Search Movie Database for

Michael Bay To Quit Transformers

Want to make a post? Log on with a free my town account.

Page 3 of 9

posters5

Jun 22, 2009 - CDT 11:39 PM
posters5
Member since:
March 2002
I just hope that Michael Bay is an honest man who means what he says and says what he means. (Y)

csjlong

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 3:37 AM
csjlong
Member since:
October 2004
I could picture Michael Bay and Dr. Uwe Boll teaming up to become the new Merchant-Ivory.

wolvinator

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 6:53 AM
wolvinator
Member since:
January 2008
You had to go and compare him to Uwe Bol. Dude, they are not in the least alike. Uwe has no idea how to make a movie. Bay is the mackdaddy of movie making. You all have seen his movies so stop making fun of him. Many of you own them as well.
[Post edited by wolvinator on Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 6:53 AM]

Falcon01

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 8:56 AM
Falcon01
Member since:
July 2006
I say we got George Lucas involved so he can bring in the whole Midichlorian thing to rate who is the most powerful. :p

Seriously though, Michael Bay gives good "eye candy" for sure and he is obviously entertaining enough or else his movies would not gross the crazy money that they do. Story wise he's not the greatest but hey, nobody is perfect.

kucoloco

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 11:36 AM
kucoloco
Member since:
September 2007
stop bashing bay. you knwo you love him. lol

Bay needs to shut up half the time.. i think hes pretty good at what he does, and i think sometimes things get reviewed not based on the type of movie it is.

csjlong

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 11:42 AM
csjlong
Member since:
October 2004
I assure you I do not own a single Michael Bay movie and am not likely to ever do so.

And I'm much more inclined to watch the next Dr. Uwe Boll film then the next Michael Bay just because at least Dr. Boll is awful in a fascinating, circus freak show kind of way rather than just generically bland and dull.

wolvinator

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 12:14 PM
wolvinator
Member since:
January 2008
Thank goodness not everyone is an Artsy Fartsy flick person like yourself csjlong. I say keep the Bay films coming. So doesn't the majority of movie viewers. Who says a movie has to have deep meaning or cause the viewer to have some kind of epiphany to be good. All flicks have their place in entertainment(except flicks that promote racism or harm to ones neighbor for no reason at all). Just because I don't like the type movies you might like doesn't mean I have the right to say the director of those sucks.
[Post edited by wolvinator on Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 12:18 PM]

Tim Raynor

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 12:44 PM
says... It looks fake . . . very fake!
Tim Raynor
Member since:
March 2002
I know I don't consider myself "artsy-fartsy", spend time watching films at the Camel Back or writing reviews on my laptop of foreign/independent films at my local Starbucks. However, I do enjoy films that are made well or films where the effort seemed worthy of valuable entertainment. Knowing that, I don't think Michael Bay could direct his way through a Helen Keller Museum. And it's not so much that he stinks as a director, he's simply mundane and predictable.

Look, I like explosions and CGI and more pointless thing blowing up as much as the next guy, but when your films come across as a pandering, spoon feeding machine, the veil becomes too thin for the mind to acquire an acceptable taste for. Therefore, Bay is really nothing more than a cow churning hack. However, if he truly is going to quit with the "show-boating" CGI films, then it will be interesting to see. I'll give him enough rope.

csjlong

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 1:02 PM
csjlong
Member since:
October 2004
Quote:
Who says a movie has to have deep meaning or cause the viewer to have some kind of epiphany to be good.


Oy vey, do people ever get tired of spouting this same lame argument in defense of every single goddamn blockbuster film that's ever released? Is it supposed to be a convincing argument? Hey, you can't say "Deuce Bigelow, Male Gigolo" is bad because it's supposed to be lame and stupid and predictable.

There's a difference between a good blockbuster and a bad blockbuster. One major difference is that Michael Bay doesn't direct the good ones. Spielberg made some great blockbusters early in his career. Iron Man was a standout last year. Peter Jackson did a bang up job on the LOTR films. Bay, not so much. I do think Bay gets singled out too often. He's not the only bad blockbuster "auteur" - Tony Scott has proven that he's every bit as weak. Likewise Stephen Sommers who apparently couldn't even pull off G.I. Joe.

posters5

Jun 23, 2009 - CDT 1:37 PM
posters5
Member since:
March 2002
wolvinator,

you've been a longtime member with valuable contributions in many discussions, so i'm puzzled by your sudden switch to "strawman" attacks. just because a person doesn't like michael bay's movies doesn't mean that he's automatically artsy-fartsy. chris likes a wide variety of movies, some of which are generally considered "trash cinema" (i.e. john waters).

like tim wrote, some of us simply think that bay's movies are boring. explosions can be cool and exciting, but an orange fireball is an orange fireball at the end of the day. some of us want more than eye candy, you know?

Page 3 of 9

Want to make a post? Log on with a free my town account.


Get this site ad-free »