Kath and I went to see “Transformers” this afternoon.
Now I was a bit old for the animated series when it first aired, so I have no particular attachment to the characters or concepts. I’m not going to get my knickers in a knot because character designs were changed or liberties were taken. I’m much more interested in the simple concept of whether I was entertained or not.
Answer: Most definitely.
Mild spoilers below…
I have to admit that I found the first forty five minutes the most engaging. Our young hero, Sam (Shia LeBoeuf acting his heart out) buys his first car, a yellow Camaro, which turns out to be (wait for it) more than meets the eye. In short order the vehicle is playing matchmaker for Sam and a local hottie. But the car is also heavily armed and good in a fight as a shapeshifting police car goes after Sam and a titanic struggle ensues. Basically the film initially plays out like the mutant crossbreeding of “Terminator II” and “The Lovebug”…”Herbie Goes to Defcon 4,” if you will.
If that’s where the movie had remained, that honestly would have been good enough for me. But nearly an hour in, the rest of the titular heroes show up: Twenty foot tall living machines who mostly appear to have picked up our language through the internet (which would explain the wacky names they have. Bumblebee? Why in the world would an alien be named after an Earth insect?) As Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen, the original OP) explains the Autobots’ backstory while his cohorts each exhibit their one character trait, the film teeters into the arena of the truly ludicrous.
Fortunately director Michael Bay wisely decides to go with the silliness rather than fight it. The result is grin worthy sequences such as the sight of a bunch of gargantuan robots trying to remain inconspicuous in a suburban back yard and failing spectacularly. By acknowledging the inherent absurdity of the situation, Bay manages to hold on to his audience’s suspension of disbelief long enough for us to segue into some truly spectacular battle scenes, including a climactic half hour running battle between Autobots, Decepticons, and the US Army, while various bystanders desperately try not to get themselves blown up, shot up, or just plain crushed. Some gloriously hysterical dialogue (one Autobot, fed up with Sam’s annoying parents, argues the advantages of simply blowing them to hëll; at another point, Optimus Prime obliterates Sam’s mother’s garden and mutters, “Sorry…my bad”) and surprisingly scatological sequences (a Transformer chooses a very crass means of displaying his contempt for an abusive government spook) hold the entire film together. At its best when focusing on the core concept of A Boy and His Car, it nevertheless…despite a bit of unevenness…provides exactly what one would expect: Two-plus hours of mindless entertainment.
Surrender now to the certainty of a sequel.
PAD
• 
Mike – Mike – Mike – Mike – Mike (right 5 times in a row): It’s unwise to argue with you, because you’re better at making Mike look insane than I am. When I get your name wrong, or Bill/bill/others’ name wrong it’s not a deep psychological thing, but the facts that I don’t know you, don’t feel the lesser for it and don’t care enough to get it right.
Now, if I were a betting man, I’d put money on Megatron being resurrected as Galvatron for the sequel, possibly as an unanticipated side effect of the Allspark’s destruction combined with an inconveniently placed volcanic vent.
Where was this established in the movie? And why would tearing Jazz in half extinguish his spark?
It wasn’t. Optimus Prime mentioned he had a Spark, but that was the extent of how much Sparks were talked about. As for tearing him in half, that kind of damage is hefty enough to put enough of a strain on a Spark to extinguish it.
And if this would, then what exactly is it that does this, and what type of damage won’t?
Well, as we saw Brawl/Devastator, the tank, go through, transformers can take a lot of “minute” damage before it all just eventually adds up and extinguishes them. Most of the encounters were fought hand-to-hand between factions; perhaps physical damage is their biggest weakness. (I mean, Optimus sawed off Bonecrusher’s head and that was the end of it…)
Why didn’t the mutilation of Bumblebee’s legs do this?
Well, let’s take a human, for example. If a human’s legs get shredded, you can still save him through proper medical care and amputation. But if he gets torn in half at the stomach, like poor Jazz…
Jeffrey, review the bolded text: with no sense of irony, you’ve openly and unapologetically admitted to an insincerity in contradiction to the intuitive fidelity to accuracy you find obvious. You’ve confirmed my observation in the very response you sought to rebut it. Thank you.
I vaguely remember you mentioning having the recall of at least a young adult of the 1970s, and you default to imposing a formality strict enough to lead me to believe you aren’t maintaining a loving-trust you find of any consequence. I can only hope your situation isn’t as bleak as you straight-jacketing your own feelings and intuitions in quiet desperation, as you enter middle-age without the shelter of a loving relationship.
