|
Donnerberg posted:I love it. It's like if Nolan and Burton made Batman movies at the same time. Aren't the DC movies pretty much doing that anyway? Between 'The Batman', the Jared Leto Joker movie (I know it's been canceled), the Joaquin Phoenix Joker movie, and whatever's left of the DCEU, it seems like they're all over the map as well.
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2019 10:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
Robot Style posted:I don't know if it had been officially announced yet, but if this billboard from Trans4mers is any indication, A) That billboard is dope. B) For stupid loud popcorn flicks....the Transformers movies are pretty good. I haven't seen the last two....but the first one was pretty drat good. And I am a fan of Mark Wahlberg. Side note.....Shia LaBeouf.....now I really liked Disturbia.....but holy crap with the blatant product endorsements. Chevy, Xbox Live, Itunes? Am I missing anything?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 12:10
|
|
|
This is just confusing now. https://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/more-info-for-future-transformers-films-from-di-bonaventura-now-using-the-word-reboot/43092/
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 05:07
|
|
|
The setup left by the last Knight is so bonkers that I'm glad it's being continued.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 09:44
|
|
|
I dunno, how do you follow up Earth being the robot devil and mankind being essentially the spawn of satan?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 10:26
|
|
|
The United States posted:I dunno, how do you follow up Earth being the robot devil and mankind being essentially the spawn of satan? Yeah, it hews a bit too close to reality. They need to sci fi harder.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 10:44
|
|
|
Clearly the solution is to take inspiration from both Beast Machines and Mass Effect 3: we merge the energies of Primus within Cybertron with the entire Earth and its inhabitants, cleansing them of the taint of Unicron forever with the side effect of turning every life on the planet into technorganic organisms. The final scene is Cade Yeager looking at his new self and shouting "Hey Optimus, I'm a Transformaaah!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 10:55
|
|
|
It cannot be overstated how loving weird Beast Machines was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
This should probably be here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7f26gVlDQI
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns15sHq_k8A Bumblebee VFX reel.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
Arise, Threadimus Prime. I've been watching these films with a friend of mine who, somehow, hasn't seen any of them before. His thoughts as a complete newbie have been interesting. We've gone through the first two so far, and he's said: "These films have a really bizarre energy from the very first scene." "Everyone in this film is some kind of weird psycho. Sam, Lennox, the parents, the robots, everyone." "Mikaela is the only character who really does anything." "The Autobots do not have a sincere regard for humans." "Bay's view on the military seems to be: soldiers good, fancy toys good, bureaucracy/industrial complex bad." "They were cutting up Megatron for parts while he was still conscious?" "Give me the Cube-Boy!" "Why didn't Optimus use the Cube as a weapon against Megatron?" "I could listen to Optimus monologue forever." "Is the division between Autobots and Decepticons cultural, political, or racial? I feel like they're different races of Transformer. They do not appear to be able to compromise." "There's something about the Decepticon accusing Optimus of fascism before he shoots him in the head that's interesting." "No one is safe from the sex jokes - not the parents, the dogs, not Sam, not even the robots." "It's weird that Sam treats Bumblebee like a dog and not a sentient being." "Convenient for Optimus that the All-Spark was their only record of history." "The frats have comebacks in this - amazing." "Prime: 'Allow me to justify my conquest of your society, you can't be like us so let me have my way.'" "They said Decepticons came before Autobots." "Holy poo poo, Sam just became the Cube-Boy!" "'Give me your face!' Holy gently caress! 'I rise, you fall?' It was Optimus' revenge!"
