Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
worksux101 wrote:awful..quite disappointed i must say...bay with the usual crazy effects, alot too explosive and fast to appreciate...story thin, inconsistent and vague...the cgi and 3d were the only saving graces...
Mark! wrote:Acting was bleh. But the visuals and vehicles were pretty decent and that's the reason i looked at his type of film. If i wanted impeccable acting, script/screenplay would have watched a Scorsese film. If you had huge expectations in those areas for a Bay film then that's a bit naive, come on
Soul Collector wrote:Mark! wrote:Acting was bleh. But the visuals and vehicles were pretty decent and that's the reason i looked at his type of film. If i wanted impeccable acting, script/screenplay would have watched a Scorsese film. If you had huge expectations in those areas for a Bay film then that's a bit naive, come on
You understand? All these stupid Bay-haters just jumping on the bandwagon to trash Bay's work...and for what reason? He is the best at what he does and his movies have raised the bar for action movies in hollywood.
You dont go to a movie....knowing fully well what to expect, yet hoping for something else, then complain about it, unless of course you are a retard...like a lot of ppl here too.
His use of the imax 3D camera was fkin brilliant as opposed to the cheap ass conversions other movies utilize to cut costs. I actually enjoyed the hell out of this movie despite all the trash talk everyone spewing. The humour was fine this time around. I found Mark took on the role pretty well.
I have my little qualms about it but its more along the lines of the score Jablonsky did for it. He is Hans' protégé and I usually like his work alot but he needs to step up his game. The score wasnt prominent throughout the film, just not powerful enough to handle the epicness of what was happening on screen. And also, I didnt get that swooning feeling like when Optimus had the forrest battle in a previous film where he said "I"LL TAKE YOU ALL ON!!!" Grimlock was fkin awesome, just didnt get "that" feeling again tho and that was probably because it didnt have the epic music accompanying it like in the Forrest Battle.
worksux101 wrote:^lmao...your post sounds like a teenage fanboy...didnt realise that people voicing their disapproval equated to thrash talk...
Soul Collector wrote:worksux101 wrote:^lmao...your post sounds like a teenage fanboy...didnt realise that people voicing their disapproval equated to thrash talk...
^ That is what I mean as "trash talk" too. You just talking sheit for talking sheit sakes. You aint even bother to comment anything useful. Just like why I'm saying everyone is critiquing for critiquing sakes and just failing to point out what's actually GOOD about the film.
RASC wrote:
16 cycles wrote:For the peeps that stayed awake....
Did galvatron transform into a cannon?
I swear was glavatron in beginning but that was the bounty hunter lockdown
Any reference to unicron specifically?
Bay will get more of my money if next film has unicron...
Oh yeah...why go on a tirade abt not expecting oscars from a bay film but chastise the person writing the score?
Soul Collector wrote:worksux101 wrote:^lmao...your post sounds like a teenage fanboy...didnt realise that people voicing their disapproval equated to thrash talk...
^ That is what I mean as "trash talk" too. You just talking sheit for talking sheit sakes. You aint even bother to comment anything useful. Just like why I'm saying everyone is critiquing for critiquing sakes and just failing to point out what's actually GOOD about the film.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2014/06/29/box-office-transformers-4-scores-100m-weekend/
Michael Bay’s Transformers: Age of Extinction scored the biggest opening weekend of 2014, earning a strong $100 million in America and $301.3m worldwide in its initial frame
http://variety.com/2011/film/features/michael-bay-seriously-1118039082/
Action auds adore him. Fussy cineastes revile him. Hardly anyone in either camp puts much thought into assessing his work.
But even some critics — who regard him warily and risk ridicule from their peers if they praise him — are coming to admit that, love him or hate him, Michael Bay needs to be taken seriously.
“He’s an auteur through and through,” says Scott Foundas, contributing editor for the highbrow Film Comment magazine. “You know within a few seconds of watching his movie that it’s a Michael Bay movie and beyond that there’s no question that he’s influenced the visual language of the contemporary Hollywood blockbuster in a major way.”
