I was recently trawling through Metal Archives review section, checking out what the majority consensus is of albums you like and hate. As you do. When I came across the review for Sunbather by Deafheaven.

Now initially I was actually quite surprised to see the band featured on the site. Not because their not metal, because lets face it it is, but because of how divisive it seems to have been among Black Metal fans. I'm firmly in the camp of "It was good but not as good or as bad as some people say it is". I was unsurprised to see that my own experience of varying reviews was echoed here and that it sat with an avg review of 60%, being comprised from reviews as low as 0% and as high as 92%.

This is understandable because like it or not, Deafheaven have become the poster boys for this new surge in hipster/shoegaze black metal.

I wondered if there have been any other examples of famously divisive albums on this site?

"Illuminations of Vile Engorgement" by Enmity perfectly fits your criterion. With an average of 49%, the ratings vary from 0% to 100%, 6 out of 18 reviews giving scores between 92 and and 100% and other 6 give 0%.

The remaining 6 reviews give scores which are in between, ranging from 1% to 75%.

Waking the Cadaver's Preverse Recollections of a Necromangler

That's only because some folks are rather clever in rationalizing the complete failure this album really is - as brutal death metal and as gorenoise, which is the unlikely second template this album can be judged against. On the bright side of things, this thread reminded me of Brodequin's Festival of Death and Forensick by Disgorge.

But yeah, it's divisive.

People are free to like whatever they want, but Illuminations of Vile Engorgement is one of the most baseless, monotonous, pretentious, pathetic metal albums in existence today. It deserves nothing more than a 0...but clearly some people think very differently to me. The reasons I hate it are likely the same reasons others adore it. It's probably the most divisive album I know in terms of the reviews here, but I'm happy to be wrong if someone else can find another.

I get ya. Though, and I do think this makes sense, I don't see it as a metal album at all. Which probably has to do with the pretentiousness you mention since there's no doubt that this album was driven by a desire to pulverize brutal death metal (nevermind "regular" death metal of any style) into a terrifying slob of brutality.

The problem being it's been done before (by other means), and some of it has solidified into genres all their own. And this is where the album fails spectacularly, along with the completely inappropriate sound for such a...project.

I can't really hate it though. It's incomprehensible to me, how these people still managed to think they're within the confines of death metal.

I think their intentions for the album were clear and they wanted to create the most brutal thing they could muster, and I don't think they failed in that regard. However, the album just transcends brutal to just become an annoying paste of notes and noises that pass through with no staying power. But that's just me. Let's hear from someone who loves it.

And I summon Caspian, the Wanderer of the Wastes... damn I need a ritual spell card to summon him

I didn't think Enmity was too bad at all. I think it's weird when extreme metal fans listen to that and go 'it would be better with a cleaner production and made more accessible.' That just seems antithetical to what extreme metal is about to me I guess.

Into the Pandemonium is a good one.

0% from Bernard Doe at Metal Forces, which echoed the sentiment of those who looked to Celtic Frost for the ultimate evil band and the album that spawned all the atmospheric, gothic, dark metal.

I side with Bernard Doe.

Someone could easily say the inverse of what you claimed and be talking about you. That's pretty cool.

Yeah, that's true. In my defense, I quite simply don't like it; it's monotonous bullshit. For an album famed for its brutality, it doesn't sound anything like it. And here come the rationalizations in terms of what they could have possibly wanted to produce, which inevitably comes down to comparisons with other bands.

Pathfinder? Most reviews are either a 100 or a 0. I would probably give it a 60-70.

How on earth do you get pretentiousness out of Enmity? I get the feeling you don't know what pretentious means, which funnily enough is quite pretentious.

I'd throw in "Neanderthals Were Master Butchers" by Neoandertals. It's not as popular as Enmity, but people either love it or hate it. Well it's experimental butal death metal without a guitar, just bass and drums and gurgling.
http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Neoandertals/46293

Therein lies the issue with that particular album and why it is such a love\hate affair, that it is perceived as something new largely by those who have paid little attention to the genre as a whole.
Its not hard to find elements of shoegazer in the works of Wolves In The Throne Room and Coldworld among countless others, especially when one definition of the genre is "the blurring of component musical parts—typically significant guitar distortion, feedback, and obscured vocals—into indistinguishable mixture of sound."

Much like Nirvana getting all the credit for inventing grunge rock while really doing nothing that fans of Melvins and Wipers hadn't already heard done to perfection, Sunbather was being championed as The Next Big Thing, when those in the know were wise enough to see it as just a continuation of something already present (that the mainstream happened to take notice of), regardless if they themselves found it enjoyable or loathed it.

I realize this does not answer the question of other decisive releases, but getting a better understanding of just why this release was so polarizing might lead to others, or at least lead to interesting conversation.

The Deafheaven talk reminds me of Myrkur that was being publicized at the time as the chick that will change black metal. All that happened was her album getting slammed here for being nothing of note. Others enjoyed it for being a welcome addition.

I also remember way back in 2007 when Alcest's debut album was leaked this forum was abuzz with talk of how good / bad it was. Utter garbage or genuis work were the claims.

I've never even listened to the Enmity album. But this sounds about right to me. I want my metal extreme and inaccessible! EXTREME

Most people who use "pretentious" use the word to cover up the fact that they can't think of a more appropriate word to articulate their dislike. I would recommend reviewers avoid "pretentious" if at all possible. Use a word that means something, not a dried-up, hackneyed snarl word.

(not that this is a defense of Enmity; to me it sounds like what your grandmother thinks death metal sounds like)

Huh, I forgot about this discussion here.

In short, I'm completely convinced that the album is completely based in an idea of pushing the boundary of brutal death metal into literally maximum brutality. That's why their "riffs" come across as something like additional, guitar-produced blast beats (the other component being mangled slams). When other bands want to whip out smoking brutal tunes, Enmity wants to make a statement in the form of sound waves which aren't those of human speech. That's my take on it and the pretension, if this makes sense, is precisely that.

This isn't a problem on its own. The same argument could be made in relation to any other groundbreaking and unique act. And I do believe Enmity is completely unique in fact. It's just that I'm inclined to use the word because of its negative connotations, and that's because I think the album is horrible and a waste of talent in some sense.