• Record Label: Elektra
  • Release Date: Jun 10, 2003
User Score
5.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 390 Ratings

User score distribution:

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. Sep 22, 2010
    5
    When i first herd this i knew that this wasn't the metallica everyone was used to. Something was wrong. I found that this was the album were james (singer) just got out of that huge rehab deal that he was going though and was returning to the band. I guess the just wanted to get back in slowly with just riffs and no solos. Ill let u off this time metallica but now start getting to the goodWhen i first herd this i knew that this wasn't the metallica everyone was used to. Something was wrong. I found that this was the album were james (singer) just got out of that huge rehab deal that he was going though and was returning to the band. I guess the just wanted to get back in slowly with just riffs and no solos. Ill let u off this time metallica but now start getting to the good stuff. I mean mind blowing solos. I CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT UR SOLOS! Expand
  2. Nov 25, 2011
    5
    St. Anger. Well, well, well... Certainly Metallica's most slated album (though oddly not on this site) - and perhaps with some reason. The songs are generally rather bland, with simplistic riffs and less than enthusiastic drumming from the usually impressive Ulrich. Considering the troubles the band was going through at the time - with each other, and with producer Bob Rock, perhaps it'sSt. Anger. Well, well, well... Certainly Metallica's most slated album (though oddly not on this site) - and perhaps with some reason. The songs are generally rather bland, with simplistic riffs and less than enthusiastic drumming from the usually impressive Ulrich. Considering the troubles the band was going through at the time - with each other, and with producer Bob Rock, perhaps it's not surprising this effort is their least popular. However, there are some high points - 'Some Kind of Monster' is sufficiently choleric without being dull, and were it not for Hetfield's repetitive screaming of 'Kill, Kill, Kill' at the end of 'All Within my Hands', that wouldn't be bad either. 'Invisible Kid', it must be said, I am a closet fan of. Overall, due to the lack of solos, a poor production effort by Rock and overall mediocre lyrical content, this is certainly Metallica's worst album to date - but is nevertheless nowhere near as bad as is often made out. Expand
  3. JonyeA
    Jun 29, 2003
    5
    when i heard about this CD i expected something like master of puppets. What i got was not Metallica at all. no solos, sounds like it was recorded in a day. just download the video and hope they dont sue you
  4. AlexS
    Jun 10, 2003
    4
    frustrating. it should be awesome, because they've brought the chunkiness and speed back, but the album is actually pretty boring. all the songs sound exactly the same, there are no solos, and, to be honest, het's lyrics kinda suck.... metallica knew, after the ridiculousness that was load and reload, that they had to bring the fire back to their music, but it's too bad frustrating. it should be awesome, because they've brought the chunkiness and speed back, but the album is actually pretty boring. all the songs sound exactly the same, there are no solos, and, to be honest, het's lyrics kinda suck.... metallica knew, after the ridiculousness that was load and reload, that they had to bring the fire back to their music, but it's too bad that they couldn't do anything cool with it. i may sound like an old fart, but i really miss cliff..... (i was five when he died, so i can't be an old fart...) Expand
  5. [Anonymous]
    Jun 10, 2003
    6
    St. Anger is a progression of their Load/Reload albums (the blooze riifs, sing-along melodies, and personal lyrics have remained) except that they have grafted on harder, speed/power-metal phrases. There are problems with marrying the two styles. (And Slayer, Anthrax, Megadeth, and even Pantera have all struggled with this too.) In are the varying double-time signatures, bass drum fills, St. Anger is a progression of their Load/Reload albums (the blooze riifs, sing-along melodies, and personal lyrics have remained) except that they have grafted on harder, speed/power-metal phrases. There are problems with marrying the two styles. (And Slayer, Anthrax, Megadeth, and even Pantera have all struggled with this too.) In are the varying double-time signatures, bass drum fills, stacatto riffs, and tremelos. Hell, some of the guitar-drum on-the-one interplay is straight out of the Slayer songbook. Out are the progressive/Euro-metal songs structures, the gorgeously harmonic bridges and theatrical dynamics, the stuff that distinguishes Master of Puppets and Ride the Lightning as defining metal albums. You don't see many nu-metal bands try old-school thrash. Here's why: The intricate speed does not allow a groove where a singer (or hip-hop beats) can easily fit on top. The elaborate time-changes almost defy verse-chorus-verse song structure. In Metallica's 80s music, progressive devices like harmonized solos and long intros were crucial in creating transitions where the riffs would be introduced and the singer would be allowed space to define a chorus. In turn, the fit of these riffs would create elaborately emotional dynamics. On this album, the awkward (and jarringly produced) pop/nu-metal phrases, basically forcing a "unnatural" song structure, that take the air of the flow, make many of the tracks tedious, and wipe out most of the songs' dramatic buildup. That said, St Anger does appeal as a sort of concensus "adult metal" album. Although the lyrics seem solopilistic, the words and the singing seem that of a man confronting his middle age, his past, as well as his addictions. The riffs themselves contain 20 years of heavy metal and hard rock , are stand up to anything in their mainstream peers. And I enjoyed the stoner-rock-meets-psuedoindustrial production (though many don't), it's the first time since And Justice for All, that the Metallica has had real mid-range in their sound. In short bits, St Anger is a lot of fun, and you feel that Metallica is getting closer to "getting it" again. So while not a return to form, it is basically a good metal album and reminder of metal's glorious past. Expand
  6. DavidK
    Jun 9, 2003
    6
    I have heard alot about Metallica and Bob Rick trying to make an album that sound more like "live" Metallica. It seems that with every album Rock produces, they get farther away from that ideal. The album is overproduced. If you listen to it at low volume, all you hear is vocals and drums.
