- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Understanding Michael Bay
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:38 pm
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:38 pm
LINK
Pretty quality review on why Michael Bay's films work, don't work, and are over-the-top. And honestly, while I think most of his films are terrible, they are shockingly competent in ways his imitators and wannabes (particularly Emmerich) aren't. Bay is very skilled at making an epic shot (the gliding through Chicago was a nice highlight in an otherwise terrible film), he just takes it over-the-top and doesn't have any real relatable characters to connect to.
His earlier films were at least somewhat competent, but he's just fallen off the edge completely recently and is self absorbed with his own shooting style to give a damn about the plot and characters. I honestly don't hate Bay, but this is a well thought out fairly short review on what works and what doesn't in his films.
Pretty quality review on why Michael Bay's films work, don't work, and are over-the-top. And honestly, while I think most of his films are terrible, they are shockingly competent in ways his imitators and wannabes (particularly Emmerich) aren't. Bay is very skilled at making an epic shot (the gliding through Chicago was a nice highlight in an otherwise terrible film), he just takes it over-the-top and doesn't have any real relatable characters to connect to.
His earlier films were at least somewhat competent, but he's just fallen off the edge completely recently and is self absorbed with his own shooting style to give a damn about the plot and characters. I honestly don't hate Bay, but this is a well thought out fairly short review on what works and what doesn't in his films.
8
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:47 pm to OMLandshark
Posting to watch later.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:47 pm to OMLandshark
I like the guy.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:49 pm to OMLandshark
to me, Bay is like an action version of Tim Burton
consistently excellent visuals coupled with consistently disappointing stories.
consistently excellent visuals coupled with consistently disappointing stories.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:51 pm to Dr RC
Micheal Bay is just the kid that plays with his toys and smashes them together as he comes up with the best storyline a 5 year old can come up with to give a reason why they are smashing into each other
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:51 pm to OMLandshark
Overall I like what he's done with transformers
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:52 pm to OMLandshark
Michael Bay is good at what you hire Michael Bay to do. He just seems to be a magnet for shitty projects and scripts, and he seems to have embraced it.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 5:55 pm to OMLandshark
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:09 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
Micheal Bay is just the kid that plays with his toys and smashes them together as he comes up with the best storyline a 5 year old can come up with to give a reason why they are smashing into each other
I'd give that honor to Emmerich. Emmerich's films have no rhyme or reason, they're just plain stupid and completely incompetent in every possible regard. He just got lucky with Independence Day since people haven't seen iconic buildings destroyed in that way before, and people enjoyed it. Every film he's made since then has been a complete incompetent disaster, sinking even lower than Bay would even consider (Transformers 2 maybe being the exception). The shots (save for Independence Day) aren't good, the characters are all complete stereotypes (save the hero and the love interest, which are good looking white people), their is no rhyme or reason to anything, and every special effect or action sequence is complete CGI. Say what you will about Bay, but he prefers to do that action sequence in real life if he can do it, while Emmerich doesn't give a frick.
Bay is more like a teenager making films. He has some basic ideas on how things work, and excels at a couple of things, but either still has some things to learn or simply doesn't care to learn them (which I think is obviously the later). Armageddon, despite the animal cracker scene and the ridiculously stupid shoot out on the rig (which is actually funny), shows that he has some competence as a filmmaker, something I don't think Emmerich has ever shown.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:10 pm to OMLandshark
Cracked had a pretty good piece on him LINK
quote:
James Cameron, the most successful action director of all time, admits to having "studied his films and 'reverse-engineered' his shooting style."
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:13 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Emmerich's films have no rhyme or reason, they're just plain stupid and completely incompetent in every possible regard.
The Patriot was really good. I also enjoyed Stargate quite a bit.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:18 pm to Brosef Stalin
quote:
The Patriot
Considering the type of movies Emmerich did before and after this movie, it is extremely odd he ever wanted the project in the first place.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:34 pm to Brosef Stalin
quote:
The Patriot was really good. I also enjoyed Stargate quite a bit.
The only thing about the Patriot is that it is laughably bad, which makes it bearable by Emmerich's film standards. He also happened to get 2 great actors in Mel Gibson and Jason Issacs who took the film beyond its clique BS into something quite a bit better. If you got a caliber of actor below these 2, it would apparently be as bad as the others.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:36 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
Considering the type of movies Emmerich did before and after this movie, it is extremely odd he ever wanted the project in the first place.
It makes sense to me, since he's all about American pride, ironic give the fact that he's actually German.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:37 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
He also happened to get 2 great actors in Mel Gibson and Jason Issacs
Glad you didn't mention Heath Ledger here. You're probably right about the movie not being any good with lesser actors. I liked most of the secondary characters but they couldn't carry the movie like Gibson and Isaacs did.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:39 pm to Brosef Stalin
quote:
Glad you didn't mention Heath Ledger here. You're probably right about the movie not being any good with lesser actors. I liked most of the secondary characters but they couldn't carry the movie like Gibson and Isaacs did.
It crossed my mind to add him, but really you could add any 22 year old piece of man meat, and so long as they're not atrocious, it would have still worked the same. Wouldn't have been the same film with Gibson's and Issacs' performances.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 6:39 pm to OMLandshark
I was about to say. Aren't all his movies about America kicking arse? What's odd about The Patriot?
Posted on 7/7/14 at 7:41 pm to genro
Yeah I always liked the Patriot. 
I didn't know it was so reviled. Stargate, Independence Day, 10000 BC were all entertaining (ok, 10000 BC had issues but it wasnt a horrible movie), and Universal Soldier was awesome when I saw it in the theater as a kid.
I didn't know it was so reviled. Stargate, Independence Day, 10000 BC were all entertaining (ok, 10000 BC had issues but it wasnt a horrible movie), and Universal Soldier was awesome when I saw it in the theater as a kid.Posted on 7/7/14 at 7:54 pm to biglego
quote:
10000 BC were all entertaining (ok, 10000 BC had issues but it wasnt a horrible movie)
Oh, yes it was a horrible, horrible movie. Every single second of screen time makes no sense whatsoever, and the whole plot, story, and characters are generic and ridiculous. It makes "The Day After Tomorrow" look like Sorkin wrote it in comparison.
In the very least, think of the geography. So the hero goes from Siberia, to South America, apparently to the lower savannah, and then sails up the Nile to Egypt? I think anyone with even the most naive knowledge of geography would know there is something incredibly off about the geography in this film.
And that's the least of the film's problems. Nothing but nonsensical stupid decisions, clique film making techniques that even a 5 year old can see coming, stupid special effects, no characters to speak of, and dialog a 6th grader could write. It is almost without question Emmerich's worst film, and thus much in the debate for worst film of all time.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 7:57 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
and then sails up the Nile to Egypt?
the Nile does in fact flow from south to north
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News