“I would cut my legs and tits off.”

This is the opening line of “Lulu,” an insanely ambitious if stupidly perilous collaborative album between Lou Reed and Metallica released at the end of last month. It is also the response most would probably give if asked, “what would you if you were trapped in a room with Lou Reed and Metallica?” These sorts of witticisms really write themselves with this sort of project. It’s not every day that the iconoclasts of thrash metal set foot in the same studio as ex-Velvet Underground art rock extraordinaire Lou Reed – in fact, if most of the fan bases of either artist had anything to say about it, there would never be any day where this should ever happen, ever. Ever.

But an effort like this is about innovative strides into bold new territory, after all, and while it seems like a jarring combination at first, it actually sort of makes sense, albeit in an overtly nonsensical way. Metallica have been stewing in stylistic stagnancy for the better part of two decades, and could surely do with some stirring up by way of Reed’s avant-rock tendencies. Meanwhile, straight up heavy metal is probably the last musical door Reed hasn’t yet haphazardly stuck his foot all the way into. As the clichéd famous last words go, what could possibly go wrong?

Now, let’s get one thing straight: considering the monstrous amount of bad press this album is getting, it’s not that bad. Reports of wild packs of Metallica fans threatening to shoot Reed – and yes they actually are – seem slightly overreactive. Nevertheless, while it’s not that bad, it’s still – surprise, surprise – pretty bad. In fact, with a collaboration this out-there, it’s almost disappointingly not-that-bad; with something on this level of experimentation, there’s a sort of expectation that the artist(s) will either rewrite the book or ceremoniously go down in flames. But, objectively, neither of these is what happens on “Lulu.” There are decent-to-good parts that shine through on this album, and there are laughably terrible parts, and unfortunately they basically equal each other out into temperate mediocrity, which is actually worse than epically failing in a case as oddball as this.

The main failing of “Lulu” is its misinformed sense of what defines being “avant-garde” music, because that’s really what it’s attempting very, very hard to be. You don’t put someone from the Velvet Underground on the same record as the most commercially viable thrash metal band ever because the pieces all fell into place that way – someone, unconsciously or not, is really trying to be a unique snowflake here. The problem is, you can’t just throw two seemingly diametrically opposed things together, label it “avant-garde” and call it a day. That might be a good start, but you can’t do just that.

But that’s what the better part of “Lulu” does, and it comes off as gimmicky more so than experimental. The point of bringing these two stylistically unconnected artists together is to catalyze innovative reaction from at least one of them, but most of the songs just sound like they copy-pasted Lou Reed over a Metallica jam session. Neither artist seems very willing to compromise their tried-and-true approach, which is a fatal error in a venture based mostly on “let’s see what happens.” Despite Lou Reed’s peculiar vocal offerings, Metallica have a tough time letting go off an otherwise processed riff-rock sound. In an ideal world, Kirk Hammett and co. would have reacted to Reed’s abnormal approach and gone outside the box a bit to meet him halfway or at least inspire a return to grittier stylings, but Metallica’s contributions on the first half of this album unfortunately smack more of “St. Anger” than “Master of Puppets.”

Meanwhile, the 69-year-old Reed has his own issues in execution. Now, there’s certainly nothing wrong with sporting a raw and unadorned style as a Rock N’ Roll frontman, and Reed’s voice can certainly be said to fall into both those categories. But those potential strengths turn to wince-worthy weaknesses when Reed attempts to get too sing-songy on some parts of “Lulu.” As a result of his melodic shortcomings as a vocalist and Metallica’s oftentimes bland accompaniment, a few too many tracks come off more as nu-metal karaoke at the senior center than aggressive experimentalism. In the lead-off song “Brandenburg Gate,” Reed sings – to use a phrase generously – a hilariously and enthusiastically Journey-esque chorus of “Small Town Girl” over and over again atop Metallica at their most basic hard rock yet, and it becomes instantaneously obvious that through these two niche artists attempt at something new they somehow came up with something that’s at times painfully generic sounding.

The songs on this album were reportedly written by Reed and based conceptually on the work of a German playwright, which might lead one to believe that perhaps the inspired lyrical content could potentially rescue “Lulu” from stifling mediocrity. Lyrically, however, the album bounces between “understandably weird because it’s Lou Reed” and absolutely ludicrous. Reed chants “I cheat on me” over and over again as if it’s deep because it’s unintuitive and later sings the gem “I cry icicles in my stein,” and yet the winner for most ridiculous lyric on “Lulu” actually goes to Metallica lead singer James Hetfield for his brief vocal appearance on “The View,” spiritedly and repeatedly shouting “I am the table! I am the table!”

The somewhat sad thing about this album is how good the last three songs or so actually are on “Lulu.” Towards the end, Metallica ditches the impotent straight-faced rock approach and applies considerably more subtle musical accompaniments in tracks like “Little Dog” and “Dragon.” In turn, Reed ditches some of the more asinine aspects of his vocal approach and sticks to more a minimalist, spoken word style while turning down the ridiculousness knob a couple notches on the lyrics. Album closer “Junior Dad,” while standing at a daunting 20 minutes in length, is a genuinely beautiful number, and is clearly the best this pairing of musical minds has to offer.

The late-game turn-around is a day late and a dollar short, unfortunately, and really only serves to make the failings of the first half of “Lulu” stand out even more. If the whole album turned out like these last three songs, “Lulu” could have potentially been a great alchemy of sorts. Yet the presence of these praise-worthy songs, no matter how minor, takes away the possibility to claim that this was all a “troll,” some elaborately terrible attempt at a Dadaist destruction of both parties’ stylistic merits (re: “Metal Machine Music”). But it’s not this sort of “bad on purpose,” it’s just bad. It’s a shame to think “Lulu” could have turned out a lot better as an EP than an LP.

Dave Coffey can be reached at [email protected].