Lulu

Lulu Image
Metascore
45

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics What's this?

User Score
2.2

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 208 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Lou Reed and Metallica collaborated on this two-disc set of music based on Frank Wedekind's LuLu plays.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 31
  2. Negative: 13 out of 31
  1. Mojo
    Jan 10, 2012
    80
    The shock in this collaboration is that it sounds savagely natural. [Dec. 2011, p.93]
  2. Oct 31, 2011
    80
    Much advance word of Lou Reed and Metallica's excursion has been one of bewilderment and dismissal. It may well be, though, that in the fullness of time this is an album that is given the praise it deserves.
  3. Kerrang!
    Nov 17, 2011
    60
    LuLu is an album that will require many plays before the music contained within beings to make sense. [29 Oct 2011, p.50]
  4. Oct 31, 2011
    40
    It's not a successful union: the songs are too close to aimless, unfinished jams, Reed sounds as if he's trying too hard to be controversial and at 95 minutes it's far too long.
  5. The whole thing comes off as either an expensive major label joke or nigh-impenetrable high art concept. Maybe both.
  6. Nov 1, 2011
    25
    An utter wreck that curiously, miraculously, might have been great.
  7. Oct 26, 2011
    0
    Not only is Lulu the worst thing any of the players have been involved in, it's quite possibly a candidate for one of the worst albums ever made.

See all 31 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 65
  2. Negative: 46 out of 65
  1. Nov 8, 2011
    10
    Metallica and Lou Reed have created in this album a complete masterpiece destined to become a cult album. I'm not saying this is the bestMetallica and Lou Reed have created in this album a complete masterpiece destined to become a cult album. I'm not saying this is the best album ever, but sure one of the greatest CDs in the last 5 years. The main reason is because they have created something new mixing their own styles in a conceptual way. Lulu is not only an album, it's something more and it's hard to explain it. Is when yo have listened all the CD, read its lyrics and watched all the art-work when you realize it's something special. Talking about Lulu's music, I think is awesome, specially Metallica's work, that explores new kinds of music with a great sensibility. It's true that in the beginning Lou's voice can seem strange in that melodies, but listening to it you see that this is a part of his poetry, of the sense of Lulu.
    Finally I want to say that the main problem for me is that this album should have been far away from mainstream and be a little work, but nothing that is done by Metallica nowadays will go unnoticed for their main audience, and specially his "purists" and detractors fans. But no matter what they say. Lulu is a GREAT album.
    Expand
  2. 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 soAfter 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. Expand
  3. 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 goodI 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
  4. Jan 19, 2015
    0
    What happened? Honestly, I thought at first I was listening to an old man talking throughout the whole album instead of actually singing. ButWhat happened? Honestly, I thought at first I was listening to an old man talking throughout the whole album instead of actually singing. But actually, I wasn't dreaming. Oh well... Expand
  5. Dec 18, 2011
    0
    Once I heard the first line from the first song, which was "I would cut my legs and **** off", I immediately turned it off! WorstOnce I heard the first line from the first song, which was "I would cut my legs and **** off", I immediately turned it off! Worst collaboration in the history of rock! Rob Zombie and Lionel Richie can breathe a sigh of relief! Like come on, "I'm Am the Table" What the hell does that mean??? And no I would not like "Iced Honey" its disgusting!!! Expand
  6. 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 aWhy 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

See all 65 User Reviews