Rock Sexton
Superhero
- Joined
- May 16, 2008
- Messages
- 9,139
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
There's been nonsense in movies decades before transformers. You have to give this film a free pass because it didn't invent nonsense. *sarcasm*
LOL .....
There's been nonsense in movies decades before transformers. You have to give this film a free pass because it didn't invent nonsense. *sarcasm*
Saw this today and it surprised me by how much I enjoyed it. I suspect a lot of the negativity comes from the strong anti-Bay sentiment a lot of people have. It seems people don't judge his films on their own merits. This had a lot of good in it worth mentioning but reviewers chose to not mention.
You know what else is common knowledge? That people on the internet and fanboys in general love to hate all things bay, often times incessantly. Internet hate is synonymous with Bay and so forth… Blows my mind that anyone even entertains these people with discussion rather than just labeling them and blowing them off.It blows my mind to see people here writing up essays in their posts attempting to defend Michael Bay like he's just another Hollywood film maker.
His name is synonymous with excessiveness in both action and T&A. It's undeniable.
Yes, that's exactly what it was. Wolf of Wall Street works because a. it was a true story and that stuff actually happened, and b. at no point was it glamorized. It was abundantly clear that Belfort and his posse were disgusting, immoral, misogynistic, degenerate criminals who used and abused people, including women. If people found any of that "glamorous," then that's a problem with THEM and THEIR perspective, not the film. I certainly didn't find it glamorous, Belfort was a drug-addicted, wife-beating a-hole criminal, nothing more and nothing less. As for Bay, he objectives women purely for it's own sake. He cannot do a truly interesting or multi-dimensional female character. They're all just eye-candy to him.
^I can't actually hear any of this. But thanks all the same.
The 'novels' actually work to support my own argument. Not so much my brilliance but I suppose we all see what we want to see, rather assert intent at our own discretion. That might explain why people are seeing all sorts of things in these films.I know you can't. Hence these everlasting novels you keep writing in support of your own brilliance.
The strong anti-Bay sentiment is born from most of his films being terrible though. I'd say it's more likely that all the positivity toward the film comes from expectations being embarrassingly low (It wasn't as repulsive as ROTF!) or the individuals desire to overlook any and all flaws because 'hey, I saw Transformers on the big screen, so, I got what I paid for' or similar attitudes.
Getting what one pays for stems from respecting what it is that is intended. This sentiment is far more understood when people walk out of hit comedy films and some clown asks why there wasn't more character study and the goes on to explain why 'good films have character study and substance'. That's great and all but that's not actually what all 'good times' that people love are actually required to have. It works on different levels but that's actually where the 'what you paid for/expect' line of thinking is born.You mean the fact she had a drag racing boyfriend allowed them to survive one of the action scenes? Other than that, the only role her character has is to be captured, allowing an excuse for her to overhear some information and help pull a sword out of Prime (which I guess he couldn't do himself?). To an extent, I suppose you're right in the sense that being given a perfunctory action beat or two is the only thing that really makes any character 'important' in this film. The rub is still that when you couple the general emptiness of the character with Bay's fetishistic filming you're going to run up against complaints of eye candy. Rightly so, I feel.
That video you posted is exactly how Michael bay shoots his women. (And not at all how women are portrayed in marvel films) I can admit that in that video women are treated as sexual objects. You seem to realize this too. But how do you not realize this is a level beyond the average summer film? Maybe not wolf of wall street level, A&T, but still a level beyond the common pg13 action flick. Even James Bond is trying to downplay sexuality of the franchise in its recent releases. Why? Because of public outcry. People have been whining about how women are portrayed in those films since they started. Bay isn't singled out here at all. You just have selective hearing, it seems. You could make a montage like this for bay films, but try for other series, like batman, planet of the apes, the hobbit, and star wars. All action blockbusters in the vein of the transformers series. You can't, because it's not there. Star track 2 had that ONE scene, and it was gratuitous enough that people complained. However it's quantity was limited to one, where as bay has a trademark style for filming women sexually. That's the difference.
Fast and furious is the only action franchise I'm aware of that doesn't get vocal flack from its fan base for the way women or shown. The difference being that that franchise started from scratch with a sexual undertone. Transformers had over 20 years of a fan base inherited FROM TOYS AND KIDS SHOWS. Do you see why, considering it's following, it's less appropriate to have this much sexuality infused in the way women are shown?
I too was hoping bay would leave after the trilogy. I can't see him doing another. Though TF with bay is pretty much the surest best Paramount has going right now.I was pleasantly surprised by this. I'm a lifelong TF fan, but post-DOTM, I was starting to get tired of Bay's take on the franchise. While liking the first three despite their various flaws, I was hoping for a complete reboot.
But AOE was a huge improvment for me. The Autobots got some decent characterization, Lockdown and even Attinger were decent villains, less military involvment, better human characters, and little-to-no bad humor.
If Bay can keep it up and not succumb to his dumber propensities, then TF5 may turn out to be pretty decent. They have a currently good set-up for it with Galvatron on the loose and whatever is going on with the creators. Which will undoubtedly turn out to the Quintessons.
Who else could direct Transformers 5?
Who else could direct Transformers 5?
Zack Snyder, he's like Michael Bay 2.0
He's busy and he's not like Michael Bay at all. There is no glorification of the US military in Snyders films, and Snyder's visual focus is on the individual shot wheras Bay's focus is on motion. Snyder desaturates the colour in his movies, Bay supersaturates the colour in his movies.
If Snyder was like Bay he would have cast Alexandra Daddario rather than Amy Adams to play Lois Lane.
Snyder's movies have ambiguous victories, Bay's movies have total victories.
Actually there is plenty of undertone and allegory to find in the TF films when people want to talk about things they don't like. Particularly foreign policy(see TF3) and jingoism, industry..etc. What's being missed here(as usual) is intent. Not every director intends to make deep intelligent films and double meaning with each go. Sometimes they simply intend to make good times, sometimes they make buddy cop films....
But Bay? He has no intention of doing anything intelligent or deep with his TF films. He just panders to horny 14 year olds and dudebros whilst having ludicrous action scenes and broadstroke characterization.