Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:59 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
[Post Deleted] 
Author Message
Post [Post Deleted]
[Post deleted]


Last edited by TheScientist on Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:59 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Um, ok? :shock:


Tue Jun 16, 2009 4:16 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Although you can't hear my hand slapping my forehead I'd like you to know that's the sound that should be echoing about your room as you spell check your missive. Perhaps you'll look around and think, "Was that the sound of someone finding my 'Open Letter to Michael Bay' more than a little bit ludicrous? No, 'twas merely the sound of my boldness."

Rather than apologize for Michael Bay, a director that I have little to no familiarity with, I'd like to go to bat for those people that dare enjoy the fruits of a producer's stooge. For, unbelievably, it is they who are responsible for Michael Bay. And Michael Bay, a man that trades in battling robots and pyrotechnical wizadry in place of subtlety and pathos, has done nothing other than deliver a product that has been embraced by lots of wallet owners. Critical consensus may be that the man should take a job operating a forklift but I'd prefer to look at this as someone that doesn't wield a fiery sword of cynical righteousness: let us grant that Michael Bay, battling robots and sharp-tongued cops, have added perspective to what's available in the way of art. For every warring group of alien robots we have, unjustly ignored at the time of release, a film that gives us a mirror of ourselves. For every lab populated by organ banks who just want an opportunity to live a normal life, we have a film that brings critics to their feet in exuberant standing ovation and goes unseen for all the cleavage Scarlett Johansson tantalizes us with.

Rather than draft open letters to Michael Bay I offer up a simpler option: watch Casablanca a second, or third, time. Write an essay on Citizen Kane. If the action movies of yesterday have taught us anything it's that running through the streets yelling at people so they may know the dread Soylent Green is made of people... it gets very little done in the way of changing those valuable hearts and minds. Just imagine how little would get accomplished if you started telling the people in charge that they're product is recycled corpses.

Maybe Bay offers value in the way of offering up popcorn for comparison to a filet. Maybe Bay has value in that his films offer people an opportunity to find something worthwhile, sincerely stimulating, in all the thunder and lightning. I don't know but I'd wager that Michael Bay has several flying monkeys stored in his closet that will take his place just as soon as he's placed next to Walt Disney in the cryonics institute. The easiest way to buffer against the "get what you pay for" of Michael Bay is to buy two tickets to the movie playing down the street and using the extra seat for your open letter.

I think that, rather than shaming the people who enjoy his movies in a covertly crafted letter to a man that has a vision (even if that vision isn't worth a time of day to many or if that vision he has is of little dollar bills with wings), it'd be a far greater good to champion those films that are of merit. Whatever the hell 'merit' may be. And rather than demand a filmmaker stand down maybe someone could take an ad out in a paper and give Wendy and Lucy some anonymous, random exposure. Or, better yet, draft an open letter to voice singing approval for something wonderful in place of something that will exist, in one form or another, for the rest of film history.


Tue Jun 16, 2009 4:26 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Um, ok? :shock:

seconded. :?

i guess.


Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:39 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Although i agree with you, i don't like Micheal Bay's approach to film making but i find that your approach to your critisizm of Bay to be a bit too rich.

Being a director of a film is one of the hardest things imaginable. Incomparable in complexity. To pull off a film like Transformers would require not only a genius but a passion beyond that of "profit".


Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:38 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Mr. Bay has obviously enraged TheScientist. There was this excellent piece in the Onion that may help you vent http://www.theonion.com/content/node/37499.

majoraphasia wrote:
If the action movies of yesterday have taught us anything it's that running through the streets yelling at people so they may know the dread Soylent Green is made of people...


:shock: whoa whoa whoa, no spoiler warning? Soylent Green is people...who would've thought.


Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:54 am
Post [Post Deleted]
[Post Deleted]


Last edited by TheScientist on Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:53 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
I'm not enraged over it, cause the cold hard truth is that directors like Bay who go for profit over passion will always exist in one form or another, and normal people are entertained by stuff like TF2, the majority of audiences, myself included don't care whether a director makes a film for money or passion, they only care if the film entertains them or not, so what if Bay just made it for money? That's just how it is in Hollywood, directors make films just for money and no amount well-written letters or complaints will ever change that no matter what. And that's a fact and one that I can easily live with as I like Bay's action-first-story-second style, though I also applaud the fact that he's planning on doing something different and making a smaller film which means a smaller and possibly more discriminating audience will see it and that shows that he HAS matured somewhat and he isn't the total money-grubbing freak he's made out to be. The bottom line is-you can't expect every single director to make movies for passion, cause money talks much louder then heart and soul.


Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:38 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
TheScientist wrote:
I am saddened that my open letter was met with derision and confusion, but now having read a journalist in support of this monstrosity is almost too much to bear. The article above was posted on Yahoo!’s website and the author clearly has a bias in defense of the “film.”

Never have I known anyone with more contempt for his audience than Micheal Bay. This is not entertainment. People who saw the film are not his audience, they are his enablers. He operates on the assumption that people are drooling herds who spend their money freely and enjoy mindless entertainment.

And the words of Mr. Rob Moore, vice chairman of Paramount in further defense of the film are truly soulless. Critic’s forgetting what the goal of the move was “To entertain and have fun.” Even they do not believe themselves when they try to fool the public into to believing it is about anything other than money and greed. Oh yes Mr. Moore, critics do know what they are talking about, because they have minds and souls!

I am sorry to bother any of you; never will I post on here again. But if you truly can claim to be fans of film how can you not be outraged at what this film says and about what it represents?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt as being a person who actually means what he said and not just someone pretending to be this naive for the sake of trolling the forum.

It's pretty well-known that the most important thing to Hollywood studio executives is the bottom line: if a film makes money, they like it. Hollywood studios are businesses in the end: they commit a certain amount of money and other resources when presented with an idea for a film. They expect to see a return on that investment, and people that waste their investment are people to whom the old phrase "You'll never work in this town again!" will usually apply.

Michael Bay is someone who has consistently been able to make films that generate a profit for whichever studios he's worked for. Ergo, Hollywood execs are willing to support and fund his work- they know they can expect to see a positive return on their investment. Notice that I haven't once brought up the notion of "artistic merit" here.


Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:08 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
TheScientist wrote:

I am saddened that my open letter was met with derision and confusion, but now having read a journalist in support of this monstrosity is almost too much to bear. The article above was posted on Yahoo!’s website and the author clearly has a bias in defense of the “film.”

Never have I known anyone with more contempt for his audience than Micheal Bay. This is not entertainment. People who saw the film are not his audience, they are his enablers. He operates on the assumption that people are drooling herds who spend their money freely and enjoy mindless entertainment.

And the words of Mr. Rob Moore, vice chairman of Paramount in further defense of the film are truly soulless. Critic’s forgetting what the goal of the move was “To entertain and have fun.” Even they do not believe themselves when they try to fool the public into to believing it is about anything other than money and greed. Oh yes Mr. Moore, critics do know what they are talking about, because they have minds and souls!

I am sorry to bother any of you; never will I post on here again. But if you truly can claim to be fans of film how can you not be outraged at what this film says and about what it represents?


I maintain your open letter deserved all the derision it received but I'm willing to meet you halfway by halfheartedly agreeing that Michael Bay has what may be called 'contempt' for an audience of people seeking some sort of truth from cinema. Perhaps contempt isn't the right term, exactly, but if his films (or the trailers for his films, at any rate) evidence anything it's that his Cinematic Journey (Holloway's patent pending) consisted of toy commercials and cartoons. Weirdly, I can think of worse inspirations.

Good luck, one who calls himself TheScientist. May your journey into the light of cinematic truthiness be free of lumps spoiling the broth of artistic achievement in the name of anything but a shed tear. Anything but duelling robots. Not the duelling robots.


Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:46 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
One more message to the OP: I just hope you're not the kind of guy who'd suck on the muzzle of a loaded .45 over this. It's just entertainment, man. Granted, a lot of it is made purely for the purpose of vacuuming the money out of your wallet, but that's all it is. My advice: do what one of my best friends does, and just don't go to theaters anymore unless it's a film that you've actually got an interest in seeing.


Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:19 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
I feel the need to weigh in

I do not understand the position being taken by some against Transformers movies.

From the beginning of cinema there have been movies aimed at the masses for a pleasant evening out and there have been movies aimed at those who fancy something more cerebral.

I enjoy both and appreciate them for what they are. I don't go to an action movie expecting "Citizen Kane" and I don't rewatch "Vertigo" and complain that Hitchcock missed out on the explosions.

I have Transformers in HD and my two sons (13 and 10) sit there in awe as the battles unfold. Of course it's big, but it's definitely not dumb.

I would offer a counter position that Michael Bay knows exactly what people want and he develops films that meet their requirements. He does it superbly well. Of course "Armageddon" is corny and amped up to the extreme. But it's great fun, if you're in the mood for some Apocalyptical blast 'em up stuff.

More than most on this forum I have championed classic movies (The Journey thread). I am the first to recognize that after a hard day at work and a couple of beers / glasses of wine an allegorical, impressionistic black and white slow paced film about the life and times of a French donkey is probably not going to work as well as a reshowing of Will Smith in I,Robot.

My only issue with Michael Bay is that his immense success is having an impact on cinema in general. His style is being copied and usually done badly. hence we will keep getting Michael Bay clones like McG.

I would finally add that if I was investing in a movie and Michael Bay invited me to join in on Transformers 3 I'd be there in a flash. The film was made for $200m and will take in excess of $2Bn from all revenue streams. A return of 10x in under two years. My point is that film making is art but it's also a business. Forget that and you will have little art.

In the last week I have watched "Citizen Kane" three times and "Vertigo" twice. My next film will be a German art house movie about Nazi zombies who ski round the mountains and attack sex crazed vacationers, all to the soundtrack of Ludwig van. You can see the trailer here.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/deadsnow/

Have fun, in whatever way you choose!
Rob


Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:29 am
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Robert Holloway wrote:
I feel the need to weigh in

I do not understand the position being taken by some against Transformers movies.

From the beginning of cinema there have been movies aimed at the masses for a pleasant evening out and there have been movies aimed at those who fancy something more cerebral.
I have Transformers in HD and my two sons (13 and 10) sit there in awe as the battles unfold. Of course it's big, but it's definitely not dumb.

I would offer a counter position that Michael Bay knows exactly what people want and he develops films that meet their requirements. He does it superbly well. Of course "Armageddon" is corny and amped up to the extreme. But it's great fun, if you're in the mood for some Apocalyptical blast 'em up stuff.

More than most on this forum I have championed classic movies (The Journey thread). I am the first to recognize that after a hard day at work and a couple of beers / glasses of wine an allegorical, impressionistic black and white slow paced film about the life and times of a French donkey is probably not going to work as well as a reshowing of Will Smith in I,Robot.

My only issue with Michael Bay is that his immense success is having an impact on cinema in general. His style is being copied and usually done badly. hence we will keep getting Michael Bay clones like McG.

In the last week I have watched "Citizen Kane" three times and "Vertigo" twice. My next film will be a German art house movie about Nazi zombies who ski round the mountains and attack sex crazed vacationers, all to the soundtrack of Ludwig van.
Have fun, in whatever way you choose!
Rob


Hi Rob,
just to be a smartass, "Dead Snow" (original title "Död Snö" with the funky stroke through the "o" instead of the boring German dots on top) is Norwegian and not German, made by the director who also did "Kill Buljo" (no points for guessing, on which this is based).
Please do write a review as the film sounds incredibly funny!
Unke

On topic: Chastising Michael Bay for a lack of artistic ambition is pointless. However, I think that defending Michael Bay on the basis that he makes entertainment rather than art and that he makes action movies, which do not require much of a story and characterisation, also misses the point. In my opinion, the problem with his films is that they are bad entertainment (for me, obviously). I remember that, before, making "Schindler's List", Spielberg was often regarded as a lightweight director who would only make entertaining (in contrast to artistic) films. Compare Spielberg's action films to Michael Bay's, and you'll notice the difference between a master storyteller who makes exciting action movies and a guy who - as he himself described his approach - is "fucking the frame", i.e. overloading everything to the point of incoherence. Based on what he has made so far, I don't think Michael Bay has a "Schindler's List" or anything remotely close in quality in him.


Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:53 pm
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Unke wrote:
Robert Holloway wrote:
I feel the need to weigh in

I do not understand the position being taken by some against Transformers movies.

From the beginning of cinema there have been movies aimed at the masses for a pleasant evening out and there have been movies aimed at those who fancy something more cerebral.
I have Transformers in HD and my two sons (13 and 10) sit there in awe as the battles unfold. Of course it's big, but it's definitely not dumb.

I would offer a counter position that Michael Bay knows exactly what people want and he develops films that meet their requirements. He does it superbly well. Of course "Armageddon" is corny and amped up to the extreme. But it's great fun, if you're in the mood for some Apocalyptical blast 'em up stuff.

More than most on this forum I have championed classic movies (The Journey thread). I am the first to recognize that after a hard day at work and a couple of beers / glasses of wine an allegorical, impressionistic black and white slow paced film about the life and times of a French donkey is probably not going to work as well as a reshowing of Will Smith in I,Robot.

My only issue with Michael Bay is that his immense success is having an impact on cinema in general. His style is being copied and usually done badly. hence we will keep getting Michael Bay clones like McG.

In the last week I have watched "Citizen Kane" three times and "Vertigo" twice. My next film will be a German art house movie about Nazi zombies who ski round the mountains and attack sex crazed vacationers, all to the soundtrack of Ludwig van.
Have fun, in whatever way you choose!
Rob


Hi Rob,
just to be a smartass, "Dead Snow" (original title "Död Snö" with the funky stroke through the "o" instead of the boring German dots on top) is Norwegian and not German, made by the director who also did "Kill Buljo" (no points for guessing, on which this is based).
Please do write a review as the film sounds incredibly funny!
Unke

On topic: Chastising Michael Bay for a lack of artistic ambition is pointless. However, I think that defending Michael Bay on the basis that he makes entertainment rather than art and that he makes action movies, which do not require much of a story and characterisation, also misses the point. In my opinion, the problem with his films is that they are bad entertainment (for me, obviously). I remember that, before, making "Schindler's List", Spielberg was often regarded as a lightweight director who would only make entertaining (in contrast to artistic) films. Compare Spielberg's action films to Michael Bay's, and you'll notice the difference between a master storyteller who makes exciting action movies and a guy who - as he himself described his approach - is "fucking the frame", i.e. overloading everything to the point of incoherence. Based on what he has made so far, I don't think Michael Bay has a "Schindler's List" or anything remotely close in quality in him.
Well duh! Anyone could've told you that Bay will never direct a film like that, and personally I actually like Bay more then Spielberg. I can just hear the cries of blasphemy in the distance right now, but when it comes right down to it, Bay knows what mass audiences want and he gives it to thme in spades, andi cna't complain about that, cause i'll take a Bay film over soemthing like Schindler's List any day, cause I just prefer mindless entertainment over hard-hitting uncompromising drama, and i'm that's how the majority of Bay's audience feels as well. And whether films are "bad" entertiainment or not is a matter of opinion and NOT a fact.


Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:08 pm
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Unke wrote:
Robert Holloway wrote:
I feel the need to weigh in

I do not understand the position being taken by some against Transformers movies.

From the beginning of cinema there have been movies aimed at the masses for a pleasant evening out and there have been movies aimed at those who fancy something more cerebral.
I have Transformers in HD and my two sons (13 and 10) sit there in awe as the battles unfold. Of course it's big, but it's definitely not dumb.

