Jump to content


Photo

Michael Bay - Thoughts?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 littlefuzzy

littlefuzzy

    Ooo, shiny!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Interests:Anime, Disney, Horror, Sci-Fi/Fantasy, Classics, Musicals, Martial Arts, Comedy, TV, Reading, Video Games, Manga, Graphic Novels, and more.

Posted 08 May 2009 - 02:17 PM

I hesitated to put this in the Director Database, as I wasn't quite sure how to write the post... Plus, this is asking opinions on him, instead of recommending films.

He's got two films in the Criterion Collection (I own both,) although I'm sure many of you think that those don't really belong in the collection.

People even use him to refer to other directors: "_______ is the Michael Bay of Asian Films (or whatever country.)"

While critics don't seem to like his work, the audiences certainly do. His films are rated in the 6s and 7s at IMDB, except for Pearl Harbor which has a 5.4, and knowing IMDB, I'd say that there is probably some vote-stuffing going on to try and lower the rating (not that it should be a 10...)



Most of his films have broken the 100 million mark, and he broke the billion dollar mark with the first three films. I don't have any figures on home video sales.
1. Bad Boys - $23,000,000 budget - $141,407,024 worldwide gross
2. The Rock - $75,000,000 budget - $335,062,621 worldwide gross
3. Armageddon - $140,000,000 budget - $553,709,788 worldwide gross
4. Pearl Harbor - $140,000,000 budget - $449,220,945 worldwide gross
5. Bad Boys II - $130,000,000 budget - $273,339,556 worldwide gross
6. The Island - $126,000,000 budget - $162,949,164 worldwide gross (only 35 million in the US)
7. Transformers - $150,000,000 budget - $708,272,592 worldwide gross
8. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - $200,000,000 budget - due in June 2009...



I actually own 6 of the seven theatrical films he's released so far, I'm missing Pearl Harbor. I've never seen it, although I've been told the "R-Rated" director's cut is quite a bit better than the theatrical version. As soon as I can find that fairly cheap, I'll pick it up.

While I own Bad Boys I and II, and Armageddon, I've never seen them. I saw The Island over at my brother's house, and it's really hard to watch movies there because he and my sister-in-law talk!

The Rock is pretty entertaining, and I've watched it several times. Transformers was fun as well, although I've only seen it once so far.

DVD Aficionado | My Video Games

Posted Image


Criterions: (Red = 1st printing/OOP - blue = new remastered version/Special Edition)
2 (1st), 3 (1st), 4 (SE), 13, 14, 17 (SE), 20, 21, 23, 30 (1st), 37, 40, 41, 55, 56, 57 (1st), 75, 78, 79, 98, 100, 108, 112 (SE), 120, 135, 136, 137, 149, 157, 163, 164, 173, 175, 179, 180, 181, 182, 184, 196, 216, 234, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 260, 266, 271, 300 (2-disc), 309, 316, 389

#2 hal0000

hal0000

    Judge Judy and Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 May 2009 - 04:13 PM

Oh, what ever happened to Don Juan??? One of the better discussions out there, though I'm not sure what side I'm on.

Michael Bay: How I learned to stop hating and love the bomb

#3 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 05:32 PM

Don't care about him but I can say that if his movies made so much its because of the publicity budget... Anyway holywood director's job seems to consist in saying action and cut...

#4 helloemigoodbye

helloemigoodbye

    Earnest Hemingway

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:New York

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:09 PM

Don't care about him but I can say that if his movies made so much its because of the publicity budget... Anyway holywood director's job seems to consist in saying action and cut...


I disagree with you there...like him or not, Michael Bay is keeping the Autuer theory alive and well. A Michael Bay picture will always be starkly stylistically different from any cookie cutter Hollywood picture.
Posted Image

#5 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:43 PM

I disagree with you there...like him or not, Michael Bay is keeping the Autuer theory alive and well. A Michael Bay picture will always be starkly stylistically different from any cookie cutter Hollywood picture.

I can't really say I never really watched any of his movies since a long time ago...

What does the auteur theory is for you?

#6 helloemigoodbye

helloemigoodbye

    Earnest Hemingway

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:New York

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:54 PM

I can't really say I never really watched any of his movies since a long time ago...

What does the auteur theory is for you?


Admittedly this is a cop-out since I am quoting Wikipedia here, but it more or less sums up my own understanding of the Auteur Theory.

Truffaut's theory maintains that all good directors (and many bad ones) have such a distinctive style or consistent theme that their influence is unmistakable in the body of their work. Truffaut himself was appreciative of both directors with a marked visual style (such as Alfred Hitchcock), and those whose visual style was less pronounced but who had nevertheless a consistent theme throughout their movies (such as Jean Renoir's humanism).


