Lulu - Lou Reed
User Score
2.1

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 149 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 149

Review this album

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    I've seen several comments online where bloggers say we "don't get it". Anyone who says this is avant garde music has little experience with that genre. Dangerous, abrasive and compelling are all hallmarks of avant rock. This is just an embarrassment made by two creatively bankrupt artists. Please stop your Metallica hero worship and hear this album for what it is: Crap.
  2. Nov 2, 2011
    3
    Soo i bought this album being a long time fan of Metallica. Do not make that mistake! I haven't really had much Lou Reed experience but im sure he was better off on his own, same with Metallica. The whole album feels like poetry being read to you with some guys playing metal in the background. It just doesn't work. Maybe i didnt give this enough time to sink in, but i only listened halfway through the album before i had to shut it off. It was that bad. Expand
  3. Nov 6, 2011
    0
    Lou Metal(lica) Machine Music. If we weren't all aware that Lou was an idiot, we would have probably thought this was a joke, a joke on Metallica, but clearly it it not. Clearly, the man sees himself as some sort of Avant-Garde master, when really everytime he's tried to be experimental he has **** up. Metallica 1983-88 - Best metal band in the world. 1991 - Still good, but not great. 1992-2003 - Jokes. 2008 - Slight potential. 2009-2011 - Jokes, again. They've become a joke, but this has been said for almost 20 years. Lou and Metallica have both gone from being greats releasing masterpieces to has-beens with dumb fanbases. "Metallica are **** awesome, you **** Go die" That would be the general response from one of their fans, their cultureless **** for fans. I know huge Metallica fans. They're deluded idiots.... They give music and rock/metal music, in particular, a bad name. They're ruining it. They could atleast retire. They could atleast not further this, this Trage-comedy. They could give up and try their hardest to erase the last 20 years of thier career. You too Lou, the last 38 years. This is a mockery. A **** MOCKERY Expand
  4. Mar 26, 2012
    1
    I remember listening to this album for the first time and literally laughing. I thought it was a joke, I hope it is, because if Lou Reed and Metallica seriously thought this was a good album then they BOTH need to hang it up. Terrible lyrics, horrible vocals, flat melodies, uninspired riffs, just about every misfire in the book is present on Lulu. I am giving it a 1 because, as I mentioned, it made me laugh, and that has to count for something. Expand
  5. Nov 12, 2011
    0
    one of the most disgusting things i have ever encountered in my life, bad riffs, bad vocals, lyrics "appears" to be sophisticated while they are mostly crap. definitely not for Metallica fans, or music fans i general. the only good thing about this is last couple of minutes in "The View" where James Insists that HE IS A TABLE, works every time i feel down and want to have a good laugh.
  6. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    The worst thing is that Metallica can pull the whole 'it's different so THAT'S why people don't like it' thing yet again. I understand wanting to do something different musically. But the band also needs to understand that sometimes doing something different means that it can still suck. And suck this album does. Lou Reed and Metallica don't match. I don't care how poetic or progressive or deep this album is. In the end, it's about the music. And the music tends to sound stupendously bad. Expand
  7. Nov 28, 2011
    0
    This is an absolute joke of an album. It sounds like an old man reciting bad poetry over his grandson's garage band. I could go off on a lot of rants regarding Metallica releases in the last 2 decades, but I will stick to this album alone: It is trash. Artistically, it offers nothing to the listener. Musically it is a grungy mess of off beat noise. There is really no reason to buy this album, or even steal it, to be quite honest. There is no reason to add this album to your collection, not for Lou Reed, not for Metallica, not as a joke. Expand
  8. Nov 6, 2011
    4
    After listening to this album, I have NO respect for Lou Reed anymore. He has ruined Metallica and what they are known for. His voice is so annoying and sounds awful... and it's put to crazy, loud guitars. It doesn't go. If Lou thinks that this is the best thing he's ever done, then he must have has a crappy career. And Metallica, please forget you ever did this and go back to Death Magnetic. At least this wasn't as bad as St. Anger. Collapse
  9. Vic
    Nov 14, 2011
    0
    The worst piece of **** I've ever heard! Sometimes Metallica (the best band in the world) surprises me with its stupidity! They don't think rationally that's for sure!
  10. Nov 3, 2011
    1
    Aweful. Just absolute tripe from start to finish. Now, I understand that some artists like to try and experiment every now and then and end up with remarkable results. But the only think that's remarkable about this album is just how unlistenable it is. Repetitive riffs, moronic lyrics and non-existant progression simply proves that spaghetti and chocolate just dosen't mix.
  11. Apr 20, 2012
    2
    Why Mettalica? One of the greatest bands of all time falls into the greasy hands of the old geaser Lou Reed. He talks, not sings, and you would not be able to tell this was Mettalica. For the die hard fans, my heart goes out to you, haha. But really, everything is garbage, I respect a change from the hard rocking band, but I did expect a change that was higher in quality than this.
  12. Nov 6, 2011
    4
    Honestly, it's not as horrible as people make it out to be. I feel like the user score has been artificially deflated thanks to the scores of disappointed Metallica/Lou Reed fans. Don't get me wrong, it's an aggressively taxing listen, but if you make an effort to pay attention to the story, and give the album a fair chance, you'll find it does have some redeeming qualities. That said, there is a major disjunction between Lou's vocals and Metallica's instrumentals, that could have been repaired with some studio workshopping. This album was made quickly and it shows. Expand
  13. Nov 2, 2011
    1