When I first heard that Michael Bay was directing Transformers, I felt a certain amount of trepidation. Bay’s directing style is essentially “the more things blow up the better”. That said I enjoyed the movie more than I thought I would, though I do have some complaints. Essentially so long as the movie focused on Sam’s attempts to woo Mikealah with Bumblebee playing matchmaker it was on solid ground. As soon as the film became about the pursuit of the Macguffin (Archibald Witwitcky’s spectacles) everything got way too confusing. On the one hand both the Autobots and Decepticons find out about the eBay auction of the glasses, locate Sam, and fight for the glasses. But (spoiler warning) the glasses don’t really tell where the Allspark is, so almost an hour of the movie is wasted on the pursuit of a meaningless Macguffin. If I were Starscream that would have pìššëd me off enough to complain. Optimus would never do something so crass (Starscream would have though 🙂 ) but he should have had some reaction to learning that the glasses were worthless.
My second complaint is that the film never explains why Scorponok needs to hack the server in Qatar, when Frenzy so easily infiltrates Air Force One. For that matter since the film explains that all modern technology was reverse engineered from a Transformer, the Decepticons should have been able to waltz past the firewall, no matter what the sexy super-hacker and her obese pal did.
Finally, Grimlock was not in the movie, and that is a crime. 🙂
When I first heard that Michael Bay was directing Transformers, I felt a certain amount of trepidation. Bay’s directing style is essentially “the more things blow up the better”. That said I enjoyed the movie more than I thought I would, though I do have some complaints. Essentially so long as the movie focused on Sam’s attempts to woo Mikealah with Bumblebee playing matchmaker it was on solid ground. As soon as the film became about the pursuit of the Macguffin (Archibald Witwitcky’s spectacles) everything got way too confusing. On the one hand both the Autobots and Decepticons find out about the eBay auction of the glasses, locate Sam, and fight for the glasses. But (spoiler warning) the glasses don’t really tell where the Allspark is, so almost an hour of the movie is wasted on the pursuit of a meaningless Macguffin. If I were Starscream that would have pìššëd me off enough to complain. Optimus would never do something so crass (Starscream would have though 🙂 ) but he should have had some reaction to learning that the glasses were worthless.
My second complaint is that the film never explains why Scorponok needs to hack the server in Qatar, when Frenzy so easily infiltrates Air Force One. For that matter since the film explains that all modern technology was reverse engineered from a Transformer, the Decepticons should have been able to waltz past the firewall, no matter what the sexy super-hacker and her obese pal did.
Finally, Grimlock was not in the movie, and that is a crime. 🙂
Curse you double post! I shall defeat you some day, when all are one!
Mike, you “vaguely remember” some strange things. I doubt ever “mentioning (I) have the recall of at least a young adult of the 1970s” on this site, as that would be a rather over-formal thing to do. Perhaps you were clumsily implying that I am in my late 40s. Yes, I am; You either are the same (I doubt it), will be (this is possible) or will die before that time and never grow so old (I can’t help you with that, sad to say). I’m not at all interested in your comments about my love life, but since you raise the subject, it is close to impossible to imagine someone tolerating your psychoses and loving you, Mike. Try projecting a bit less of your own problems onto me.
If, in being single, you are not free to live authentically to your feelings and intuitions, but, in straight-jacketing those feelings and intuitions, you instead live to undercut your trust in yourself, then you are living the worst possible outcomes of the single and committed lifestyles. The question “How can he stand his crippled state of only being half-alive?” seems to apply more to you than anyone else posting here.
When I first heard that Michael Bay was directing Transformers, I felt a certain amount of trepidation. Bay’s directing style is essentially “the more things blow up the better”. That said I enjoyed the movie more than I thought I would, though I do have some complaints. Essentially so long as the movie focused on Sam’s attempts to woo Mikealah with Bumblebee playing matchmaker it was on solid ground. As soon as the film became about the pursuit of the Macguffin (Archibald Witwitcky’s spectacles) everything got way too confusing. On the one hand both the Autobots and Decepticons find out about the eBay auction of the glasses, locate Sam, and fight for the glasses. But (spoiler warning) the glasses don’t really tell where the Allspark is, so almost an hour of the movie is wasted on the pursuit of a meaningless Macguffin. If I were Starscream that would have pìššëd me off enough to complain. Optimus would never do something so crass (Starscream would have though 🙂 ) but he should have had some reaction to learning that the glasses were worthless.
