The Big Picture: Untransformed

[Twilight_guy]

Careful there Bob, you don't want to dip[ into the field of "me and my group are smart and everyone else is dumb" and this is dangerously close if not in that territory. It's easy to naively say that only only you are smart and get a hugely swollen ego but remember that everyone's view is equally valid and there are far smarter people then you out there, even if your ego just wants to say "because they're dumb and I'm not".

 

[12th_milkshake]

Bit of a heads up there bob.

Nimrod means great hunter and is a person/character in the blble of all places. (no i'm not religious) who was said to be the perfect hunter.

Now enters bugs bunny who mocks elmer fudd by calling him Nimrod sarcastically, And couple years later and lack of bible classes the world thinks it means idiot.

So calling the unwashed movie going masses Nimrod Nation is kinda weird.

Just a fun factoid for you. Hope you didn't think the Nimrod RAF planes were idiot planes!

 

[370999]

Firstly, there is a difference between a movie (or any other piece of art) being smart/stupid/meaningful/shallow and being GOOD or BAD (or "well-executed" or poorly-executed) in any one person's opinion. I don't "expect" everyone to call, "Sucker Punch" GOOD; but that it's NOT a "stupid" film - that it's actually slightly over-stuffed with IDEAS, meaning, layers of symbolism both thematic and visual, genuine imagination and actually attempts (with mixed results, to be sure) to actual SAY something is objectively provable simply by watching it... which I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you did. It is, in as measurable a way as possible, a smarter movie than any of the Transformers films (which are OPENLY "about" as little as possible); to the point that there's really no discernable reason to compare them.

However, if you're looking for the "difference" between appreciating these two nothing-to-do-with-eachother films, it comes down to where the appreciation comes from. I can find you other legitimate reviews - positive and negative - of "Sucker Punch" aside from mine that found something intellectually engaging about the film.

Could you please? As I remember thinking it had an interesting premise albeit poorly exxecuted, but never that it was well packed to the brine with ideas.

PS: I'm not you biggest fan at all Bob, but fair fucks for you to come wading into this forum and not respond to people like a douchebag who throws around presumptions like cough cough the dragon age 2 review. That said your little "I'm going to regret this..." was a tad insulting.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I like the costume Hawkeye has in the upcoming Avengers movie, not as gaudy as his comic book counterpart. Seriously, who wears blue with purple?

 

[moviedork]

Alright, responding to this is probably a mistake on my part but I've had about enough of this particular point - the Sucker Punch thing, I mean.

Firstly, there is a difference between a movie (or any other piece of art) being smart/stupid/meaningful/shallow and being GOOD or BAD (or "well-executed" or poorly-executed) in any one person's opinion. I don't "expect" everyone to call, "Sucker Punch" GOOD; but that it's NOT a "stupid" film - that it's actually slightly over-stuffed with IDEAS, meaning, layers of symbolism both thematic and visual, genuine imagination and actually attempts (with mixed results, to be sure) to actual SAY something is objectively provable simply by watching it... which I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you did. It is, in as measurable a way as possible, a smarter movie than any of the Transformers films (which are OPENLY "about" as little as possible); to the point that there's really no discernable reason to compare them.

However, if you're looking for the "difference" between appreciating these two nothing-to-do-with-eachother films, it comes down to where the appreciation comes from. I can find you other legitimate reviews - positive and negative - of "Sucker Punch" aside from mine that found something intellectually engaging about the film. This is NOT as true for the "Transformers" films (though I'm sure a few can be found) whose most passionate defenders tend to come down on the side of "I just want to turn off my brain and watch the fireworks!" "not every movie has to be high-art!" or some variation thereof.

Sucker Punch has an interesting concept and ideas, but the film is too dumb to fully execute on said ideas. It intends to have meaning but Snyder (who has only make one good movie "Dawn of the Dead") is not a good enough filmmaker to fully broaden those ideas into a complete narrative.

