

Written by Big-Al on 25.11.2011 at 11:17
Worst crap ever, yet people are buying it still :/

Well there are hopelessly devoted fanboys of either artist, collectors who need the album for the sake of discog completion, people who actually somehow enjoy it, and people who don't know what they're getting into.

I'd like to see what the returns figures are as opposed to just sales figures.

When you make an album that makes St. Anger sound like a masterpiece of the decade, I have absolutely no interest in ever listening to what you have to offer again.

I finally listened to a couple songs from Lulu and honestly don't see how it's any better or worse than anything these guys have released in the past.