[stone monkey]

I get it. Some people liked it. That's fine. Some people like snails and some people like lobster. That's also fine. Those of us who didn't like it are as justified in saying how and why as those of us who do like it are for saying how and why. Anyone complaining about those people who thought differently to them is kind of missing the point of a thread for discussing what you think of a film, I should think

Anyhow, the point which I, and doubtless others, were trying to make is that we went into the film with quite low expectations and it didn't even meet those. That happens. I quite liked the first one and. after the complete disowning that was done by cast and crew of the execrable second film, I was kind of hoping for a return to that sort of form. Didn't happen. They just made a slightly better version of the second - even down to plot structure - which was probably not the way to go.

No sane person goes into this kind of film expecting emotional and intellectual depth or strong characterisation or even a witty and engaging script. All I expected was some 'splodey stuff with a serviceable way of moving the characters from a to b; the film didn't even manage to provide that. Yeah, shit blows up (in a slightly less irritating manner than in the 2nd, I admit) but the film is merely an hour and a half of time spent with unengaging idiots, interspersed with stretches of boredom, followed by explosions - that's not even competent film making. We know Bay's quite capable of making films competently, he just chose not to this time.

I don't want to be sitting in front of a film like this and looking at my watch - I should be on the edge of my seat, I should be having mindless fun and looking at the pretty pictures The irony of this last is that the film manages to be both an hour too long and simultaneously feel like there's a reel missing because of how badly it's been plotted and edited - which is really not a good thing.

Okay, racism: I may be a bit sensitive to this issue, but Ken Jeong's character Jerry "Deep" Wang? Really? It's 2011 and we're expected to laugh about those furriners and their silly sounding names? And let's not even get into Bay's apparent obsession with homosexual panic - I might be tempted to say that the manly Mr Bay is compensating for something there; he certainly looks the type.

And I do understand that the film is not meant to be examined in any kind of exacting detail - trust me, if I was going that route there's plenty more that's wrong with it and there's also absolutely zero need to get into it here. As I've said before I'm quite capable of enjoying a film that's mindless fun, but for me and a few others (but not everyone obviously), Transformers 3 was simply the mindlessness without any of the fun.

This post has been edited by stone monkey: 02 July 2011 - 09:07 PM

[MWKarsa]

I just got back from it and I thought it was bad- some decent scenes but overall pretty crappy. It's rare that in the midst of the climatic battle at the end of the movie I was just wishing it was over.

I go into these types of movies(M. Bay's ones especially) just wanting to see good action scenes and explosions and even though there were plenty of those in this movie it just dragged on and on. I honestly loved the first one and the second was pretty terrible so this one was slightly better than the second but it seems like Bay has run this into the ground and the fight scenes have lost their luster. If he does another one I might check it out but I really don't care if he does.

[blackzoid]

QuickTidal, on 02 July 2011 - 04:20 AM, said:

dude, WTF is this rant even about? When did Malazan books come into this discussion? WTF? LOL

First off, no one would choose Bay to direct something like a malazan movie simply cause it's just not his forte...he's action man...not subtlety man. No one would ever give him a movie like that, better yet he wouldn't choose to do that....you want proof? Go back and run the list of his movies....are ANY of them that style of story? NO. LOL. He does big, over the top action movies. Bringing that into your argument is just stupid brother, as no one was comparing the two.

and as to this sentence: "Demand excellence from the films you see. Even if you don't know anything about transformers and you only want giant robots beating the crap out of each other."

Can you see which finger I'm holding up? LOL. I don't have to demand excellence from films I see. Sometimes I watch campy bad movies just to see how campy and bad they are...and you want to know the difference between you and me? I can find the good things in those bad movies and tell you what I liked, and even find stuff to enjoy.


So don't sit there and try to tell people their opinion is shit and they should demand more. Do me a favor and don't act like you're some film aficionado that knows whats good and whats not cause as we established that's it's all subjective.

At least Macros and I have rival lemonade stands.

The reason I brought up Malazan is that its a Malazan board and that its likely that both of us love Malazan fiction. You would not trust Bay to adapt anything from it as he can't grasp the subtle. Transformers as a concept doesn't look subtle on a first look either. That doesn't mean it can't be subtle.

