The problem is that when it comes to blockbusters hollywood is pushing out 25 movies at the Transformers 2 level of quality for every 1 that ends up being the Dark Knight level of quality. And people keep going, so they just make sequels that are even worse because they know they can make money. Transformers 2 is the Nickelback of movies.
Then you should stop going and hope that something changes because it is a simple fact it isn't going to change because not everyone wants a strong storied movie. Dark Knight is a great movie hands down on everything, but it did lack one element in my mind. That is up for debate and I wont comment on that, but not every movie is going to have everything and hollywood is making a lot of money of these movies because people(the masses) want to go see it.
The masses of people obviously do not care as much as you do about the story and are just there to enjoy themselves and watch optimus prime kick some robot ass. This trend will not change.
I can't agree with you on this debate. I don't see any problems with a movie having a lame story, or very little character development, or any allegories. I went to the movie last night to see crap being blown up, and I got what I wanted. Would the movie have been better if there was more substance to it??? Probably, but I didn't walk out of the theatre really caring.
I understand what you're trying to say here, I really do, but I just can't agree. I know that makes me sound like some dumb punk ass kid....
I don't get your viewpoint though.
It sounds like you'd like to see crappy movies. Don't you just wish for once they'd make a GOOD fun action movie where stuff blows up?
Take Die Hard or T2, they are both really great action movies but just good movies. Not great but good. T2 was the best action movie ever, hands down, but compared to all other movies it was only good. Transformers and all of its clone movies are just plain bad. Even Pirates of the Carribean was good, then the 2nd and 3rd ones were about stupid mindless fun.
Wouldn't you like fun without it having to be stupid?
Even a movie like Gladiator (which won Best Picture BTW) was pretty tame and somewhat mindless. It wasn't deep and heart wrenching but it was GOOD, it was also fun.
I just can't understand the viewpoint that a movie is only fun or a good action movie if it is completely mindless and stupid.
I get not wanting a deep thinker movie, but why does it have to be the opposite? Why do I have to feel stupider for having seen the movie?
Jaws was deep on story?? Jaws was huge back then because it was scary as hell and it was something that people hadn't seen before. It still holds up today because of its intensity and and great musical score that still makes going into the water terrifying for some people. Jaws was never big because of its great story.
Shark eats people, scares little town, crew of three go out to hunt and kill it. It was simple and it worked, but I don't know how much time and care was put into the story.
The plot may have been simple, but it was executed in an extremely captivating manner. Jaws had great dialogue ("You're gonna need a bigger boat") and compelling characterization, such as Quint's re-telling of his experience surviving the USS Indianapolis.
It sounds like you'd like to see crappy movies. Don't you just wish for once they'd make a GOOD fun action movie where stuff blows up?
I guess it's all a matter of what you consider crappy and what isn't. Transformers was mindless and silly, but I wouldn't consider it crappy. It was a lot of fun. A movie can be silly and fun at the same time.
Maybe, I'll re phrase my review: transformers 2 was not a good movie, it was a cool movie.
is that any better??
When I watch Transformers or Terminator or any kind of movie of that ilk, I put it into its own category.
I felf the best movie of last year was The Reader, but I think I enjoyed Iron Man the best but I would never compare the two or even say Iron Man was better.
I find it damn near impossible to compare movies that are so far different.
Last edited by VANFLAMESFAN; 06-24-2009 at 01:55 PM.
I guess it's all a matter of what you consider crappy and what isn't. Transformers was mindless and silly, but I wouldn't consider it crappy. It was a lot of fun. When I watch Transformers or Terminator or any kind of movie of that ilk, I put it into its own category.
I felf the best movie of last year was The Reader, but I think I enjoyed Iron Man the best but I would never compare the two or even say Iron Man was better.
I find it damn near impossible to compare movies that are so far different.
Iron Man is actually a good example of a fun, good movie. Not great but good.
Now even compared to Iron Man I thought Transformers 1 was ######ed. I get not having huge expectations for a movie but there is somewhat mindless, fun, things blowing up etc and just plain bad.
