|
A fun detail I just realized: Kelsey Grammar's deck of cards has Ironhide (the black truck) on one of the cards, crossed out. This means his list of targets predates the battle of Chicago. Ironhide was killed by Sentinel Prime before that event ever occurred.
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
Milky Moor posted:I was just about to say this in the process of building on your nihilism mention. Lockdown has seen the truth and now kills his brothers and sisters in service of the universal order, the universal order that Lockdown states means a separation between all species. But what kills him? A combined effort from an Autobot and three humans who've all come to trust and understand each other. The scary thing about this film is that crazy fuckin' Optimus now actually is the closest thing to a good guy. Optimus hasn't changed much at all from his face-stabbing murderous form. It's just these new guys are that bad. Anyway, with Lockdown: it bears repeating that his ship is a nightmare version of Cade and Joyce's labs. As I always stress, this purely Evil outside represents the essence of what the heroes are fighting for. Cade wants to keep his daughter in a cage. He wants obedient subordinates. He wants a robotic guard dog, and he wants to keep Optimus chained up. This is why killing Lockdown doesn't quite solve anything. It's a temporary class truce to repel the verminous invader - essentially what we see in the Marvel films, where Captain America teams with Tony Stark. The actual source of the problem has not been addressed. It's Stark himself. Cade gets his mansion and his lab, and his daughter no longer rebels. He presumably still wants to patent the sword-gun he found. So really, what's changed? He just got exactly what he wanted.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Lockdown basically understands that he's living in an HP Lovecraft sort of cosmicist universe. The constant Alien / Prometheus references underline that. The defining feature of his character design is how his eyes morph into various goggles, making him appear quasi-omniscient.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
Earth is a transforming planet already. Check the basic structure of the Sam trilogy: TF1 is the offputtingly fake/generic action movie about a boy getting a car (aka 'Car Mode'), while TF3 is the apocalyptic doomsday nightmare film (aka 'Robot Mode'). TF2 is, of course, the abstract and jumbled transformation between these two modes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
Gatts posted:I think while Prime had tendencies, it isn't until he dies and is resurrected by Sam that he becomes a murderous killing machine with a child's concept of justice. But then, you have the opening scenes of Revenge - where he hunts down and kills this dude who calls him a tyrant to his face.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
I agree. Stop wasting everyone's time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
I like the end of the film, where people literally need to let go of their material possessions to escape the magnetic weapon. Right as it hits, the camera lingers on a random bystander's Gucci shades.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Indie Rocktopus posted:I was talking about removing the stuff Terry described as genuinely pointless (Sam's parents getting high, etc.) (although if someone wanted to make an argument for the inclusion of that in the original films, I'd be interested in hearing it). I'd assume the misogyny and racial caricatures and everything would stay. A faithful edit would probably be much longer than a regular film, maybe four or five hours - hell, the sheer punishment of sitting through something that long might even make it more effective. That stuff was skipped over more because Terry didn't want to get into it than because it's genuinely pointless. The first two films are the most loaded, but also the most unpleasant to watch. Like, if you go back to when the first film came out, people were really pissed about the scene where the Autobots trash the back yard. Y'know "we paid for blood! What's this comedy scene doing here?" But it is important: the lawn stands for Sam's relationship with his dad, how Ron tries to be authoritative and maintain order. (Other character traits: he's head of the Neighborhood Watch, and a coward.) If Optimus is the ultimate father figure to many kids, you have to set him up against the inadequate - human - father. The real punchline to the lawn scene is that there is no zany punchline. Ron honestly doesn't care that much that the lawn was destroyed by an 'earthquake'. It was purely a way of teaching Sam respect. It's key characterization for the Autobots as well, given that they don't comprehend why destroying the lawn is a bad thing. 'Course you don't totally sympathize with these suburban buffoons trying to protect their lawn, but Optimus isn't much of an alternative. Note that he's not like "forget the lawn! People are in danger!" it's all "Sorry. Oops, sorry." He's the same dumb dad - but with greater, unrestrained, use of force. (Optimus being a dumb dad obviously carries over into this latest film.) Same with the masturbation jokes. Sam's mom constantly insisting that it's TOTALLY NATURAL is no less a method of policing her son. It's a textbook example of the superego injection to enjoy. By demanding that Sam do whatever he wants, but still making him feel guilt of he does the wrong thing (both parents are visibly relieved when they see he's with a girl), that guilt is intensified. Same with the pot joke: "pot doesn't work like that! How could they be so stupid arghh!" Obviously it doesn't work like that in reality. But given what we know about her character, she is somewhat deliberately trying to embarrass Sam and thus keep him off the drugs. On top of that, the sudden transition from hedonism to violence recurs constantly in the series - most recently, with both Beats By Dre and My Little Pony transformed into guns, and casually waved around. Cade uses his skill with football to kill a man. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Jul 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Besides the entire middle section spent on Lockdown's ship, my favorite part of the film is the scene where Cade and Joyce fumble with the comically oversized grenade. I fuckin love that grenade prop. I wish it was in my house. This grenade is a truly great visual gag because, you may note, it's roughly the same size as THE SEED. And, in fact, Lockdown literally used SEEDS as grenades. That's how Lucas was killed. This giant grenade imagery is straight out of Batman: The Movie and Dark Knight Rises. What do you do if you can't get rid of a bomb? With Cade and Joyce, their solution is to pass it off to the nearest Autobot. At the end of the film, Optimus picks up THE SEED, essentially tucks it into his pocket, and promises it'll never be misused. However - only minutes beforehand - Optimus grabbed one of Lockdown's SEED-GRENADES and set it off right on the outskirts of the city, destroying a grain elevator and lord knows what else. The imagery is recurringly of the Autobots taking these grenades 'for safe-keeping' and then immediately using them against the latest enemy. It's a pretty safe bet that Optimus is going to nuke god. Lord Krangdar posted:I'm kinda curious whether all the product placement was actually pursued and paid for by the companies, or whether some of it was actually requested by the filmmakers (like with Lady Gaga's Telephone video). My favorite examples of this is when Zack Snyder was denied the use of every brand requested for Dawn Of The Dead.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Transformers 4 "my immersion!" post.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
I'm still thinking over the decision to set the climactic battle at a grain elevator. I mean, Wahlberg is introduced as this dude driving' through the prairie in his pickup truck, past a train that I believe is transporting wheat or something. Multiple action scenes are set in and around wheat fields and cornfields. But then, Wahlberg uses his massive barn to make gimmicky Sharper Image crap. The scene with the painter-robot shows that he wants something that will do the work for him, and he clearly aspires to become like Joyce. So yeah: detonate the grain elevator, get a mansion.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted: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. I think the pointless destruction of the grain elevator is key. Bay loves farmers, pickup trucks, men who work hard to feed the world, etc. But, of course, Cade is not a farmer. He dresses as a farmer, but he simply is not. He repairs old garbage 8-track players, and hopes to become the next Steve Jobs. The obsolescence theme is undeniable. Optimus fears becoming obsolete. Bumblebee fears becoming obsolete. Cade fears becoming obsolete. On top of the scene with 8-track player, you have the old projector and the bullshit about how digital IMAX 3D is superior/inferior to how things were in 'the good ol' days'. There are numerous jokes about how young people hate the elderly (see the otherwise throwaway scene where the Chinese grandmas block a hallway). The main theme is dinosaurs dying out, or making one last stand, etc. etc. The gag with the Beats By Dre pill is instantly dated. It's destined to be tossed aside by some kid who doesn't even know what it is, with an exaggerated shattering noise. In contrast to all this, being a farmer is no fad. It's eternal, and universal. That, I believe, is what Bay truly respects. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 09:30 on Jul 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I literally do not care at all about her interpretation in any negative or positive way. I posted my reading without reading hers because the thread was mostly talking about the new movie, which I wanted to do as well. Sometimes people want to talk about their experience watching a movie without barreling through a 450+ page prerequisite, and then 30 pages of posts on top of that. People are discussing the film casually, and have always been. It's extremely un-casual to trundle up to the water cooler and attempt to start a meta-discussion over whether the conversation is actually casual enough. "So, those Red Sox, huh? Honestly, talking about sports isn't casual enough for me. What could we do to be more casual? Is everyone feeling happy? Everyone feeling relaxed? I think it's important to feel relaxed, so I always aspire to be really casual and easygoing, especially in situations like these..." SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Jul 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
spikenigma posted:This is Man of Steel all over again. Somebody kills somebody else trying to kill them AND cause untold damage to the world, and manchildren cry into their soggy communist magazines. This is not your planet to rule.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Optimus is hugely insecure. As shown in the latest film, the easiest way to cut him down is to tell him he's not needed anymore. He wants humanity to be dependent upon him, and this obviously contradicts his rhetoric about freedom. Humanity is exactly as free under Cemetery Wind as it was under NEST. Again, this isn't even subtext. It's stated aloud by multiple different characters across all the films.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
api call girl posted:They sure did a bang up job of that when Megatron took over their robot problem solution so that he could detonate their robot problem solution bomb in a populated city then use the resulting organic matter->transformium conversion robot problem solution results to rebuild his own robot problem solution army. That's Galvatron - a distinct character who combines traits from Megatron, Sentinel, and Optimus. Cemetery Wind are not good guys at all, but they undeniably represent Optimus getting a taste of his own medicine. They are literally clones of Optimus, Bee, etc. And their plan only goes awry because Galvatron escaped what is explicitly torture. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 08:51 on Jul 24, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:SMG, what's your take on Lockdown's 'If you see my face your life is done!' comment, given how much faces, violence and disguises have fit into the Bay films? And given that Lockdown regularly shows his face to both Autobots and humans throughout the film. "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see Me and live" - Exodus 33:20
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2014 09:59
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:"To punish and enslave" was a bit too on the nose for the police huh? I really liked how, in the first film, that clearly relates to the drugged-up cop who accuses Sam of popping dog medicine. For a supposedly jingoistic super-idiot, Bay really hates cops.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
If you remember back to the first Transformer we ever see, Blackout (the helicopter) is presented as a ghost of those killed in action. The disguise doesn't exactly fool anyone; everyone's on guard because it's this uncanny copy that's silently appeared. Bay cuts to a close-up of the emotionless holographic pilot, and his prominent visor evokes the T-1000's mirrored shades. In a straightforward way, the Decepticons (initially) represent the US military machine as this autonomous monster. The problem is, of course, that Optimus is no different - except that he couches it in rhetoric.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:That's about the only complaint I had with T4. The way Galvatron and the human-made transformers transform have no weight to it. Like the whole break down the re-form is a cool idea but when its literally a bunch of floating polygons it looks kinda stupid. If the car "shattered" as it changed shaped to give it this sense that the transformation is forced and painful I could be a lot more forgiving of some of the shoddy effect tracking. That's the point. The robots have always been CGI, but there was an aesthetic to it. As I've always said, they look like sentient explosions in the best possible way.  Like, this poo poo is beautiful. I want that as a sculpture. Not an action figure - I mean full size, in the town square. What the 'knockoff' transformers show is that this chunky, difficult, mechanical transformation is the soul of the creatures. Even if it was CGI, it refers to real, physical work.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
UmOk posted:I recently rewatched Transformers with my CineD Goonvision goggles on. I really didn't see the Optimus = evil and Megatron = good thing. They are both violent as gently caress but so are all the Robomen. Transformers is the first film in Megatron's arc, where he is 'just' a totalitarian. The point is absolutely that he is equally bad as Optimus, but worse at marketing himself. To be clear: Megatron is not a true good guy until partways through Episode 3, though he remains the underdog throughout the series.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