I think Optimus actually did get use of the glasses, since he seemed to have been presented a virtual map thanks to the coordinates. It was the scene when him and the Autobots (minus an apprehended Bumblebee) were sitting in that courtyard/temple thing (completely unnoticed by any humans, of course) and he gets a big globe up with his holograms, so he does find out where the Allspark was.. it’s just that they arrive way too late to find it or stop Megatron from catching wind of it.
My second complaint is that the film never explains why Scorponok needs to hack the server in Qatar, when Frenzy so easily infiltrates Air Force One. For that matter since the film explains that all modern technology was reverse engineered from a Transformer, the Decepticons should have been able to waltz past the firewall, no matter what the sexy super-hacker and her obese pal did.
Blackout was the one hacking the Qator base, while Scorponok was sent out to kill the surviving humans (I think it was an attempt to keep the Decepticons’ existence a secret from the humans until they got what they needed). And the reason Frenzy hacks it so easily, is because he uses the info provided by Blackout (info that I’m guessing gave the whereabouts of Air Force One, and it’s Firewall and all that jazz), and since they already bypassed the system once, it wasn’t that hard for him to do it a second time.
And maybe the reverse engineering stuff was the reason it took ten seconds for them to hack it.. I never thought about it that way, but if the Decepticons are pretty much the mother of all invention, then they should’ve hacked it either way, whether they got the info in Qator or not.. I guess they just wanted to give sexy Aussie super-hacker some screentime?
Finally, Grimlock was not in the movie, and that is a crime. 🙂
I’m guessing you saw the Viral Marketing thing at the Official Sector 7 site, then? Cause Wikipedia is saying that Grimlock is on a video there.. I can’t get in there, and since it’s 4 in the morning, I’m too dámņëd lazy to try.. hope my insomniac impulse of posting here helped you with some of your questions.
When I first heard that Michael Bay was directing Transformers, I felt a certain amount of trepidation. Bay’s directing style is essentially “the more things blow up the better”. That said I enjoyed the movie more than I thought I would, though I do have some complaints. Essentially so long as the movie focused on Sam’s attempts to woo Mikealah with Bumblebee playing matchmaker it was on solid ground. As soon as the film became about the pursuit of the Macguffin (Archibald Witwitcky’s spectacles) everything got way too confusing. On the one hand both the Autobots and Decepticons find out about the eBay auction of the glasses, locate Sam, and fight for the glasses. But (spoiler warning) the glasses don’t really tell where the Allspark is, so almost an hour of the movie is wasted on the pursuit of a meaningless Macguffin. If I were Starscream that would have pìššëd me off enough to complain. Optimus would never do something so crass (Starscream would have though 🙂 ) but he should have had some reaction to learning that the glasses were worthless.
I think Optimus actually did get use of the glasses, since he seemed to have been presented a virtual map thanks to the coordinates. It was the scene when him and the Autobots (minus an apprehended Bumblebee) were sitting in that courtyard/temple thing (completely unnoticed by any humans, of course) and he gets a big globe up with his holograms, so he does find out where the Allspark was.. it’s just that they arrive way too late to find it or stop Megatron from catching wind of it.
My second complaint is that the film never explains why Scorponok needs to hack the server in Qatar, when Frenzy so easily infiltrates Air Force One. For that matter since the film explains that all modern technology was reverse engineered from a Transformer, the Decepticons should have been able to waltz past the firewall, no matter what the sexy super-hacker and her obese pal did.
Blackout was the one hacking the Qator base, while Scorponok was sent out to kill the surviving humans (I think it was an attempt to keep the Decepticons’ existence a secret from the humans until they got what they needed). And the reason Frenzy hacks it so easily, is because he uses the info provided by Blackout (info that I’m guessing gave the whereabouts of Air Force One, and it’s Firewall and all that jazz), and since they already bypassed the system once, it wasn’t that hard for him to do it a second time.
And maybe the reverse engineering stuff was the reason it took ten seconds for them to hack it.. I never thought about it that way, but if the Decepticons are pretty much the mother of all invention, then they should’ve hacked it either way, whether they got the info in Qator or not.. I guess they just wanted to give sexy Aussie super-hacker some screentime?
Finally, Grimlock was not in the movie, and that is a crime. 🙂
I’m guessing you saw the Viral Marketing thing at the Official Sector 7 site, then? Cause Wikipedia is saying that Grimlock is on a video there.. I can’t get in there, and since it’s 4 in the morning, I’m too dámņëd lazy to try.. hope my insomniac impulse of posting here helped you with some of your questions.
