Why are people attracted to movies made by Michael Bay
- Thread starter Yminale
- Start date
I have to get the link from my husband, but he was watching a video that showed side by side comparisons of scenes from The Island reused in Transformers 3. While he didn't see a big deal as they are both Bay's work, I found it assuming that his wam bam well is so try, that he is ripping himself off.
Okay, he shared the link with me! IGN is 'his' site, so he claims.
http://movies.ign.com/articles/118/1180411p1.html
Supposedly it is reused because a serious injury to a crewman made a filmed scene unusable? Is that true or is it just a cop out?
I've also heard that that particular scene was indeed the one in which the extra was injured, it was a pretty well documented accident.
Pretty much any director you can think of has probably reused footage. Sometimes it's their own and sometimes it's someone else's footage that the studio has rights to, but it's as common as fucking.
Also, in this case, all of the focal elements of the scene are completely different. It's not like they literally reused a shot. People are just taking any opportunity to shit on Bay these days.
It's not Michael Bay's fault that you weren't paying attention.
No, I was paying attention. The action scenes are incoherent and unclear and the various robots weren't well delinated.
strange, as soon as i saw megatron rip apart Jazz, i said to myself in the theatre, "wow jazz went out like a punk"
I think it's actually easier to tell apart the robots in the Bay movies than it is the old cartoon, since many of the toys used the same molds so the 'toon used the same character model for different characters, which often confused whoever colored the toons and comics. So you'd have one Transformer the wrong color speaking the lines of some other Transformer, or something like that, or even multiple versions of the same character. For example-Starscream, Skywarp, Thundercracker; Bluestreak, Smokescreen, Prowl; and also Cliffjumper and Bumblebee. What made things even more confusing was that the same voice actor was used for multiple characters ex. Peter Cullen and Frank Welker did like half the other autobots and decepticons in addition to Prime and Megatron.
Apart from Blackout/Grinder; constructicons+ protoform drones from ROTF, I never understood why people get so confused by the robots, who are clearly marked by color, alt mode, and different models. (Although some toys have used the same mold-Starscream in particular has been used to make a ton of repaints, just like the old toon and toys).
There's a similar situation, actually, in the Star Wars prequels-Between I and II (probably due to the production changing from Britain to Australia)George Lucas cast different actors in the same makeup for some of the Jedi council members, but they looked different enough that the licensees actually named them as different Jedi. However, apparentally the "Clone Wars" team didn't get that memo, and have the "new" jedi being named by the old Jedi names.
Apart from Blackout/Grinder; constructicons+ protoform drones from ROTF, I never understood why people get so confused by the robots, who are clearly marked by color, alt mode, and different models. (Although some toys have used the same mold-Starscream in particular has been used to make a ton of repaints, just like the old toon and toys).
There's a similar situation, actually, in the Star Wars prequels-Between I and II (probably due to the production changing from Britain to Australia)George Lucas cast different actors in the same makeup for some of the Jedi council members, but they looked different enough that the licensees actually named them as different Jedi. However, apparentally the "Clone Wars" team didn't get that memo, and have the "new" jedi being named by the old Jedi names.
Last edited:
According to IMDB, he's directed 9 blockbuster movies:
Bad Boys
The Rock
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
Bad Boys II
The Island
Transformers
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Of these, I hated Bad Boys II, was meh on Revenge of the Fallen, and haven't seen Dark of the Moon yet, but plan to.
All the rest I loved when I saw them, some multiple times in theatre, and I own them on DVD.
Exciting, fast-paced, awesome visuals, hot chicks, great casts, America-Fuck Yeah! with support for and from the military. All-around, his movies rock.
I could ask why people aren't attracted to his movies, but I don't really care, nor do I expect everyone to like the same things I do.
Bad Boys
The Rock
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
Bad Boys II
The Island
Transformers
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Of these, I hated Bad Boys II, was meh on Revenge of the Fallen, and haven't seen Dark of the Moon yet, but plan to.
All the rest I loved when I saw them, some multiple times in theatre, and I own them on DVD.
Exciting, fast-paced, awesome visuals, hot chicks, great casts, America-Fuck Yeah! with support for and from the military. All-around, his movies rock.
I could ask why people aren't attracted to his movies, but I don't really care, nor do I expect everyone to like the same things I do.
I really like his Verizon-commercial.. 
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXRCf9LbLM0[/yt]
Apparently, he did a Victoria Secret-commercial too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmNEG8IFd_Y
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXRCf9LbLM0[/yt]
Apparently, he did a Victoria Secret-commercial too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmNEG8IFd_Y
^Yeah, this!
Even though he has had a great deal of success with quite a few of his films, I don't think he is in any way popular as a director. In fact, I doubt anybody other than film geeks and dorks online know who he is. His "formula" is based on generic, consistently recycled action movie cliches.
This is a transcription of a conversation I had recently with a 23 year-old girl (who acts like she is 12).
Her: Did you see Transformers yet? It rocked!
Me: Nope. Not interested.
Her: Why not?
Me: I don't care for Michael Bay's films.
Her: Who?
Exactly.
Hee, I've always shit on Michael Bay. These days everyone else is on the bandwagon 
I only like The Rock and The Island, and well, that's more for Sean Bean. It's story could have been good sf, if typical and also a rip off. However, he turns the ethics of cloning into some barrel drop bridge chase thing with one long ass commercial within a commercial thing.
There is one scene in the Transformers trailer 3 trailer where some robot flips and somersaults up along the side of a building and comes down with two people in his hands. It took me seeing the trailer 4 times to figure out what it was. First I didn't know it was a robot jumping on the building, then I didn't know what orientation and rotation he was in, then I finally saw he did all that to apparently rescue some itty bitty cgi people. It gave me a headache. Him and Megan Fox belong together. I don't know how they got where they got and how the hell they are successful staying there.
Eh.
I only like The Rock and The Island, and well, that's more for Sean Bean. It's story could have been good sf, if typical and also a rip off. However, he turns the ethics of cloning into some barrel drop bridge chase thing with one long ass commercial within a commercial thing.
There is one scene in the Transformers trailer 3 trailer where some robot flips and somersaults up along the side of a building and comes down with two people in his hands. It took me seeing the trailer 4 times to figure out what it was. First I didn't know it was a robot jumping on the building, then I didn't know what orientation and rotation he was in, then I finally saw he did all that to apparently rescue some itty bitty cgi people. It gave me a headache. Him and Megan Fox belong together. I don't know how they got where they got and how the hell they are successful staying there.
Eh.
I have to get the link from my husband, but he was watching a video that showed side by side comparisons of scenes from The Island reused in Transformers 3. While he didn't see a big deal as they are both Bay's work, I found it assuming that his wam bam well is so try, that he is ripping himself off.
Okay, he shared the link with me! IGN is 'his' site, so he claims.
http://movies.ign.com/articles/118/1180411p1.html
Supposedly it is reused because a serious injury to a crewman made a filmed scene unusable? Is that true or is it just a cop out?
I've also heard that that particular scene was indeed the one in which the extra was injured, it was a pretty well documented accident.
Pretty much any director you can think of has probably reused footage. Sometimes it's their own and sometimes it's someone else's footage that the studio has rights to, but it's as common as fucking.
Also, in this case, all of the focal elements of the scene are completely different. It's not like they literally reused a shot. People are just taking any opportunity to shit on Bay these days.
Someone who actually read the report of what happened in the accident thought the state of Indiana was covering for the production. From what he got out of it, he thought it pointed to negligence on the part of the crew.
I don't know. I don't watch his films anymore.
I see nothing wrong with this exchange. I have a feeling the majority of movie-goers couldn't give a shit about directors, and really, they shouldn't. People should be attracted to a movie because the previews make it look entertaining, regardless of who is involved in making it.
Now, I realize that it doesn't always work that way, but it should. I, for instance, will never watch an M. Night Shyamalan movie again, even if the trailers make it look awesome.
I don't think people should go see a film based solely on who is in the film or who directed it, and I do not think the majority of Americans see a film knowing who directed or produced it. That requires too much thought on their part.
However, that doesn't stop Hollywood from marketing films as being directed or produced by "the director or producer of such and such other generic action film". Nor does it stop certain directors from assuming they have a household name and slapping their name above the title, as Bay does with Transformers 3. Even though 99% of the viewers have no clue who he is.
Generally who directed the film is one of the more useful barometers of whether or not one wants to see a movie, right up there with the critical reaction to a film.
I know I want to see the next Coen Brothers movie, sight unseen. It does not particularly matter if it is in a genre I care nothing for - like, say, the Western. I want to go see it because they consistently entertain me, and they've even entertained me with a Western.
I went to see Tree of Life only really knowing that Terence Malick directed it and it won the Palme d'Or. SPOILER ALERT: It was time well spent at the multiplex. So it goes.
Likewise, that a film is a Michael Bay film tells you quite a bit about it. Most of the posters on this thread have pretty clear opinions about Bay - they either hate or love his directorial style and recurring interests. Want to see a Bay movie because it's a Bay movie or avoiding it for the same reason are pretty sensible ideas.
I posted this in the x-men first class thread
I would love a thread with all the misconceptions people have heard
That Victoria's Secret commercial makes me love him more. It's made of all kinds of awesome.