But the truth is...film taste is subjective depending on age, mood, personality, and other circumstances. You have to accept the fact that just because someone does not enjoy the same things you enjoy (case in point Sucker Punch being one of the worst movies of the year IMHO) does not give you the right to downright insult them. Intelligence cannot be measured with taste. I know a lot of intelligent people who'd rather escape from their exhausting jobs and watch something mindless like a Transformers or a Fast Five over thought-provoking pieces that try to win Oscars.

 

[maninahat]

I watched Men in Black just the other day. Excellent, compared to a lot of what we get these days.

Say what you like about how much the 90s sucked, a lot of good genre movies came from that period. It was a time just before studios went into overdrive with sequels and comic franchise plundering, where CGI hadn't quite replaced animatronics yet, and where making somekind of effort seemed to count.

Sure, it is largely a nostalgia filter, and I've already forgotten most of the bad movies, but look at the line up: Jurassic Park, Men in Black, Home Alone, Total Recall, The Mask, Something About Mary, Galaxy Quest. All good, solid stuff. And probably responsible for setting terrible trends.

 

[imnot]

Fun fact: "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic" is the direct result of the first Transformers movie doing well, take from that what you will.

It is? , please explain further!
(Not that I don't belive you I'm just curious)

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I still do not know why he is harping on the green lantern it was not that bad all things considered.

Actually, it was. I don't think it was as terrible as Bob made it out to be, but it was pretty darn bad. I went into the movie fairly unbiased and had a friend with me that had never read a single comic and she hated it too. Yes, I knew who the Green Lanterns were, had a basic rundown of the story, and understood a lot of the lore, but I haven't gone through the entire history of the comics (yet) and was going to pick at them for not getting a character's hairstyle right.

And yes, it is understandable for different opinions, but there are times when a film can just be provably bad. This was one of them.

I tend to hate subpar films but I found GL to be ok at best the worest thing about it was it was draggy. It was hella better than Ghost rider/Batman 4(the one before bale)/Xmen 3/Spiderman 3(and reboot >> lulz),All the TF films,ect,ect,ect,ect,ect.

I just have seen far worse and far better.

 

[maninahat]

However, if you're looking for the "difference" between appreciating these two nothing-to-do-with-eachother films, it comes down to where the appreciation comes from. I can find you other legitimate reviews - positive and negative - of "Sucker Punch" aside from mine that found something intellectually engaging about the film. This is NOT as true for the "Transformers" films (though I'm sure a few can be found) whose most passionate defenders tend to come down on the side of "I just want to turn off my brain and watch the fireworks!" "not every movie has to be high-art!" or some variation thereof.

But I'm sure that even you like to "turn off your brain" and watch utter crap from time to time. Perhaps a more clear example would have been that Piranha movie you once mentioned liking; the one you admitted was trash but fun? Is there an appreciable difference between liking that trashy movie and liking Transformers? And would it be reasonable to generalise that people who like that piranha movie are also too dumb to be trusted with automobiles, despite you (a smart person) also enjoying that movie?

Whether or not you enjoy a movie "ironically", or "intellectually" or "explosiony", it all shows up the same in the ticket sales - you might find Sucker Punch full of compelling ideas, the guy next to you might have watched it purely for the costume designs. I don't see how it is reasonable for anyone to come along and call you a couple of cretins just for having those preferences.

 

[marurder]

Incidently, Transformers 3 was THE biggest movie in China last year. And most of them saw it dubbed into Chinese, so dialogue really isn't that important when making money. (watch any movie dubbed into Chinese it sounds AWFUL - bad lip sync, and voices don't fit any actor or situation at all)

here's a tip for mr bay:
KEEP...
HUMANS...
OUT OF IT......

But how to make it relate-able to the masses!??!

 

[PunkRex]

Im PunkRex,
And thats bloody depressing...

 

[PunkRex]

Fun fact: "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic" is the direct result of the first Transformers movie doing well, take from that what you will.