Anyway we obviously can't change each others opinion on this. I have loved transformers fiction since I was a kid and I know what the property is capable of. Its dear to me. You may not have, so thats cool. I guess it would be like Bay adapting My Little Pony or Dallas. I don't care about those properties, so I would laugh at a camp/badly made film in that situation.
So lets agree to disagree...and leave the neg-repping to others.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 04 July 2011 - 09:15 AM

[Gothos]

I've been disappointed enough by the first film that I didn't even watch the second. I'm considering going to see this but only because I haven't seen any film in 3D yet - is that at least done 'properly'?

[MWKarsa]

Gothos, on 04 July 2011 - 09:23 AM, said:

I've been disappointed enough by the first film that I didn't even watch the second. I'm considering going to see this but only because I haven't seen any film in 3D yet - is that at least done 'properly'?

I really didn't notice the 3-D much in the movie apart from a few scenes- the effects and CGI are really great(the film itself looks fantastic) and I was told by a co-worker that the 3-D was amazing but I wasn't wowed by it at all.

[QuickTidal]

stone monkey, on 02 July 2011 - 09:05 PM, said:

Okay, racism: I may be a bit sensitive to this issue, but Ken Jeong's character Jerry "Deep" Wang? Really? It's 2011 and we're expected to laugh about those furriners and their silly sounding names? And let's not even get into Bay's apparent obsession with homosexual panic - I might be tempted to say that the manly Mr Bay is compensating for something there; he certainly looks the type.

Jeong wrote his dialogue and came up with his character name. Bay knew how funny he is, and asked him to provide some of that funny here. If you have a problem with an Asian guy making fun of his own culture, I suspect you don't know what racism is. In fact, Jeong making fun of his own culture is something established years ago to FIGHT racism....cause if the guy you are being racist against is already racist against himself then it's no longer fun for the bully racist to do it. So, I'm sorry but I fully believe you are being too sensitive. Comedians like Jeong, Russel Peters, Margaret Cho, Omid Djalili ect. are all using comedy about race and culture to break down walls about racism in societal mores and norms.

[amphibian]

QuickTidal, on 04 July 2011 - 03:29 PM, said:

stone monkey, on 02 July 2011 - 09:05 PM, said:

Okay, racism: I may be a bit sensitive to this issue, but Ken Jeong's character Jerry "Deep" Wang? Really? It's 2011 and we're expected to laugh about those furriners and their silly sounding names? And let's not even get into Bay's apparent obsession with homosexual panic - I might be tempted to say that the manly Mr Bay is compensating for something there; he certainly looks the type.

Jeong wrote his dialogue and came up with his character name. Bay knew how funny he is, and asked him to provide some of that funny here. If you have a problem with an Asian guy making fun of his own culture, I suspect you don't know what racism is. In fact, Jeong making fun of his own culture is something established years ago to FIGHT racism....cause if the guy you are being racist against is already racist against himself then it's no longer fun for the bully racist to do it. So, I'm sorry but I fully believe you are being too sensitive. Comedians like Jeong, Russel Peters, Margaret Cho, Omid Djalili ect. are all using comedy about race and culture to break down walls about racism in societal mores and norms.

Tread carefully when talking about racism here. Stone Monkey is black and probably has had more experience with it than some people. I'm a white looking Asian-American and I experience something like reverse racism sometimes in my home countries.

However, I do believe that he is being overly sensitive regarding Jeong's character and the "homosexual panic". Jeong's character was more of the crazy/belligerent type rather than a caricature and I think the audiences have taken that in the right spirit. The bathroom scene could have been a simple "haha, laugh at them for acting gay" moment, but Jeong subverted that by being so confrontational to Malkovitch's character regarding any possible interpretations that it basically became a non-issue. In the audience where I was, people laughed harder at the confrontation than the "accidental gotcha".

[QuickTidal]

amphibian, on 04 July 2011 - 05:18 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 04 July 2011 - 03:29 PM, said:

stone monkey, on 02 July 2011 - 09:05 PM, said:

Okay, racism: I may be a bit sensitive to this issue, but Ken Jeong's character Jerry "Deep" Wang? Really? It's 2011 and we're expected to laugh about those furriners and their silly sounding names? And let's not even get into Bay's apparent obsession with homosexual panic - I might be tempted to say that the manly Mr Bay is compensating for something there; he certainly looks the type.

