Transformers 2

[megladon8]

Anyone else seen these (http://youtube.com/watch?v=xo0cwRY59X4) viral (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q0oQZi2G_Ns) videos (http://youtube.com/watch?v=talnB4coGiI)?

[Dukefrukem]

Anyone else seen these (http://youtube.com/watch?v=xo0cwRY59X4) viral (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q0oQZi2G_Ns) videos (http://youtube.com/watch?v=talnB4coGiI)?

awesomely done.

[right_for_the_moment]

Michael Bay's letter to Paramount regarding the promotional campaign, courtesy of Hollywood-Elsewhere:

http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/0619_michael_bay_tmz_wm.pdf

[megladon8]

If that's real, Michael Bay is an awful writer.

Not like that's a surprise to anyone, but you know. Just sayin'.

[Dead & Messed Up]

"Besides my good friend Steven..."

I never figured that Michael Bay would have to name-drop.

[Acapelli]

he's pretty much right though. up until a couple weeks ago i thought this was coming out next year

[Dukefrukem]

Massawyrm from aint it cool news doesn't like it

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41503


TRANSFORMERS REVENGE OF THE FALLEN is one of the most unrepentantly juvenile, gleefully offensive, mind bogglingly inane films I have ever seen with a real budget behind it. And that’s saying a lot.

he goes on


Here Bay magnifies EVERYTHING bad about the first. You thought robot pissing was weak? Check out robot farting, robot crying and giant, clanging robo-testicles. Oh yeah. Michael Bay wanted his big cast iron balls in the film and there they are, dangling off of Devastator in one of the film’s defining dramatic moments. I guess he couldn’t get away with a giant, limp swinging cyber-phallus, so he went with the next best thing

[Ivan Drago]

Option A: See this at midnight
Option B: Stay in my apartment and revisit Star Trek: The Motion Picture and watch Star Trek III: The Search for Spock for the 1st time.

GAAAH what to do?

[The Mike]

This is one of those cases where I've already decided this movie is awesome and anyone who says otherwise is wrong and not worthy of my breath in regard to such matters.

Can't wait to see it. :D

[Watashi]

I decided I will never see this movie.

Hold me to this, Match Cut.

[Ezee E]

You work in a movie theater. It'd be near impossible to not see a transformer ejaculate on Megan Fox.

[Ivan Drago]

Decided to see this at midnight. Couldn't resist passing up a midnight showing. Especially one with MICHAELBAYSPOLSIONS!!!!!

[Ezee E]

Decided to see this at midnight. Couldn't resist passing up a midnight showing. Especially one with MICHAELBAYSPOLSIONS!!!!!
Your av works so well with that post.

[Ivan Drago]

Bah! The movie theater near me was sold out. Surprising considering both Watchmen AND Iron Man didn't sell out 3 hours before it started at this theater.

EDIT: Never mind, a friend had an extra ticket! MICHAEL BA-BLA-SPLOOM!!111!!1!

[Ivan Drago]

Your av works so well with that post.

That post is also exactly how I reacted to the Crank movies. Unbelievably awesome.

[Saya]

This movie is HUGE in Indonesia. I will catch it in a couple hours.

Also, I just saw this pic (not really Transformers related, but I thought it was funny):

http://i40.tinypic.com/fwjfxu.jpg

http://i44.tinypic.com/6y2l2p.jpg

[number8]

Those of you who ae excited won't believe it until you see it for yourself, but this was terrible. Seriously terrible. This is 1/10 the first movie was. I am fucking pissed at how bad this movie is.

[Ivan Drago]

Those of you who ae excited won't believe it until you see it for yourself, but this was terrible. Seriously terrible. This is 1/10 the first movie was. I am fucking pissed at how bad this movie is.

As am I. What a disappointment.

[Dukefrukem]

Those of you who ae excited won't believe it until you see it for yourself, but this was terrible. Seriously terrible. This is 1/10 the first movie was. I am fucking pissed at how bad this movie is.

This follows the Aint it Cool News reaction. I wasn't gonna see this movie anyways. Thanks for confirming.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41512


The well talked about racist foul-mouthed robots that are built in monkey proportions, have a big shiny gold tooth and do nothing to advance the story an inch

How are the robots racist?

[Saya]

Those of you who ae excited won't believe it until you see it for yourself, but this was terrible. Seriously terrible. This is 1/10 the first movie was. I am fucking pissed at how bad this movie is.

I just saw it too and yeah, this was horrible. The humour was beyond juvenile in this one. So much cringe-worthy moments in the film (leg humping decepticon robot, that "tazer" moment, decepticon testicles... and those twins!). The movie is also waayyyyy too long. And what was up with the moment in the final part of the movie?

Shia dies and goes to robot heaven? What the...?

Duke, I guess you could say that those robots they mention are basically "street" robots. I think they are supposed to be like black people stereotypes. The way they talk and act. I found it a little bit offensive... at one point they even mention that they can't read.

[Dukefrukem]

What the eff?? Really??

[Saya]

Did anyone else found it weird that Optimus Prime basically

executed that helpless Shanghai Decepticon with a shot to the head? I mean, I thought Optimus was like a "noble warrior" kind of robot. It seems like it went against his character. :)

[Skitch]

You cannot hurt my excitment for this...namely because most everybody loathed the first one when it came out except for me.

[Dukefrukem]

You cannot hurt my excitment for this...namely because most everybody loathed the first one when it came out except for me.

I didn't. i mildly hated it.

[Ivan Drago]

Did anyone else found it weird that Optimus Prime basically

executed that helpless Shanghai Decepticon with a shot to the head? I mean, I thought Optimus was like a "noble warrior" kind of robot. It seems like it went against his character. :)

What I really found weird was how every single robot was even more beatable this time around.

[Saya]

What I really found weird was how every single robot was even more beatable this time around.

You're right, especially Devastator. I thought there were also a bit too many robots, which made some of the action scenes kind of confusing at times.

[number8]

You cannot hurt my excitment for this...namely because most everybody loathed the first one when it came out except for me.

I loved the first one.

[number8]

A total of 3 action set pieces in a 2.5 hour movie about giant robots is ridiculous. Do we really need to have that much shitty Shia/Megan Fox love story in between? It's fucking terrible.

It's insulting how Bay chose to ignore the Autobots and have the American military might basically kick all the Decepticon's asses in the film's final battle. WTF movie did he think he was making?

And the racist stereotype... I'd heard about it before and didn't believe it. I thought it was just PC hype, maing a big deal out of nothing, but no. That was fucking racist. I can't believe nobody at any point went to Michael Bay and go, "Yo, this is wrong. Like, really wrong."

[Morris Schæffer]

I was entertained enough by the first one, albeit thanks to the novelty value of ILM doing big, fucking robots and doing them spectacularly.

I'm seeing the sequel in two hours time, our weekly TV guide gave it one star, calling it an unbearable assault on the senses.

I'm concerned.

[Ezee E]

So basically the same result as the first movie? Lame.

[Skitch]

I loved the first one.

OOHHHHhttp://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e125/skitchthemovieman/Net%20Fun/VaderNOOOOO.gif

:cry:

[Sycophant]

A total of 3 action set pieces in a 2.5 hour movie about giant robots is ridiculous.

I don't know exactly how that works in an action to non-action screentime ratio, but whatever it is, it's backwards.

[Ivan Drago]

One other thing I hated was the humor. It ruins the action sequences - the awe-inspiring mood created was ruined by the (dare I say it) Batman and Robin-esque camp. I know there was some of that in the first movie, but here it's taken to ridiculous levels.

The testicles on Devastator = nipples on the Batsuit.

EDIT: And there were quite a bit of black people in the theater I was in. I didn't pay attention to reactions of the stereotypes, though.

[NickGlass]

Soon-to-be Oscar Best Picture nominee.

[Watashi]

http://www.nypress.com/article-20003-bad-boys-and-toys-transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen.html


Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is more proof [Bay] has a great eye for scale and a gift for visceral amazement.

What.

[Watashi]

Transformers doesn’t simultaneously critique pop culture like Joe Dante’s Small Soldiers, Paul W.S. Anderson’s Death Race or Joseph Kahn’s near-miraculous Torque (none of Bay’s mechanical anthropomorphism matches the wit of how Torque’s human characters live through their vehicles), but there is satire in Sam’s roommate Leo’s (Ramon Rodriquez) Everynerd chatter: “The Internet’s pure truth! Video doesn’t lie!”That breathless naiveté indicts Transformers’ target audience, yet there’s something in scenes of an overturned carrier ship, of alien assaults on the Great Pyramids or Sam’s Clockwork Orange torture that is close to wonderful. Bay’s skills have found their appropriate subject now that he’s abandoned fake history (Pearl Harbor) for fantasy.

Is Mr. White somehow reading our posts?

[Dead & Messed Up]

What.

We need to develop a verb form of Armond White. As in, "Spinal really whited that review" or "Sven's whiting out on us."

[Wryan]

We need to develop a verb form of Armond White. As in, "Spinal really whited that review" or "Sven's whiting out on us."

I'd prefer "armwhiting."

[Morris Schæffer]

I wouldn't say that was worse than the original. It wasn't as unbearable as I had expected. There are some stunning shots, but perhaps it's telling that, for me at least, the most genuinely breathtaking shot was that of a crashing helicopter during the finale and the sight of a sinking aircraft carrier. Anything with the robots is difficult to appreciate, relate to. It's just so soulless, over-the-top, inhuman. The humour was indeed embarassing, Sam's parents were godawful especially his mum.

[Fezzik]

I went in expecting to hate it. Maybe that's why I didn't?

I mean, yeah, most of it was god awful - especially the humor - but for some reason I enjoyed the two big action sequences, especially the forest fight.