It is? , please explain further!
(Not that I don't belive you I'm just curious)

Proberly to do with popularity with Hasbros older shows. Transformers does well as a movie, therefore a TV show gets made, Hasbro makes money, so try the same with another of their francises (in this case MLP), Lauren Faust offers after her Galaxy Girls proposal gets shot down (I hope that gets made some day) by Hasbro, Magic is made!

 

[QCX]

Welcome to Costco I love you

 

[honeybakedham]

The live-action films are far from the worst thing to ever happen to Transformers.


And the next movie (which I hope gets marketed as "Trans4Mers") is scheduled for two years from now. Two years is a VERY long time in Hollywood-Land. A lot of things can happen.

For example... in two years, maybe they could all come to their senses...

Seriously though... I don't care. Every movie that gets made pays someone. Not just big name actors and producers... but grips and gaffers and assistant camera operators. Greensmen, CG artists, craft service people, make up artists, and so on down the line are all middle class folks making a living, buying groceries, and paying mortgages because someone had the good idea to greenlight a project that has a good chance of turning a buck. I hope they never stop making (insert franchise of choice here) movies.

Fortunately, the film industry makes several hundred films a year, a few thousand globally, so if you hate Transformers (I know I do) you can choose another film you'll probably like.

But then there are the fans. I keep hearing people complain about Transformers not getting it right. What does that mean? It's obviously my opinion, but this is a trilogy of big budget FX spectaculars based on a low budget cartoon infomercial for cheap plastic children's toys from the 80s. What could have been done wrong? Just throw some robots on the screen... toss in some nationalism and a speech about our hope for peace, add a hot chick, and release.

And Bob... Shia Labouf (did I spell that even close to right?) didn't ruin Transformers. He did as good a job as anyone could do in a film made for adult men trapped in their nostalgic 12 year old minds. Hell, Liam Neeson is a brilliant actor, and there isn't a single frame in all of Phantom Menace where he manages to look a single CGI character in the eye.

Who cares? I'm gonna be watching the better movie playing in the next theater anyway. Now what I would care to hear a lot more about is the accounting and backroom dealing that guides Hollywood decisions. That stuff is fascinating.

 

[honeybakedham]

What happened to making a trilogy, then not going back to it for 10 years or so? Are entertainment corporations so much more greedy now than they were 30 years ago?

Why?

What is the magic in the number three? Why should a franchise vanish for a decade after each "trilogy"?

And no... the entertainment industry isn't less or more greedy (assuming the act of running a for profit business means the same things as greed), but they are technically capable of doing things now that they could not do back then.

There is really no reason I can think of why we can't have a Batman movie every few years. If you enjoy them, that's more likely a good thing than a bad thing.

Remember folks... it isn't art vs. commerce. Art IS commerce.

 

[Snotnarok]

I'm sure I'm going to get glares for this but, I liked the Transformers movies. ...The parts with the robots and fighting of course not for the story. But I'm sure that's where most of the complaints are for, the story. Oh well.

 

[Wriggle Wyrm]

Most of the time, I?d be disgusted that another one of these wretched films is being made but for some reason I can?t shake this feeling of schadenfreude. It?s mostly directed at Michael Bay for getting typecast in a rut, at Hollywood for being forced to whore itself out even more to pay its bills and at the stupid masses that line up like pigs to wallow in this crap.

All I have to say is kudos to Bob for a great episode.

 

[Right Hook]

Bob you honestly can't want them to portray Hawkeye in the same way as he is in the comics. I mean look at that! How could you take that guy seriously?

I kinda agree, I feel like they should have put a mask on him at least though. oddly enough they've shifted comic Hawkeye to look more like the movie one anyway which is even more annoying.

Spoiler: Oh you guys don't like movie Hawkeye having a different costume? Hang on...problem solved!

 

[Kanatatsu]

This was so snotty and condescending it makes me want to give Bob a swirly just on general principle.