There are many stereotypes associated with metalheads. Most of them are about hygiene, but one predominant stereotype seems to be “Let’s diss Metallica, because all pure metalheadz do it lolz!!1111″
I know what you’re thinking: But Alex, you make fun of Metallica all the time! True, but it’s tongue-in-cheek humor which is aimed at every band out there, not just them. It’s how we roll around here. I’m talking about people who genuinely try to take a shit on this band for the sake of taking a shit (on this band).
If you’re one of those guys who just never liked them, this article isn’t about you. If you’re a guy who liked/loved 80s Metallica, then just gave up being a fan because of 90s and especially early 2000s Metallica, this article isn’t about you either. If you spend your days commenting on each Metallica-related article on Blabbermouth, saying the same thing over and over again, and using the ‘sell out’ argument, this article is definitely about you. Bitch
So no matter how much you love or hate this band, continue reading this article and read my flawless arguments which contradict this popular trend with metalheads.
Fanboy alert!
Argument #1: Lars is a competent drummer
The most overused “Metallica sux” argument (maybe after the sell out thing) is that Lars is a bad drummer. I disagree, he is a decent drummer. Just because he’s not the best doesn’t mean he sucks.
See, I have no problem with actual drummers who dislike his bad timing and go into lengthy discussions about why they think Lars is not good. I have a problem with people who can’t even play drums yet they say “LARS IS AWFUL!” all the time, just cause they heard it elsewhere.
My definition of a decent drummer involves stuff related to how well his drumming gels with the rest of the instruments. It’s not speed nor is it technicality. Think AC/DC. Most AC/DC songs are used by beginners to learn basic beats. Does this mean AC/DC suck? No. That drumming fits the song perfectly. I wouldn’t want Joey Jordison performing with AC/DC. I wouldn’t want him performing with Metallica ever again either:
That doesn’t sound bad, it just doesn’t sound like Metallica to me. At around 2:20 it sounds pretty badass, but again, not the ‘tallica sound.
I think Lars shines in And Justice For All… He really does in my book, especially on songs like ‘One’ or ‘Dyer’s Eve.’ Is he the most amazing and fastest drum virtuoso? No, but he’s not horrible either.
I do get that some people are more picky about drums than I am, so I know there are people who feel Metallica needed someone like Benante to keep up with James and Cliff in the early days. Maybe that’s true to some degree, but that’s constructive criticism. Saying “LARS SUCKS” on Blabbermouth is just mindless internet idiocy, and that’s what I have a problem with.
Lars plays drums better than you, so keep that in mind before you try to verbally destroy his career.
Argument #2: Metallica are not the only ones who sold out
Well, this one is pretty obvious. Metallica have changed their appearance and sound a bunch of times to ‘fit in’ with what was popular at the time. But why doesn’t Megadeth get shit for ‘Crush ‘Em’? Why don’t Pantera get shit for being a glam band who turned metal overnight?
Metallica is not the only band in existence to do this yet they get, by far, the most shit for it. Why? They got shit when they released the video for ‘One.’ It was a grim video, the total opposite of what was popular at the time (colorful, huge stages with singers wearing makeup, and tight shit). Yet they apparently ‘sold out’ for being on MTV. They ‘sold out’ before when they got a major record deal and they kept selling out in the eyes of the fans. It seems that no matter what they do, one way there’s a group claiming they sold out.
Listen, I don’t condone what Metallica did after the Black Album either, but some people want musicians to just be a garage band only known by a bunch of people. Can’t do that. Being a musician is a career. If you want to be a filmmaker, it’s pretty obvious your goal is to make big Hollywood films. Even if you don’t want to ‘sell out’ you still dream of a $100 million budget, right? Well that’s what musicians also dream of when they start. Sometimes the temptations of mansions, cash and ass get to them.
I’m not a fan of the Load/ReLoad albums at all, but I wouldn’t crucify them for them either. It’s their band — if they want to turn away from thrash, it’s their choice.