I guess it was one of those movies that despite everything that was wrong with it, I was still able to find some level of enjoyment in it, unlike Wolverine.

I feel dirty for liking it. I need to take a bath.

There was one moment of ridiculously juvenile humor that actually did make me smile a bit:

Wheelie humping Megan's leg. I thought "that's ridiculous, but who can blame him?"

[Spun Lepton]

And what was up with the moment in the final part of the movie?

Shia dies and goes to robot heaven? What the...?

I read that spoiler and nearly pissed myself laughing ... oh, lawdy.

[number8]

A little late, but finally posted my review. Got a little carried away.

[Spun Lepton]

Cinema Blend's "8 Spoilerific Reasons to Avoid Transformers 2" (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/8-Spoilerific-Reasons-To-Avoid-Transformers-2-13688.html)

[Saya]

The humour was indeed embarassing, Sam's parents were godawful especially his mum.

I really hated that pot joke with Sam's mum at the college. Why did it had to go on for so long?

[number8]

I really hated that pot joke with Sam's mum at the college. Why did it had to go on for so long?

Not to mention nonsensical. Pot brownies make you hallucinate and run around like a crazy person on PCP tackling people randomly! LOL!

[Ivan Drago]

^ Ugh, yes, I hated that too.

Hell it hurts me to know that two of the writers for this also wrote Star Trek.

[MadMan]

Cinema Blend's "8 Spoilerific Reasons to Avoid Transformers 2" (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/8-Spoilerific-Reasons-To-Avoid-Transformers-2-13688.html)You know, this entire article almost makes me want to go back on my promise never to see another Bay movie again. Granted I also said I would never ever give him any more of my money, so since I work at a movie theater I would be seeing it for free. Yet, my good sense and unwillingness to subject myself to a movie that sounds like one of the worst of the year will prevent me from doing so. The article was also quite hilarious, btw.

[Morris Schæffer]

^ Ugh, yes, I hated that too.

Hell it hurts me to know that two of the writers for this also wrote Star Trek.

Perhaps it's time to stop overpraising Orci and Kurtzmann's work on the Abrams flick. They were working within an established universe, and even with the altering timelines, all they could come up with was time travel, glorified cameo's and vengeful villains. Star Trek is good because of the great cast, the (finally!) epic budget and obvious feelings of nostalgia.

[Morris Schæffer]

Box office intel:


We knew that Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen would be big – that tends to go with the territory when you’re dealing with giant robots – but we weren’t sure just how big.

Until today, that is, when news broke that Michael Bay’s mega-sequel grossed a record $55 million on Wednesday, its opening day in the States, beating the previous title-holder, Harry Potter And The Order Of The Phoenix, by a cool $10.8 million.

Although that’s a figure as mightily impressive as Devastator’s giant metal swingers, industry folk have used calculators and flux capacitors to work out that the movie is on course for a five-day haul in the region of $150-170 million which means that it won’t overtake The Dark Knight’s record of $203 million in the same timeframe.

But if the pace holds up – and that includes $16 million from midnight shows – it should beat the $152.4 million amassed by Spider-Man 2, the previous holder for the equivalent weekend, in 2004.

However, with the film attracting largely negative reviews, it’s going to be interesting to see how the movie will hold up over the coming weekends. It’s pretty much a shoo-in to become the biggest film of the summer (although Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince will have a major say in that), but only time will tell if it can push on past the $300 million mark that seems to be inevitable, and hit headier heights.

All figures, of course, are currently estimated, but final figures will be released later today.

[Saya]

Ebert's blog post on Transformers (http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/06/the_fall_of_the_revengers.html )

[Derek]

And the racist stereotype... I'd heard about it before and didn't believe it. I thought it was just PC hype, maing a big deal out of nothing, but no. That was fucking racist. I can't believe nobody at any point went to Michael Bay and go, "Yo, this is wrong. Like, really wrong."

I thought it was impossible for Bay to top FDR standing up in the name of patriotism, but gold-toothed, monkey-faced, ghetto-talking robots? Good lord man.

[Skitch]

Ebert's blog post on Transformers (http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/06/the_fall_of_the_revengers.html )

Eberts responses to the comments are hilarious.

[Dukefrukem]

LOL @
God help anyone viewing it from the front row of a traditional IMAX theater--even from the back row.

[number8]

This isn't you, is it, duke?

http://i44.tinypic.com/ztjjmg.jpg

[Dukefrukem]

Blocked by my work. Upload it to imageshack and I'll let you know.

[number8]

No, it's quite all right. I'll just assume it's you.

[Spinal]

Q: "Why one star, and not zero?"

Ebert: "It is merely bad, not morally evil."

:lol:

[Dukefrukem]

You think I'm megan fox?

[number8]

You think I'm megan fox?

I'm fairly certain that I do not think so, no.

[Dukefrukem]

such a weird question....

[[ETM]]

io9: Michael Bay Finally Made An Art Movie (http://io9.com/5301898/michael-bay-finally-made-an-art-movie)

:pritch:

[Derek]

such a weird question....

Hint: There are other people in the picture.

[Dukefrukem]

Hint: There are other people in the picture.

Ah the kid who was dissed by Fox holding the flower.

Still a weird question...

[number8]

Kurtzman and Orci sympathize with the racism complaints:

http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/orci-and-kurtzman-respond-to-claims-of-racism-in-transformers-2.php


Cole: I heard that the gold tooth was Michael Bay’s idea, but do you have any response to those who found The Twins offensive?
Orci: Number one, we sympathize. Yes, the gold tooth was not in the script, that’s true.
Kurtzman: It’s really hard for us to sit here and try to justify it.I think that would be very foolish, and if someone wants to be offended by it, it’s their right. We were very surprised when we saw it, too, and it’s a choice that was made. If anything, it just shows you that we don’t control every aspect of the movie.
Cole: Were you offended by them?
Kurtzman:I wasn’t thrilled. I certainly wasn’t thrilled.
Orci: Yeah, same reaction. I’m not easily offended, but when I saw it, I thought, ‘Someone’s gonna write about that.’”

[Watashi]

60.6 million on opening day. Would have easily beaten Dark Knight's single day record if opened on a Friday.

[Pop Trash]

Has anyone made a Transformers: ROTFL joke yet? Can I copyright that?

[robhumanick]

Oooooh I'm going to have fun with this. A review of this almost necessitates a personal attack on Michael Bay. Only an asshole could have made this film.

[Raiders]

Oooooh I'm going to have fun with this. A review of this almost necessitates a personal attack on Michael Bay. Only an asshole could have made this film.

As much as I want to believe he is an asshole; if people eat this shit up, and they do, is he to blame or the people for making it so easy for him?

[Pop Trash]

;177806']io9: Michael Bay Finally Made An Art Movie (http://io9.com/5301898/michael-bay-finally-made-an-art-movie)

:pritch:

I really like the Speed Racer dig in that piece too: "The closest thing I can think of to this movie is the Wachowskis' Speed Racer, which had a similar kind of CG image overload, although it was only five hours long as opposed to ROTF's nine." :lol:

[Derek]

As much as I want to believe he is an asshole; if people eat this shit up, and they do, is he to blame or the people for making it so easy for him?

No one made him put a gold tooth on the ghettobots or a poster of his own movie in Shia's room.

[Ezee E]

A friend of mine described this as a "most masterful piece of shit"

[Sycophant]

Ebert's comments sections are usually pretty good, but these are killing me.

Pretty sure I'd rather watch Pearl Harbor again over this movie.

[Spinal]

I can't understand why anyone would be taken in by such a blatantly obvious attempt to manipulate childhood nostalgia for commercial gain.

On a completely unrelated note, when does that Fame remake come out? That's gonna be awesome!

[Derek]

Pretty sure I'd rather watch Pearl Harbor again over this movie.

Like Pearl Harbor, this is a failure of such epic proportions that it must be seen to be believed. Bay has bookended the decade with two of its worst films, so there's some historical significance as well.

[lovejuice]

No one made him put a gold tooth on the ghettobots or a poster of his own movie in Shia's room.
i like ghettobots. such a nice ring to it. :lol:

[Skitch]

I can't understand why anyone would be taken in by such a blatantly obvious attempt to manipulate childhood nostalgia for commercial gain.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e125/skitchthemovieman/08-Volkswagen-NewBeetleS-F3401.jpg

[Dukefrukem]

Mark Kermode Reviews Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g__bQ-Y7D8Q)

hehe. "Mind bindingly terrible".

In case you don't want to listen to the whole thing, you only really need to listen to the last 20 seconds.

[Spinal]

.... it must be seen to be believed.

I learned my lesson with Armageddon. I believe it. I really don't need to see it.

[Derek]

I learned my lesson with Armageddon. I believe it. I really don't need to see it.

:lol:

And if you lived with Davis in the late 90s, you would've been believing it on a daily basis for about a month.

[D_Davis]

:lol:

And if you lived with Davis in the late 90s, you would've been believing it on a daily basis for about a month.

That's right. I would have learned 'em a Masters Degree in Armageddonology.

[Spinal]

And if you lived with Davis in the late 90s, you would've been believing it on a daily basis for about a month.

So, just to put this in perspective, what are a couple other films that would be in the neighborhood of a '6' on your rating scale?

[Ivan Drago]

Perhaps it's time to stop overpraising Orci and Kurtzmann's work on the Abrams flick. They were working within an established universe, and even with the altering timelines, all they could come up with was time travel, glorified cameo's and vengeful villains. Star Trek is good because of the great cast, the (finally!) epic budget and obvious feelings of nostalgia.

Eh when I saw it the first two times I didn't feel this because at that point I had not seen any of the old Star Trek movies. The third time I saw it, after having seen the first two Trek movies, I got the references (the Kobayashi Maru test and Old Spock).

[Derek]

So, just to put this in perspective, what are a couple other films that would be in the neighborhood of a '6' on your rating scale?

From this decade, these are films that would most likely be in single digits.

Honeybee (Melvin James)
The Patriot (Ronald Emmerich)
Pearl Harbor (Michael Bay)
Stealing Harvard (Bruce McCulloch)
The Shipment (Alex Wright)
American Psycho 2 (Morgan J. Freeman)
The Cat in the Hat (Bo Welch)
Legally Blonde 2: Red, White, and Blonde (Charles Herman-Wurmfeld)
The Room (Tommy Wiseau)
Are We There Yet? (Brian Levant)
Crash (Paul Haggis)
Madea's Family Reunion (Tyler Perry)
Little Children (Todd Field)

[Qrazy]

From this decade, these are films that would most likely be in single digits.


Crash (Paul Haggis)

I love you.

[Derek]

I love you.

You've temporarily sated my anger towards you for Mad Men. :)

[Pop Trash]

Little Children (Todd Field)

Por serio?

[origami_mustache]

Little Children was terrible.

[trotchky]

Little Children was terrible.

It sure was.

[Derek]

I love MatchCut sometimes, almost as much as I hate Little Children.

[Watashi]

I'm pretty sure Michael Jackson loved Little Children.

[Watashi]

That was not called for. What the hell is wrong with you, Watashi?

[Boner M]

This movie wasn't even fun to hate on. I think this film represents the moment where Michael Bay decides that he doesn't want to be Michael Bay anymore.

[number8]

This movie wasn't even fun to hate on. I think this film represents the moment where Michael Bay decides that he doesn't want to be Michael Bay anymore.

Funny, I think this film represents the moment where Michael Bay decides that he has enough money to start experimenting on conjectural forms of torture.

[Qrazy]

Any inventive use of product placement this time around?

[The Mike]

It's awesome.

[Sxottlan]

I worship at the Church of the Assumption of Saint Barricade of Mission City.

Ever since the day I watched Barricade just vanish from a climatic chase in the first Transformers, I knew I had witnessed a holy miracle. Either that, or else the film suffered from horrible continuity and editing.

Now I'm questioning my faith with Transformers: Rolling on the Floor, er, I mean Revenge of the Fallen. Oh Barricade, tell me who to smite and they shall be smote! Who would be responsible for such poor script supervision and editing? Because here we are yet again, now with the unspoken resurrection of Scorponok and Blackout (wikipedia says this is someone else). It's just another bizarre example of an incredibly bizarre film.

I don't think this is nearly as bad as it's being made out to be. Then again, I think this could end up like my viewing of Bad Boys 2, which I enjoyed, but more because of just how strangely inappropriate parts of it were. So much of this film could have been slashed, from kitchen appliances transforming to Sam's mom going stark raving insane to the roommate to the uncommented upon Decepticon that can mimic a human. I can appreciate some strange choices in a blockbuster, but so much of this feels like when I sat there somewhat dumbstruck at pirates appealing to a five-story woman to save them and she turns into a pile of crabs.

I think I'll probably grow to like this film more over time by virtue of it starring giant robots, but given the absolute pounding this is taking, I wonder if the studio or Spielberg might be able to rein Michael Bay in for the next one. At least, no iron testicles. Apparently Transformers reproduce sexually, but I don't know if I needed to see Devastator practically drag his sack across John Turturro's face. Then again, Turturro engaged in golden shower action with Bumblebee in the first film. So are these strange choices really all that different from the first film? Maybe not.

I think what I'm most disappointed at is the more simple choice to say that the Transformers are still somehow top secret. What did people just see gas leaks everywhere in the last film? I had this strange hope that we'd see a film in which Transformers, while more powerful but outnumbered, openly walk among us. There could have been this Ellis Island-like place where they arrive and try to integrate into our society. But envisioning a new world where humans and robots work together would have been too much for this film, content to do more of the same, although now with a new villain that we're suppose to fear more than Megatron and yet has maybe five minutes of screen time.

Oh well, a fun diversion. I laughed a good amount, but I'm not sure it'll resonate much at all.

[Dukefrukem]

I think what I'm most disappointed at is the more simple choice to say that the Transformers are still somehow top secret.

Yes def. an inconsitantcey. wasn't there a huge fight in the city in the first film?

[KK2.0]

BAYSPLOSIONS!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRS90V8BQGo

[Morris Schæffer]

haha. I love how quickly shit blows up. :lol:

[Dead & Messed Up]

Twelve Observations about Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen.

1) Pot doesn't do that.

2) If you're a filmmaker, you're good for one testicle joke per movie. Anything more is desperate. This film has six or seven. None of them inspire anything more than groans.

3) In theory, transformers reproduce asexually, through the power of the Cube, at least I thought, but here a small Transformer humps Megan Fox's leg. Does it ejaculate oil? Shouldn't it reserve that attraction for similar robotic creatures?

4) Two dogs hump each other too. I was unmoved.

5) Do robots smash? Yes, yes they do. But the best sequence is a lame rip-off of Peter Jackson's Kong/Rex fight in King Kong. The scene challenges even the most basic of viewers, as Optimus Prime waits until the last minute to whip out a pair of swords, and his fellow Autobots inexplicably lag behind, most likely because arriving too early would ruin the "suspense."

6) Rainn Wilson's in this movie? Sweet, I can't believe th--hey, where'd he go?

7) I have to return to the ball and sex jokes for a moment, if only to warn parents in this forum that this movie should not be viewed by children. The robots use words like "pussy," "shit," "scrotum," and one barely-saved "mother-f." The mom jokes about Sam popping his cherry. One girl makes all manner of sexual innuendo while in the car with Sam.

8) Of course, you also shouldn't take them because the movie sucks.

9) The writers create a Decepticon that looks exactly like a person and, through sheer force of will, never allow a character to mention her again.

10) Seriously. Never again. The humanlike Cylons on Battlestar Galactica provoke all manner of suspense and thematic heft. Here? Jack shit.

11) Sam Witwicky's journey throughout the film has an undercurrent of Roy Neary, as an alien object burns images into his mind that he becomes obsessed with. Spielberg, of course, was a producer on this film, and it was his influence that made Bumblebee a variation on E. T. in the first film. Is this new plot also a result of his influence? Maybe. What is certain is that this film has none of the awe and power of Close Encounters.

12) Not that it wants to. This is, after all, Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen. I knew what I was getting into. But I honestly believe that any movie story, no matter how brain-dead, can be redeemed with craft and intelligence. This film has neither. But if robot dick jokes are your thing...

[Pop Trash]

I dunno, equating Little Children with Transformers: ROTFL just seems wrong. I admit it was a bit of a disappointment since I think In the Bedroom is a near masterpiece, but Todd Field is a talented guy. Michael Bay, most emphatically, is not.

[The Mike]

I'd watch this over Little Children any day.

Hell, over ANYTHING with Kate Winslet any day.

[trotchky]

Kate Winslet was the best part of Little Children, IMO. Her performance in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind was also great.

[The Mike]

Kate Winslet was the best part of Little Children, IMO. Her performance in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind was also great.

I'd agree with this, I just seem to end up finding most of her movies....depressing.

She needs to do a car chase flick or a buddy cop comedy or be in Transformers 3 as Megan Fox's long lost MILF. Or something like that.

[Qrazy]

I'd agree with this, I just seem to end up finding most of her movies....depressing.

She needs to do a car chase flick or a buddy cop comedy or be in Transformers 3 as Megan Fox's long lost MILF. Or something like that.

Now that you mention it actually it's true. Most of her new Millenium films have been mediocre Oscar bait (excepting Eternal Sunshine). Hopefully now that she has the Oscar she'll go back to doing better films.

[Saya]

Spoilers: Transformers 2 FAQ (http://www.toplessrobot.com/2009/06/bonus_robs_transformers_2_faqs .php?page=1)


What is the status of the Transformers at the beginning of the film?
The Autobots have joined the military to hunt down the Decepticons. We're told the Decepticons are "doing things," but they appear to be hiding peacefully when the Autobots show up and brutally murder them.

What?
Yeah. The Decepticons aren't apparently doing anything, then the Autobots show up, the Decepticons run for their goddamn lives, and the Autobots hunt them down and brutally murder them. It's kind of weird.

So true!

[The Mike]

Now that you mention it actually it's true. Most of her new Millenium films have been mediocre Oscar bait (excepting Eternal Sunshine). Hopefully now that she has the Oscar she'll go back to doing better films.

I'd settle for that too.

[Henry Gale]

As someone who wasn't a fan of the first one (my second least favourite Bay film just above Pearl Harbor), I found myself strangely excited to see this. Buzz was terrible, but there still seemed to be some hope in the fact that most of that seemed to be coming from people who enjoyed the original quite a bit. So as I sat down in the theatre I still wasn't sure what I was going to make of it.

When it ended all I could think was that it was no better or worse than the original, because as much as I thought stuff like the action, scope any other good stuff was doubled up and far more effective here, all the things I found terrible before were sadly tripled or quadrupled.

The effects are obviously top notch (especially in the sequence with Megatron and Starscreams's home planet). The script... okay maybe not so much seeing as a more complex story and new characters at every turn don't really seem like something a movie like this needs. Plus, I hated that little robot in the first one and here we have about twenty of them, seemingly all voiced by the guy who does Spongebob.