I would offer a counter position that Michael Bay knows exactly what people want and he develops films that meet their requirements. He does it superbly well. Of course "Armageddon" is corny and amped up to the extreme. But it's great fun, if you're in the mood for some Apocalyptical blast 'em up stuff.

More than most on this forum I have championed classic movies (The Journey thread). I am the first to recognize that after a hard day at work and a couple of beers / glasses of wine an allegorical, impressionistic black and white slow paced film about the life and times of a French donkey is probably not going to work as well as a reshowing of Will Smith in I,Robot.

My only issue with Michael Bay is that his immense success is having an impact on cinema in general. His style is being copied and usually done badly. hence we will keep getting Michael Bay clones like McG.

In the last week I have watched "Citizen Kane" three times and "Vertigo" twice. My next film will be a German art house movie about Nazi zombies who ski round the mountains and attack sex crazed vacationers, all to the soundtrack of Ludwig van.
Have fun, in whatever way you choose!
Rob


Hi Rob,
just to be a smartass, "Dead Snow" (original title "Död Snö" with the funky stroke through the "o" instead of the boring German dots on top) is Norwegian and not German, made by the director who also did "Kill Buljo" (no points for guessing, on which this is based).
Please do write a review as the film sounds incredibly funny!
Unke

On topic: Chastising Michael Bay for a lack of artistic ambition is pointless. However, I think that defending Michael Bay on the basis that he makes entertainment rather than art and that he makes action movies, which do not require much of a story and characterisation, also misses the point. In my opinion, the problem with his films is that they are bad entertainment (for me, obviously). I remember that, before, making "Schindler's List", Spielberg was often regarded as a lightweight director who would only make entertaining (in contrast to artistic) films. Compare Spielberg's action films to Michael Bay's, and you'll notice the difference between a master storyteller who makes exciting action movies and a guy who - as he himself described his approach - is "fucking the frame", i.e. overloading everything to the point of incoherence. Based on what he has made so far, I don't think Michael Bay has a "Schindler's List" or anything remotely close in quality in him.


Hi Unke

You are of course right about the Norwegian Dead Snow. Lazy writing from me!

The whole Michael Bay thing is ridiculous. Some people ridicule him to further
their own self perception as a serious film viewer. others attack because it's
trendy.

Alfred Hitchcock made a certain type of film, as did Godard and Lubitsch.
I'm not suggesting Michael Bay walks alongside these masters. However, he makes a certainn type of movie and does it extremely well.
Many people love his movies - supported by the box office take
Some people find his films to be poor.

I see them for what they are. They do something very well, for many.

Rob


Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:17 pm
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
The very smart bay Area film critic Mick LaSalle often says

"Never confuse opinion with criticism"

It's like people in the work environment who confuse motion with progress

Rob


Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:20 pm
Post Re: An Open Letter To Michael Bay
Robert Holloway wrote:
The whole Michael Bay thing is ridiculous. Some people ridicule him to further
their own self perception as a serious film viewer. others attack because it's
trendy.


Agreed. Diff'rent Strokes, baby. There still hasn't been anyone show up to force me to watch Transformers at gunpoint. So long as noone does, I'm good with folks forking over their own perfectly good US dollars (or whatever currency applies) of their own free will to see it.

I will say, however, that I wish someone other than Bay had found the opportunity to make a modern Epic about Pearl Harbor. I don't begrudge him his shot, per se, but having done so means he basically ensured that a more thoughtful film about Pearl Harbor won't be made for a long time.

Ah well . . .


Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:43 pm
Post Re: [Post Deleted]
well. isn't this interesting. "[Post Deleted]".

immature tendencies. at least one should be open to debate.

Image


Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:44 am
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:37 pm
Posts: 108
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Post Re: [Post Deleted]
aameen wrote:
well. isn't this interesting. "[Post Deleted]".

immature tendencies. at least one should be open to debate.


Wholly agreed. The original letter was actually quite articulate. Too bad the dude takes it waaay too seriously.


Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:50 am
Profile
Post Re: [Post Deleted]
Yeah...this forum is SERIOUS BUSINESS.


what a baby.


Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:01 am
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr