Metallica question.
Posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 23, 2003 at 23:32:50: Previous Next
One of my friends at work several years back mentioed this I think when they first cut their hair. I think he told me that they told the media during the 1980s that they would never cut their hair and now they have sold out to MTV. So is that true that they said that? Since they were still very popular at the time with their long hair right before they cut it I couldn't understand why they did it since they would still be able to sell out arenas. Metallica never seems to have the problem that a lot of 80s hair bands like Warrent, Slaughter and Ratt had of having to lower themselves to playing clubs and small venues.
I myself cut my hair out of desparation for a job and to regrow it hoping that it will grow out better but Metellica had a huge following and was very sucessful so they had more pressures to cut their hair short.
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by Headbanger on January 23, 2003 at 23:52:39: Previous Next
In Reply to: Metallica question. posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 23, 2003 at 23:32:50:
Though Jason Neusted (the former bassist of Metallica) cut his hair first, it wasn't until James got his hair caught in an ATV accident and had to have it shaved that the rest of Metallica cut their hair. This was in 1993 or so already and Metallica was ready for a new sound. There music dramatically changed after their 1991 release (the black album or "Metallica") and so did their image. This was right in time for the alternative stuff that was being played on the radio so they may have sold out. This is not necessarily the case because Metallica never really had two albums that were very similar, they were always "progressing".
To answer your question: I think that it was benificial to their bank accounts to cut their hair because metal was pretty much dead on the mainstream at the of Load and most alt-rockers had short hair.
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on January 24, 2003 at 10:06:10: Previous Next
In Reply to: Re: Metallica question. posted by Headbanger on January 23, 2003 at 23:52:39:
:An insightful reply, but I wonder about your comment which states that "most alt-rockers had short hair". Wasn't 1993 part of those Grunge years, meaning that every band tried to look/sound like Nirvana (KURDT COBAIN!), Pearl Jam, and the like, meaning that long hair would accompany part of that look?
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by Marco on January 24, 2003 at 19:39:57: Previous Next
In Reply to: Re: Metallica question. posted by Headbanger on January 23, 2003 at 23:52:39:
: Though Jason Neusted (the former bassist of Metallica) cut his hair first, it wasn't until James got his hair caught in an ATV accident and had to have it shaved that the rest of Metallica cut their hair. This was in 1993 or so already and Metallica was ready for a new sound. There music dramatically changed after their 1991 release (the black album or "Metallica") and so did their image. This was right in time for the alternative stuff that was being played on the radio so they may have sold out. This is not necessarily the case because Metallica never really had two albums that were very similar, they were always "progressing".
: To answer your question: I think that it was benificial to their bank accounts to cut their hair because metal was pretty much dead on the mainstream at the of Load and most alt-rockers had short hair.
Metallica still rules man! Hey Headbanger, have not been around for awhile. My hair length is almost mid back. Got any progress pics to post. I should have one by this weekend
my name
Posted by the original headbanger on January 24, 2003 at 20:44:00: Previous Next
In Reply to: Re: Metallica question. posted by Headbanger on January 23, 2003 at 23:52:39:
sorry dude, but i had that name first. i dont post frequently as i used to but i still consider myself part of the board and ask that you choose another handle. thanks
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by Anonymous Poster on January 24, 2003 at 05:50:21: Previous Next
In Reply to: Metallica question. posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 23, 2003 at 23:32:50:
James grew his back out to around chin-length circa 1999.
Kirk currently has long hair, and has since at least 2000.
Lars grew his back out briefly around 2000-01.
Jason is growing his back out to suit his new (much harder) band, Voivoid.
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by Rokker on January 24, 2003 at 12:50:19: Previous Next
In Reply to: Metallica question. posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 23, 2003 at 23:32:50:
I think they're sell-out posers. I'm a FORMER Metallica fan. It's not because of the hair though. It's the whole Napster thing and their incredible greed.
Does it matter why they cut their hair?
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 25, 2003 at 01:24:36: Previous Next
In Reply to: Re: Metallica question. posted by Rokker on January 24, 2003 at 12:50:19:
: I think they're sell-out posers. I'm a FORMER Metallica fan. It's not because of the hair though. It's the whole Napster thing and their incredible greed.
: Does it matter why they cut their hair?
If they said they won't and lie about it than it does matter!
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by SixStringThing on January 26, 2003 at 16:39:56: Previous Next
In Reply to: Metallica question. posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 23, 2003 at 23:32:50:
To me the fact that they cut their hair is not important, the fact that they completely changed their style of music in an obvious attempt to make money does. Not like that's a sin or anything, extra money never hurts but you can't exactly expect loyal fans to be happy about the change. I never liked Metallica anyway so I don't care. Look at Dream Theater, everybody except James cut their hair but they still play the same music. Steve Vai, Joe Satriani, Eric Johnson, Andy Timmons... they all cut their hair and they did so without changing their style of music.
Re: Metallica question.
Posted by SixStringThing on January 26, 2003 at 16:43:07: Previous Next
In Reply to: Metallica question. posted by PINK FLOYD FANATIC on January 23, 2003 at 23:32:50:
To me the fact that they cut their hair is not important, the fact that they completely changed their style of music in an obvious attempt to make money does. Not like that's a sin or anything, extra money never hurts but you can't exactly expect loyal fans to be happy about the change. I never liked Metallica anyway so I don't care. Look at Dream Theater, everybody except James cut their hair but they still play the same music. Steve Vai, Joe Satriani, Eric Johnson, Andy Timmons... they all cut their hair and they did so without changing their style of music.