  7. dougk
    Apr 13, 2005
    6
    they need to get wasted again
  8. MichaelC
    Dec 20, 2006
    5
    Where are the solos? Ps. Anybody who pays attention to Rolling Stones top 100 guitarist dosn't know anything about the instrument. There are so many names left off that list, most notably, Steve Vai, Frank Zappa, John Petucci and Joe Satriani. Those guys arn't top 100, but Kurt Cobain and Jack White are top 30, is just garbage.
  9. PatC
    Feb 28, 2007
    5
    Drum sounds awful not even in the shadow of the Black album
  10. tomg
    Nov 20, 2008
    4
    While this isn't the worst Metallica CD, it is not good. The omission of guitar solos, the steely sounding drums, and Hetfield's woman-like cracking voice on Frantic, make this an un-stellar CD. Though some songs sound rather good, the CD needed way more work on it.
  11. JeffF
    Jun 10, 2003
    4
    On this CD Metallica really tries to return to their old sound, but try as they may, they fail miserably. This music on this CD borrows from bands that early Metallica likely served as an inspiration to. There are guitar riffs that sound lifted from the latest Queens of the Stone Age CD and there are choruses and vocal arraignments that sound like they were lifted from the latest Linkin On this CD Metallica really tries to return to their old sound, but try as they may, they fail miserably. This music on this CD borrows from bands that early Metallica likely served as an inspiration to. There are guitar riffs that sound lifted from the latest Queens of the Stone Age CD and there are choruses and vocal arraignments that sound like they were lifted from the latest Linkin Park or some other Nu-Metal release. I am not even going to get into the utterly ridiculous lyrics on here. I will give Metallica some credit, the drums, guitar, and bass on the CD show great talent and tremendous potential, but all of that is wasted as soon as Hetfield opens up his mouth. The lure of ?old? Metallica was Hetfield growling and barking out lyrics like ?Master, Master, Master of Puppets is pulling your strings.? Well now James feels the need to try and actually sing, which is horrible because it is painfully obvious that he simply cannot sing. This has been obviousto Metallica fans since he tried to sing on ?The Unforgiven.? He sounds like some small town hick singing at Karoeke night at the local watering hole or some hapless wannabe in a pathetic cover band. If I were Lars, Kirk, and the new guy, I would kick Hetfield to the curb and get a new singer because this one is washed up. Expand
  12. RyanG
    Jun 13, 2003
    5
    It's not as good as Master of puppets or black album, and Hetfield sounds weak, and it sound a little like garage punk but it still is ok
  13. JohnJ
    Jun 15, 2003
    6
    Nice hard double bass style very agressive drumming, but lacking in the true guitar shreading that Metallica fans of old have learned to expect. Lyricaly James Hetfield has a lot to say but who did he take singing lessons from Fred Durst? The album isn't all that enjoyable from start to end, the best tracks on this new LP are the first two. This is a dissapointment considering such Nice hard double bass style very agressive drumming, but lacking in the true guitar shreading that Metallica fans of old have learned to expect. Lyricaly James Hetfield has a lot to say but who did he take singing lessons from Fred Durst? The album isn't all that enjoyable from start to end, the best tracks on this new LP are the first two. This is a dissapointment considering such albums as MOP, Justice, and RTL, were all albums you could listen to over and over. Not so with St. Anger. Great bonus DVD however. Expand
  14. BitBurn
    Jul 15, 2003
    5
    Well, they could have worked on sound a little bit harder. It reminds me of when they came out in 1988 with "...justice.." with that wicked tick in the bass drum, V-style EQ on the guitar and simply no bass guitar! That was innovation, just splendid. But this time around, not that simple. And when oh when are they gonna get rid of that goofy producer Bob Rock! He's washed up! Well, they could have worked on sound a little bit harder. It reminds me of when they came out in 1988 with "...justice.." with that wicked tick in the bass drum, V-style EQ on the guitar and simply no bass guitar! That was innovation, just splendid. But this time around, not that simple. And when oh when are they gonna get rid of that goofy producer Bob Rock! He's washed up! He's hurting'em! Oh well... Expand