UmOk posted:How is he the underdog in the first one? Like, in the basic sense that he's an escaped science experiment up against the combined forces of the entire United States and Prime's autobots.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
UmOk posted:What happened to Megatrons child-bearing hips and vagina? Isn't he supposed to be a "bitch"? He died.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:It's crazy. At least among the people I know, it's like... the people who disliked the previous films love this one. The people who liked the previous films hate this one. That's because The Last Knight is a very different beast from all the other films. It's a mockbuster version of Star Wars that also includes explicit references to basically every recent and upcoming blockbuster. There's Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Godzilla 2, Independence Day 2, Guy Ritchie's King Arthur, Alien: Covenant.... (Plus also Gladiator, The Abyss, and so-on.) The plot is obviously convoluted, but the narrative is extremely straightforward - so, much of the interest comes from how it changes form every three seconds, creating a sort of abstract hyper-generic big-budget film. Big 'setpiece' scenes are deliberately deflated, while huge importance is placed on such as Wahlberg eating tuna - but there otherwise isn't as much of the familiar satire. It's more of a parody. In other words, it's Spaceballs 2.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
well why not posted:It needed some narrative focus and a clear bad dude (or good dude that Optimus justifies murdering) at the end. Quintessa and Megatron just aren't in the movie enough. Optimus Prime is unambiguously the villain of this film. He's simply the most charismatic and dangerous villain because he has the power friendship. The joke is that Optimus, failing at everything he's ever set out to do, has blundered his way into finally winning his war against the deceptions. Cybertron, at the end, is explicitly declared home of the autobots - and Prime has also implicitly gained dominion over the Earth.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Excelsiortothemax posted:I just want to know when Grimlock and Slag had time to dig those holes and ambush the TRF convoy? It seems insane to both spoiler-tag this film's plot and answer questions about it, but they actually do explain that the T-Rex lives in a burrow that he dug for himself. So when he pops out, there was legitimate foreshadowing!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:I don't think they particularly care about the autobots killing a few humans when cybertron straight up wiped a couple of cities / regions / maybe entire countries. Nobody cares about that later part either. The beauty of the transformer films is that the things you 'should' care about are curiously downplayed. For example, Megatron is under mind control for the entire duration of the film, and it never comes up in the story or is even mentioned by anyone.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
a cock shaped fruit posted:It becomes easier to just make the Earth literally the target, by way of creating a giant gently caress off reason why. As far as I could tell, there is never any reason given for why transformers randomly crashland on Earth. What is it, a giant magnet? The reveal is meaningless. It's important to note the discrepancy between dialogue and what actually happens. For example, the ostensible heroes constantly talk about self-sacrifice, but only Anthony Hopkins actually dies. Meanwhile, evil Megatron leads the literal Suicide Squad.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
Payndz posted:I'm imagining an Affleck moment when someone asks Bay how Laserbeak got from Wang's office down to a crowded open-plan office and transformed into a copier in a matter of moments without anyone seeing him. "Shut the gently caress up!" I mean, ‘gently caress continuity’ and all, but everyone’s clearly distracted by the apparent suicide. Moreover, the whole Ken Jeong section is loaded with ‘active workplace shooter’ subtext.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
Turns out that the parts that nerds complained endlessly about were those same parts that actually made them think or feel something. Also, It’s tough to believe that they went with Bumblebee as a title. That’s an awful title for any movie let alone a fuckin space invasion robot combat movie. Like here’s our new movie, in which an E.T. - an extraterrestrial person - is abandoned on Earth and tries to survive while pursued by government agents. We call it... Butterscotch Buttercup.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
I’m reading these articles and stuff like “I was told that if I got the part, I’d have to work out.” is spun into “Bay forced Kate Beckinsake to lose weight.” The recurring theme in the articles is that these minor interactions prove the secret truth of Bay’s movies: “male chauvinism that’s reflected constantly in his films. (Life imitates art imitates life, etc.)” “As Bay gained clout in the industry, the women in his films became more and more scantily clad, his camera training on their glistening bodies.” And so-on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2019 20:44