Posted Image

#7 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:57 PM

^ So Is Tarantino an auteur? :lol:

#8 helloemigoodbye

helloemigoodbye

    Earnest Hemingway

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:New York

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:01 PM

^ So Is Tarantino an auteur? :lol:


Yes, definitely ahahaha. Other filmmakers I would count as modern auteurs include Judd Apatow and i can't think of any others right now ahahahahaha
Posted Image

#9 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:14 PM

Other filmmakers I would count as modern auteurs include Judd Apatow and i can't think of any others right now ahahahahaha

By modern you mean actual? (what about kusturica, rohmer, garrel) of young? (what about Arnaud Desplechin, Ursula Meier, kore-eda and the director of the return?) Just in quebec there was dozens of auteur but now I can still count four young(Turpin, Villeneuve, Falardeau) or still active (Arcand). Thats not bad...

#10 helloemigoodbye

helloemigoodbye

    Earnest Hemingway

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:New York

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:17 PM

Well by modern i sort of meant American, active, fairly new. Which is my extremely loose, very arrogant American definition of the word "Modern"
Posted Image

#11 hal0000

hal0000

    Judge Judy and Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:25 PM

Yes, definitely ahahaha. Other filmmakers I would count as modern auteurs include Judd Apatow and i can't think of any others right now ahahahahaha


Wes Anderson is among them, without a doubt. All his films have such a distinct stye and feel to them that you only need to watch about 30 seconds to see his fingerprints.

In regards to Michael Bay, his films definitely carry a sort of hyperreality and stylization. There is nothing realistic about them, but they are unmistakably his films. I think it's worthwhile to look at his films through a serious lenses at least in terms of seeing him as an auteur. Matthew Dessem's review of Armageddon: link goes into this quite well and doesn't simply brush off his work like a cine-snob. Whether you like his films or not is a different story, but you have to say he's a master at aesthetic. He sets up shots that are gorgeous even if it's at the cost of reality.

I don't know. I don't particularly like his films, but it seems to me like so called and self-proclaimed cinephiles have a tendency to turn their noses to this sort of thing. I used to do this, but since then (especially after reading Don Juan's thoughts on a film like Transformers), I've decided that even though I don't like Bay's work, I cannot simply brush him off as a Hollywood director that says: "action" and "cut."

edit: I get the feeling that the "auteur theory" gets overabused at times, and I sometimes get tired of how much attention the director gets when it's at the detriment of others involved. Even so-called auteurs like Kieslowski have input from other people. Yes, his films invariably have his stamp on them, but the input from Zbigniew Preisner is integral to the feel of the later Kieslowski directed pictures.

#12 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:27 PM

ew, american filmakers... :lol:

But what 'bout Noah Baumbach? wes anderson? Jarmush? Soderberg?

#13 hal0000

hal0000

    Judge Judy and Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:29 PM

Wes Anderson is among them, without a doubt. All his films have such a distinct stye and feel to them that you only need to watch about 30 seconds to see his fingerprints.



ew, american filmakers... :lol:

But what 'bout Noah Baumbach? wes anderson? Jarmush? Soderberg?



#14 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:36 PM

Even if you have Holywood and you play with billions of dollars each years, the world of cinema still belongs to French Europeans:
Phillipe Garel
Claude Chabrol
André Techine
Arnaud Desplechin
Dardenne bros
Alain Resnais
Ursula Meier (watch HOME!!!!)

America isn't modern we all return to black period of alienation... Bay may be an auteur but he still contribute to make our society dumber and dumber...

#15 Ian

Ian

    Auteur

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:37 PM

Admittedly this is a cop-out since I am quoting Wikipedia here, but it more or less sums up my own understanding of the Auteur Theory.


By the definition of auteur quoted from Truffaut, I suppose Michael Bay could be considered one, as long as we DO make the disctintion that someone who is an auteur can also be a bad director. I think part of Bay's problem and why people have such a negliable view of his work, is the genre that he operates in. The big budget kick'n'splode summer blockbusters are not intended to be artistic projects but are limited almost exclusively to commercial ambitions, ie. to sell product through the offering of spectacle. They always are attached to action figure lines, fast food tie-ins, soundtracks by current pop idols, etc.

The storyline is meaningless, just a thin narrative device to link extended scenes of spectacle. Does Michael Bay have a distinct way of filming these extended scenes of pyrotechnics and hazy CGI? Debatable. I think these films due to their high cost and contractual tie-ins are tightly controlled by studio heads and it's backers and that directors who are involved in these projects most certainly do not get final cut. I think Michael Bay gets more wiggle room that most other directors but only because he quickly established his own production company after leaving Don Simpson-Jerry Bruckheimer's studio and is able to negotiate slightly more favorable terms for himself. I don't know if this is enough that I would call Bay an auteur but it might result in a distinctive enough product to fill Truffaut's requirements.

The way I see it, you take a film like Transformers or Transformers 2...the owners of the toy line almost most certainly has their stipulations about what can or can't be done with their franchise, the studio also probably had to guarantee a certain rating and that the film would not contain certain types of violence or sexuality because it might make McDoanld's or Pepsi uncomfortable. Due to the film's high visibilty, the studio probably also signed contracts with various companies to have their cars, soft drinks, clothing featured and displayed in the film as a form of advertising, etc. There is just such a laundry list of concessions that a director needs to make to operate in this part of the Hollywood arena, that I have difficulty believing Bay or any other director who chooses to make these films is an auteur no matter the definition set forth by Truffaut. These films are strictly work-for-hire and if you make enough hits you might be able to get away with a moderate amount of stylistic flourishes. Doesn't add up to a lot if you ask me!

