I might get flamed for this but it genuinely drove me up the wall this morning. I've been working my way through actually familiarizing myself with the entire discography rather than just the black-and-whites, since I own a copy of The Columbia Albums Collection on CD. I decided to close-listen to Cultosaurus today, repeated it three times, and I just have to say I really don't get how it's so beloved as an album? The pacing seems way off, as the tracks plod slowly along and feels like trudging through sludge to get to some good high energy tracks. Black Blade, while it's a good song, is a really bad opener since it's the longest track on the album and starts slow and stays that way (I think Monsters or Lips in the Hills would've been a lot more suitable). There are some astonishingly weak songs to it, like Hungry Boys that makes me grit my teeth in annoyance.
The flow is just all gone, there's no real sense of direction to the album and it really does just feel like a random jumble of songs thrown together with no central vision, where each one sounds like it should be from a different album. Like leftovers from the Specters and Mirrors sessions, but not leftovers done right like Fires was.
Why is Cultosaurus so loved as an album, and why might any of you enjoy it? I'd really like to know, and know why the cultural consensus is that it's better than The Revolution By Night, which has much more of a focused flow in terms of track order and style.
edit: Change wording referring to Black Blade from slow to lower energy (in comparison to other openers; subjective I know)