So yesterday I went and saw the Fate of the Furious at my local theater. Now the Fast movies are, at this point, known for being turn-your-brain-off action flicks with lots of explosions. This one is no different. As a matter of fact in my opinion this one was significantly worse than the others. Way too many one liners, forced jokes, scenes that really push it with the physics, and story elements that try to be very meaningful but just end up being corny and feeling forced.

...and yet it sits at an 66%rt rating with most audiences giving it widespread approval. How the hell the transformers movies get shat on so hard for being brain- off movies yet the fast franchise gets a pass is ridiculously hypocritical. And the excuse of fast always being a brain-off flick is irrelevant because for the last 3 movies now they've tried to be very serious with dark tones and themes and the whole "family" thing to add meaning. This recent movie I walked out not caring about any of them and I liked the rest of the series.

 

Maybe they're just better?!

 

Because Michael Bay.

 

makes bad movies?

 

 

At this point I thoroughly believe it's completely subjective. I love a good flick. One that has great execution and jokes and action. The transformers movies struggle back and forth but at least, to me, they're watchable. Fate just felt like it had horrible execution, acting, okay jokes and okay action. Bottom line is the movie got me bored because I could predict just and bout every line about to be said in the movie.

My problem is this whole "law" complex that can somehow put Fate popularly above all of the transformers movies, when it had the same kind of errors and brainless action the tf movies have. Not a "I don't like that you don't like what I like" thing, but more of a "how can official standards let this movie pass but not transformers when they're virtually the same kind of movie??"

 

Because Bay doesn't know how to direct a movie. He knows how to make a cool scene or two but as a 2 hour movie (that often feels like a 5 hour one) they all fall apart. I had a massive headache after AOE and a huge smile over my face after FF7.

FF movies are just campy stupid fun. The movies themselves know that they are just campy stupid fun and they have fun with it like that insane tank scene in FF6 or the Diesel and Rock jump off the hood of cars to punch themselves in the face. It's well directed, the stupidity of the "cars as supoerpowers" is fun and the nonsensical story actually flows well, has a point and overall it's just a decent fun movie.

Bayformers aren't that. Every movie has 3 billion plots and subplots, most of which either lead to nothing or are unneeded and the action is mostly shaky-cam shit that no normal human being can follow (no fans who spent hours looking at CGI models before the movie don't count, you maybe can tell Starscream's arse from his head but an average human being who see's him for the first time in an action scene can't do that).

There is a reason why the first movie is so well regarded to the rest. It was actually a decent trun-off your brain movie. It had a plot that's easy to follow, it had sublots that tie in nicely into the movie and main plot and it had semi decent action scenes solely on the fact that the CGI of that scale was mind blowing 10 years ago.

Everything after the first movies aren't really movies...they are music spot glued together by explosions and white noise.

 

Critics hate Michael Bay

 

Transformers is an adaptation of a cartoon about alien robots. Alien wars and cartoons are not for everyone.

Fast and Furious is about car chases all over the world. Everyone enjoys a good car chase.

 

Yeah that's probably why the Rock has 66% on RT why his Black Sails tv series has an 80% and why Bad Boys films are regarded as cult classics.

It can't possibly be that the Transformers are just bad movie.

 

That was his first movie, before it became popular to hate him.

He is the executive producer on the show, it's no more his than Back to the Future is Stephen Spielberg's.

What does that have to do with critics?

 

I feel like this is it right here. It's simply the content matter and appeal.

 

I think the Fast movies know what they want to be and the Transformers movie still can't seem to decide exactly what they want to be.

The Fast movies don't seem to mind being big, loud, stupid, fun, and let's break physics even harder next film to the point where they seem more like a live action cartoon than something grounded in the real world. Instead of feeling shame at big stupid fun the Fast movies seem to wallow around in it. Can't remember the plot or the bad guy from a Fast movie, it's not something the production team seems to get too worried about just did you remember that vehicle trick. Say turn your brain off for a Fast movie and people aren't going to pull out the pitchfork and torches to say how dare you.

The Transformers films try to be everything to everyone and they end up feeling like a mess. At one point they are hey just loud stupid fun, but then they try to get so crazy thick with mythology you'd think they were going for a robotic Lord of the Rings. Hey we are going to be dark, grim, and gritty, or maybe we are something for the little kids. This is serious stuff where token characters die all the time, oh wait lets have robots pee, balls on a robot, or lets have dogs hump a leg. Sometimes we hear the production team say Transformers is grounded in the real world and then films find a point to throw that out the window. Under think these films and fans get angry at you, over think the films and fans get angry with you.

There is also something to be said for execution. Marvel Civil War and Batman v Superman are almost the same film. Villain with no real power has an over convoluted plot that requires everyone to be stupid and things falling exactly according to plan have two superheroes fight it out. Civil War was rather well received while Batman v Superman caught hell. It's not that the Marvel film didn't have some glaring logic problems just that because of the end results people focus on the Batman v Superman problems more than the Marvel problems.

 

The Fast and Furious movies have a great cast. Theres good chemistry amongst them, and despite being over the top action, we really get attached to the characters. Theres also a lot of story consistency between films: they flow pretty well.

 

I pretty much agree with everything except that first statement. Whatever happened after the first Transformers movie does not affect his other directorial efforts. Pain & Gain and 13 Hours show what he can do as a talent.

 

That's about all there is to it.

Another director could helm a sequel, people would love it... then reveal that he was Michael Bay wearing a face mask- then people would start pulling the "... I watched it again, and it turns out not to be good after all" card.

 

I can... Actually totally see this happening.

Though personally, I'm throwing my hat into the "tries to do too many things" pile. That, or pacing. The TF movies are still not well paced films. It's why a movie like Mad Max which was just one long action scene with hardly any plot or story was a blast when the TF movies are a headache.

 

Unfortunately, as much as this would be a very immature and stupid thing to do, I could actually see this happening with some people.

 

Because it's "hip" not to like them.

 

There's no such thing as a good Fast and Furious movie, so that's not it

 

I haven't seen them all, they don't really interest me, but the ones I've seen seemed alright. Action is well made and the central theme always seems to be about family, which is nice.