|
"Their new stuff sucks, but I like their old stuff. Yeah, their old stuff is good." |
The genius of the old stuff argument is that it can be said in reference to any band at all. From Slayer to Slipknot, you can almost always claim that a band's earlier material was vastly superior to their more recent work, and as such it isn't really appropriate to consider a band's recent activity when judging their entire metal merit. The old stuff defense is especially effective when you take a band's demo work into consideration, as most people are unfamiliar, and therefore feel they have no basis for argument. I of course, think that the old stuff defense is a bullshit tactic, and anguish at how it still continues to be a effective means of supporting one's opinion.
The following is a typical exchange between two metal heads where the "old stuff" defense is put into play, with devastating results:
Metalhead: "Five Finger Death Punch sucks. A lot."
Douchehead: "Yeah, but I like their old stuff, their old stuff was good."
Metalhead: "Okay."
Here's where the conversation typically stops, because it ends with a mutual agreement where everyone walks away happy. Doesn't sound very metal to me. Your "suck" statement should be made with the intent of hurting feelings, passing judgement and boldly claiming your metal superiority! Here's how it should really go:
Metalhead: "Five Finger Death Punch sucks."
Douchehead: "Yeah, but their old stuff was good".
Metalhead: "It's too bad I didn't say 'sucked' or else you would have had a good reason to open your stupid suck hole. Nice pink mohawk, by the way. Did your boyfriend help you dye it while you were both rocking out to some old school Five Finger Butt Punch?"
Let's put this into perspective... Pretend you're at a restaurant and your waitress brings you your steak freezing cold. When you complain to her about it, she replies "well it was a really tasty steak twenty minutes ago", as if it were a legitimate argument. Would that make any sense to you? If not, then why would it make sense for Exodus to get away with Shovel Headed Kill Machine just because they released Bonded by Blood twenty years prior?
So let me go ahead and make mention of the fat, smelly, has-been elephant sitting in the room: Kill Em' All, Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, and (arguably) And Justice for All... These albums no longer matter. They are outnumbered by the five inexcusably terrible albums that followed them. There is officially more bad than good material, so we're just going to have to face hard facts, join hands across the nation and admit it...
Metallica sucks.
Metalhead: "Five Finger Death Punch sucks."
Douchehead: "Yeah, but their old stuff was good".
Metalhead: "It's too bad I didn't say 'sucked' or else you would have had a good reason to open your stupid suck hole. Nice pink mohawk, by the way. Did your boyfriend help you dye it while you were both rocking out to some old school Five Finger Butt Punch?"
Let's put this into perspective... Pretend you're at a restaurant and your waitress brings you your steak freezing cold. When you complain to her about it, she replies "well it was a really tasty steak twenty minutes ago", as if it were a legitimate argument. Would that make any sense to you? If not, then why would it make sense for Exodus to get away with Shovel Headed Kill Machine just because they released Bonded by Blood twenty years prior?
So let me go ahead and make mention of the fat, smelly, has-been elephant sitting in the room: Kill Em' All, Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, and (arguably) And Justice for All... These albums no longer matter. They are outnumbered by the five inexcusably terrible albums that followed them. There is officially more bad than good material, so we're just going to have to face hard facts, join hands across the nation and admit it...
Metallica sucks.
What if a member of a band that doesn't suck makes music that does suck with a different band? I'm thinking you could arguably still use "old stuff" defense for Ozzy, Dimebag, or Mark Tremonti.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I was joking about Mark Tremonti.
Good question. Dimebag's years with Damage Plan were tragically, (but thankfully) cut very short, so the damage to his reputation was minimal, and he can live on as the legendary Pantera guitarist he was truly appreciated as. Ozzy on the other hand, has been damaging his reputation for a very, very long time. What you really have to look at is the quantity of joy a band or artist has brought to the music world versus the quantity of misery they have brought. Ozzy's solo career is in truth a much bigger beast than his time in Black Sabbath, so the statement that "Ozzy sucks" is a safe one to make.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLol, so you attack everything else for being not metal, yet you create a sacred cow out of DimeFAG Darrel?
ReplyDeleteNIGGA PLEASE!!!!
Dimebag is as metal as my shit is rose scented. Pantera was a horrible band that had douchebag "tough guy" lyrics(ie compensation for small dicks), recycled boring riffs(Walk and Drag the Waters anyone?), and equally boring pentatonic solos that might as well have been lifted from Kirk Hammet.
Face it, Pantera blows. I shit upon the grave of DimeFAG Darrel.
@Ascended Goddess
ReplyDeleteGo say that to Phil Anselmos face. I don''t think you would you pussy. Phil would kick your ass. Just shut the hell up you butthurt internet tough guy.
Fuck that poser Anselmo. He couldn't win an ass kicking contest against Stephen Hawking. Fuck Dimebag and Pantera too. Go back and listen to their first four albums when they made Trixter and Slaughter look badass. Bunch of wannabes running away from their hairspray and spandex covered past.
DeleteJoe, I don't think anyone would tell that to Phil Anselmo's face because he is crazy enough to pull a gun or break a bottle over your face, despite the fact that he absolutely sucks balls without Dimebag and that Pantera was on a 'Down'ward sucking spree the longer they produced music together.
ReplyDeleteFuck yeah, I'm not the only one that hates Metallica, their old shit can suck a dick too. There is so much thrash metal goodness in this world, yet people are content with the big 4 and Pantera (people are actually calling Pantera thrash metal now adays LOL!) GIMME MORBID SAINT! GIMME POSSESSED! GIMME MUTILATOR! FUCK YOUR "THRASH" METAL!
ReplyDeleteToo "Satan", I say:
ReplyDeleteLOOOOOOOL
Hmmm well 4-6 if you count S&M, more like 5-5 to me since i liked the black album.........that's sort of a wash so i guess it stands.
ReplyDeleteYeah Sell-outica sucks shit, it's crazy how so many people actually like their stuff after Master or maybe Justice. They say "They didn't change for the money, they were just experimenting with a new different sound!"
ReplyDeleteBull. Shit.
There is and never was or will be anything "new" about their shitty jock rock, it's the same old recycled radio 'hits'.
And about the money issue, no band goes from being the heaviest, most obscure, underground metal act to the blandest, most uninspired vapid crap on the top 10 radio without money in mind.
God Metallica fanboys are dumb.
-SA1
When commenting, leave a Name/URL or log in with one of the applicable services. All "Anonymous" comments WILL BE REMOVED. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteAnd you call others dumb Anon?
And Justice for All is the best Metallica's album ever, it could have been made in 1989, 2011 or 3456 and still be the best anything Metallica ever shat. So go suck a Lars dick for your "arguably" non metal taste.
ReplyDeletehahaha
ReplyDeletefive finger butt crunch
oh fuck my sides
This article thinks that Slipknot was once good while calling Shovel Headed Kill Machine was a terrible album? This article is now irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteMetallica Sucks Indeed!
ReplyDeletemetallica is the best metal band ever and nothing else matters (pardon the pun).
ReplyDeleteyou know whats not metal. the whole "everything after justice sucks) argument. 90% percent of you faggots probably never listened to any of those albums. bandwagoners.