I'd even say up until the reveal with the girl in Shia's dorm, I was almost enjoying myself (maybe because I was trying to ignore all the terrible humour). Once that scene hits it just drops ten steps leaving little hope left but luckily recovers just minutes later with the forest battle. Now, that is an amazing action set piece that I found to be the peak of the movie. After that though... it hits such a lull for at least a half hour before the climax with all of that garbage with Tuturro, Jetfire, the Smithsonian and wandering around Egypt for far too long. At least the end battle has its moments, as much of a blur as it now is in my mind.

In the end, this is definitely a movie for the age of DVD/Blu-Ray. It will make an amazing home-theatre demo disc for millions of homes and electronic stores 'til kingdom come (or at least until the next one in the series is released). But more importantly when it comes out I'll joyfully jump to the scenes I did find some enjoyment in and then forget certain other things ever happened in it.

** / **** (Just like the last one.)

[lovejuice]

Spoilers: Transformers 2 FAQ (http://www.toplessrobot.com/2009/06/bonus_robs_transformers_2_faqs .php?page=1)
this makes me almost want to see it. then again, supporting unintentionally bad films is against my principal.

[Ivan Drago]

BAYSPLOSIONS!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRS90V8BQGo

:lol: I love Robot Chicken.

[Henry Gale]

Spoilers: Transformers 2 FAQ (http://www.toplessrobot.com/2009/06/bonus_robs_transformers_2_faqs .php?page=1)

This explains what's wrong with anything in the movie that doesn't blow up better than any review has or possibly could.

[Skitch]

Saw it today. I didn't think was better or worse than the original. Sure, it needed trims, and some of the comedy was flat, but it was equal to the first. So I totally dug it. The twins didn't annoy me at all. The only character that did was Shia's roommate, who was drug along for, I assume, comic relief, which the film had more than enough of anyway. I thought the action was easier to see this time than the last.

[The Mike]

I was more afraid of Aqua Teen Hunger Force bringing a lawsuit against the Twins than black people bringing a lawsuit against the Twins.

[MadMan]

Ebert's blog post on Transformers (http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/06/the_fall_of_the_revengers.html )The man's still go it.

[Skitch]

I was more afraid of Aqua Teen Hunger Force bringing a lawsuit against the Twins than black people bringing a lawsuit against the Twins.

If people find the twins depict black people offensively, they clearly haven't seen Soul Plane, White Chicks, or anything by Tyler Perry.

[origami_mustache]

If people find the twins depict black people offensively, they clearly haven't seen Soul Plane, White Chicks, or anything by Tyler Perry.

...or Pearl Harbor, the original Transformers, and most other Bay movies.

[number8]

My neighbor downloaded this movie and brought it over. My roommates are MST3King it. I'm in the other room. It already sounds like they're having a way better time than I did on IMAX.

[number8]

Wow, the mood turned quickly. They started off laughing and now they're just angry. I'm amused.

[Boner M]

Wow, the mood turned quickly. They started off laughing and now they're just angry. I'm amused.
Not surprising, the last hour is the worst shit ever.

[Watashi]

I can see this movie anytime I want and for free too.

Yet, Boner, Raiders, and Derek have all seen it and some may have given their own money towards to.

I am the king of Match Cut.

[MadMan]

I can see this movie anytime I want and for free too.

Yet, Boner, Raiders, and Derek have all seen it and some may have given their own money towards to.

I am the king of Match Cut.You're not the only one here who works at a movie theater, yah know :P

That said, even though I can see it anytime I want to and for free, I refuse to. Michael Bay can go screw himself.

[Boner M]

I've just realised that except for Bad Boys 2, I've seen every Bay film on its opening weekend since Armageddon.

[Skitch]

...or the Pearl Harbor, the original Transformers, and most other Bay movies.


Yep!

[Dukefrukem]

After just five days, "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" is halfway to $400 million domestically, a box-office milestone only eight other movies have reached. If it climbs that high, the "Transformers" sequel will be by far the worst-reviewed movie ever to make the $400 million club.


According to Paramount's exit polls, 91 percent of the audience thought the sequel was as good as or better than the first "Transformers," which received far better reviews.


On Rottentomatoes.com, ... the sequel had only 38 positive reviews out of 187, a lowly 20 percent rating usually reserved for box-office duds.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9949OT00&show_article=1

[The Mike]

Humans 1, Stupid Critics 0.

[Mara]

I haven't seen this film, or the previous one.

But I have to tell you, this thread is fun readin'.

[Ezee E]

I'd almost like to see it for the MSTK3 reasons as well, but 2+ hours?

Good thing there's a lot of movies coming out this week finally.

[Skitch]

The overheard reviews while walking out of my showing were all positive. The crowd really liked it.

[Dead & Messed Up]

The overheard reviews while walking out of my showing were all positive. The crowd really liked it.

People like blood sausage, Rita.

[KK2.0]

My take: it's the same of the first movie... but longer. And longer Michael Bay means increased torture, that explains why people disliked this even after enjoying the first one, not to mention the lack of the novelty factor.

I admit to be having fun until the 2+ hour mark hit me, Bay should be forbidden to make movies that surpass the 90 minute period, and i suspect his best efforts are also his shortest. By the time the movie reached the bloated desert battle, i didn't cared for it anymore, even with fantastic visual FX at display. My friend contemplated walking out because he felt nauseous. I blamed Turturro's unnecessary butt shot, and overuse of rotating cameras. *vomits*

The crowd seemed to enjoy it though, everybody was laughing at the most juvenile of jokes, and one man sitting next to me was punching the air with joy over all the baysplosions, his girlfriend seemed to be curled in her chair enduring the pain for her lover.

The box office says it all, the influence of professional critics is nearly dead, people pay for spectacle, doesn't matter how incompetent it is, and this should be Bay's epitaph: "Michael Bay: Delivered incompetent spectacle like no one else."

[Sycophant]

Humans 1, Stupid Critics 0.

I appreciate that you liked this while most people here and in the critical community didn't. Fine. But stop stealing lines my dad has been using for the last 15 years.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Humans 1, Stupid Critics 0.

How dare they apply thought to an artistic venture that took away seventy million man-hours from the human race.

How dare they.

[number8]

Ummm more like Humans 1 Critics 1,000. Or something. Critical consensus and box office performance line up more often than people care to admit. It's only in rare instances like this that people suddenly make retarded "haha critics know nothing" comments.

[Raiders]

How dare they apply thought to an artistic venture that took away seventy million man-hours from the human race.

How dare they.

I'm sure those people who put in the man-hours are happy with the result. And by result, I mean $200m domestic in five days.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I'm sure those people who put in the man-hours are happy with the result. And by result, I mean $200m domestic in five days.

Seventy million refers to the time spent viewing the picture, not making it. Two hundred million dollars means twenty-seven million tickets sold, multiplied by two and a half hours means just under seventy million man-hours spent viewing jokes about robot testicles.

[Raiders]

Seventy million refers to the time spent viewing the picture, not making it. Two hundred million dollars means twenty-seven million tickets sold, multiplied by two and a half hours means just under seventy million man-hours spent viewing jokes about robot testicles.

Oh, I thought we were talking about the vast crew and IMAX people. Screw your obscure math-science!

[number8]

More like seventy million BOY-HOURS.

Amirite??!!!

[KK2.0]

Saw it today. I didn't think was better or worse than the original. Sure, it needed trims, and some of the comedy was flat, but it was equal to the first. So I totally dug it. The twins didn't annoy me at all. The only character that did was Shia's roommate, who was drug along for, I assume, comic relief, which the film had more than enough of anyway. I thought the action was easier to see this time than the last.

i agree, it's juvenile, bloated and some character are annoying, but i think it's still not that different from the first.

[Ezee E]

Ummm more like Humans 1 Critics 1,000. Or something. Critical consensus and box office performance line up more often than people care to admit. It's only in rare instances like this that people suddenly make retarded "haha critics know nothing" comments.
Exactly. They don't list the "two thumbs up" or "****" quotes for kicks. There's no way that a movie like No Country For Old Men or Slumdog Millionaire would make $100 million if it weren't for the critical community raving about them.

[number8]

Yeah. And it's not just the Oscar films. This could also be a sign that critical consensus today is closer to the populist than ever before. I wish I can find it, but there was this article about the study of how top grossing films often have high Tomatometer ratings. The Dark Knight, Pixar films, Judd Apatow movies, etc. And most of the time, movies with 10%-20% T-meter are bombs.

But then the occasional Paul Blart comes along and people think it's proof of something.

[Sycophant]

But then the occasional Paul Blart comes along and people think it's proof of something.

It is obviously proof that critics are snooty retards.

[Mara]

Yeah. And it's not just the Oscar films. This could also be a sign that critical consensus today is closer to the populist than ever before. I wish I can find it, but there was this article about the study of how top grossing films often have high Tomatometer ratings. The Dark Knight, Pixar films, Judd Apatow movies, etc. And most of the time, movies with 10%-20% T-meter are bombs.

This (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31610605/ns/entertainment-movies/) talks about it a little bit.

[Ezee E]

Even when the "retard" movies come out, there's at least one or two critics that talk about how we can leave our brain at home, and have a wild ride on a segway with Kevin James.

[Ezee E]

Critics “forget what the goal of the movie was. The goal of the movie is to entertain and have fun,” said Rob Moore, vice chairman of Paramount, which is distributing “Transformers” for DreamWorks

I get this the most from people when I talk about movies and absolutely hate it. Just because I can explain why I was entertained, doesn't make it any different.


Of the eight movies that have grossed more than $400 million domestically, four scored 90 percent or higher on Rottentomatoes: “The Dark Knight,” “Spider-Man,” “E.T. the Extra-terrestrial” and “Star Wars.” Two others, “Shrek 2” and “Titanic,” topped 80 percent.

Shrek 2 was well-liked?