  15. garys
    Sep 17, 2004
    5
    Anger. Agression. Madness. Distain. These are all Metallica, always have been and always will be. Unfortunately this time the boys have misdirected all that is good about them. Understanding that bands change and change is good still makes it hard to take this as Metallica. This album is alot like getting boiling mad then running around naked yelling at people at the beach. It kind of Anger. Agression. Madness. Distain. These are all Metallica, always have been and always will be. Unfortunately this time the boys have misdirected all that is good about them. Understanding that bands change and change is good still makes it hard to take this as Metallica. This album is alot like getting boiling mad then running around naked yelling at people at the beach. It kind of sucks and is kind of pointless. Expand
  16. KellyO
    Oct 11, 2005
    6
    This album might not be perfect, but it's OK. It deserves an exact rating of 6. I didn't like it at first, but it grows on you. Plus, this might be the heaviest album on metacritic!
  17. Landon
    Feb 24, 2008
    5
    This shit ROCKS my socks, and that is what Metallica is supposed to do.
  18. Kenshiro
    Dec 9, 2003
    5
    Being the big Metallica fan that I am, I was one of the first to buy this album. If you go in expecting the old Metallica sound, you will be very disappointed. If you are a newer fan, you will probably enjoy this. I went in there expecting the old sound. And no, I'm not going to start talking about that whole suing business. I'm supposed to be talking about the music. Being the big Metallica fan that I am, I was one of the first to buy this album. If you go in expecting the old Metallica sound, you will be very disappointed. If you are a newer fan, you will probably enjoy this. I went in there expecting the old sound. And no, I'm not going to start talking about that whole suing business. I'm supposed to be talking about the music. That's what counts. I will admit that the boys have a renewed sense of energy that is refreshing to see after Load and Reload. However, all this energy is not being channeled properly, and comes out sounding like a mess. All this aggression, but nowhere to place it - - and so it is all over the place, with no aim or direction. At least Load (which I liked better) had more sense of melody than this. Despite a few good tracks (Frantic, St. Anger, All Within My Hands), this album goes nowhere with its new sound. A somewhat decent album, if it wasn't Metallica. It sounds more like Metallica doing Nu-Metal, which they shouldn't be trying at all. To see the boys at their finest, go and buy all their albums up to the Black Album, or see them live. This CD certainly does not do their reputation any justice. Expand
  19. JeffL
    Jun 11, 2003
    4
    This album is rhythmically interesting in some sections. James singing is awful - lots of intonation problems. I'm not too thrilled with Lars' set on this album. Hammet's solos are non-existent. Very disappointing. St.Anger could lead Metallica to a new type of song writing, but this attempt is upsetting. The album just doesn't work.
  20. Headpiece
    Jun 13, 2003
    5
    hmmm..maybe I should just give this album some time to grow on me, but I have been a Metallica fan since I was able to choose my own tapes. Where is Hammet? Where are the solos? Metallica is trying so hard to go back to their heavy, hair-banging days because all they're old fans bitch about how they've gone pussy, they've forgotten that the reason they don't sound like hmmm..maybe I should just give this album some time to grow on me, but I have been a Metallica fan since I was able to choose my own tapes. Where is Hammet? Where are the solos? Metallica is trying so hard to go back to their heavy, hair-banging days because all they're old fans bitch about how they've gone pussy, they've forgotten that the reason they don't sound like they used to is because.... they've gotten better! They can't play that type of music anymore because they've evolved as musicians. They need to understand that, and the fans need to understand that, and Metallica needs to go back into the studio and produce the record they want to produce... not what bitter fans bitch for. But, this album does have some pretty hard hitting riffs that I could definitly get really wasted to on occasion. Expand
  21. FrédérickL
    Feb 28, 2005
    6
    I miss the solo.
