Do you like Michael Bay?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

Michael Bay is the Michael Bay of cinema. He consistantly make bad movie that people love. I am reminded of someone I ran into at the movie theater a while back. He'd asked me if I'd seen The Island. I told him no, I don't like Michael Bay. And this is what he told me: "You know how, in general, Michael Bay directs the best action ever? Here, he does everything else well, too. Really makes you think, almost as much as The Butterfly Effect."

[Richard Penna 2,082]

I remember seeing Roger Ebert on The Tonight Show a few years back when Pearl Harbor came out. He pretty much summed up my feeelings when he said that "by the time the attack came, I was rooting for the Japanese."

Critics shouldn't even bother going to see Michael Bay movies - they know exactly what they're going to get.

It's like any movie of this type - Bay's a typecast director and he's popular among the mass of cinema goers. Critics should just leave him alone and let the people that want to enjoy it do so.

I enjoy some of his movies because hey, sometimes they can be fun mindless popcorn entertainment, and what the hell's wrong with that? If I want a great movie experience I'll pop on Shawshank Redemption instead.

Transformers did have all the usual Bay mannerisms, but I still read a lot of reviews remarking how innovative it was and how incredible the SFX were, and I don't believe the film was trying to do anything more than that. Plus, before it came out, I myself dismissed it as a useless piece of CGI-filled rubbish.

Then I saw the trailer....wow. And I really enjoyed the film.

[Henry B 49]

Nothing about Transformers awed me in the slightest. They found a way to make those photo-realistic special effects boring.

[Ollie 859]

The first hour you could see some of Spielberg's influence. The second hour I spent looking at my watch and trying not to get motion sickness from the constant camera movement.

[pixie_twinkle 44]

Not at all. Transformers was an over-long pile of poo.

[Red 73]

But he has made decent movies here and there. Red Dragon was terrific.

True, and that's why I dislike Bay much more. Ratner is sort of the lesser evil.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Red Dragon was very good, but the path was already layed out for him to a large extent.

[Morlock 9]

I thought that it was gonna be terrible, so that I really liked, concidering the serious name he had to live up to, and him being the wildly least impressive of all the directors on the series....I was very impressed at the time, and I still liek the movie a great deal now.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Oh I like it a lot, the direction is very solid, though Ratner looked carefully at Demme's style for Silence.

On thing that helpen the film tremendously is that he cast it very...very well.

Even the minor roles. Keitel, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Emily Watson just bring that little bit extra to what normally be just fairly standard roles.

[Morlock 9]

Oh, certainly. Hoffman's performance is just a perfect evocation of the sleazy tabloid columnist. It kind of reminded me of The Sum of All Fears in that way. It's got so many fantastic character actors in there in the supporting rules, lending credulity to what should have been an all-around crappy film. And both have main actors I sometimes like, sometimes find annoying (although Affleck has decidedly more bad and fewer good roles than Norton (who I find to be overrated)).

And, of course, Ralph Fiennes is just superb. It seems kind of no brainer ot cast him as the villain...but he really did something with the role.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Actually, having read the book and seen Manhunter, I thought Fiennes would be all wrong for the role, but he was fantastic.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,064]

As a commercial filmmaker he is damn good.

As a cinematic filmmaker...he leaves much to be desired.

And as for whoever brought South Park in to this...I can't remember...

But if you watch that thing, you have no right to be criticizing anyone...not even a hobo.

[John Crichton 4]

The first hour you could see some of Spielberg's influence. The second hour I spent looking at my watch and trying not to get motion sickness from the constant camera movement.

Me too, with the added annoyance of being stuck on floor level seats.

[Ollie 859]

And as for whoever brought South Park in to this...I can't remember...

But if you watch that thing, you have no right to be criticizing anyone...not even a hobo.

Says the man who praised Gladiator.

[Sergeant 1,093]

Praising Gladiator isn't that bad. It's still 1000 times better than anything this Bay-man created.

[Luke Skywalker 1,284]

I enjoyed somewhat Transformers...for the CGI i suppose.

But i still want to know why they go into the city for the final battle (appart from Bay's need of mindless destruction....). But i fear there is not much more to it than that...

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Why would you like a film just for the CGI?

[Quintus 5,391]

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly. Red Dragon on the otherhand will always be garbage, regardless of Hopkins apparently playing for pantomime laughs. That film was never any good, let alone "great".

[Morlock 9]

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly.

It is arguable how properly it was done. IMO, the parts are far greater than the whole, which really doesn't work. Besides, it is a flawed concept to begin with. The Golden age epics are in general not particularly golden.

Red Dragon on the otherhand will always be garbage, regardless of Hopkins playing for pantomime laughs. That film was never any good, let alone "great".

Hopkins is a supporting character. Almost feels like a cameo in the film. The film is a terrific police procedural, with a terrific cast and a fantastic Ralph Fiennes, acted well, scored well, shot well, from a good script (which is the main thing Gladiator was lacking).

Gladiator aims high and is not entirely successful (to put it somewhat mildly). Red Dragon aims lower, but totally succeeds at it's aims.

[Luke Skywalker 1,284]

Why would you like a film just for the CGI?

Did i say i like that movie?

I just enjoyed it..a bit.

And the CGI is onw of the few things worth in that movie...

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly.