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 09:58
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO0gS5JMfGs
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 04:44
|
|
|
I saw the Last Knight the other month and then I saw a bunch of actually good movies and, after avoiding too much CD for a while, I realized just how stupid and insane goons can be to desperately try to imagine depth in dumb movies for babies and do a Zizek LARP rather than trying to just watch a good loving movie once in a while. What a heap of trash. I think Felix described these best as monuments a decadent society builds to itself. Edit: On the other hand, I’ll grant that they have a certain bizarre fascination, but they aren’t good. Michael Bay is way smarter than mkst people think he is but at best this is just a multi billion dollar exercise in mean spirited commercial cynicism and that’s kind of interesting for a while but these movies themselves are just garbage and spiritually caustic to watch. Pain and Gain is really good tho. Robotnik Nudes fucked around with this message at 08:57 on Mar 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 08:52
|
|
|
The Last Knight is about Optimus Prime’s mission to kill God and therefore owns. But it does own in the sense that these movies are, indeed, spiritually caustic, and hate you (the audience) as much as Prime hates all life which will not bow to him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:27
|
|
|
Still thinking about the time Optimus and the autobots pretended to leave/die so that the decepticons would invade and massacre an entire city just so Optimus could say “I told you so”
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:32
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:[...] Think of Bays Transformers as our The Room. That's what's happening here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:53
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Still thinking about the time Optimus and the autobots pretended to leave/die so that the decepticons would invade and massacre an entire city just so Optimus could say “I told you so” If I remember right, that plot was ripped straight out of an episode of the original 80s cartoon. I mean I’m not trying to justify it, just that it’s accurate to the source material (and it’s funny that a kids cartoon would carry that kind of message).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:The Last Knight is about Optimus Prime’s mission to kill God and therefore owns. But it does own in the sense that these movies are, indeed, spiritually caustic, and hate you (the audience) as much as Prime hates all life which will not bow to him. Conceptually there’s some interesting stuff but they’re just torture to actually watch. Yes Bay has a definite sense of style and in some movies his excess can work but they’re just a confusing angry jumble of barely discernable cgi objects smashing against each other while the camera has a rage spasm. They’re loud, confusing, ugly, and barely coherent, and when they ARE coherent they’re even worse. OTOH I get that Michael Bay isn’t a fascist per se but just seems to think it’s really funny to see how much toxic slop his idiotic audience, who he holds in the highest contempt, will lap up. But they aren’t even satirical really. He thinks it’s funny that people take them at face value. Bay’s cynical nihilism IS funny but it turns into movies that are just BAD. Intentionally so, which removes the charm and sincerity of something like The Room. Admittedly he’s not wrong. It is pretty funny to see how much of a comically brutal fascist psycho you can make your heroes without the audience ever batting an eye. It is pretty funny to drop in some super racist robots because you think your dumb poo poo audience are dumb racists who’ll lap it up. It’s conceptually funny but if you make a bad movie ironically, it’s still a bad movie. Bay’s expertise in excess and his talent just make it more painful because he can more be more effectively dreadful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:I saw the Last Knight the other month and then I saw a bunch of actually good movies and, after avoiding too much CD for a while, I realized just how stupid and insane goons can be to desperately try to imagine depth in dumb movies for babies and do a Zizek LARP rather than trying to just watch a good loving movie once in a while. Its not about the movies being deep, or good. The original analysis that started this all was about noticing the actual content of these movies doesn't fit how they are usually talked about or interpreted. That doesn't necessarily make them deep or good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
movies turned to poo poo when they went from interesting insect/monstrous designs for the robot heads to just being human faces with robot beards. also when there was a 2minute scene explaining the legality of having sex with a minor
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 23:56
|
|
|
banned from Starbucks posted:movies turned to poo poo when they went from interesting insect/monstrous designs for the robot heads to just being human faces with robot beards. Oddly enough both have precedent in the franchise. Transformers have done some terrible things in its history.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 00:16
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:Conceptually there’s some interesting stuff but they’re just torture to actually watch. Yes Bay has a definite sense of style and in some movies his excess can work but they’re just a confusing angry jumble of barely discernable cgi objects smashing against each other while the camera has a rage spasm. They’re loud, confusing, ugly, and barely coherent, and when they ARE coherent they’re even worse. Whether they are good or bad or good because they're bad on purpose or bad because they're bad on purpose is kind of orthogonal to whether they're interesting to talk about. They're baffling expensive artifacts which consumed millions of man-hours to produce something insanely weird. It's interesting to poke at all the weird stuff, just because of how weird it is. Like, it's quite strange that Megatron is primarily characterized as a mother. It's quite strange that the Autobots joke about Optimus brainwashing them. It's all very strange. It's fun to look at things that movies say but which the audience doesn't pick up on. For example, in Batman Begins, Batman is trained by ninjas, and his final exam is to execute a villager who committed a crime. Batman refuses. He is so serious about not killing people that instead of executing the villager, he blows up the ninja fortress, killing dozens (?) of people. He carries one person out of the wreckage on his back. It's not the villager whose life he wanted to spare, though. It's his friend Liam Neeson. He just left that villager in there to die. That's hilarious. The movie never calls it out but it is important characterization.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
