Of “Lulu,” his already infamous collaboration with Metallica, Lou Reed said, “It’s maybe the best thing done by anyone, ever. It could create another planetary system. I’m not joking, and I’m not being egotistical.” Critics wholeheartedly disagreed, panning the record nearly universally, turning it into a punchline, and becoming the prime example of a collaboration that could sound intriguing on paper but excruciating on record. Despite the admiration many critics offered for its purely artistic motivations, journalists couldn’t help but take a whack at “Lulu” like a danging piñata. Here are some highlights.

Rolling Stone: “Revels in dominatrix decadence and bodily fluids.”

Pitchfork: “For most of the record, Lou Reed and Metallica barely sound like they’re on the same planet, let alone in the same room.”

: “If the Red Hot Chili Peppers acoustically covered the 12 worst Primus songs for Starbucks, it would still be (slightly) better than this.”

Washington Post: “An 85-minute misery delivery system.”

LA Times: “This morning when I woke up knowing that the entire day would be spent listening to the thing, I sighed, rolled over and went back to sleep.”

AV Club: “Like an iceberg deciding to start a band with the Titanic.”

The Quietus: “Time that could be more constructively spent watching the grass grow or perhaps wanking into a sock.”

Chicago Sun-Times: “The marriage of Reed’s thin, monotone voice to Metallica’s thick, monotone riffs — and an average song length of nearly nine minutes (including a 19-minute punishment at the end) — produces a listening experience that is never anything more than a dismal, grueling chore.”

Consequence of Sound: “It reads like a misguided Bukowski impersonation and sounds like field recordings taken from Guitar Centers across America.”

Pop Matters: “They let us down harder than the last episode of Seinfeld. Except far fewer people will forgive Metallica.”

RELATED: Lou Reed Is An A-Hole | \m/