The Big Picture: Leave Michael Bay Alone

[lord canti]

You know what? I actually enjoy the transformers movies. Are they great movies with good story and characters? oh god no, but it is very damn entertaining. Every now and then I like having a movie where I can just watch and not have to think about the story or worry about the characters. There is nothing wrong with enjoying mindless garbage every now and then as long as that's not the only thing you watch. Those ignorant people you claim to be the problem also could be the very same ones who go and watch other great and smart ones as well.

 

[Barciad]

I honestly don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to turn your brain off for 100 minutes to watch a series of firefights wrapped around a nonsensical story. I personally think that's a fine way to unwind after a long week.

I wouldn't consider myself a brainless sheeple, and in fact would like to think I'm a bit of an intellectual. Just not the kind of intellectual that is so presumptuous as to consider a form of entertainment "beneath me."

Nice to see that somebody gets it. I will tell you a quick story.
When Transformers 2 came out, I was working at a school, teaching English. A friend and colleague suggested that we went to see it. I agreed, and we went that Friday evening. We bought our tickets, I bought my popcorn, and see sat down, ready to be entertained. Two and how ever many minutes later, with Megatron and Starscream flying of into space, promising revenge, I turned to my friend and said "roll on number 3".
I absolutely loved it and was glad I went. As to why is simple. It was a Friday evening, we had both been working hard, often intellectually demanding jobs. We needed to be awake, alert, constantly. Always things to do, emergencies to solve or prevent. Now, it was Friday evening, now it was time to unwind. Now, how people choose to do this is up to them. Some like to drink half their own bodyweight in Miller's brew or whatever. My friend and I chose to watch a film that was utterly and gloriously dumb and just not care. It was a catharsis of sorts, and a damn good one.
As for my lack of fuss over the source material, the reason is also a simple one. I am British and, though US 80's cartoons (He-Man, etc) were a big thing, there was other stuff out there. My childhood passions were Lego, Asterix, and Tintin; all of European origin. Other children my age did like (and own) Transformers, but this was not as widespread in the US. Thus the lack of any genuine emotional weight attached. In other words, I went to watch giant robots beat the hell out of each other, not re-live my childhood.

 

[Aitamen]

Personally, I'd have to agree, but some of the blame can be laid at the low barrier to entry as well, the same as gaming. Theater performances and MUDs generally have a more appreciable fanbase because of their requirements of the audience... retrogaming and many movies that require foreknowledge or knowledge of the subject to progress fit this standard as well, with similar results.

The central problem of "economy vs. art" is that bad art takes less energy and sells better than good art, leading to both major-selling bullshit and the fact that more people are going to *try* to make shit movies this year than something interesting or groundbreaking.

I think your statements about the anti-intellectual movement and the poor state of education in the states is probably getting at the core of the matter, more than anything... but how do we fix that?

 

[Uriel_Hayabusa]

It's tiring to me, to be honest, when internet critics "grow old" and confuse tha calmness that supposedly comes with age with an apologetic attitude that is quite frankly pathetically reliable in this scene.

Personally, I don't even think that applies to Bob. I actually think he's simply redirected the hate and bile he used to spew at Michael Bay('s Transphormers movies). These days it's Marc Webb and his The Amazing Spider-Man movies that are Bob's punching bag.

 

[Failsafe Operator]

Thanks bob for calling me an idiot and insulting your audience because of our guilty pleasures. Why don't you be the king and show us American idiots the light.

 

[Talvrae]

THe only micheal Bay movie i ever liked was The Rock

 

[Twinmill5000]

You know, I'm really considering seeing the new Transformers movie. Why? Well, it'll be fun. I don't think I'm going to hate it. At the very least, I can appreciate the modeling and rendering techniques that went into it, but moreover, like I said, it'll be fun. I don't know what these movies entail, as I've only seen the first, and it's been so long that all I remember are some action scenes, slapstick humor, and a 'chosen one' adventure with a main protagonist that I didn't really like. Really, I don't care.

The movie isn't designed to give you something to think about afterwards. It's basically like visual cocaine. From what I've observed, from other critics, those around me, and the previews themselves, the movie is designed to be a juvenile, action packed roller-coaster ride. Blaming people for going to see that is like blaming people for going to an amusement park.

I mean, who knows, maybe I'll see it, and it'll be complete masturbatory trash and I'll then be inclined to agree with you (that I'm dumb for thinking it'll be fun). However, with what I know of the movie so far, I think, as I assume most others think, it looks fun. Then again, so does jumping off a bridge, yet most people know better than to try that, but that's not the point.

I rationalize, like others probably rationalize, that I've got League for my urge to tryhard, great, small indie titles, both interactive and non-interactive, for when I need a thought provoking piece of media in which I can process for weeks to come, mainly anime, and a mind that tends to make terrible fanfiction I will never write about. Sometimes, I want to witness something I know won't affect me deeply, if at all. Sometimes, I just want to see giant robots hump eachother, and not feel bad about it, because this time, it's not some weird hentai.