  22. James
    Aug 15, 2007
    6
    Not bad. But not as good as their older stuff.
  23. LuisA.
    Sep 15, 2008
    4
    This is Metallica's effort to show ewat they were feeling and the tension that was between them. That would be a good idea if it was released on an EP, or an internal disc not showed to anyones. But if you want to show that to a multitude of hungry fans who want good ol' Thrash Metal, that's not the way. Lars' Can Drums, James Hurting voice, Kirk's monotone This is Metallica's effort to show ewat they were feeling and the tension that was between them. That would be a good idea if it was released on an EP, or an internal disc not showed to anyones. But if you want to show that to a multitude of hungry fans who want good ol' Thrash Metal, that's not the way. Lars' Can Drums, James Hurting voice, Kirk's monotone solo-less songs. You see, RtL's "The Call of the Ktulu" lasts 8 minutes andit keeps you close to the music. St Anger's title track lasts 5, and on the 4th minute the song is so repetitive that you want to stop. But let's see it as an experimental an therapeutical album, at least, they did an effort. Expand
  24. May 26, 2012
    5
    This album could have been so much better had the band not opted to use drums that sound like trash can lids. They sound cheap and coarse, which I can understand was due to the band trying to go back to the "raw" feel of an album like Kill 'Em All, but it simply doesn't work on this record. While the songs are not ruined by the drum sound, a lot come close. The vocals are good, but some ofThis album could have been so much better had the band not opted to use drums that sound like trash can lids. They sound cheap and coarse, which I can understand was due to the band trying to go back to the "raw" feel of an album like Kill 'Em All, but it simply doesn't work on this record. While the songs are not ruined by the drum sound, a lot come close. The vocals are good, but some of the lyrics are extremely weak coming from a band like Metallica. Not an awful album, but poor for Metallica. Expand
  25. Aug 18, 2011
    6
    St.Anger in My Opinion was a Decent Album it is Not Metallica's Best work but i still think its worth checking out for die hard fans. This Album isnt for Everyone but with songs Like St.Anger, Frantic, and Some Kind of Monster it definatly Delivers and is Overall Something that isnt for everybody
  26. May 14, 2012
    5
    This album is notorious for being complete **** It was released in 2003 and the band was having a lot of problems like their bassist of about 15 years Jason Newsted quit the band. Now the album itself I have mixed feelings about. Number one it's kind of long. This wouldn't be a problem if it didn't feel so long. Number two the drums sound horrible. Number three the songs tend to beThis album is notorious for being complete **** It was released in 2003 and the band was having a lot of problems like their bassist of about 15 years Jason Newsted quit the band. Now the album itself I have mixed feelings about. Number one it's kind of long. This wouldn't be a problem if it didn't feel so long. Number two the drums sound horrible. Number three the songs tend to be repetitive and boring. Number four there isn't a single guitar solo on the entire album. I don't care if there isn't one on a couple of songs but in this case it probably would have helped. There are several good things to this album. One the style improved a lot since Load/ Reload. They dropped the makeup, which back in the early days would ridicule bands that wore any makeup at all. Two the band was falling apart at this time so the release of the album helped prevent the band from disbanding. All in all, this album is okay. Expand
  27. Oct 27, 2012
    4
    This is a Mixed bag for me. I thought some songs were ok and others terrible.. To be honest the whole album is really nothing special. St.Anger and Frantic are the 2 Best Songs on the Album. Not an improvement of Load. Reload or any album prior. Hands Down the Worst Metallica Album Ever.
  28. Mar 27, 2014
    6
    I liked it. But what keeps bothering me and probably people who have listened to this album too, is how it sounds very distant to its former style. It sounds good, but they're just not Metallica-sounding songs. The sound of the drums really annoyed me, too.
Metascore
65

Generally favorable reviews - based on 20 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 20
  2. Negative: 5 out of 20
  1. 80
    This is miffed and exemplary metal. [Jul 2003, p.108]
  2. 80
    Against all odds, St. Anger constitutes the cutting edge of commercial yet aggressive heavy rock in 2003. [Aug 2003, p.106]
  3. The production on St. Anger is abysmal.