Transformers could have easily been fun, silly etc without being bad and stupid. I just don't get it. And the whole "i want a movie that is fun and silly" doesn't work as an answer because it doesn't explain why it is stupid. You can just as easily turn off your brain watching Iron Man, it is just that unlike Transformers it doesn't actually hinder the functions of your brain.
To each his own I guess though. Only reason it bothers me is that movies like Year One and Land of the Lost and Transformers doing so well ruins the quality of movies for the rest of us because then movie studios don't put in the effort to actually hire writers.
Wow!! Transformers made 16 million alone on its midnight screenings last night and another 24 worldwide. 40 million dollar day. yeah, those folks at paramount and dreakworks are idiots.
Then you should stop going and hope that something changes because it is a simple fact it isn't going to change because not everyone wants a strong storied movie. Dark Knight is a great movie hands down on everything, but it did lack one element in my mind. That is up for debate and I wont comment on that, but not every movie is going to have everything and hollywood is making a lot of money of these movies because people(the masses) want to go see it.
The masses of people obviously do not care as much as you do about the story and are just there to enjoy themselves and watch optimus prime kick some robot ass. This trend will not change.
I think I see 1-2 movies per year at theatre's, so I already have stopped going. I'm not going to spend my money, and more importantly, 2 hours of my life on a movie that makes me feel dumber for having seen it.
Are you sure this is what people want or are they just going for lack of better options? Or are they buying what hollywood is selling them? I'm not so sure that people are the driving force behind movies with paper thin plotlines.
The fact is hollywood blockbusters focus primarily on making money, and secondly, making a movie. Until "the people" decide they've had enough of that, then you're right, the trend will continue.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
To each his own I guess though. Only reason it bothers me is that movies like Year One and Land of the Lost and Transformers doing so well ruins the quality of movies for the rest of us because then movie studios don't put in the effort to actually hire writers.
Land of the Lost and Year One have done less than stellar numbers so far. Land of the Lost especially, it's made 45 million in 3 weeks.....it had a budget of 100 million.
Wow!! Transformers made 16 million alone on its midnight screenings last night and another 24 worldwide. 40 million dollar day. yeah, those folks at paramount and dreakworks are idiots.
Not idiots. Great business minds. I admire their ability to sell people crap in a shiny package.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
Nothing, which is why I haven't watched a Michael Bay film since Armageddon.
The point I (and others in this thread) are making is that there's a better way. You can make an awesome summer action movie with amazing special effects, tightly-choreographed fight sequences, and loud explosions without having to sacrifice quality dialogue, a compelling plot, and innovative storytelling. Some directors can do it right; Micheal Bay, Roland Emmerich, and McG cannot.
I agree with that. Summer movies can be great and considering how much we pay for them I would even accept the arguement that they should be great.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that you shouldn't use Micheal Bay movie as an example when discussing the declining quality of summer blockbusters. He is always going to make the same kind of movie and it is never going to have all of, or even decent percentage of the qualities you mentioned. It is not his style.
Here is an analogous hockey example:
If you were going to discuss a recent trend in hockey where the GM's were making terrible management decisions and signing ridiculous contracts you wouldn't use Kevin Lowe an example of the recent trend because he has ALWAYS made bad decisions. The whole league could be making Sutter type moves and he would still be signing Penner and Horcoff to the same contracts. The single worst example that has been doing the same thing for years doesn't represent a recent trend.
I think the bigger beef should be with the studio heads hiring Kevin Lowe... sorry.. Michael Bay in the first place
Edit.. I wrote part of this and then left my office,came back and submitted. I think there may have been 60 or so more posts since then, so I'm pretty sure everything I wrote has already been covered.
Iron Man is actually a good example of a fun, good movie. Not great but good.
Now even compared to Iron Man I thought Transformers 1 was ######ed. I get not having huge expectations for a movie but there is somewhat mindless, fun, things blowing up etc and just plain bad.
Transformers could have easily been fun, silly etc without being bad and stupid. I just don't get it. And the whole "i want a movie that is fun and silly" doesn't work as an answer because it doesn't explain why it is stupid. You can just as easily turn off your brain watching Iron Man, it is just that unlike Transformers it doesn't actually hinder the functions of your brain.
To each his own I guess though. Only reason it bothers me is that movies like Year One and Land of the Lost and Transformers doing so well ruins the quality of movies for the rest of us because then movie studios don't put in the effort to actually hire writers.