Besides, if I don't slot out something completely void of thought provoking material in my mind, the important things that need to be thought about, like, say, my chemistry homework, won't really be pondered to its full potential.

 

[Gorrath]

As Bob himself points out, it isn't because Bay commits a few cinema sins (every one and every movie does.) The problem is that his movies are often nothing BUT a torrential downpour of awful. They aren't even bad in a way that one can appreciate. I can appreciate the earnest effort put in by a budding cook who makes a shitty meal. I cannot appreciate McDonalds.

If you crank out a good movie, such sins can be over looked. You crank out a shit movie that is chalk full of every conceivable sins and the sins are what everyone's going to remember. You make most of your career out of making said films and it's no wonder you're famous for being awful and everyone's favorite whipping boy!

As for the whole "It's the audience's fault!" claim, yeah, sure, the people that pay for a product are culpable for more of the product being made. But this race to the bottom is merely funded by the audience, they aren't the ones driving the damned cars. Audiences also funded stupid TV from the mid nineties an through to today. Crappy reality shows have made a mint. Does this indicate that what the audiences want is enough reality TV show to choke a whale? No, it's simply market over saturation which leads to a faulty conclusion; the audiences like stupid shit, and only stupid shit, because they are stupid.

Continuing with the TV comparison, someone got the brilliant idea that sweeping, epic television was ripe for a comeback. Audiences were largely sick of flipping through endless channels of "reality" TV and needed some counterpoint to this, and in response to this need we now have a tremendous number of television shows banking on depth and substance (comparatively) instead of the Honey Boo Boos of the world.

Audiences will keep seeing Bay's movies so long as they keep being made, but this does NOT indicate that that's primarily what they want; people are just going to see what's being produced. If movie makers make shit, we'll have to watch shit if we want to go to the movies. If movie makers make good movies, we'll likely go see those as well.

The central problem of "economy vs. art" is that bad art takes less energy and sells better than good art, leading to both major-selling bullshit and the fact that more people are going to *try* to make shit movies this year than something interesting or groundbreaking.

This I agree with. Shitty movies with bad plots that use action sequences in place of telling an actual story are easier to make than anything compelling, and people will watch them because that's what's being made.

I think your statements about the anti-intellectual movement and the poor state of education in the states is probably getting at the core of the matter, more than anything... but how do we fix that?

The idea that people watch stupid movies/shows because they are stupid themselves is just not true at all. All sorts of people watch stupid movies, whether educated or not, liberal or conservative, smart or dumb. Hell, as more transformers movies got made, not only did they make more money, but by the time Dark Side of the Moon came out, a much greater percentage of that money came from the world-wide take.

So is poor education and anti-intellectualism in America also responsible for more and more non-Americans paying to see our dumb films? Or is it that people just watch whatever movies get made regardless of quality? I'm betting it's the latter. Did Breaking Bad get successful and Jersey Shore get cancelled because the audiences in America suddenly got smarter, or were people watching Jersey Shore and its ilk because that's what made up most of what there was to watch on TV? Blaming anti-intellectualism or poor education for people watching stupid films is a cop out at best or a way of trying to insert a bit of political ideology at worst, and in either case is not only not the core of the matter, its role is probably of only minor significance if any at all.

 

[caselj01]

Reminded me so much of this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGjwMMlUhCQ

 

[ZexionSephiroth]

In my defense... I haven't been to the cinema in a long time... I stopped going to the cinema and buying DVDs and generally giving a damn about Hollywood movies a LONG time ago... Relative to my age that is.

Though that may have more to do with the seeming general apathy of most characters in Hollywood and the complete devaluation of emotion itself. Like... Nobody in Hollywood films seems to be having fun, not do they really seem to care at all really.

Meanwhile... What I myself watch generally tends towards things where the power of the soul itself and the emotions that make it up are generally the very thing that makes the heroes able to fight at all.

... Actually, now that I think about it... I think the problem with Hollywood films for me might actually be that they're too slow and maybe not even over the top enough, like really, they might not be going far enough. I mean, sure Hollywood has explosions and car crashes... But they never have 1000 punch salvos or sword swings that split the earth itself.

...

Basically, the Hollywood industry is too tied down to "realism" by trying to make stuff where things make sense and failing.

Just once I'd like to see Hollywood try to make a movie where the power of friendship is the reason they can defeat the enemy. Like, literally, not in some poetic sense but in the sense that having friends and the emotions one has for them awakens power within the protagonist that allows them to freaking just burn everything that's a problem with the flame from their heart.

For it is the power of strong sentiment that will save us from all the ills of the world. Especially Hope, Love, Joy, and whatever emotions comprise exhilaration, excitement, and enthusiasm.

...

Maybe I should stick to magical girl anime.

 

[marioandsonic]

I see what you're saying, Bob, and I do agree to an extent.

Doesn't change my opinion that his Transformers movies are godawful, though.

 

[red255]

French fries analogy, America has diabetes, because America can't help himself and has an eating disorder.

is it really blameless to bring America French Fries? McDonalds French Fries no less. But I won't get into a food arguement over Michael Bay.