Argument #3: Metallica are amazing live
This is the only argument where I won’t respect your opinion if you disagree. Metallica put on an amazing show, fact. James might not sound like he did in the 80s. Kirk may be way sloppier than when he was 20. But they still kick major ass.
I’ve seen Metallica four times and they blew my mind each time. Simple enough stage yet enough pyrotechnics to make the show worthwhile. I dare you to see a Big Four show and not see the obvious difference between them and the other three bands. Sure, they have more money, but they put on an amazing show and they’d do that on a small stage also.
And with all their flaws, at least they don’t dub vocals on their DVDs like some other bands we could mention. James uses auto-tune to stay in pitch and it sometimes shows, but he can’t help the fact that he doesn’t have the voice he used to have in his youth. I still think it’s a minor detail, especially since his guitar playing is as superb as ever.
There is no reason to miss Metallica live, even if you’re not a fan. They simply own you and whatever band’s your favorite band. The only metal band that can rival their great show is AC/DC.
Argument #4: They did not sue their fans
A thing we often hear about Metallica is that they sued their fans. No they didn’t. How is this lie still spread around in 2011? Do you know anyone who was directly sued by Metallica?
Metallica sued Napster and gave them a list of users Napster should ban. That list of users had Metallica stuff for sharing so they wanted them gone. They did not, I repeat, they DID NOT sue those people — they simply pointed them out as proof that their music was illegally distributed.
Why don’t people mention the time when Beatallica got sued by Sony and the only reason they didn’t get legally and financially ass-raped was because Lars stepped in? He even asked Metallica’s attorney to help. How come a stupid myth is used against this band and has been spread around for a decade, yet a true story isn’t?
At least research stuff before spreading dumb lies.
Argument #5: They treat their fans nicely
When fans ‘have had enough’ of Bob Rock, Metallica got rid of him. Sure maybe Bob left himself, but point being, fans were mad and they got their wish one way or another.
Metallica‘s live set is mostly 80s stuff. They know fans want their first four albums and they give it to them.
Hundreds of fans can testify to how nice all four members of Metallica were to them when they met them backstage through MetClub.
Every time there’s a special event, Metallica gives away tickets to fans via MetClub. They could simply sell them, but they don’t.
The guy who owns Encycmet.com is from Europe. He was flown to the U.S. for MTV Icon and he was given signed stuff amongst other things, just for being a fan and running a big fansite.
I’m not saying other bands don’t do this, I’m just saying that for a band who ‘sued their fans,’ they sure are nice to them. MetClub does have a membership price, but get in there and you get your money’s worth.
Argument #6: They wrote Master Of Puppets
No matter what these guys do as musicians or as people, they will always have one argument going for them: They fucking wrote Master of fucking Puppets.
Sure, they also made St. Anger, but metal was forever changed once these guys started writing albums. And they wrote four of the best metal albums of all time whether you like them or not. You can hear their influence in any post-80s metal band. They simply kicked ass while they were thrash so that’s something no one can ever take from them.
So whoever says Metallica isn’t metal anymore is wrong. They might not write metal albums, but they did enough for metal to be considered metal, especially as long as their setlists are mostly 80s stuff.
Argument #7: To each his fucking own
At the end of the day, we’re all entitled to our opinion. If you think Metallica suck, fine, I don’t care and Lars definitely doesn’t care. He makes more money than you and everyone you know put together (times 200). They do what they want and you can either go to their shows or not. It’s simple.
But I just don’t like biased people. While I may be a fan, I do recognize all their flaws. It pisses me off when ‘haters’ don’t recognize their qualities. Although the fact that this band still fills up stadiums anywhere in the world proves that all you subjective assholes are in the minority.
So do have an opinion and do express it, but learn to back it up with facts (like I did, cause I rule) instead of simply ‘shouting in caps’ that this band sucks.
If you disagree with this article, construct an essay of your own and prove me wrong. Otherwise I’m just right and you simply failed.
In closing, here’s one reason why Metallica is better than your shitty band:
