|
I'm so glad this thread is back. Although I might have to rewatch the third movie, at least, to jog my memory and see if my idea that even more than the other two, it's about Sam being initiated into Transformer-hood holds up.
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2013 09:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 15:21 |
|
|
The key to this whole argument is whether the twins are (symbolically) black people or not. If they're incomprehensible raceless aliens taking on minstrelry as a way to interact with humans in a way they'd understand, then Krangdar is right (or at least on the right track) and they can easily be read as a criticism of the stereotype itself. The trouble is the twins' minstrelry never actually functions as a disguise. We never see them behave like aliens. Their subservience and idiocy isn't part of their role, it's who they really are; they picked up those familiar stereotypes because they were descriptive of their real identities. The role of Transformers in general in all three films is to serve as a kind of heightened symbol for neoliberalism; in other words, they are us. So basically the film says: Transformers are America, America has a stupid and subservient underclass, and that stupid and subservient underclass maps perfectly to (a stereotype of) black people. The fact that the twins act like a stereotype instead of acting like real people doesn't matter, because the stereotype is being used to draw an analogy about real people (in order to say something horribly racist about them.) And just as an illustrative example, Optimus Prime works the same way, just in a manner that serves the film better thematically. He borrows constantly from the imagery of American leaders and heroes, and acts like a selfish psychopath. This isn't an abstract criticism of "the stereotype of America;" it's straight up saying that America's leaders and the nation's actions as a world power are psychopathic.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2013 15:04
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:That's the other related attitude, that only Good Movies are worthy of analysis or discussion. And we determine what is a Good Movie without/before analysis by... ? Nobody ever says. I'm kind of sympathetic to where you guys are coming from, but I think I can answer this one. The one unforgivable sin a film can commit is to be boring, and I definitely know that before I do an in-depth analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Ok, sure. Like, of course nobody has to engage with any film if they're just not interested. But then why should that person's opinion be automatically elevated above someone who actually took the time to analyze the film in detail (like Terry)? It shouldn't! I generally don't post in threads about media that disinterests me, because I know that my opinion of it won't be sufficiently informed to be worth sharing. On the other hand, there are some movies (the Matrix sequels come to mind) which, no matter how much you argue that a great deal of thought went into them, that a great deal of meaning can be gleaned from them -- even no matter how much I agree -- it still doesn't save them for me. I'm willing to keep my mouth shut, but not willing to deny that some kinds of badness are immediately recognizable and/or hard to articulate. But I was actually pretty entertained by the Transformers movies, so there's that. 
Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Jan 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Give it to Zack Snyder. I don't even know if he's a good match for it, I just want to a) bathe in the tears and b) read CineD when it happens.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
I don't like Signs either but that's not what "plot hole" means.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
notaspy posted:How does a robot get fat anyways? He always takes the universal serial bus instead of walking.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Transformers 3 was actually a Shia LaBouef biopic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Please don't compare with prometheus kthx. Please tell me which movie you're offended on behalf of. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Then what is your point I don't know about BSS but yes, comic books in general are a wasteland.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
I think Bay has a much more ambivalent relationship to his subject matter than Verhoeven does. Starship Troopers is a film relentlessly mocking fascism because Verhoeven hates fascism with all his heart and humor is the most effective and disarming weapon he could use against it. Bay's more like Zack Snyder, or Hideaki Anno -- he recognizes flaws in something he loves and is willing to explore those flaws even if the results are kind of damning. But he's not willing to back down from enjoying it. That's why all of those directors' work so often seems contradictory, or even hypocritical. It's about self-aware entanglement, not ironic distance.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
I haven't seen Pain and Gain yet but The Rock is a perfect example of this. It's about Nicholas Cage transforming from a nerdy chemist into a literal action hero, which is presented as good and correct and saves his life and that of thousands of people, but at the same time his role model is a bitter old man who destroyed his own family and spent most of his life in prison -- played by an actor who famously portrayed James Bond. And then the villains are former Marines led by a frustrated, impotent father figure. There are two ways to look at this -- the charitable one, where you might say that it's about threading the eye of the needle and finding a form of masculinity that's righteous and protective and all the other good traits associated with maleness without the bad ones just as openly on display, or the uncharitable one where you argue that the movie just wants to revel in explosions and one-liners and killing bad people because they're bad while somehow absolving itself of the toxicity it knows is present in that narrative. (To be clear, in the case of The Rock I'd definitely say it's the former. Transformers is harder to parse, though.) Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Jul 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
Also the book isn't a satire of anything; according to Heinlein's own statements he wrote the book to defend his political views and drum up support for the United States' nuclear weapons testing program.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:^^^^ Should be in one of the essays in The New Worlds of Robert Heinlein: Expanded Universe.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
atrus50 posted:Big Hero 6- to my eyes at least- owed a lot to this series. As a refutation, or is it also an intensely cynical kids' movie? Or just in the visual sense?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Good, Churchill was scum. I was curious about this, so I looked it up.  I knew Churchill was a war-loving shithead but I didn't realize it went as far as "letting entire countries starve to death on purpose."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Travis Knight of Laika is directing the 2018 Bumblebee movie. Well, if nothing else, Laika is incredibly talented at making thematically hideous films by accident. Seems like an interesting fit, maybe even a good one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Dude's in loving Bram Stoker's Dracula, and not only that, he's one of the few people in the movie who acts like he gives a poo poo. e: I guess you could make a case for Gary Oldman, too
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:When did you last see it? Whatever BSD is, it ain't low effort I mean, it's been a while, so it's entirely possible my impressions aren't accurate, but I'm thinking more in terms of two different kinds of hamminess. There's goofing off like the actress who plays Lucy and then there's committing to the loving absurdity that's going on, like when Van Helsing wards off Dracula's wives when they come to collect Mina.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 15:21 |
|
|
I only watch movies that are rated "rotten."
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2017 16:23
|
|