- Feb 9, 2009
- 2,235
- 1
- 36
So Lulu is out today (Lou Reed/Metallica), and I think that the people reviewing their album are in a strange competition to see who can trash it the most creatively. Some of these reviews are downright side-splitting. Here's the ones I've seen so far:
Sound Spike
"That the ill-thought collaboration -- bloated to double-album length at a torturous 87 minutes, which almost feels like taunting -- should never have been made is a given, considering that no single track on the album merits even a full listen, let alone a full repeat spin."
Washington Post
"Its already been called the worst album of all time, this unholy union of Lou Reed and Metallica, the multi-headed hydra of unpleasantness known colloquially, though not fondly, as Loutallica."
Chicago Tribune
" Then the music dissolves into more than 11 minutes of brain-numbing drone, snuffing out whatever remaining hope of redemption this album might have had. Given their history, that might be the point."
Sound Spike
"That the ill-thought collaboration -- bloated to double-album length at a torturous 87 minutes, which almost feels like taunting -- should never have been made is a given, considering that no single track on the album merits even a full listen, let alone a full repeat spin."
Washington Post
"Its already been called the worst album of all time, this unholy union of Lou Reed and Metallica, the multi-headed hydra of unpleasantness known colloquially, though not fondly, as Loutallica."
Chicago Tribune
" Then the music dissolves into more than 11 minutes of brain-numbing drone, snuffing out whatever remaining hope of redemption this album might have had. Given their history, that might be the point."
But yeah, that was a pretty funny line...