Properly done?!? It has a blockbuster kind Zimmer score.

I rather have Rozsa, Steiner and the likes.

[Morlock 9]

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly.

Properly done?!? It has a blockbuster kind Zimmer score.

I rather have Rozsa, Steiner and the likes.

I believe he was talking about the film.

[Luke Skywalker 1,284]

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly.

Properly done?!? It has a blockbuster kind Zimmer score.

I rather have Rozsa, Steiner and the likes.

I believe he was talking about the film.

IMHO, the music is part of the film...

[Ollie 859]

I liked the theme of Gladiator when it was done as Spartacus and Ben Hur.

I found it to be a complete bore and I lost interest 45 minutes into it. And not even commenting on it's weak score.

[Morlock 9]

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly.

Properly done?!? It has a blockbuster kind Zimmer score.

I rather have Rozsa, Steiner and the likes.

I believe he was talking about the film.

IMHO, the music is part of the film...

Yes, one part of the film. There are many other parts. The storytelling of Gladiator necasserily sucks because Zimmer scored it?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Hmmmm....sounds reasonable.

[Ollie 859]

Well I'll say this, his music doesn't help the film.

[Quintus 5,391]

What? Gladiator was a splendid throwback to the big and expensive epics of the Burton/Taylor era, only done properly.

It is arguable how properly it was done. IMO, the parts are far greater than the whole, which really doesn't work. Besides, it is a flawed concept to begin with. The Golden age epics are in general not particularly golden.

I mentioned nothing about the movies of that era being particularly golden, since besides the likes of Spartacus and even The Vikings, they most certainly were not. But that is perhaps another argument. Regardless, Gladiator pushed the exact same buttons as Spartacus and its ilk did and especially well for that matter. I disagree with you about Red Dragon, that film is flatout turgid to me. No style, and even less substance - a money spinner if ever there was one.

Oh and for the record (Luke Skywalker!), give me Zimmer's Gladiator score over ANY relevent and comparable score from the Spartacus era, beyond and before.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner for dumbest post of the week, and it's only tuesday.

[Ollie 859]

Now Steef he's entitled to his opinion.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

That's what they said about Hilter at first.

[Ollie 859]

Egads!!!! Maybe we should just ban all talk of Zimmer from this board then!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

If only....

[Quintus 5,391]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner for dumbest post of the week, and it's only tuesday.

I'll take that as a compliment, albeit a backhanded one and of the sheer most snobberish variety.

Water off a ducks back, you understand

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Water off a ducks back, you understand

Darling, I give you very best duck!

[Ollie 859]

Daffy duck??

[Quintus 5,391]

No, Duck Soup. Since this thread sort of reminds me of that very silly movie. A load of entertaining nonsense masquerading as something far more worthy.

[Ollie 859]

Hey one could use that description for Michael Bay's movies as well.

[Luke Skywalker 1,284]

Mindless zimmer bashing is wrong (for the most part...) but doing the contrary with that statement is just...

[Sergeant 1,093]

I stopped to watch his movies after Armageddon and I'm never gonna see any of his films anymore.

[bondo 33]

Hell yes I love his movies! Bad Boys 1 and 2 were fun, mindless action flicks. The Rock was a great pairing of Nic Cage and Sean Connery against Ed Harris. Armageddon and Pearl Harbor were so-so. The Island and Transformers put the fun back in summer sci-fi blockbusters.

His movies may not have a great bit of depth, but I don't require all movies to. He makes movies to entertain, and nothing more. In that regard, I believe he succeeds.

[Morlock 9]

Doncha just love it when what Michael Bay does is made to sound noble and down-to-earth?

[bondo 33]

It's entertainment, no more, no less, and it should be treated as such. You either love it or you hate it. End of story.

[Morlock 9]

See my post above. Something could be just entertainment and still be offensive to the human intelligence (I'm not saying this as a rule about Bay....but there's nothing commendable in my eyes about setting one's standards to such low levels as many filmmakers do).

[bondo 33]

If you're that easily offended, you shouldn't be seeing any of todays movies anyway. Times change, people change, tastes change. That's the way of the world. You can still enjoy what's already out... there's plenty of it.

[Morlock 9]

Nonsense. There are many good films made. Which is precisely why I can afford to disregard filmmakers of Bay's ilk.

[soundwave 0]

I've never thought Michael Bay as a brilliant director. When matched up with Bruckheimer, I think his films where great action pieces, but that's about all. Entertaining, but nothing award winning. I thought Bad Boys was good, the sequel was just plain too long and Armaggedon was alright for what it's worth. The Rock was freakin awesome, though. I never bothered to see The Island, but heard it was ok. Pearl Harbor I haven't seen since the theater, but seem to remember the bombing scene was done well. Now, Transformers was easily his best film in large part, I believe, to his collaboration to Spielberg who probably kept him in line from doing his normal, irritating camera moving ever scene (and, yes, I know he did get away with it some times in the film). All in all, I'm pretty indifferent about him. I guess I'm drawn to seeing his movies for the sheer notoriety he's gained through the years.

[AI 0]

Bad Boys was just crass and stupid.

The Rock is one of the best action films ever made.

Armageddon is silly, as is Pearl Harbor.

The Island was good.

Transformers was good for the first half, then degenerated into a borefest of stupidity.

Overall, Bay is hit and miss.