Discussion in 'Transformers News and Rumors' started by Tyrannosaur, Jun 22, 2009.
michaelbay.com | news
It's the most recent entry.
This is why his films have grossed $2.5 Billion. Go Mike!
I'm surprised at critics. Nothing but snot nosed brats who think they know shit about movies.
No, some of us critics can be very bright among a pack of dim light bulbs (and let me say that the pack of dim light bulbs is HUGE). The only reason it became such a hit was that kids liked it the most, them and the fans too.
you probably will not go to the movie with the mindset to specify every detail and point out almost every flaw. i used to base my movie viewings based on review but no more. i actually watch the movie then decide if it was good or not
Well, here's how I think if a movie did good or bad. I spoil myself just to see what happens. If the cons outweigh the pros, I can ASSUME that the movie won't be good. Vice versa if the pros outweigh the cons. But, since ROTF hasn't come out yet, and with the pros and cons being balanced, I'll see it as a casual moviegoer. And who knows? I might change my mind and shrug off the negative things about it.
Going into Revenge of The Fallen, I WANT to enjoy it. Knowing what kind of movie it is, I know I WILL. I loved the last one, so this one should be twice as good to me.
As for critics, if they don't agree with me, why should I care what they say? Thank you Mr. Bay.
I am going to say this here and now, not directed at anyone in particular:
Please stay on topic.
Please respect what other people are saying.
Please check the sarcasm and snarky replies at the door.
Have fun, but not at anyone else's expense.
umm doesnt spoiling yourself ruin the whole point of watching a movie
What- Bay can't handle criticism? I thought he was made of sterner stuff.
I don't know why we need a thread every time Bay makes some off-the-cuff remark.
And people don't seem to know how to use reviews. You don't read them to tell you what to think, you read them to decide if a movie is worth taking a chance on. After you've seen it, you make up your own mind. If you are going to see the movie anyway, you don't need to read the reviews.
I sometimes read the reviews after I've seen the movie. I'm curious to see if anyone else noticed the same things I did.
He does by dismissing them. His summer movies are mostly critic-proof as they are made for film critics. It makes no sense that people who has an affinity for the French New Wave critique a movie like TF2. It's like an action genre critic taking on a Woody Allen movie, it's pointless and a waste of time.
I think it was Ridley Scott who said "critics are like broken pencils, they're useless and have no point. With the exception that a pencil can be sharpened."
People can say what they like about Michael Bay's directing style but one thing cannot be disputed is that his films are profitable.
With all due respect Nelson, when every critic has the same complaints then there's probably some truth to them. Bay's films might make hundreds of millions of dollars, but that doesn't mean he's incapable of improving as a filmmaker.
Personally, I don't understand why at times the man can be so meticulous that he'll spend three days perfecting the shading on Optimus Prime's upper lip, but doesn't give a second thought to a character showing up for a scene despite being dead for two years.
IMAX on Wednesday night. It's going to be good times.
Critics judge media upon an abstract and often somewhat arbitrary set of standards when only one is needed: Does the media reach and affect it's intended audience in a relevant way?
I dunno, I'd sooner the critic just give their own honest opinion. Rather than try and extrapolate whether they think the intended audience is going to like it.
But it's a fair point, the more relevant reviews are from generally from the critics who fall within that target audience.
I think people rely too much on the bottom line in film reviews the same way they do in video game reviews. All they want is a number or a grade...if that number isn't to their liking, they ignore all of the critic's analysis, which would have gone a long way in telling them whether or not they'd like the movie themselves.
If a critic does his job well, it doesn't matter how arbitrary his standards are, because he should always explain them. Therefor, a reader can look at a review and say "Oh, well I don't mind a stupid action movie, so long as there's some good action scenes, and this reviewer says there's plenty of those." It's a poor critic that uses nebulous phrases such as "it accomplishes what it sets out to do" or "you'll like this movie if you're a fan" without citing concrete examples of how and why. Critics shouldn't be wishy-washy and they shouldn't speak for people they don't know. They should be able to look at a movie, identify what they felt worked and what didn't, and use that to construct a review. And readers should be able to read that review without concentrating solely on the final verdict.
What does that mean? It's so abstract and arbitrary. That he won't be a better one until he makes a movie that is loved by critics, seen by 3 people, and wins an Oscar? At this point in life, he's an artist and an entertainer. His desire is to make a film in which the maximum amount of people watch it.
Because he picks and choses his battles ahead of time.
Not quite, since Pearl Harbor his box office returns had been in a decline. Bad Boys II barely made it out of the theaters with surpassing it's budget and the Island was a TOTAL flop, leaving the theaters 90,000,000 in the red. That's just US numbers, not worldwide, but as far as studios are concerned, those are NOT good numbers.
Then he was given the gift of Transformers by Spielberg (such a shame he didn't go with his gut reaction and turn it down). So, anyhow, his career got a standing 8 count and he's back up again.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. To put it bluntly he is not a good director, and after having seen Star Trek there is no way you can blame it on the writing. Bay is an amazing cinematographer, but that's where it begins and ends. His credibility as a storyteller is non-existent. He's more suited for music videos and commercials and any other media that doesn't run longer than 5 minutes. Had it not been for the Aaron Burr milk commercial, I'd be hard pressed to tell you something he's done that I think is praise worthy.
Separate names with a comma.