This year’s biggest hits so far had terrific scores, “Up” with 97 percent and “Star Trek” with 95 percent. Both movies have grossed about $250 million, a number the “Transformers” sequel will soar past by next weekend.

Yeah... Disagreeing with the critics alright. Wasn't it last year where there were articles about how audiences are wanting more serious summer movies. Hence the success of Dark Knight?

At the end it says Bay still wants to his small movie. I'm curious as to his idea of small.

[Skitch]

i agree, it's juvenile, bloated and some character are annoying, but i think it's still not that different from the first.

I completely agree.

[Sycophant]

More like seventy million BOY-HOURS.

Amirite??!!!

This joke gets funnier each time I read it.

[Dead & Messed Up]

What no one seems to be pointing out is that opening weekends say nothing about what audiences think of the film they saw, only what they hoped to see.

This whole situation is comparable to the success of Dead Man's Chest, which (a) came out at a similar time in its year, when the other summer movies had already blown their load, (b) coasted on (and squandered) the goodwill of its successful predecessor, and (c) was backed by a gargantuan marketing campaign that offered cinemagoers little alternative.

[Sycophant]

What no one seems to be pointing out is that opening weekends say nothing about what audiences think of the film they saw, only what they hoped to see.

This whole situation is comparable to the success of Dead Man's Chest, which (a) came out at a similar time in its year, when the other summer movies had already blown their load, (b) coasted on (and squandered) the goodwill of its successful predecessor, and (c) was backed by a gargantuan marketing campaign that offered cinemagoers little alternative.

That's a good point. Didn't everyone hate Spider-Man 3, even though it made a kajillion dollars on its opening weekend?

[Ezee E]

That's a good point. Didn't everyone hate Spider-Man 3, even though it made a kajillion dollars on its opening weekend?
Yeah.

But Paramount is claiming a 90% success rate with the Transformers movie.

[Derek]

But Paramount is claiming a 90% success rate with the Transformers movie.

Wow, that seems high, but how can you question the numbers delivered by a studio who just released a film and is looking to maximize profits for the rest of the time that film plays?

[Qrazy]

They failed to mention that statistic has a standard deviation of 90 percent.

[Raiders]

Yeah, marketers know who to ask in their "sample" exit polling.

Though imdb is not a reliable basis either, it is notable that the movie has a much lower rating than the first and tons of negative comments, also unlike the first. I do not expect this to have a large shelf life even if it does have a couple easy weeks ahead of it before the little wizard comes. I'll bet it struggles to even get to $400 million.

[KK2.0]

Yeah. And it's not just the Oscar films. This could also be a sign that critical consensus today is closer to the populist than ever before. I wish I can find it, but there was this article about the study of how top grossing films often have high Tomatometer ratings. The Dark Knight, Pixar films, Judd Apatow movies, etc. And most of the time, movies with 10%-20% T-meter are bombs.

But then the occasional Paul Blart comes along and people think it's proof of something.

I was about to write something along those lines, i actually don't believe people follow the critical consensus, it's just that the consensus pretty much matches the masses opinions.

Both are generalizations, maybe that's the reason.

I remember hearing the "critics don't know shit" phrase my entire life. I think it's just that the regular, non movie-nerd crowd only watch movies for pure scapism and simply cannot diss a bad movie like Transformers since it shows so much eye candy. It reminds me of the Zombies that stop to watch fireworks on Romero's Land of The Dead.

Hmmm... I guess every regular movie goers i know hated No Country For Old Men, saying stuff like "i'll never watch an Oscar winning movie again!" :lol:

[Pop Trash]

Yeah, marketers know who to ask in their "sample" exit polling.

I know...I've been to sneak previews with marketing people asking questions after the flick and they never approach me. I think it's because I look like I might be educated and have a job that requires skill and don't have my pants hanging a foot below my ass and an asymetrical ballcap.



Though imdb is not a reliable basis either, it is notable that the movie has a much lower rating than the first and tons of negative comments, also unlike the first. I do not expect this to have a large shelf life even if it does have a couple easy weeks ahead of it before the little wizard comes. I'll bet it struggles to even get to $400 million.
Agreed. It seems to be on people's minds right now and not much competition out there. After 4th of July weekend and after Public Enemies, Bruno, and especially Harry Potter come out, people will just move along. I doubt there will be much repeat business for this thing.

[Ezee E]

Hmmm... I guess every regular movie goers i know hated No Country For Old Men, saying stuff like "i'll never watch an Oscar winning movie again!" :lol:

Its been playing non-stop on the TV in the fire station. The two or three that have seen Transformers 2 have also been loving that. I think they just like anything action.

They all hated Death Proof.

[number8]

Its been playing non-stop on the TV in the fire station. The two or three that have seen Transformers 2 have also been loving that. I think they just like anything action.

They all hated Death Proof.

Do they like Clue and Resident Evil?

[Skitch]

That's a good point. Didn't everyone hate Spider-Man 3, even though it made a kajillion dollars on its opening weekend?

Spider-Man 3 > Spider-Man 2 > Spider-Man

[Sycophant]

Spider-Man 3 > Spider-Man 2 > Spider-Man

I probably agree with this, but I heard a lot more bitching about SM3 from people in general than the previous 2.

Or is my perception off here?

[Ezee E]

Do they like Clue and Resident Evil?
Heh. No idea.

[Skitch]

I probably agree with this, but I heard a lot more bitching about SM3 from people in general than the previous 2.

Or is my perception off here?

No, that was the general reception. Kudos, though, to you sir.

I have similar feelings between SM2 and 3 as I do TF1 and 2. Equal problems between previous films and their follow ups.

[The Mike]

How dare they apply thought to an artistic venture that took away seventy million man-hours from the human race.

How dare they.
All I'm saying is they made the movie they wanted to make, and got the results they wanted. The critics matter ZERO in regard to the movie.

I'm all for artistic ventures and stuff....but this wasn't one of 'em. And that doesn't make the human race worse off, doesn't ruin cinema, or do any of that bullshit critics are slingin' around.

"Stupid Critics" was a little harsh on my behalf. I'll admit that.

[Dead & Messed Up]

All I'm saying is they made the movie they wanted to make, and got the results they wanted. The critics matter ZERO in regard to the movie.

From here grows the discussion of how critics "matter" and what they offer to cinemagoers.


I'm all for artistic ventures and stuff....but this wasn't one of 'em. And that doesn't make the human race worse off, doesn't ruin cinema, or do any of that bullshit critics are slingin' around.

Makes people dumber.

[The Mike]

From here grows the discussion of how critics "matter" and what they offer to cinemagoers.



Makes people dumber.

Here's my thoughts. 100% of people I've talked to in real life that saw the movie have primarily positive things to say about it. No one's saying it should win awards or that they hope all movies are like it, but they can enjoy the movie for what it is.

I understand that critics want to gauge the artistic value of every movie, but they lack a human component. There's little consideration for people's preferences between genres, actors, directors, etc.....the stuff that is what 90% of people in the real world make their decisions based on. In short, most people go to a movie because they want to enjoy it, and I don't get the feeling that most critics I've read are coming from the same perspective.

I don't believe people, under any circumstance, get dumber from watching a movie. I don't believe that all movies should be graded on the same continuum, and I don't believe a bunch of people sitting around looking for the deepest implications of a sequel about robots from another planet that turn into vehicles are going to have any influence on the millions of people out there who go to the movies to sit down, see something that they want to enjoy, and go home happy.

I will never worry about myself liking something like Transformers 2, no matter how much I can see that the plot doesn't connect or that the lead would be better off as a porn actress or that the Aqua Teen Jar-Jar Binks Twins don't serve a purpose in the plot besides making pot-smoking teens laugh. All I wanted was to have fun, to stare at a shiny screen with shiny robots that had shiny battles that reminded me of the Transformers that made me dream when I was a kid, and I was thrilled to have that occur.

And it doesn't mean I'll be first in line to see Ass: The Movie when it eventually comes out....because I didn't have an ass fetish when I was a kid.

EDIT: As far as what critics do offer...I have no idea. I used to think they mattered from the artistic standpoint, and that they helped form a picture of what entails a good movie....but now the word critic itself is enough to piss me off. It's such a negative profession.

[transmogrifier]

Spider-Man 3 > Spider-Man 2 > Spider-Man


any halfway decent movie >> Spider-Man 2 > Spider-Man > Spider-Man 3

[number8]

Holy shit. I just realized that Sam's annoying roommate is Omar's boyfriend from The Wire.

[Sycophant]

Plenty of critics like plenty of populist, not-award-winning, extravaganzas. Plenty evaluate mainly on whether or not they enjoyed a movie. Most of them didn't enjoy this one. You (The Mike) did, because you were happy just to see shiny giant robots and explosions and stuff, and that's fine.

[The Mike]

Plenty of critics like plenty of populist, not-award-winning, extravaganzas. Plenty evaluate mainly on whether or not they enjoyed a movie. Most of them didn't enjoy this one. You (The Mike) did, because you were happy just to see shiny giant robots and explosions and stuff, and that's fine.

I concur. It just baffles me sometimes when the vitriol gets going and yet the average filmgoer has no concern...there's something not right in the equation.

Then again, I only know like 10 people, who are all nerds, and live in a basement.

[number8]

How is it weird? How much more vitriolic do these "average moviegoers" get when it comes to... say, Uwe Boll movies?

What's the difference. It's just levels of incompetence.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I understand that critics want to gauge the artistic value of every movie, but they lack a human component. There's little consideration for people's preferences between genres, actors, directors, etc.....the stuff that is what 90% of people in the real world make their decisions based on. In short, most people go to a movie because they want to enjoy it, and I don't get the feeling that most critics I've read are coming from the same perspective.

I don't know about this. Looking at the evidence, critics love a lot of summer blockbusters that don't strive for out-and-out intelligence: they generally liked Crystal Skull, the first Pirates film, Revenge of the Sith, and other films that aim for the eyes and the inner child (and that child's allowance).

A majority of them liked the first Transformers.


I don't believe people, under any circumstance, get dumber from watching a movie. I don't believe that all movies should be graded on the same continuum, and I don't believe a bunch of people sitting around looking for the deepest implications of a sequel about robots from another planet that turn into vehicles are going to have any influence on the millions of people out there who go to the movies to sit down, see something that they want to enjoy, and go home happy.

I didn't like the implications of the film, especially considering how many four- and five-year-olds were laughing at the pidgin-bots and the ball jokes, and witnessing the terribly bland sexualization of the lone female voice in the picture. Will that make them dumber? I think so. Bay knows his film is going to attract families - it's opening in the beginning of July. His complicity and encouragement of marketing such witless entertainment to kids bothers me. Frankly, they deserve better (thank God Up is still in theaters).

And I'm speaking as a fan of movies like The Fifth Element, The Mummy, and Drag Me to Hell. But the difference is that those films seem defensible on their own terms, something that I feel cannot be said for Transformers 2.

I doubt anyone was looking for the deepest implications of this film - most, like me, were hoping for a good time and little else.


I will never worry about myself liking something like Transformers 2, no matter how much I can see that the plot doesn't connect or that the lead would be better off as a porn actress or that the Aqua Teen Jar-Jar Binks Twins don't serve a purpose in the plot besides making pot-smoking teens laugh. All I wanted was to have fun, to stare at a shiny screen with shiny robots that had shiny battles that reminded me of the Transformers that made me dream when I was a kid, and I was thrilled to have that occur.

Clearly Bay could not have made the film purely for Transformers fans who played with the toys and used them as a springboard to imagination. If he had, the movies would be colossal flops. So why can't he throw us, the viewers unencumbered by childhood nostalgia, a few more bones?

Maybe, say, explain why it's not relevant that Decepticons can look like people.

Just for a start.

[Skitch]

Watched it again tonight. Even better the second time.

[dreamdead]

This is a steaming mess. Even foregoing Bay's refusal to hold shots long enough to get a decent understanding of spatial relations and who is where, the film's script is really the chief offense. Whether it is pretending that Sam's parents are mere comic foils during the pre-and-post college scenes, and disastrous ones at that, only to pull an about-face and ask us to sympathize with their capture, or trying to establish some kind of emotional connection with Sam and Bumblebee even as it crosscuts with Mikaela changing clothes for a sense of voyeurism. It's worse at sustaining a consistent tonal quality than Korean films, and the whole decepticon humping Mikaela's leg, like a loyal dog you see (hah!), is just off in so many ways. And it isn't that saying the l-word isn't hard in modern times. It's that it's too easy to say. So pulling a whole first Matrix film where love isn't uttered until the film demands for it doesn't work here, because this film hasn't even earned the modicum of warmth that Matrix possessed. Just a horrible offense to anything resembling reality amidst the many fantastical moments, which causes it to fail at every step of the way.

[Dukefrukem]

So is this worse than Pearl Harbor and the Island?

[Spinal]

Aaagh! Stop giving them money!

[Skitch]

:)

But how will I ever get TF3?

[KK2.0]

Bay said he'll not direct part three, which names can hold the tradition? :lol:

I'm torn between Tony Scott and Stephen Sommers.

[Morris Schæffer]

So is this worse than Pearl Harbor and the Island?

If I had to choose I'd pick Pearl Harbor. A failure, but at least I detected some ambition. Moreover, as schmaltzy as it gets, like Armageddon, I definitely felt some emotion compared to Transformers which was entirely and utterly superficial.

And the action scenes are pretty fantastic and easy to follow, to appreciate.

[Mara]

Morris, you rated Coraline the same as Transformers 2. I'm having sadness about that.

[Dukefrukem]

If I had to choose I'd pick Pearl Harbor. A failure, but at least I detected some ambition. Moreover, as schmaltzy as it gets, like Armageddon, I definitely felt some emotion compared to Transformers which was entirely and utterly superficial.

And the action scenes are pretty fantastic and easy to follow, to appreciate.

I definitely can this.

[Morris Schæffer]

Morris, you rated Coraline the same as Transformers 2. I'm having sadness about that.

I know that it doesn't seem right, but I'm usually fairly harsh with animated feature films. While I won't deny that Coraline had a unique visual style, its story about a girl who, unhappy with her current existence, thinks up, or stumbles upon a secret door that leads to an alternate reality was so tiresome, so gruellingly devoid of surprises that I found it fairly unengaging. I suppose it made more of an impression on me than something Dreamworks might produce, but that's damning with faint praise. It's creepier than most animated fare, but oooh, not enough to rattle a 33-year old. ;)

Transformers: RotF is more my kind of thing even if it'll be nowhere in sight when I'm compiling a top 10 of 2009. I really wanted to see where the story was going next despite realizing that it would involve ever bigger explosions and crazier set pieces.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I know that it doesn't seem right, but I'm usually fairly harsh with animated feature films. While I won't deny that Coraline had a unique visual style, its story about a girl who, unhappy with her current existence, thinks up, or stumbles upon a secret door that leads to an alternate reality was so tiresome, so gruellingly devoid of surprises that I found it fairly unengaging. I suppose it made more of an impression on me than something Dreamworks might produce, but that's damning with faint praise. It's creepier than most animated fare, but oooh, not enough to rattle a 33-year old. ;)

Learn to watch movies better.

;)

Seriously, though, no surprises? Not the creepy Other-Father's true nature? Not the mouse circus? Not the bat-dogs? Yes, it was a re-imagined Wonderland, but what great imagination.

I prefer it to Up.

[Morris Schæffer]

Learn to watch movies better.

;)

Seriously, though, no surprises? Not the creepy Other-Father's true nature? Not the mouse circus? Not the bat-dogs? Yes, it was a re-imagined Wonderland, but what great imagination.

I prefer it to Up.

In the way that some of the visuals were crafted, in the ever expanding roster of characters which were certainly far more inspired than you know, talking animals voiced by Robin Williams. But not in the way of narrative ingenuity. It's Chronicles of Narnia, Bridge to Terabithia, Wizard of Oz, but more macabre. Draw a small door into a wall and hey presto. Alternate reality! And of course the little girl makes it back eventually and everything is peachy.

True, so did Shia, but what the heck.

[Spinal]

Morris, you rated Coraline the same as Transformers 2. I'm having sadness about that.

And City of Ember. Which is an even better film.

[Mara]

And City of Ember. Which is an even better film.

I know you're a big fan, so I checked it out. I thought it was occasionally great, but overall a bit uneven.

[[ETM]]

I know you're a big fan, so I checked it out. I thought it was occasionally great, but overall a bit uneven.

Mostly in its ambition. While it's an ambitious story, the small budget was obvious in almost every scene. Still an enjoyable little flick.

[KK2.0]

If I had to choose I'd pick Pearl Harbor. A failure, but at least I detected some ambition. Moreover, as schmaltzy as it gets, like Armageddon, I definitely felt some emotion compared to Transformers which was entirely and utterly superficial.

And the action scenes are pretty fantastic and easy to follow, to appreciate.

Choosing between Pearl Harbor, Armaggedon and Transformers 2... seriously, i'm positive that Transformers was the least painful experience of the three.

i guess people forget the absolutely atrocious HOURS that preceded PH's only action scene.

And Armaggedon's "emotional" moments are just as bad as Transformers, please. We're talking Michael Bay here, and I'm afraid i cared more for Optimus than Bruce Willis. :lol:

[Winston*]

I know you're a big fan, so I checked it out. I thought it was occasionally great, but overall a bit uneven.

Me too. Monster House was better.

[The Mike]

So is this worse than Pearl Harbor and the Island?

No and Yes.

Pearl Harbor's an ass sandwich.

Transformers 2 is Super Awesome.

The Island is good and kinda Awesome.

[Morris Schæffer]

Choosing between Pearl Harbor, Armaggedon and Transformers 2... seriously, i'm positive that Transformers was the least painful experience of the three.

i guess people forget the absolutely atrocious HOURS that preceded PH's only action scene.

And you seem to have already forgotten that Transformers: RotF is very similar, with atrocious character moments preceding and superceding the action scenes. So which movie has better action scenes? I reckon the 2001 one and yes, it does have more than one action scene. But nah, its characters moments are still superior to anything in Transformers 2.

[lovejuice]

No and Yes.

Pearl Harbor's an ass sandwich.

Transformers 2 is Super Awesome.

The Island is good and kinda Awesome.
wow, didn't know you like pearl harbor that much.

[Chac Mool]

Everything save the giant robots is terrible, but it's a movie about giant robots, so that criticism is irrelevant. Bay again provides exactly what is important to the audience -- and that's why the movie's so successful.

[Raiders]

Everything save the giant robots is terrible, but it's a movie about giant robots, so that criticism is irrelevant. Bay again provides exactly what is important to the audience -- and that's why the movie's so successful.

Sadly true, of course. Though the reaction is noticeably less enthusiastic from your standard-issue fans this time around. Though there were a healthy number of cheers (they were delivered what they expected), I also heard a lot of sarcasm afterwards directed towards the movie's non-big robot moments. The lack of effort that went into creating anything but the effects seems to be apparent even to the least critical. The problem of course is that people still want their fix of dumb action and will pay regardless, so nobody has to learn anything or correct the definciences. If anything, they are encouraged to put even less effort into it the next time around.