Bay's problem is he did a 3 hour transformer movie which is promotionalized by an image of Optimus Prime a Giant robot man god using a flaming broadsword atop a fire breathing T-rex which is tacked on at the tail end of a movie about evil burecrats.

its basically throwing stuff up there to make a gif or trailer short, or Youtube video teaser of a nearly naked girl and then being about doing your god damn taxes.

 

[dubious_wolf]

I paid to see the third one because a friend I hadn't seen in a while was and begged me to join.
I left the theater at some point during the movie.
I also stopped hanging out with the guy.

I think it's the audience too. It's the boring uninspired Americans that shill out crap like that.

 

[dubious_wolf]

Great Episode Bob.

I don't hate Bay, but he does confuse the hell out of me. I don't understand how someone who can make something as gut-wrenchingly awful as Transformers (Four times!) can make something as fantastic as Pain and Gain. The former is racist, sexist, jingoistic garbage. The latter is a hilarious condemnation of that shit and the stupid people that like it. The characters in Pain and Gain are clearly portrayed as bad people, and they're also the people who would be first in line for a movie like Transformers. If he knows this stuff is bad and bad for you, why does he keep making it? Why doesn't he use Transformers to do something more? Or at the very least not propagate the views he's previously criticized.

I just don't get it.

*in my best attempt at a west coast surfer bro*
maybe he's just like, you know a prisoner of the man, dude.

ahem.
I think he might be just making movies for a pay check as opposed to really using it as a creative outlet, a lot of the other directors bob mentions were very much artists and creatives which is why they are so beloved. Maybe the one or two hits were left up to statistical probability and really good writing support?

 

[walrusaurus]

I would offer up a counterexample to Bob's claim that the bulk of American viewers would only turn out for slop - but not that the bulk of American movie-goers are in fact turning out for slop.

Let me explain.

A statement about what movie-goers are doing, namely, filling the theaters up for the big, dumb robot movie and ignoring better cinema is not the same as a statement about what they would do under different conditions.

On the small screen, we saw the dumbing-down during the early 2000's of television shows with the reality TV craze, but that subsided as networks managed to sell the general public on more complex serials with long arcs, multi-season plots, and deep characters. What started with Lost and 24 ended up with Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones becaming massive institutions that dwarf most of the contemporary shows on television. The networks sold the populace on the idea of these shows while the critics of the early 2000's were crying about the dumbing down of the TV-viewing population.

Right now, a movie viewer doesn't generally go to the movies expecting to see something that's part of a larger world or longer story (Marvel excepted - and notice how they are hitting it out of the park?) They go expecting two hours of abnegation. They go to turn off for a couple of hours. The small screen sold the viewers on investing in a series, expecting it to be smart, expecting to have to invest in it, and so on. One viewers got the idea that TV would expect that of them, the viewers still turned on and tuned in.

Hollywood for the most part still sells abnegation (exceptions are many but still in a minority). The movies that stick with the viewers are those that offer more - we can all remember Frozen, but does anyone still care about or even remember clearly what happened in the recent Jack Ryan movie? But for the most part, movie viewers go in with the mindset of just zoning out for two hours. And that's fine. Plenty of television is just a way to zone out. However, the small screen has shown us clearly that the public is willing to put a bit of work in when they believe the medium requires it.

The thing is that Television is inherently better suited to that kind of in depth character driven drama. A good portion of your average 2-hour movie has to be devoted to exposition and plot mechanics, leaving only maybe an hour or so to completely focus on character building/development. Yes, a good film weaves its character development into its expository scenes, but even then they have a fraction of the time a TV series has. The average tv season is 20-24 episodes, they have literally 10x the space to have intimate character moments that film simply cannot afford.

I think the decline of 'serious cinema' viewership goes hand in hand with the rise in serialized television. With how expensive movie tickets are these days i'm not going to a theater to see a film unless its something that i can only experience there. Which invariably means big showpiece movies with lots of CGI and explosions, because thats something i can't experience the same way on my computer monster at home. Therese no reason for me to pay 13 dollars to go see Lincoln when i can spend $1 and get the exact same experience when it comes out on redbox.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

Well said, Bob. I don't hate Michael Bay movies (mainly because I don't go out of my way to watch them), though I can see why so many people dislike them... and yet more people are going to the theaters to see them. Maybe he shouldn't keep pandering to the masses, but people also shouldn't overlook good movies for adolescent pandering.

(And okay, I admit I liked the first Transformers movie, but the sequels are rather lackluster.)

 

[Darth_Payn]

That was very mature of Bob to recognize how far he came as a film critic. I love it when he takes pot-shots at other critics for being too harshly critical, as if they have an agenda of their own for writing their opinions in the way they do. Critics aren't just criticizing the movie/video game/novel/[insert creative work here] itself, but they people who made it and the perceived "peons" who buy it.

 

[Stabby Joe]

I liked Pain & Gain even if one of my favorite film critics called it worst of last year. I have never really shrugged off the director out right but you can hardly blame anyone for being... cautious?

Then again, one could argue Bay could try and NOT catering to the lowest common denominator IE "with great power comes great responsibility" etc.