When I first heard that Michael Bay was directing Transformers, I felt a certain amount of trepidation. Bay’s directing style is essentially “the more things blow up the better”. That said I enjoyed the movie more than I thought I would, though I do have some complaints. Essentially so long as the movie focused on Sam’s attempts to woo Mikealah with Bumblebee playing matchmaker it was on solid ground. As soon as the film became about the pursuit of the Macguffin (Archibald Witwitcky’s spectacles) everything got way too confusing. On the one hand both the Autobots and Decepticons find out about the eBay auction of the glasses, locate Sam, and fight for the glasses. But (spoiler warning) the glasses don’t really tell where the Allspark is, so almost an hour of the movie is wasted on the pursuit of a meaningless Macguffin. If I were Starscream that would have pìššëd me off enough to complain. Optimus would never do something so crass (Starscream would have though 🙂 ) but he should have had some reaction to learning that the glasses were worthless.
I think Optimus actually did get use of the glasses, since he seemed to have been presented a virtual map thanks to the coordinates. It was the scene when him and the Autobots (minus an apprehended Bumblebee) were sitting in that courtyard/temple thing (completely unnoticed by any humans, of course) and he gets a big globe up with his holograms, so he does find out where the Allspark was.. it’s just that they arrive way too late to find it or stop Megatron from catching wind of it.
My second complaint is that the film never explains why Scorponok needs to hack the server in Qatar, when Frenzy so easily infiltrates Air Force One. For that matter since the film explains that all modern technology was reverse engineered from a Transformer, the Decepticons should have been able to waltz past the firewall, no matter what the sexy super-hacker and her obese pal did.
Blackout was the one hacking the Qator base, while Scorponok was sent out to kill the surviving humans (I think it was an attempt to keep the Decepticons’ existence a secret from the humans until they got what they needed). And the reason Frenzy hacks it so easily, is because he uses the info provided by Blackout (info that I’m guessing gave the whereabouts of Air Force One, and it’s Firewall and all that jazz), and since they already bypassed the system once, it wasn’t that hard for him to do it a second time.
And maybe the reverse engineering stuff was the reason it took ten seconds for them to hack it.. I never thought about it that way, but if the Decepticons are pretty much the mother of all invention, then they should’ve hacked it either way, whether they got the info in Qator or not.. I guess they just wanted to give sexy Aussie super-hacker some screentime?
Finally, Grimlock was not in the movie, and that is a crime. 🙂
I’m guessing you saw the Viral Marketing thing at the Official Sector 7 site, then? Cause Wikipedia is saying that Grimlock is on a video there.. I can’t get in there, and since it’s 4 in the morning, I’m too dámņëd lazy to try.. hope my insomniac impulse of posting here helped you with some of your questions.
Wow, triple post on my first try.. sorry about that.. I didn’t know if it was posting or not
Mike, if you spoke in English, rather than Mikespeak, it would be easier to deal with your statements. “I can keep citing the post you keep saying doesn’t exist as long as you keep denying it exists” – You keep citing a post, it is true, but I don’t deny that it might exist. You simply ignore my initial point: PAD has written a number of posts on this string. In some of them he deals rather well with the issues that interest me, and in others he does not. My initial post – pay close attention here – was criticism of one post; It did not attempt to characterize the whole string, nor did it presume PAD has not addressed the issues.
Here is a model:
PAD: A and B are so. It’s stupid to even address G!
Jeff: It’s arrogant to assume G shouldn’t even be addressed. The post above is foolish.
Somebody: blah, blah, blah, blah…
Somebody Else: I like PAD! He’s really great!
PAD: Something, something, C, D, E, F, G, H, I…, Here’s my response to G….
Mike: Jeff, you’re crazy!! PAD did deal with G.
Jeff: He didn’t in the post I criticized, and that’s it.
Mike: Don’t ignore it, he DID, he DID, HE DID. Listen, Z, R, Y, W, X…Let’s talk about your personal life now…You’re pathetic…you probably aren’t getting any…..and that’s how I show that black is white, and PAD did what he said he would not, and…and…and….Mike, here it is: I really don’t care enough about you or your opinions to care whether I get your name wrong (although you should notice that it was “bill” I mis-named, rather than calling you by the wrong name). Your assumptions that you are central to all thought, and foremost in all minds, is wrong. If I called you “Pedro” it wouldn’t have anything to do with the thrust of my argument.
