RiffTrax Forum
 

Transformers 2 in summer 2009

Started by Minnesota, September 27, 2007, 10:04:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Junkyard

THIS MOVIE IS TEARING OUR FAMILY APART!

Tyrant

Quote from: Imrahil on June 29, 2009, 05:13:39 PM
It doesn't bother me in the sense of this movie; it bothers me a bit in the sense that we'll now see this aesthetic in a million other movies.  You know, like every movie after The Matrix had to have a slow-motion wire sequence in it.

 Isn't that part of what makes film evolve as art, though? I'm certainly not suggesting anything Bay or his ilk does is art, but it's sort of how the ball gets rolling. Good or bad, these directors mimic a thing and over time that thing evolves either into something astounding or acts as a stepping stone for the next big thing.

 Not everyone liked Cubism or punk music at first and made many parallel complaints about them as some of the commentary heard about action movies these days.
 

Darth Geek

Transformers the name, and giant robots fighting, got people in theaters, that is why it is lucrative. A better filmmaker would have made a better movie AND it would have been made a buttload of money. Even his fans don't go see Michael Bay movies on his name alone.



Sideswipe

you cant say that a different film maker would have made a better movie because you dont know what they would have done.  Every director has a bad film.  People did not go to the theater to see this film for the acting, they came to see it for the action, and Michael Bay does action as well as anyone else.

I was bieng threated with death by wolf raping before it was cool!.

Tyrant

Quote from: Imrahil on June 29, 2009, 06:24:25 PM
Quote from: Tyrant on June 29, 2009, 05:55:01 PM
Quote from: Imrahil on June 29, 2009, 05:13:39 PM
It doesn't bother me in the sense of this movie; it bothers me a bit in the sense that we'll now see this aesthetic in a million other movies.  You know, like every movie after The Matrix had to have a slow-motion wire sequence in it.

 Isn't that part of what makes film evolve as art, though? I'm certainly not suggesting anything Bay or his ilk does is art, but it's sort of how the ball gets rolling. Good or bad, these directors mimic a thing and over time that thing evolves either into something astounding or acts as a stepping stone for the next big thing.

 Not everyone liked Cubism or punk music at first and made many parallel complaints about them as some of the commentary heard about action movies these days.
 

The flaw in your argument is that this is driven by commerce. We'll see a fuckton of Bay-esque things not because it's artistically valid or interesting, but because it's financially lucrative.  I don't think Picasso and the Cubists did what they did because they wanted to be financially lucrative.

 Actually, Picasso was pretty well off when he died.  :)   I actually agree with your point, though. I didn't specify why the movies evolve as they do, only how. I may have drawn the wrong comparisons, though.

bettertomorrowamy

Quote from: Sideswipe on June 29, 2009, 06:53:22 PM
you cant say that a different film maker would have made a better movie because you dont know what they would have done.  Every director has a bad film.  People did not go to the theater to see this film for the acting, they came to see it for the action, and Michael Bay does action as well as anyone else.

Which movie is Michael Bay's bad film? ~giggles to himself~
On timeout

wurwolf

Quote from: BBQ Platypus on June 29, 2009, 05:42:20 PM
If I sound pissy it's because I honestly haven't hated a big studio movie this much since Ocean's Twelve.  Forgive me for venting - my anger is directed not at you, but at the people responsible for making this movie in the first place.  Any collateral damage is entirely incidental.

Oh, that makes me feel much better. I'm glad you clarified.
Bonhead #2
fs!!


Doctor Who?

Quote from: Imrahil on June 29, 2009, 06:56:52 PM
Quote from: Doctor Who? on June 29, 2009, 06:43:20 PM
Quote from: TeamRAD on June 29, 2009, 05:39:46 PM
Quote from: Doctor Who? on June 29, 2009, 04:39:45 PM
If you ask me anything Bay makes is a 0.

Flippin' snob.

;)


And proud of it ;)

You weren't proud of it when I was slamming everyday peons and SUV driving soccer moms. You were quite indignant. 

I haven't slammed anyone who likes this movie i have just said it is bad.  Show me where I acting like anyone who likes this movie is sub human.

I have just said it is a stupid movie.

gbeenie

Quote from: Imrahil on June 29, 2009, 06:24:25 PM
Quote from: Tyrant on June 29, 2009, 05:55:01 PM
Quote from: Imrahil on June 29, 2009, 05:13:39 PM
It doesn't bother me in the sense of this movie; it bothers me a bit in the sense that we'll now see this aesthetic in a million other movies.  You know, like every movie after The Matrix had to have a slow-motion wire sequence in it.

 Isn't that part of what makes film evolve as art, though? I'm certainly not suggesting anything Bay or his ilk does is art, but it's sort of how the ball gets rolling. Good or bad, these directors mimic a thing and over time that thing evolves either into something astounding or acts as a stepping stone for the next big thing.

 Not everyone liked Cubism or punk music at first and made many parallel complaints about them as some of the commentary heard about action movies these days.
 

The flaw in your argument is that this is driven by commerce. We'll see a fuckton of Bay-esque things not because it's artistically valid or interesting, but because it's financially lucrative.  I don't think Picasso and the Cubists did what they did because they wanted to be financially lucrative.

The "separation" between Art and Commerce is an artificial creation of the twentieth century.
"All I ask of you is one thing: please don't be cynical. I hate cynicism -- it's my least favorite quality and it doesn't lead anywhere.
Nobody in life gets exactly what they thought they were going to get. But if you work really hard and you're kind, amazing things will happen."

- Conan O'Brien

Tripe

Quote from: gbeenie on June 30, 2009, 12:38:23 AM
The "separation" between Art and Commerce is an artificial creation of the twentieth century.
19th.

a pretty girl is like

#566
Quote from: TripeHoundRedux on June 30, 2009, 04:26:27 AM
Quote from: gbeenie on June 30, 2009, 12:38:23 AM
The "separation" between Art and Commerce is an artificial creation of the twentieth century.
19th.


18th

I wanna count down too!

Also I did not like Transformers 2.   There are more betterer, less minstrelsy popcorn movies out there with even more assplosions.  But I did like the unicycleboticon.  He was adorable. 
I'm all out for kicks...and every inch of me spells EXCITEMENT!

Tripe

Nah, in the 18th is was still very much a salable commodity. It's in the 19th that people like Van Gogh began to promote the idea of the artist standing outside of the humdrum world of society and its commercial concerns.

a pretty girl is like

Quote from: TripeHoundRedux on June 30, 2009, 05:05:33 AM
Nah, in the 18th is was still very much a salable commodity. It's in the 19th that people like Van Gogh began to promote the idea of the artist standing outside of the humdrum world of society and its commercial concerns.

Damn!  So we're not counting down anymore?  I wanted to see what happens when we reached zero.
I'm all out for kicks...and every inch of me spells EXCITEMENT!

RobtheBarbarian

Then you'd get that Mel Brooks skit about the first cave paintings and the first art critics.