It’s kind of interesting that Michael Bay isn’t just a dumb propagandist but an actively malicious cinematic force doing his own private joke at everyone’s expense but to get that you have to watch the movies and holy poo poo is that a task more painful and excruciating than Salo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 05:06
|
|
|
The Nolan Batman being a dumbass isn't anything new/unnoticed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 10:55
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:It’s kind of interesting that Michael Bay isn’t just a dumb propagandist but an actively malicious cinematic force doing his own private joke at everyone’s expense but to get that you have to watch the movies and holy poo poo is that a task more painful and excruciating than Salo. Not really. Bay’s movies without robots - i.e. Pain & Gain, 13 Hours, and 6 Underground - are just straightforward satires with clear stories and good action scenes. Like, 13 Hours is just nonstop making GBS threads on American foreign policy - and it looks pretty much like Black Hawk Down. There’s no hyperbole needed to describe it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:The Nolan Batman being a dumbass isn't anything new/unnoticed. He's not at all a dumbass, he's very deliberate! I also love the bit where he's hit by fear gas and surrounded by scary poor people in the slums, so he grapples on to his dad's passing monorail. It's Visual Allegory
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 20:37
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:He's not at all a dumbass, he's very deliberate! Yeah, the fact he pointedly allows the criminal villager to die during the ninja explosion is called back to later on. "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you." Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Mar 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 20:42
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Not really. Bay’s movies without robots - i.e. Pain & Gain, 13 Hours, and 6 Underground - are just straightforward satires with clear stories and good action scenes. I was referring to TF I’ve seen Pain and Gain I know what Bay’s up to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:I saw the Last Knight the other month and then I saw a bunch of actually good movies and, after avoiding too much CD for a while, I realized just how stupid and insane goons can be to desperately try to imagine depth in dumb movies for babies and do a Zizek LARP rather than trying to just watch a good loving movie once in a while. Don't sign your posts
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2020 16:58
|
|
|
banned from Starbucks posted:also when there was a 2minute scene explaining the legality of having sex with a minor It's a funny scene because of how gross it is. Carrying around the romeo and juliet law on a card is some peak sleaze
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2020 17:41
|
|
|
The Transformers movies are my favorite movies of all time. Thanks for reminding me I need to watch em all again! The last time I had a TF marathon was right before I saw Bumblebee a couple years ago. EDIT: wow, just got thru reading OP's analysis and I completely disagree with most of the things they said (especially their interpretation of Optimus being the badguy) but I still appreciate someone taking the time to actually analyze these movies instead of just going "lol Michael Bay bad" Jamie Faith fucked around with this message at 04:49 on Jun 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 02:58
|
|
|
It's weird, I recently read Susan Sontag's "On style," which is something she wrote in the early-'60s but is even more relevant now than it was then, and I think is particularly apt when it comes to not only reading Bay's films, but also clarifying why they provoke such particular feelings of distaste. Obviously, SMG and others have outlined their theory of revulsion to Bay's work being in a certain sense ideological, but I think there's something to be said for some folks (especially popular critics or those parroting them) simply failing to effectively communicate what about the form of his work is so alienating:quote:"Stylization" in a work of art, as distinct from style, reflects an ambivalence (affection contradicted by contempt, obsession contradicted by irony) toward the subject-matter. This ambivalence is handled by maintaining, through the rhetorical overlay that is stylization, a special distance from the subject. But the common result is that either the work of art is excessively narrow and repetitive, or else the different parts seem unhinged, dissociated... No doubt, in a culture pledged to the utility (particularly the moral utility) of art, burdened with a useless need to fence off solemn art from arts which provide amusement, the eccentricities of stylized art supply a valid and valuable satisfaction... Yet it is evident that stylized art, palpably an art of excess, lacking harmoniousness, can never be of the very greatest kind. To clarify, when Sontag distinguishes style from stylization here, she is defining the former as simply the particular idiom of form in a work of art, which is inevitable because all art requires form; whereas stylization describes "what is present in a work of art precisely when an artist does make the by no means inevitable distinction between matter and manner, theme and form." In other words, stylization is an aesthetic approach in which the role of aesthetics is treated as distinguished from that of content. For Sontag, the typical role of "style" in the popular arts, particularly in motion pictures, is to project a fantasy that, whatever form the