Originally Posted by Spider-Who?
I really didn't get a chance to flesh out my thought earlier, so let me do that now, and address your points.
I do not believe that movies - regardless of genre - can lack the potential to be truly moving, societal-changing works of art. Anything and everything has that potential. But having that potential does not mean it will ultimately fit the requirements of "high art" and it certainly doesn't mean that every piece of art, every book and every film should even try. There is absolutely nothing wrong with "low brow" art and entertainment at its core; there is only our reaction to it.
In terms of these movies, we have to look at them for what they are. These are standard summer blockbuster movies that are meant appeal to a wide range of people. These movies are designed to be purely adrenaline pumping action set pieces. That was the film makers' intent. That intent is what we should judge it on. My comment about trying to get milk out of an orange reflects this. It seems like those who are the more vocal in this thread are looking for philosophical inspiration, messiah-like ideals and values out of a movie that was never intended to harbor such things.
Could the movie have handled some things better, while remaining a popcorn flick? Yes. Should directors not cave to the summer blockbuster check lists? Yes. Do I think that Transformers should have been the steeple of the "watch this movie to be enlightened" movie genre? Hell no. I personally don't want to watch a movie like transformers and be hit over the head with morality lessons and philosophical mutterings. There are a plethora of other movies, games, books and sermons for that.
My intent is to not excuse the weakness of these films (lord knows there are many), such as story structure and the unnecessary sexuality of certain characters. My only intent is to offer my opinion that looking for and ultimately complaining about the lack of high art appeal and musings in a decidedly low art film is frivolous. Vid and others are analyzing this film based on what it could have been, while I am looking at how it is.
That's the thing. Nobody is expecting "high art". People seem to be dealing in extremes when it comes to other people's opinion of the movie. The two arguements people use against other people's negative reactions are "What were you expecting, Citizen Kane?" or "The cartoon was dumb, why shouldn't this be?". How it is is that it's not a very good movie. I'm a Transformers fan and I see how this could have been a good movie. And I'm perplexed at other fans just going "good enough" or "it was dumb just like the cartoon". That's where I find the lack of imagination coming in.
Originally Posted by Vid Electricz
I'm sorry you're disappointed, but I cannot say I have any interest in cultivating an image or reputation, so to speak (and I'm not being self-aggrandizing or flippant).
I realize that some of what I've written could be interpreted as a bit brash or brazenly dismissive, but in all honesty (and if you look back at any of my comments), all I'm expecting is that if one is going to make an argument or attack, then at least be informed and be able to substantiate it.
There have been quite a few wonderfully thoughtful and insightful comments contributed to this conversation among many others that have in no way made any effort to reply to the actual subject matter.
That said, what are your thoughts on the topic?
Maybe you should substantiate your arguments first. You made this topic specifically accusing this film of sexism, racism, jingoism, and homophobia and give weak exaples of why you think this. People have replied and you've either dismissed their arguments and insulted them, or just ignored them. After five pages you've only engaged one person who has disagreed with you on only one point and that ended up turning into a conversation about the guys wife. The rest is just praise for people who agree with you.