I think now more than ever, crappy movies are somewhat getting what they deserve at the box office. Wolverine, Terminator Salvation, Land of the Lost, Watchmen all were pretty crappy movies that pretty much bombed at the box office due to their crappiness. Up, Dark Night, Iron Man, Star Trek, The Hangover all exceeded box office expectations due to being well received by critics and fans.
Transformers 2 looks to be defying this trend, but that's mostly due to all the hard core fans who seem to be very attached to their favorite childhood toys (I think I am just about 4 or 5 years too old to understand this phenomenem).
Transformers could have easily been fun, silly etc without being bad and stupid. I just don't get it. And the whole "i want a movie that is fun and silly" doesn't work as an answer because it doesn't explain why it is stupid. You can just as easily turn off your brain watching Iron Man, it is just that unlike Transformers it doesn't actually hinder the functions of your brain.
You're making it sound like I don't know it's a stupid movie and a bad movie as a piece of art. I realize this. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy it. It's fluff, it's stupid, it's every adjective that you can think of, but that didn't stop me from clapping at the end.(actually, I didn't clap, I've never got that, but I would if the makers were in the theatre).....I had fun last night.....we could go back and forth on this for hours with no resolution.....it's just the way I feel.
I personally dont think there's anyway possible to make Transformers critic friendly, so I wouldn't put too much stock into that RT rating. Like I said above, it got a huge ovation at the end of the screening last night, so the franchise really liked it.
I'm reading reviews today just ripping into the story and how ridiculous it is and that's why they didn't like the movie. Christ, it's a fantasy where alien robots that disguise themselves as machines to blend in on Earth. Of course that sounds ridiculous. The whole premise is ridiculous and stupid, but that doesn't mean the flick isn't a lot of fun. There were plenty of "ooohhhhhh shiiiiiiiiit" moments.
oooohhhhhh shiiiiiiiiit, I can't believe I just spent $14 on this.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
I think now more than ever, crappy movies are somewhat getting what they deserve at the box office. Wolverine, Terminator Salvation, Land of the Lost, Watchmen all were pretty crappy movies that pretty much bombed at the box office due to their crappiness. Up, Dark Night, Iron Man, Star Trek, The Hangover all exceeded box office expectations due to being well received by critics and fans.
Terminator has a worldwide gross of over 321 million with a budget of 200
Wolverine has made 360 million with a budget of 150
Watchmen has made 182 with a budget of 130
So you're statement of "bombing at the box office due to their overall crappiness" doesn't really hold much water.
Land of the Lost.....you're bang on with that one.
Are the scenes with the transformers fighting actually as bad as everyone is saying? Can you even tell what's going on and who is who?
I suspect it's kind of like Batman Begins fighting where it's all closeups and random flashing around with with big metal bits that all look dark and shiny and mechanical and all the same while the camera is shaking and spinning.
You're making it sound like I don't know it's a stupid movie and a bad movie as a piece of art. I realize this. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy it. It's fluff, it's stupid, it's every adjective that you can think of, but that didn't stop me from clapping at the end.(actually, I didn't clap, I've never got that, but I would if the makers were in the theatre).....I had fun last night.....we could go back and forth on this for hours with no resolution.....it's just the way I feel.
Stupid is one thing. I can deal with some stupidness and mindlessness. I find a lot of these CGI blow up fests to be completely boring though. The movie has got to throw me some kind of bone, and make me care somewhat about the characters if I am going to care about them fighting big giant CGI machines. And give me some indication of why they are fighting these things, and why the things are fighting each other.
Everything imaginable has been created with CGI in movies now, special effects alone no longer impress. Watching CGI explosions and battles that have no apparent reason are not mindless fun, they are BORING, and that's the problem IMO, they are just not entertaining.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
Are the scenes with the transformers fighting actually as bad as everyone is saying? Can you even tell what's going on and who is who?
There are times where it's a little hard to tell who is who, but outside of strapping them with white uniforms for the autobots and black uniforms for the decepticons, what else can you do??
I didn't find it any harder to distinguish than the first one and I didn't think it was that big of a deal.