film currently assumes, for the spectator, it is as if it could be done no other way. Stylization -- which Sontag treats as inferior, and, notably, uses Orson Welles as an example -- causes a schism between content and form, and thus arouses 'dissociation' or 'distanciation' in the spectator, who now becomes hyper-aware of form in particular as that which is specifically not bound to content, which in fact could appear almost any other way. You can already see in this essay the seeds of the "style over substance" meme -- Sontag is, however dismissively, literally articulating the idea of a kind of popular art in which style literally operates above content. The irony being, that Sontag's whole essay is about how contemporary critics should be concerned less with content, and more with form. Her critique of stylization is fundamentally not that it gets in the way of or obfuscates the lack of "substance." She is in fact more honest in simply articulating the view that "stylization" is an inferior type of form that is not sufficiently sensual or erotic. I feel like even among Bay's contingency of supporters we either claim or imply too often that his works are somehow misanthropic, accepting the dismissive line that he must "hate" the viewer, that he's just shoveling them "slop." I think it's much more accurate to describe his films, fundamentally, as "ambivalent" in precisely the way Sontag describes: "affection contradicted by contempt, obsession contradicted by irony." Bay legitimately does have affection for the Transformers I.P. and the possibilities it gives him to work with these luxury car brands and state-of-the-art CGI, etc. He is, indeed, obsessed with making every shot "perfect." But this perfectionist attention to form, regardless of intent, betrays a certain degree of ambivalence. Hence, how often do his works provoke precisely the kinds of reactions that Sontag outlines: 1) The feeling that the narratives of his films are "narrow and repetitive" 2) That they are "unhinged, dissociated" 3) That, per that Every Frame a Painting video essay, that Bay seems to apply his "style" even to scenes where it isn't "appropriate" or "doesn't communicate what he wants" or whatever... The ending of that video is literally the reader expressing their dissatisfaction that Bay's stylization of a supposedly parochial, optimistic end to the story is presented in such a way as to make it seem non-specific, as if it really can and should be done any other way. And in contrast, we are presented with the thoroughly un-stylized ending of Fargo. Now, of course, Fargo has style. But it's not stylized, at least not in that particular moment. There is no schism between form and content. Like Sontag, the authors of the video consider this, then, to be the hallmarks of art "of the greatest kind"; i.e., art that is both formalistically particular, while also maintaining the illusion that the work itself is irrevocable, that it is consistent and 'harmonious,' that it could not appear any other way. The essence of Bay's filmmaking, as virtually the reigning champ of the "art of excess," is not misanthropy, but ambivalence. It is defined by the profound, obsessive investment in form as serving "a valid and valuable satisfaction" unto itself, while also maintaining an almost asexual distance from getting too close, from becoming too emotionally involved or invested in the outcome of a fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
Jamie Faith posted:The Transformers movies are my favorite movies of all time. Thanks for reminding me I need to watch em all again! The last time I had a TF marathon was right before I saw Bumblebee a couple years ago. please watch better movies if the transformers live action movies are your favorites "of all time"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 08:35
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Its not about the movies being deep, or good. The original analysis that started this all was about noticing the actual content of these movies doesn't fit how they are usually talked about or interpreted. That doesn't necessarily make them deep or good. Duh Who the gently caress cares about any of that in these movies aren’t actually fun to watch in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 08:55
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:please watch better movies if the transformers live action movies are your favorites "of all time" I'm so sorry I committed the crime of liking a movie you don't like. I'm sure one day you'll get over it. I believe in you. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 09:07
|
|
|
I would genuinely be interested in hearing you elaborate on why these movies are your favorite of all time, and why you disagree with the concept that movie optimus is not a good guy. Without the cringey passive aggressiveness, please
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 09:46
|
|
|
Look, if you want to watch these Transformers movies go ahead. But if they’re genuinely you’re favorite movies of all time you probably need to grow up a bit because your taste in film is infantile.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:01
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:I would genuinely be interested in hearing you elaborate on why these movies are your favorite of all time, and why you disagree with the concept that movie optimus is not a good guy. "cringey passive aggressiveness" like implying someones dumb and haven't seen any other movies because they like a movie you don't like? I seriously don't know how you can start off a convo in bad faith like that and expect a good faith reply in return. If you started off this convo with the first paragraph in your second post as opposed to your first post, I would have gladly discussed this with you but I don't want to bother if this is just going to turn into some dumb slap fight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:03
|
|
|
'i could totally justify my position, but will choose not to, because you guys are mean. this is totally distinguishable from not being able to justify my position because'
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
the most lukewarm mocking imaginable makes you do the "take my ball and go home" thing, huh. I thought you were made of sterner stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:16
|
|