I guess by seeing it myself I am part of the problem, but whatever. I'm not going to deny myself viewing the box office phenomenon of the summer. I at least know there will be others to discuss it with.

[Chac Mool]

To be fair, the special effects are spectacular -- technically perfect and deployed in inventive, often thrilling fashion (see: the razor thin infiltrator, et cetera).

[dreamdead]

Raiders is right in that everything beyond the robots themselves is a failure. Structurally the whole thing is weak, and the whole idea of needing Sam as a surrogate for the audience to care about is exposed as a waste of effort, since his struggles are never given any real weight. The whole unfaithful thing at college could be dramatically engaging, but only if the filmmakers don't cheapen it by making the girl a decepticon. Unfortunately, time after time Bay and his crew dampen any dramatic effect.

[Eleven]

Haven't seen this yet, but...


Everything save the giant robots is terrible, but it's a movie about giant robots, so that criticism is irrelevant. Bay again provides exactly what is important to the audience -- and that's why the movie's so successful.

This is one case where I think it would be worthwhile to dispense with actors altogether. Any pleasure on that front in Bay movies (Connery in The Rock, some of the sidekicks in Armageddon) is purely coincidental. Better to just spend that money on showing even shinier, whip-pannier robots smashing each other. That way, Bay gets even closer to that avant-garde film of big, dumb, loud inanimate objects colliding into each other, devoid of those pesky things like plot, character, dialogue, theme, and subtlety that just impede the proceedings, that I know is just waiting to get out.

[number8]

Interesting story from a friend who went to a screening with Bay in attendance.

He went to talk to Bay after the movie and they ended up chatting for 2 hours, apparently, but while they were talking, some guy came up to Bay and went, "That movie sucked!"

Bay, calmly, turned to him and politely asked, "Okay. What didn't you like about it?"
The guy replied, "I don't have time to go over everything crappy, but I can tell you the things I liked."
"All right. Tell me."
"Megan Fox and the end credits. That's it."
"Okay. Would you really have seen the movie if it was just two hours of Megan Fox?"
"Ummmm..."
"I win."

Bay immediately turned back to my friend and ignored the guy.

[Skitch]

:lol:

[Raiders]

"I win."

Sadly enough, indeed he does.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Interesting story from a friend who went to a screening with Bay in attendance.

He went to talk to Bay after the movie and they ended up chatting for 2 hours, apparently, but while they were talking, some guy came up to Bay and went, "That movie sucked!"

Bay, calmly, turned to him and politely asked, "Okay. What didn't you like about it?"
The guy replied, "I don't have time to go over everything crappy, but I can tell you the things I liked."
"All right. Tell me."
"Megan Fox and the end credits. That's it."
"Okay. Would you really have seen the movie if it was just two hours of Megan Fox?"
"Ummmm..."
"I win."

Bay immediately turned back to my friend and ignored the guy.

I don't think he won so much as the other guy lost. What a disrespectful dolt.

[MacGuffin]

I don't think he won so much as the other guy lost. What a disrespectful dolt.

Michael Bay doesn't deserve respect.

[Skitch]

Michael Bay doesn't deserve respect.

Really? We're IMDB now?

[MacGuffin]

Really? We're IMDB now?

He hasn't made anything that has warranted any respect as a director. His contributions include wasting money that could be used for other things. Plus, he has the intelligence of a rodent.

[Winston*]

Michael Bay doesn't deserve respect.
We are all God's creatures.

[MacGuffin]

We are all God's creatures.

I'm not talking about him in real life (although I've heard he's a jerk there), but as a director.

[Skitch]

He hasn't made anything that has warranted any respect as a director. His contributions include wasting money that could be used for other things. Plus, he has the intelligence of a rodent.


I'm not talking about him in real life (although I've heard he's a jerk there), but as a director.

You're a strange one.

[MacGuffin]

You're a strange one.

Well, look at his movies. Do they really look like the products of an intelligent human being? Seriously, though, this is Michael Bay we're talking about here; it's not like I made an unbelievably controversial claim.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Michael Bay doesn't deserve respect.

I think everyone deserves respect (as in consideration), but not everyone deserves regard.

I'd be cordial to him in person, but I'd still think him a misguided person.

But then, I find humility to be an important virtue.

[Skitch]

Well, look at his movies. Do they really look like the products of an intelligent human being? Seriously, though, this is Michael Bay we're talking about here; it's not like I made an unbelievably controversial claim.

He makes shiny zero calorie entertainment that makes assloads of money. That has to require some sort of intelligence. No? He's just the luckiest big dumb dumb head ever?

Either way, the dude has a solid career in Hollywood. Even if I was to talk to someone in Hollywood I hated, I'd still ask them questions respectfully.

[MacGuffin]

Even if I was to talk to someone in Hollywood I hated, I'd still ask them questions respectfully.

There goes my dream of becoming an interviewer.

[Skitch]

There goes my dream of becoming an interviewer.

Or a balanced reviewer.

[MacGuffin]

Or a balanced reviewer.

Well, that's just the thing. I wouldn't willingly watch Transformers 2 unless I was paid to.

[Skitch]

Well, that's just the thing. I wouldn't willingly watch Transformers 2 unless I was paid to.

Of course. But now I'll never know if another movie you give bad score is because its bad, or you just hate some person in the films production! The horror, the horror.

:pritch:

[MacGuffin]

Of course. But now I'll never know if another movie you give bad score is because its bad, or you just hate some person in the films production! The horror, the horror.

:pritch:

But then, I would only hate a director involved in a movie if the movie sucks or if he did something to offend me or wrong me personally!

EDIT: And wasting my time is indeed offensive.

[number8]

My friend didn't like the film at all, by the way, but found that Bay was pleasant and interesting to talk to. They ended up chatting about the movie only briefly. He politely told Bay what he thought didn't work with the film. Bay respected his opinion and then they started talking about other things. His impression was that, as suspected, Bay is very much aware of his contribution to cinema, and he makes decisions with the sole goal of maximizing the profits. And he's very good at it.

Here's the point of the story. The reason he said, "I win" is because he's right. Nobody would really want to go see just Megan Fox, or just two hours of CGI Optimus Prime incoherently beating on CGI Decepticons. They just say those things. Bay has constructed something that got people to go see it, one way or another, through the facade of storytelling. But really, it's a front for the kind of things he knows people want to see: Megan Fox in sexy poses, comical banter, kiddie patronizing, big shit blowing up. He doesn't even have to do them well, or piece them together properly. He just throws them in, and the herd comes. It's the big-screen equivalent of Google.

[MacGuffin]

But really, it's a front for the kind of things he knows people want to see: Megan Fox in sexy poses, comical banter, kiddie patronizing, big shit blowing up.

But I don't want to see these things.

[Sycophant]

CSC, you are more the exception than the rule.

[KK2.0]

And you seem to have already forgotten that Transformers: RotF is very similar, with atrocious character moments preceding and superceding the action scenes. So which movie has better action scenes? I reckon the 2001 one and yes, it does have more than one action scene. But nah, its characters moments are still superior to anything in Transformers 2.

No. No. No. Transformers at least has the Robots and cool fx sequences scatterered through the entire film, and while the characters on both are worthless, at least Bay wasn't pretending to emulate Titanic. Nothing about Transformers is to be taken seriously.

Besides the main attack scene, i don't remember any other action/fx scene worth of notice in PH, and lets be honest: FUCK character moments in Michael Bay movies, only the visuals are worth the price of the ticket and Transformers:ROTFLOL has plenty of very impressive stuff:

-Shangai chase of the giant decepticom
-the invasion of the military bunker, where thousands of micro-decepticons join to form a new creature
-The destruction of the Eiffel Tower.
-Forest fight
-Sinking of the Carrier.
-Devastator and Jet looked amazing.

i'm not saying it's a good movie, but using Pearl Harbor as a measure of quality for anything is almost like a personal offense :lol:

[Skitch]

My friend didn't like the film at all, by the way, but found that Bay was pleasant and interesting to talk to. They ended up chatting about the movie only briefly. He politely told Bay what he thought didn't work with the film. Bay respected his opinion and then they started talking about other things. His impression was that, as suspected, Bay is very much aware of his contribution to cinema, and he makes decisions with the sole goal of maximizing the profits. And he's very good at it.

Here's the point of the story. The reason he said, "I win" is because he's right. Nobody would really want to go see just Megan Fox, or just two hours of CGI Optimus Prime incoherently beating on CGI Decepticons. They just say those things. Bay has constructed something that got people to go see it, one way or another, through the facade of storytelling. But really, it's a front for the kind of things he knows people want to see: Megan Fox in sexy poses, comical banter, kiddie patronizing, big shit blowing up. He doesn't even have to do them well, or piece them together properly. He just throws them in, and the herd comes. It's the big-screen equivalent of Google.

Exactly.

[KK2.0]

Bay has constructed something that got people to go see it, one way or another, through the facade of storytelling. But really, it's a front for the kind of things he knows people want to see: Megan Fox in sexy poses, comical banter, kiddie patronizing, big shit blowing up. He doesn't even have to do them well, or piece them together properly. He just throws them in, and the herd comes. It's the big-screen equivalent of Google.

I also think he's not dumb at all, his movies are so blatantly commercial they're easy pick for criticism but i'm positive everything is calculated, even if it looks like a 200 million Uwe Boll picture.

[Skitch]

EXACTLY!

Please don't think I'm blind or defending his directing. I think of him more as a business man than a director.

[MacGuffin]

EXACTLY!

Please don't think I'm blind or defending his directing. I think of him more as a business man than a director.

And I think of Hollywood more as a Capitalist playground than a film industry.