    This album have some great riffs, but they are overexploided. For example, Junior Dad is composed basically with 1 riff. 19 minutes for 1 riff is very bad. Lou Reed voice sucks, and sometimes just destroy the songs. For example, the Pumping Blood intro. It's a horrible album, Lou Reed and Metallica doesn't combine, so please don't try to do more albums together. Worst album in Metallica's History.
  14. May 25, 2012
    2
    While I can understand what Metallica and Lou Reed tried to do on this record, their sounds are too different to fit well together. This album sounds like Lou Reed reciting dark, and unappealing poems that he had written, while Metallica can be heard jamming in the background and it ends up sounding like a mess. I gave this album several chances to grow on me but it truly is a waste of time and a poor collaboration between very accomplished musicians. The only thing keeping this from a 1/10 is "Iced Honey", which is actually more or less listenable. Expand
  15. Nov 30, 2011
    2
    Lulu has two alright songs on it, the songs that are alright are "Iced Honey" and "Cheat on Me" the rest of the album is just **** The lyrics for the album are just rubbish, such as, in the song "Frustration" Lou says some like "Kiss your breast and toes" what **** idiot would say that? The man is a wanker and Metallica are dick heads for working with him! What ever you do, don't waste your money on this bull****, buy something better. But i do recommend listening to the album on youtube for a laugh. Expand
  16. Nov 16, 2011
    0
    After first hearing some of this album some months ago, I first thought that it was weak, not fitting and generally painful to listen to. Despite this, I decided to try out the whole album regardless. And the end result was just as bad as my prior opinion. The main problem with the album is that Lou Reed does not go with Metallica in any way. It's like a 12-year-old kid mish-mashing two songs together and calling it a 'remix'. As much as I don't like saying this, this is an album deserving of it's criticism. Metallica fans won't like it, Lou Reed fans won't like it and anyone with the gift of ears won't like it either. Expand
  17. WD2
    Nov 1, 2011
    4
    The only saving grace for this album may be that it is not the worst album of 2011; Theory of a Deadman already clinched that honor back in the summer. But Lou Reed's nasally delivery just doesn't fit, it comes off as some uninspired old fart recording his voice in the living room while a metal riff plays in the background. As Allmusic wrote, this would have worked far better with an ambient band such as Sunn 0))) than with Metallica. Expand
  18. Jan 3, 2012
    0
    This is the worst album of 2011. Metallica seems to be playing a uninspired jam session with Lou Reed mumbling bad poetry to another tune. Both made a great contribution to music and maybe we should just forget that this ever happened.
  19. Nov 1, 2011
    1
    I gave this rating a star because Metallica does have some good riffs in here, some of them with a bit of variety/progression could make good Metallica songs. The issue here is Lou Reed ruining any potential here. I like a lot of Lou Reed solo work (Blue Mask, Transformer, Coney Island Baby) but his lyrics here are awful, to the point that they distract from any musical flow. Worse yet, his "singing" has no consistent pattern, melody, nothing of redeeming value. This was a struggle to get through, a total vanity project for Reed, maybe wanting to put out a metal machine music for the new decade. It's funny, because Reed has now been responsible for some of the best works of rock/pop music with Velvet Underground, and now the worst as well. Metallica does not help matters here, the music is too repetitive to be enjoyable. If they could work with a stronger producer like Danger Mouse or Rick Rubin, they could do something interesting again. Ever since Bob Rock reared his ugly head into their careers, they've gone downhill. Expand
  20. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    Why Lou? Why would you choose to work with Metallica? I could think of 100 better artists you could have chosen to work with. This is just a terrible album on all accounts. Fans of both Lou Reed and Metallica need to be honest with themselves and admit that NEITHER artist is relevant anymore. They are not changing the music scene or doing anything of significance. They are OLD artist trying desperately to change the landscape of music like they did earlier in their careers. I have no problem saying I love a particular artist for the influence they originally had, but that I hate their current desperate pretentious career. Expand
  21. Nov 2, 2011
    0
    Metallica, what happened? The snare drum experiment in the st anger now this?! mediocre would give credit to this garbage.
    the brand and name of both lou reed and metallica and everyone involved will be forever scarred.
  22. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    If this album was listened to without knowing who the artists were you would think it was a 4th rate garage band made up of 17 year old high school students spewing forth really bad teenage poetry!
    I am all for trying new things and pushing the boundaries but sometimes you have to know when to pull back and review your art objectively.....this i'm afraid is just an exercise in self
    indulgent narcissism by musicians who are obviously bored.....probably shouldn't have been released because i can only see it hurting their brand! Expand
  23. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    to give it a 0 is to say it hasn't any artistic merit, which it has. still, it hasn't got enough to score a 1. listen to it as a Metallica fan, a Reed fan, or not a fan at all, everything in this album sucks the same
  24. Nov 3, 2011
    3
    The emperor has no clothes. There are people who want to like this because they think it's "avant-garde", or "artistic", or "challenging". I don't criticise Lou Reed or Metallica for attempting this project, but I think they failed quite badly. There are many problems with this album, but perhaps the most fundamental is the general lack of connection between Reed's vocals and Metallica's backing music, something that, in combination with the monotone delivery, robs the lyrical storyline of any possible impact (not that some of the lyrics aren't downright laughable in their own right) and the entire album of any coherence.