Variety senior film critic Peter Debruge calls Bay “a singular voice” and notes that of a generation of filmmakers who came out of commercials and music videos, “He is the one that has risen to the top of the pack and really continued to pioneer that esthetic on the bigscreen, for better or worse.”
And even Variety senior film critic Justin Chang, who generally abhors Bay’s style of cinematic mayhem, concedes, “I think that the critical revulsion that Michael Bay inspires actually is itself a kind of proof of his distinctiveness. There are a million hacks in Hollywood but there’s only one Michael Bay.”
But why? How is Bay’s fast-cutting style different from that of, say, Paul Greengrass, and what is original about his tentpole bombast? Why is Bay himself successful and famous enough to appear as a Verizon FiOS pitchman when Simon West and Tony Scott could wait in a ticket line for “Transformers 3″ unrecognized?
RASC wrote:18% rating. Yet people here VEX when you give a harse critique... Objectivity has completely been thrown out the window here.
I really question anyone's movie watching prowess or even analytical ability as an adult- to watch filth like that and say "yeah man Bess"
That's why I have to say y'all HAVE to be simple mouth breathers.
worksux101 wrote:This guy still ranting? In case u didn't realise, I did commend the 3d and visuals. But it simply wasn't enough to make up for the rest. If u seriously think ppl anyone gives a damn who made the movie and "hating" for that reason, then u need a reality check. Stop being a fanboy
Soul Collector wrote:There are ppl who enjoy the movies. I like Bay's work and I like Steve Jabslonsky's work on the scores he does for Bay's films too. I just thought he could have made a more potent score for this movie. Remember the 1st movie when you heard "Arrival to Earth" when the autobots were touching down in the pods? Now that's a piece of music.
http://www.gossipcop.com/michael-bay-ha ... ers-video/
And well the beauty of it is all the ppl who hating, going to the cinema and paying so Bay really could care less lol. See why below....http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2014/06/29/box-office-transformers-4-scores-100m-weekend/
Michael Bay’s Transformers: Age of Extinction scored the biggest opening weekend of 2014, earning a strong $100 million in America and $301.3m worldwide in its initial frame
Bay - “No, they love to hate,” replies Bay. “I don’t care, let them hate. They’re still going to see the movie!”
Bay continues, “I think it’s good to get a little tension… I used to get bothered by it, but I think it’s good to get the dialogue going. It makes me think, and it keeps me on my toes.”http://variety.com/2011/film/features/michael-bay-seriously-1118039082/
Action auds adore him. Fussy cineastes revile him. Hardly anyone in either camp puts much thought into assessing his work.
But even some critics — who regard him warily and risk ridicule from their peers if they praise him — are coming to admit that, love him or hate him, Michael Bay needs to be taken seriously.
“He’s an auteur through and through,” says Scott Foundas, contributing editor for the highbrow Film Comment magazine. “You know within a few seconds of watching his movie that it’s a Michael Bay movie and beyond that there’s no question that he’s influenced the visual language of the contemporary Hollywood blockbuster in a major way.”
Variety senior film critic Peter Debruge calls Bay “a singular voice” and notes that of a generation of filmmakers who came out of commercials and music videos, “He is the one that has risen to the top of the pack and really continued to pioneer that esthetic on the bigscreen, for better or worse.”
And even Variety senior film critic Justin Chang, who generally abhors Bay’s style of cinematic mayhem, concedes, “I think that the critical revulsion that Michael Bay inspires actually is itself a kind of proof of his distinctiveness. There are a million hacks in Hollywood but there’s only one Michael Bay.”
But why? How is Bay’s fast-cutting style different from that of, say, Paul Greengrass, and what is original about his tentpole bombast? Why is Bay himself successful and famous enough to appear as a Verizon FiOS pitchman when Simon West and Tony Scott could wait in a ticket line for “Transformers 3″ unrecognized?
There is alot more in the article. My whole point to anything that I post is that ppl just talking crap but have zero appreciation for the work he does and doesn't appreciate what he represents in the movie industry. Just like someone going to reply to my post with some BS rather than say something about how they at least found the 3D was in IMAX as Bay was the 1st to use the new 4K IMAX 3D cameras, valued at $1 million a piece.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Duane 3NE 2NR and 233 guests