[Skitch]

And I think of Hollywood more as a Capitalist playground than a film industry.

But I thought they were all greenie weenie Bono loving pro-socialists?

[/sarcasm, lol @ Hollywood types]

[Qrazy]

It's the big-screen equivalent of Google.

Don't really agree with this but I do agree with the rest of your post. But frankly the fact that he's aware of the product churning bullshit that he's doing makes him all the more reprehensible.

[Spun Lepton]

Don't really agree with this but I do agree with the rest of your post. But frankly the fact that he's aware of the product churning bullshit that he's doing makes him all the more reprehensible.

Bay's just making films, he's not committing genocide.

[Spun Lepton]

And I think of Hollywood more as a Capitalist playground than a film industry.

Last I checked, an industry is capitalism in practice.

[Qrazy]

Bay's just making films, he's not committing genocide.

So only people committing genocide are reprehensible?

Are we really of the opinion here that people who make soulless art purely for profit are doing the world a service? If you say every film is made for profit I will find you and punch you in the face.

[MacGuffin]

Last I checked, an industry is capitalism in practice.

You're basically right, I suppose. But I still would like to think that independent industries such as, I don't know, France's Studio Canal or even an organization like the Criterion Collection, puts their love of quality cinema before profit (while still caring greatly about profit obviously, but again, more interested in cinema itself, rather than taking movie pictures of explosions in order to create revenue).

[Spun Lepton]

So only people committing genocide are reprehensible?

Are we really of the opinion here that people who make soulless art purely for profit are doing the world a service? If you say every film is made for profit I will find you and punch you in the face.

People can be reprehensible for many things. Making stupid, empty entertainment is not one of those things. And if he entertains people with his garbage, then, yes, he is providing the world with a service.

[Spun Lepton]

You're basically right, I suppose. But I still would like to think that independent industries such as, I don't know, France's Studio Canal or even an organization like the Criterion Collection, puts their love of quality cinema before profit (while still caring greatly about profit obviously, but again, more interested in cinema itself, rather than taking movie pictures of explosions in order to create revenue).

I would imagine these kinds of companies will put "art before profit" up until their bottom line is threatened. Then their tune will change. Criterion released Armageddon on DVD, after all.

[number8]

Criterion released Armageddon on DVD, after all.

And The Rock. And Pearl Harbor. Criterion fellows love their Bay.

[MacGuffin]

I would imagine these kinds of companies will put "art before profit" up until their bottom line is threatened. Then their tune will change. Criterion released Armageddon on DVD, after all.

Yeah, basically. What's your point? Criterion appeals to people who love movies (and have to release mainstream fare every once in a while to continue to do so). Transformer 2 exists not for cinema, but for people who work in the studios and who rake in money by the hundreds daily, careless as to the quality of the bullshit they shell out on a daily basis.

[Qrazy]

People can be reprehensible for many things. Making stupid, empty entertainment is not one of those things.

Yes, yes it is. Have you never heard the term selling out? That is basically his modus operandi.


And if he entertains people with his garbage, then, yes, he is providing the world with a service.

Cigarette barons also provide the world with a service (my point is not to draw a parallel between the two but to point out the scope of your current definition of service).

[Qrazy]

And The Rock. And Pearl Harbor. Criterion fellows love their Bay.

What? When did they release Pearl Harbor? Kill me now.

[MacGuffin]

To conclude, I'm done fighting about Michael Bay. Because in the end, you contributed to him by seeing his latest shit; I didn't!

[Sycophant]

Transformer 2 exists not for cinema, but for people who work in the studios and who rake in money by the hundreds daily, careless as to the quality of the bullshit they shell out on a daily basis.

It also exists for people who like to pay $10 to look at Megan Fox's ass and explosions on a huge screen for two hours.

[MacGuffin]

It also exists for people who like to pay $10 to look at Megan Fox's ass and explosions on a huge screen for two hours.

But who would want to do something so mindless when they could go watch a classic instead?

[Pop Trash]

But who would want to do something so mindless when they could go watch a classic instead?

Or porn. I'm pretty sure I've seen much more interesting porn than movies in the Michael Bay canon.

[Skitch]

To conclude, I'm done fighting about Michael Bay. Because in the end, you contributed to him by seeing his latest shit; I didn't!

True. And I firmly believe every dollar is more a vote that a ballot for all things. Kudos for standing by you're convictions, and I'm not being sarcastic, I'm dead serious. I don't pay for films I think look like trash either.

...but you did make the decision to post in a thread titled Transformers 2.

:P

[Winston*]

I don't like this thing I don't like. I don't understand why people do this thing I don't like and don't spend their time doing this thing I do like.

[MacGuffin]

True. And I firmly believe every dollar is more a vote that a ballot for all things. Kudos for standing by you're convictions, and I'm not being sarcastic, I'm dead serious. I don't pay for films I think look like trash either.

...but you did make the decision to post in a thread titled Transformers 2.

:P

Yeah, I thought number8's story was kind of funny.

[Spun Lepton]

Yes, yes it is. Have you never heard the term selling out? That is basically his modus operandi.

Selling out? What makes you think he sold out? Last I checked, he's been making these big empty movies from the start. Selling out is going against your own morals in order to profit. And even if he has sold out, what kinds of harm is he causing the public by releasing big, dumb, explodey movies?


Cigarette barons also provide the world with a service (my point is not to draw a parallel between the two but to point out the scope of your current definition of service).

But you drew a parallel. You believe Bay's films are, what, some kind of societal cancer?

[trotchky]

Let's just make it a forum-wide project to blow up Michael Bay's car.

[trotchky]

Cigarette barons also provide the world with a service (my point is not to draw a parallel between the two but to point out the scope of your current definition of service).

Cigarette barons aren't evil because the product they provide causes cancer, they're evil because they don't care about human beings, just like any other corporation.

[Qrazy]

Selling out? What makes you think he sold out? Last I checked, he's been making these big empty movies from the start. Selling out is going against your own morals in order to profit. And even if he has sold out, what kinds of harm is he causing the public by releasing big, dumb, explodey movies?

Selling out does not mean that you started with high moral standards and then disposed of them. You can sell out with your very first film. Selling out is making commodified art solely for a profit. It's as 8 said. He's presumably a relatively intelligent guy. He could make better films (they can still have action and explosions) but he doesn't because he's ticking off focus group boxes to maximize his profit.

The harm he is doing is systematically lowering the lowest common denominator (I'm not speaking of this film as I have not seen it but Michael Bay and his films in general... keep in mind that I mildly enjoyed the first Transformers). As long as his films are financially successful more will be made.


But you drew a parallel. You believe Bay's films are, what, some kind of societal cancer?

No I did not draw a parallel. This is why I explicitly said I am not drawing a parallel. A parallel would be saying he and his films are the equivalent of cigarette barons and their product. I am not saying this. I am saying that based upon your definition of service anyone providing any thing of interest to anyone at all is doing the world a service. So an arms dealer is doing the world a service. This definition is bereft of meaning.

What I believe is that soulless films made solely for profit... focus group films filled with product placement, lowest common denominator humor and T&A, where characters act as shallow, hollow automatons... provide the world with absolutely nothing and should not be made. I have nothing against big fun action blockbusters en masse.

To clarify all of this is in reference to 8's comments about Bay. If he is aware of what he's doing and capable of making better films and isn't (and I think this is likely the case) then I find his actions reprehensible.

[Qrazy]

Cigarette barons aren't evil because the product they provide causes cancer, they're evil because they don't care about human beings, just like any other corporation.

I don't quite agree. Some corporations have different leadership than other and some have better policies and effectively care about people more than others (some 'go green' sooner, some take care of their employees better). There are also gradations of moral culpability and corporations which sell products which they know are actively harmful are worse than those which try to maximize profit by selling products that are merely superfluous. That is to say that the leaders of Marlboro are worse than the leaders of IBM. But this is a very tangential conversation.

[Fezzik]

Let's just make it a forum-wide project to blow up Michael Bay's car.

That might backfire. Bay's a fan of explosions. He might actually appreciate the effort.

[number8]

Pretty sure he had already done that himself.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiHsxQJ9ZOo)

[trotchky]

There are also gradations of moral culpability and corporations which sell products which they know are actively harmful are worse than those which try to maximize profit by selling products that are merely superfluous. That is to say that the leaders of Marlboro are worse than the leaders of IBM. But this is a very tangential conversation.

From what I know about both companies, I agree that the leaders of Marlboro are worse than the leaders of IBM, but that's entirely because of the manner in which they do business and not because of the product (cigarettes in general, i mean. not necessarily Marlboro Cigarettes because i don't know what they put in that shit) itself. What do you think of Lockheed Martin?

[Qrazy]

From what I know about both companies, I agree that the leaders of Marlboro are worse than the leaders of IBM, but that's entirely because of the manner in which they do business and not because of the product (cigarettes in general, i mean. not necessarily Marlboro Cigarettes because i don't know what they put in that shit) itself. What do you think of Lockheed Martin?

I know nothing about them but business practice being one important factor I stand by the position that selling a product which you know is harmful is worse than selling one which isn't.

[trotchky]

I know nothing about them but business practice being one important factor I stand by the position that selling a product which you know is harmful is worse than selling one which isn't.

If the contents of the product are fully disclosed to the consumer, no, I don't think it is. But as someone who thinks all drugs should be decriminalized, my opinion is probably far from the norm.

[Qrazy]

If the contents of the product are fully disclosed to the consumer, no, I don't think it is. But as someone who thinks all drugs should be decriminalized, my opinion is probably far from the norm.

It's more than the contents of the product, it's the effect of those contents. They actively try to conceal those effects. It has only been after immense pressure and legislation over the years that they've included warning labels.