I also dislike Truffaut's definition as I think it would exclude some directors like John Huston, who has a rich library of brilliant films but can vary thematically and stylistically from feature to feature. I think this is unfair and I would not place such limitations on my own view of what an auteur is.

#16 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:37 PM

Hal0000 : I didn't saw your post before posting mine...

#17 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 09 May 2009 - 12:10 AM

I do consider a very good auteur as someone who acquired a lot of culture (history, literature, art history, psychology ect...) I think thats the whole thing that make difference of Tarantino and Bay vs Desplechin and Resnais. The first two knows the history of cinema, knows greatly the technique but they really don't have enlightening elements in their movies and take Kings and Queen for example, this movie is full of content that metaphor renaissance and greek mythology while having some kinda great dialogue and the editing is quite brilliant, it perfectly support the mood of the characters and the rhythm of the speach that is wonderful to look at! It really put emphasis to the movie, the directors knows how to captive the audience by studying unconscious mind reaction (I think Bunuel was the one qho invented these technics in Viridiana and exterminating angel). Some other great directors (Chaplin, Fellini, Kusturica is there any other who can do this?) made dreams come on screen. Using my own auteur definition, bay and tarantino aren't cultivated enough to be auteurs...

#18 sexy rancheros

sexy rancheros

    The Secret of the Grain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,079 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 May 2009 - 01:25 AM

Even if you have Holywood and you play with billions of dollars each years, the world of cinema still belongs to French Europeans:
Phillipe Garel
Claude Chabrol
André Techine
Arnaud Desplechin
Dardenne bros
Alain Resnais
Ursula Meier (watch HOME!!!!)

America isn't modern we all return to black period of alienation... Bay may be an auteur but he still contribute to make our society dumber and dumber...

GTFO!

Haven't seen anything by Garrel. I'm sort of interested in seeing Regular Lovers.

Chabrol's last movie, A Girl Cut in Two, was a pile of shit.

I'll give you Techine just because I've only seen one film by him and that was The Witnesses, which was really good.

I still need to see A Christmas Tale, but I didn't much care for Kings and Queen at all except for one tiny part.

Dardenne Bros. are sort of hit and miss for me based on L'Enfant, which was pretty great, and Rosetta, which was pretty meh.

Haven't seen any of Resnais's latest stuff.

I want to see Home based on Mike D'Angelo's glowing review and the trailer.

You should check out Bruno Dumont if you haven't already. I suggest seeing La Vie de Jesus and Twentynine Palms since I feel those are his two best films. Twentynine Palms is pretty damn slow, but I think you'll feel rewarded in the end.

Have you seen anything by Leos Carax? I've been kind of interested in him lately. All I have seen by him is Lovers on the Bridge, which I didn't much care for, but I'm still interested in checking out his other work.

To me, America is still where it is at because of:
Terrence Malick
Michael Mann
Hal Hartley
Jonathan Demme
David Lynch
Sofia Coppola
Steven Spielberg
Brian De Palma(maybe...)
Posted Image

#19 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 09 May 2009 - 01:45 AM

GTFO!

Get the fuck out?
Go To Fuck Oreos?

Haven't seen anything by Garrel. I'm sort of interested in seeing Regular Lovers.

Only saw Frontiere de l'aube and I'm still not sure if it was great or fuckin boring... I would need to saw some of his earlier work... Though Cahiers
loved it and it was in competition at Cannes... Regular lovers seems quite good...

I'll give you Techine just because I've only seen one film by him and that was The Witnesses, which was really good.

Yeah thats a good one... They are playing almost all his movies in these times at tv I'll try to watch most of them...

I still need to see A Christmas Tale, but I didn't much care for Kings and Queen at all except for one tiny part.

I wonder how its possible to don't care for kings and queen :blink:

Dardenne Bros. are sort of hit and miss for me based on L'Enfant, which was pretty great, and Rosetta, which was pretty meh.

Lorna's silence is kinda sick...

Haven't seen any of Resnais's latest stuff.

Me either :(

I want to see Home based on Mike D'Angelo's glowing review and the trailer.

Thats the discovery of 2008! I loved it so much!!!!

You should check out Bruno Dumont if you haven't already. I suggest seeing La Vie de Jesus and Twentynine Palms since I feel those are his two best films. Twentynine Palms is pretty damn slow, but I think you'll feel rewarded in the end.

Its in my plans... Though I need to get into Pialat and Godard before...

Have you seen anything by Leos Carax? I've been kind of interested in him lately. All I have seen by him is Lovers on the Bridge, which I didn't much care for, but I'm still interested in checking out his other work.

Never heard anything about that one...

Brian De Palma(maybe...)

Maybe not... :lol:

#20 sexy rancheros

sexy rancheros

    The Secret of the Grain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,079 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 May 2009 - 02:04 AM

Yeah, I meant go to fuck oreos.

I'm basing De Palma's inclusion mainly on Femme Fatale, which I feel the need to rewatch just to make sure it's bitching.
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users