Jeong wrote his dialogue and came up with his character name. Bay knew how funny he is, and asked him to provide some of that funny here. If you have a problem with an Asian guy making fun of his own culture, I suspect you don't know what racism is. In fact, Jeong making fun of his own culture is something established years ago to FIGHT racism....cause if the guy you are being racist against is already racist against himself then it's no longer fun for the bully racist to do it. So, I'm sorry but I fully believe you are being too sensitive. Comedians like Jeong, Russel Peters, Margaret Cho, Omid Djalili ect. are all using comedy about race and culture to break down walls about racism in societal mores and norms.

Tread carefully when talking about racism here. Stone Monkey is black and probably has had more experience with it than some people. I'm a white looking Asian-American and I experience something like reverse racism sometimes in my home countries.

However, I do believe that he is being overly sensitive regarding Jeong's character and the "homosexual panic". Jeong's character was more of the crazy/belligerent type rather than a caricature and I think the audiences have taken that in the right spirit. The bathroom scene could have been a simple "haha, laugh at them for acting gay" moment, but Jeong subverted that by being so confrontational to Malkovitch's character regarding any possible interpretations that it basically became a non-issue. In the audience where I was, people laughed harder at the confrontation than the "accidental gotcha".

Oh I'm in the know. I'm part Japanese and was the target of neo-nazi bullies in highschool...my stepmother is East Indian and my stepdad is Jamaican. I've got a handle on things.

I meant no offense though Stone monkey (if that came across that way, I'm sorry dude). I just think it was an oversensitive reaction is all...considering I went to see this with an asian friend who found jeong endlessly funny in his role and wasn't in the slightest offended. Poorly worded post I guess. Sorry.

On topic, I think if Jeong really had an issue with it he wouldn't have done it. also Bay is a huge proponent of a diversity in characters and cultures. His movies represent that. He especially enjoys pinning racism against a wall and outing it for the mean spirited thing it is. So you get stuff like BAD BOYS which deals with African American's and Latino's as main characters who turn racism around into humor, even on each other. Hell BAD BOYS 2 has an opening action sequence where Will Smith and Martin Lawrence take on the KKK. Even Transformers is a who's who of ethnicities castwise. In fact I would argue that Bay is actually helping to break down stereotypical walls with his films by diversity of cast and ethnicities that aren't afraid to hold racism up in front of the camera and say "Look, here it is...it isn't pretty...but if we use humour to de-fang it...maybe one day we can stamp it out completely. I think that's a big deal in a world that needs to stop looking at each others colour or background and start looking at people for people.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 04 July 2011 - 06:07 PM

[MTS]

I suppose it's a credit to Michael Bay that people still went to see this movie despite their own prodigious ranting at how god-awful its predecessor was. Now, I took my cousin to see this movie today. I didn't really have any burning desire to see it - I wanted to see Bridesmaids instead. But he's 13, this sort of stuff is right in his wheelhouse. As you would expect, he enjoyed it thoroughly. Said it was better than the first, but not the second. He didn't care (nor did he even notice) that this film made just as little sense as the second one did either. In his mind, robots blowing shit up in a mildly entertaining way was enough. 'Who cares that the girl couldn't act? She's hot!' - exact words.

I had a different reaction to this film. I didn't find it offensive, nor did I think it was a highly polished piece of cinematic nonsense like Macros and SM did. I just found it boring. Like, spectacularly boring. I was shaking my head at the attempts at humour (although Tudyk, Jeong and Malkovich had their occasional moments), scratching my head at the plot and counting down the minutes until Optimus Prime began his inevitable ending monologue. I just didn't care about the characters either. Sam and what's-her-face were never going to die, nor were Optimus and Bumblebee and the rest. The only ones who did die were randoms we'd just met (with the exception of Ironhide?). I couldn't even summon the energy to curse Sentinel's sudden-but-inevitable betrayal. I think the problem with this film is that the explosions themselves aren't enough to carry the film. They are nice and all, and if this movie was an hour and a half instead of two and a half, I might have enjoyed it more than what I did, but after a certain point it all merged into the same thing over and over again. I didn't go into this film expecting Citizen Kane - in fact I went into this film knowing that I probably wouldn't enjoy it, but my cousin wanted to see it, so what was I going to do? However I did go into this film expecting something to keep me engaged and actually care about beyond the explosions, since they could only keep me engaged for so long, and that just didn't materialise.

