Jump to content

Talk:Metallica (album): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 100: Line 100:


Why is his review posted on the site? His review consists of a symbol, illustrating that he thinks its some of the worst he's ever heard. Congratulations, you have written the worst, most shallow review I've ever read... Unless anyone argues why this uninformative, unfounded review should stay on, I'm deleting it. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.93.4.119|83.93.4.119]] ([[User talk:83.93.4.119|talk]]) 19:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Why is his review posted on the site? His review consists of a symbol, illustrating that he thinks its some of the worst he's ever heard. Congratulations, you have written the worst, most shallow review I've ever read... Unless anyone argues why this uninformative, unfounded review should stay on, I'm deleting it. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.93.4.119|83.93.4.119]] ([[User talk:83.93.4.119|talk]]) 19:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

I agree. Reviews consist of words and not a fucking simbol. See, Allmusic review for death magnetic didn't stay till it had something written (b4 it was just 4 stars and nothing more). That isn't a review. [[Special:Contributions/189.58.35.107|189.58.35.107]] ([[User talk:189.58.35.107|talk]]) 19:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:08, 22 September 2008

Genre

Is it really right to call this album 'Thrash Metal'? I mean, the main criticism from 'alienated' fans is that this album deviated from Metallica's normal thrash style, is it not? The article even says 'Gone, for the most part, were the faster staccato riffs during verses and throaty screaming found on the first four albums; the overall speed and complexity of the music were greatly reduced. The Black Album presented a more radio-friendly, commercially accessible Metallica, evidenced by the ballad "Nothing Else Matters"'. Unclejimbo827 12:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Groove Metal?

I've noticed some musical similarities between this album and the groove metal scene that would develop soon after. Does anyone think that The Black Album could possibly be one of the first groove metal albums? With all the riffs that meld into one another and the slightly more juvenile lyrics (just an opinion), this album does seem to be a primitive groove metal album, except for Hetfield's vocals, which are nothing like most groove songs. Just tell me if I'm right or wrong, I wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.95.183 (talk) 01:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. I find a lot of similarities between this album and the "groove metal" genre. On the "classic albums" documentary for the Black album, one critic even went as far as saying that it introduced a really "grooved" aspect to Metallica. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.10.234.92 (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So should The Black Album be put into consideration as an early example of groove metal? Its a pretty slow album, only picking up on "Holier Than Thou," "Through the Never," and "The Struggle Within." I know it doesnt sound much like mid 90's Pantera (ugh...) or Machine Head (UGH!), but the basic blueprints of Groove is there: Slow riffs, less serious lyrics, a degree of commercial success/popularity, and of course the fact that Metallica used to be a thrash band, and so many thrash bands jumped on the groove bandwagon (Anthrax and Overkill are the most noticeable ones, and Machine Head was formed out of Vio-Lence). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.84.173.65 (talk) 01:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs work

Anyone notice that this article is just one POV statement right after another. I cleaned it some but it needs work. You can see where the initial 'information page' started...and almost track through where little hints of POV statements have weaseled in to make it go from an encyclopedia article to sounding like a conversation between Wayne and Garth. The 'It's metal man!'-'No it ain't Dude!' edits are better left for a teen chat room. And trying to decide what 'metal' is within the confines of a single album description is pointless. Anyone else want to clean the fluff out of it?...it needs a real make-over. Anger22 11:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC) djk[reply]

Cover

The cover picture isn't the right one. Actually, someone added the (almost) right one, but it was reverted. The only mistake by that pic was the fact that it was too contrasted. Could someone add the real album cover, please? --217.84.142.114 15:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is the the album cover.24.144.137.244 02:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the image has very bad quality.. --80.74.110.170 11:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning

Isn't it a bit silly to start the article with "controversy"? --Big gun 18:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Defacing

Someone has defaced the page with 'metallica rules' - also i notice on a coupel of other metallica linked pages that there have been swear words put in..maybe someone can check them out?

But METALLICA does rule !..!24.144.137.244 02:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:6ae3b2c008a078705cf75010 L.jpg

Image:6ae3b2c008a078705cf75010 L.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 04:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced

Much of this article is unsourced and that is problematic. This paragraph, however, has so many problems that I have removed it until somebody provides sources:

The Black Album stands as a dividing point for Metallica fans. Its' supporters claim that it is still a "metal" album, while its critics describe it as the beginning of the end for Metallica's greatness. Songs such as "Holier Than Thou", "Through The Never", and "The Struggle Within" show Metallica still practiced elements of thrash, while detractors point to the ballads "Nothing Else Matters" and "The Unforgiven" as signs that Metallica was more interested in commercial gain than catering exclusively to their thrash metal fan base.


If someone can provide sources, please do so. Thanks. Wikipediarules2221 02:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The Black Album"

I could be completely wrong here, but I was under the impression that subtitling this album as "The Black Album" was a sort of tongue in cheek nod to the movie "This is Spinal Tap" ... in which the band members talk about releasing an album with a completely black cover - "... like a black mirror." Maybe this is a connection that only I have made.

Has anyone found any evidence to support this theory? ThreeKings

Yeah, there's a part in A Year and a Half in the Life of Metallica where James and Lars are looking at the finished cover artwork. Lars holds it up and goes, "Spinal Tap lives," and then James says, "The answer is 'none more black.'" --jh51681 (talk) 00:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Album sales:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080103/20080103006104.html?.v=1

It's now up to 15,077,000 so please someone update it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.205.43.222 (talk) 00:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just bought a copy so now it's 15,077,001. 206.169.113.197 (talk) 21:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hammet playing rhythm on Nothing Else Matters

Is it really true that Kirk Hammet plays rhythm-guitar on Nothing Else Matters? I know that the solo is Hetfields, but that doesn't automatically make Hammet be rhythm-guitar player for that song. It was my understanding that Hetfield plays all guitar on the song. This is confirmed by the wikipedia-page on "Nothing Else Matters". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.231.166.20 (talk) 11:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand (I think they mentioned this in a video - possibly Year and a Half..) that Kirk does not play on NEM at all, everything is James. Skeletor2112 (talk) 12:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genre?

Metallica is not hard rock album. It's mostly classical heavy metal, but not hard rock (like Load and ReLoad). It also has some thrash metal songs such as The Struggle Within, Trough the Never and Holier Than Thou: they are fast and non-melodic, so they are thrash. Metallica should be classified as heavy metal and thrash metal album, but not hard rock. 80.230.151.231 (talk) 12:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be heavy and thrash, I agree. -MetalKommandant (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point out which hard rock/heavy metal song on the album qualifies as thrash metal???? The Real Libs-speak politely 18:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ones mentioned previously above my comment. "Hard rock". Not even "Nothing Else Matters" or "The Unforgiven" qualifies as hard rock. If you're looking for that, try "Mama Said" or "Low Man's Lyric"... -MetalKommandant (talk) 04:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by 66.116.24.200

Seen that today there has been a fair bit of "Dan" vandalism by IP address 66.116.24.200. Might be a short term thing, jsut keeping it up to date.sheeldz (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. 'Holier Than Thou' and 'Of Wolf and Man' may be more mainstream songs, but that's definitely thrash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MetalKommandant (talkcontribs) 00:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Constant "Evile" frontman plugging?

Why does every metallica album have a quote from this "Evile" guy talking about how he loved the album? It comes off as a blatent self-promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.88.168 (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christgau's nonsensical review?

Why is his review posted on the site? His review consists of a symbol, illustrating that he thinks its some of the worst he's ever heard. Congratulations, you have written the worst, most shallow review I've ever read... Unless anyone argues why this uninformative, unfounded review should stay on, I'm deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.93.4.119 (talk) 19:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Reviews consist of words and not a fucking simbol. See, Allmusic review for death magnetic didn't stay till it had something written (b4 it was just 4 stars and nothing more). That isn't a review. 189.58.35.107 (talk) 19:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]