Rated 4/10
Eh, these guys were just kind of also-rans in the hair metal scene at the time as far as I know. I don't think they are essential listening at all. Normally, I like this genre of hard rock, but these guys just can't pull it off. It's competent enough musically, but it lacks the same sort of cool feel that makes AC/DC a great band. The lyrics are just straight shit("Peace Dog" sounds like incoherent babble that tries to sound meaningful), often even more so than other hard rock of the period(which is saying something). Riffs are very generic, though OK to listen to. However, I have one glaring question: Why is this album on the list? It's not anywhere close to the best example of the period's hard rock sound, and it utterly lacks merit in any other capacity. This album has the highest number of appearances of the word "generic" of any on this site, and it's pretty obvious why.
This album is ranked #17 of 25 albums for 1987. Other 1987 albums rated by me:
Bad(1/25)-4
Appetite for Destruction(2/25)-5
Document(4/25)-4
Sign o' The Times(5/25)-4
Strangeways, Here We Come(6/25)-4
Music for the Masses(7/25)-4
Trio(9/25)-3
Darklands(10/25)-4
You're Living All Over Me(13/25)-4
The New Tango(19/25)-2
Warehouse: Songs and Stories(21/25)-4
Opus Dei(24/25)-4
Scum(25/25)-5