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:you don't gotta stan for someone who is serially cruel and dismissive of women in order to appreciate the nihilistic intentionality of his work. The one article does everything it can, within the confines of libel laws, to suggest that Bay goes home at the end of day and privately jacks off to images of a fully-clothed Megan Fox. Even assuming that’s true, which of course it isn’t (the article is banking on the reader not knowing what a screen test is), it’s bizarrely wholesome.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2019 09:47
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Wasn't she like 20 when she made TF1? Yes. There are bizarre fantasies of Bay as a despotic jouisseur. In the second article Fsmhulk posted as evidence of harassment, model Rosie Huntington-Whitely describes shooting an underwear commercial in the desert. She had to do a runway strut for 10-12 minutes while wearing underwear, and it was hot. Article title: "This Is What Happens When You Meet Michael Bay For The First Time". That decontextualization is used to generate a narrative that Bay randomly abducts women and strips them nude or something. The writer even throws in brief decontextualized quotes where Scarlett Johansson calls him "merciless" and Frances McDormand says that Bay knows how to manipulate American men. So the spin on the existence of underwear commericals is that Bay is constantly raping women for the gratification of toxic American masturbators. Now, the point here is not to be uncritical of the modelling industry and so-on, but "objectification" is not when you see a bra. The goal is not to cover up bras. Objectification is when you cease to see models and so-on as workers. It's a term that grew out of marxist critique that was, as usual, appropriated by liberals to promote "ethical consumption" - divorcing it from its anticapitalist context.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:K Waste that was a really good post. I guess I would ask a dangerously middlebrow question here - are the Transformers movies actually ambivalent? What I mean is, they play all the repugnant and crude and fascist stuff completely straight. They don’t do anything to push the viewer towards an ambivalent stance, there’s no Jim Halpert character staring at the camera while Optimus executes prisoners, no Black character staring in disbelief at the racist robot twins.They leave it up to the viewer to realize what’s really happening-the only ‘push’ they provide in that direction is simply piling on more straight faced obscenity and atrocity. What you’re looking for with the ‘Halpert winking at the camera’ thing is the opposite of ambivalence; it’s that stance that art must have utility as moral instruction. Bay’s films (as distinct from the characters portrayed) are amoral - which is extremely different from being immoral. (It’s actually kinda odd that you bring up Watchmen as a contrast, because Watchmen doesn’t have any particular ‘winks’ either. How do we know that killing millions of people is wrong?)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
It should be noted that, where Bay’s films don’t feature any particular moral instruction, they do feature very obvious truths. Like, it’s simply true that the Mikaela Baines character is not an object. She’s objectified by the male characters, but that’s an entirely different thing (though fake progressives tend to get them mixed up). Waiting for Office Jim to turn to the camera and tell you that this woman is a person means you are shirking your responsibly to treat all women as people - regardless of what you’re told, regardless of how much makeup they wear, etc. What Bay does is simply make that issue inescapable. There is absolutely nothing ‘natural’ about how Meg Fox is presented. The mistake of liberal reviewers is that they ascribe this disruption of nature to Bay’s corrupting influence - Bay as despotic jouisseur. What they miss is the truth that there is no nature. Nature doesn’t exist.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2020 23:42