[QuickTidal]

MTS, on 05 July 2011 - 07:50 AM, said:

Tudyk, Jeong and Malkovich

These three are what I think brought the humour level above the second movie indeed. I think without them I'd have been hard pressed to like it as much as I did comedy-wise.

[Abyss]

Big silly stupid Bay Hollywood nonsense fun. Can't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny but entertaining enough when in brain-off mode watching the shooty 'sploody.

Altho the bit

Spoiler

with the VW decepticon with a german accent executing Einstein/Wheeljack

was hamhanded even for Bay.

[Beezulbubba]

Saw this movie today. Holy shit this movie is tedious. The only thing that kept me from walking out of the theater was my infatuation with Rosie Huntington-Whiteley's beautiful bj lips.

[Chance]

Geekstad Nerdhammer, on 13 July 2011 - 04:29 AM, said:

Saw this movie today. Holy shit this movie is tedious. The only thing that kept me from walking out of the theater was my infatuation with Rosie Huntington-Whiteley's beautiful bj lips.

Ain't that interesting, lots of people expected some fun nonsense with decent action me included. While the common words for describing the movie seem to be boring, tedious and longwinded. Its interesting that enormous budgets, very good animations result in such pieces of crap failing at the very basics of moviemaking.

Saw it a few days ago and it's a favorit for worst movie I've seen in cinema this year.

/Chance

This post has been edited by Chance: 13 July 2011 - 09:12 AM

[Abyss]

What i still don't understand, is why, giving all things Bay already loose in the universe, anyone expected anything other than exactly what we got?

That's like going to an ayce chinese buffet and being shocked, SHOCKED! that it includes yummy things deep fried and battered that are bad for your health.

[Salt-Man Z]

Okay, don't jump to lynch me all at once, but I bet Michael Bay doing the Chain of Dogs would look really cool.

[Darkwatch]

The cussers certainly wouldn't be under-powered.

[Salt-Man Z]

And they would never run out!

[MWKarsa]

Abyss, on 13 July 2011 - 02:25 PM, said:

What i still don't understand, is why, giving all things Bay already loose in the universe, anyone expected anything other than exactly what we got?

That's like going to an ayce chinese buffet and being shocked, SHOCKED! that it includes yummy things deep fried and battered that are bad for your health.

I check my limited intelligence at the time I buy a ticket for a Bay movie and just want to see a great popcorn movie that even though the plot makes no sense I counter balance that with a hope that the action complete with neat explosions and general humor will offset that but this movie couldn't even provide a WWE lame style of entertainment. I go into these types of movies expecting to turn off all sense of rational thought and just want to enjoy explosions and great action scenes. Even by Bay standards this movie sucked IMO- the last battle scene dragged on forever without a great pay-off and I sadly just wanted it to end. Give me great campy- plot nonsense but fantastic action scenes and I'm cool with it but this movie did not deliver that at all. I'd rather watch Godzilla vs. Mothra or a Gamera movie over this movie.

Salt-Man Z, on 13 July 2011 - 07:35 PM, said:

Okay, don't jump to lynch me all at once, but I bet Michael Bay doing the Chain of Dogs would look really cool.

Until Bay introduces a love interest for Coltaine like Pearl Harbor and turns a great action flick into a crappy soap opera. Probably has Coltaine and Bult fighting over Felisin with Bent and Roach getting speaking parts but only being able to bark in ebonics.

[QuickTidal]

MWKarsa, on 14 July 2011 - 02:25 AM, said:

I'd rather watch Godzilla vs. Mothra or a Gamera movie over this movie.

Those are GREAT films! LOL Love old school Godzilla.

[blackzoid]

Salt-Man Z, on 13 July 2011 - 07:35 PM, said:

Okay, don't jump to lynch me all at once, but I bet Michael Bay doing the Chain of Dogs would look really cool.

HAHAHA!

Ya, no denying it, the resultant "film" would look cool. Very cool.
Especially the end part where we would see all the crucified soldiers done with awsome sunsets in the background.
In 3-D!