    Many of the songs are excessively long, stretched out with mindless repetition or pointlessly tacked on sections. Incidentally, there's absolutely no justification for the length of the album, it could have only been improved by trimming it to fit on a single CD. The heavy parts which some fellow-Metallica fans probably enjoy are often... just there... sounding ok for what they are, but contributing little. (Who thought it was a good idea to take the already average speed/thrash riff of Mistress Dread and repeat it for 5+ monotonous minutes? Incredible).

    This could have been an outstanding project. All it needed was a different singer (one able to convey the twisted emotions and inner workings of the character rather than drone on witlessly, relying on the tired shock value of lyrics about vulvas, tampons and various forms of degradation to create any impact) and a different band (one able to consistently display the subtlety and creativity required to make the soundtrack fit the storyline).

    I was tempted to give it less than 3, as when I think of this project as a whole, it's pretty dire. But there are some good moments, and even a few songs that come close to working, though spoiled to some extent by the failings I've mentioned.
    Expand
  25. Nov 4, 2011
    0
    This album makes me sick to my stomach. What has happened to Metallica? Megadeth comes out with a new one and its just as good as their stuff in the 80's. I'm almost ashamed to be a Metallica fan.
  26. Nov 7, 2011
    0
    Worst album in the world. Metallica has been a great band since the 80's but since then it seems like it's been losing their magic to make music. What happened to Metallica?
  27. Nov 16, 2011
    0
    Listening to this record is like witnessing your middle-aged parents performing sexual act for an hour. They certainly enjoy it themselves, and you respect them both, but that performance is not intended for anyone else to see. You wish you never saw it and want to flush the scene from your memory. There's something unnatural in that from your perspective.

    I get it - it's not 100%
    Metallica album, but who are you kidding ? If not for Metallica fans, nobody would pay attention to this dreck. I couldn't care less about Lou Reed, but I am not sure if I can take Metallica seriously after this. Expand
  28. Nov 8, 2011
    2
    I laughed at times. Specifically at Reed's vocal efforts. He sounds like a confused old man without any muscial abilities.

    Summary: Metallica wasted riffs on this album. Lou Reed's poetry would be better off in text form.
  29. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, what a joke for an album, the sound on this album does not work or fit together at all.
    Sounds like Metallica were keen to make an album that would be remember through time. But they have grabbed Lou Reed who isnt a very successful singer with music that isnt appealing to the mainstream market or metallica fans and try and failed very very badly, more dissapointing the st
    anger lol. Expand
  30. Oct 11, 2012
    0
    I'm afraid I'm going to have to join the long list of people who consider this album absolute crap. I've tried. Many times. But no, I can't get it. Right from the opening track, James Hetfield appears to be taking the piss out of himself.

    Metallica throw their instruments around the room, while Lou Reed talks over it. Utterly boring.

    If this were the first album that today's
    youth heard of Metallica's, or indeed of Lou Reed's, they would forever foresake their earlier output, which would be a terrible shame. Expand
Metascore
45

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 31
  2. Negative: 13 out of 31
  1. Jan 10, 2012
    80
    The shock in this collaboration is that it sounds savagely natural. [Dec. 2011, p.93]
  2. Dec 13, 2011
    40
    Occasionally it's so insane that you can't help but be swept along with it. Mostly, however, it's so over the top the more likely reaction is to run it off and make sure you don't hear it again in a hurry. [Dec. 2011 p. 122]
  3. Dec 8, 2011
    80
    Metallica's unrelenting sledgehammer style works as the perfect complement to Reed's vision of compassionless love, with monolithic chords deployed with almost surgical precision wile he dissects relationships w of masochism and power. [Dec 2011, p.63]