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:The fundamental problem with this argument is the material reality of how Fox was treated by Bay throughout her career - sexualized as a child and treated like dirt. Right, so let’s break down your thought process here. Step 1: you’re watching Jimmy Kimmel, and you conclude from an anecdote that Michael Bay is definitely a pedophile. No point dancing around it with euphemisms. Step 2: if Michael Bay is evil in this way, then we can presume that the depictions of sexist behaviour in his films are wholehearted endorsement. Step 3: if those parts are wholehearted endorsements, then it follows that the other similar depictions are also wholehearted endorsements. Bay straightforwardly just loves the death penalty, for example. The moral of Pain & Gain is that the death penalty is great because it’s funny. This is just one of many things Bay definitely believes. Step 4: effectively, the entire runtime of a given Bay film consists of a demonic Bad Halpert imploring to do harm for petty reasons. Step 5: against this threat, it is necessary to create a Good Halpert, who will battle Bad Halpert at the end of days. Hence the above embedded tweet, and your very earnest complaint that we just aren’t caring enough.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:What the gently caress is this Halpert bullshit. If we’re to talk about the material reality where actors work, then we are talking about their material conditions. But you’re not really doing that, because the content of a given movie isn’t particularly relevant. You’d have to admit that an actor wearing full Victorian dress on Downton Abbey or whatever is also being exploited - because they are, by definition. Megan Fox herself made that point at the peak of her career, when she became interested in overidentifying with her celebrity persona in a confrontational way - saying that all actresses are objectified. Her work in Transformers is a sort of auteur statement, akin to how ScarJo keeps taking on roles where she plays a murderous fembot. The decision to keep working on the Transformers up until she was sacked is a part of this. (I find it infinitely curious how nobody ever talks about Fox as an artist who, like, makes choices with her performances). We’re getting into the fact that there are no good movies by this standard, because there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism. I’m siding with Dworkin here: patriarchy is all-pervasive, inescapable. If this were only about teens in swimsuits, then just shut down the waterparks. (Though, to be clear: I do say “shut down the waterparks.” They’re a genuine obscenity.) Depressingly, I probably have to explain now that the above obviously does not excuse sexual harassment, or ‘make it good’ - let alone far worse actions. That would be the cynical take, and I am not a cynic. The point is that the horizon of feminism/antisexism cannot be just cleansing the system of its symptoms through such as twitter callouts. That’s not enough to protect people. Like, one issue is that it’s just horribly inefficient. It’s as Zizek notes about the Catholic church: it’s not that the church is being corrupted by evil priests; something about the very institution of the church is causing priests to become molesters. This leads to a second point: when you see people voicing fears about violent or sexual content in movies influencing people or whatever, that’s being done as an ersatz substitute for the critique of ideology. Measuring levels of blood or skin (or, on the flipside, combing a work for deeply-embedded “hidden meanings” and “subliminal messages”) is an escape from the political. In truth, a “G” film can obviously have a far worse influence than an “X” film. And then, we have to ask what it is about our society and economies that makes people susceptible to such influence? (It’s like in the case of MLM schemes: obviously they’re terrible cult-like things, but they wouldn’t work at all if the public weren’t already primed to accept them with stories about Jeff Bezos or whatever.) Anyways, the story in the youtube is that Fox was working as an extra on Bad Boys 2 -playing an adult character. Like, the point of the character is that she’s drinking in club (although regulations meant they couldn’t show her drinking alcohol). Notably, a big chunk of the anecdote is about the people overseeing the production and making sure that everyone was following the rules. So my take is a lot like how Fox seems to take it: she found it amusing that she ended up working on a very crass movie, and that Bay apparently just treated her with indifference. This is the only shot, lasting about one second, in which Fox actually appears in the film: 
SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Jun 22, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
It should also be noted that the club scene in the movie is presented according to Bay’s usual associative nightmare logic. It’s a club where men pay to get drugged up and lie immobile on cots? while women in underwear gyrate over them, indifferently. The horror-movie camerawork and lighting emphasize that, from their perspective, the men are looking up at a literal glass ceiling where the bosses stand back and dispassionately count money. Like everything in all Bay’s films, this is like the least erotic scene ever. So this is where the contortions start, because maybe being entirely unerotic is Bay’s fetish??? If we follow that assumption, then Bay must have this utterly perplexing alien psychology. And then, who knows what this intruder is capable of?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
The called the eighth Transformers movie the Transformers One.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 16:47
|
|