I usually approach these arguments with you as insignificant bantering, but Mike, the truth is this – I really don’t like you. It would be nice to say I’m concerned about your insanity, and wish you nice psychoactive drugs and therapy – but you’re just too obnoxious and offensive for me to have such goodwill.
You are reiterating “You say that ‘Peter confirmed Mark’s [rebuttal of] bill.’ If that is so, it happens elsewhere than in the post to which I responded, that is, the one with ‘The rest of your post is just too stupid to respond to.’” Your denial is literally wrong. Peter literally confirmed Mark’s rebuttal of bill in the same post he said, “The rest of your post is just too stupid to respond to.” It isn’t Rocket Surgery.
Again, my citing the post you keep saying doesn’t exist — for all the various rephrasings of your denial — is no burden to me, because I can align and realign my judgments to the obvious linearly-presented facts of this thread all the live-long day.
I never implied you were pathetic because you aren’t getting any. I just said if you are going to be obnoxious and antagonize people — without giving your feelings and intuitions the freedom to interact authentically with their environment — then your driving people away simply has no pay-off.
Your feelings and intuitions are the ghostly-white worm-like things underneath a paper Darth Vader costume that’s been left out in the rain. If you choose to continue this way, it won’t be because I stand-by silently watching it happen. It’s the truth and where the truth isn’t all that difficult to say, it should be said.
I’ve got to admit to being hesitant about ‘Transformers’ being a good movie (after the horror that was ‘He-Man: The Movie’. However, like many, I did like the end result.
I even entertained my own ‘realistic’ explanation for the Autobots/Decipticons (however overused): they were evolved ‘Von Neumann devices’, initially ment to be weapons who hid in high tech societies until activated.
Seeing as how the ‘All Spark’ seems to make nothing but mindless killing machines, I wonder if my ‘theory’ was that far off the mark? Well, we’ll see in the sequel (of course, Optimus is about to be knocked of his throne by Harry and crew ^_^).
I was big into transformers when I was a kid. And I was slightly looking forward to this film when It was first announced at comic con. When everyone complained about the first pictures of optimus prime I actually thought they seemed interesting.
Then the trailers came. I had this inexplicable feeling of deja vu. A feeling that this was Godzilla all over again.
Basically the trailers scared me off of this film and I have little to no interest in ever seeing it. The buzz has not been positive enough to overcome this horrible sense of dread I feel about seeing it.
Now I have seen that 1-18-08 trailer online and I must say I’m intrigued. But for transformers I wish I could find a way to want to see it, but the trailer guys are making it really hard.
Trust me Maskdmirag, It’s worth going to see, it’s good fun
Funny thing about dreading something. Often the dread is far worse than the actual event. And, though my wife might call this the basest heresy ever uttered, trailers don’t really show you much. I mean, I saw the trailer for As Good As It Gets and thought it looked good. We left twenty minutes into that one, desperately hoping that (INSERT FAVORITE UNPLEASANT FALLING THING HERE) would fall on all their heads. Likewise, I thought Dude, Where’s My Car would be a snorefest, but I hadn’t laughed that hard in a very long time.
Mike, the best way to tell if someone is reiterating something is to look at his post and see if he reiterates it. That’s a very different thing from (you, Mike) repeating something of your own a dozen times and inserting an occasional accusal that someone else has reiterated himself. Simplifying a bit, if MIKE says something a dozen times it doesn’t make it so, nor is it relevant to whether someone else has repeated himself. Look back at all of the posts and see who has reiterated!
“I saw the trailer for As Good As It Gets and thought it looked good. We left twenty minutes into that one, desperately hoping that (INSERT FAVORITE UNPLEASANT FALLING THING HERE) would fall on all their heads.”
I actually liked that movie. It just goes to show how tastee in movies is subjective. When you recommend a movie you can only say why the movie was good for you or try to figure out the other person’s taste. Maybe “As Good As It Gets” is just not your cup of tea, or maybe you’ll enjoy it more if you give it a second chance. I can only guess.
I actually did give that one a second chance, because I really like Jack Nicholson, but the characters just really got on my nerves. When I watch a movie, I like to like the people I’m watching. Now, one thing I will say is that all the actors in it did remarkably well, I just didn’t like any of them. In that same vein, I had a friend in high school that swore Spaceship was an excellent movie with brilliant special effects. But then, what do I know? I liked the Highlander sequels and Generations.
“I actually did give that one a second chance, because I really like Jack Nicholson, but the characters just really got on my nerves. When I watch a movie, I like to like the people I’m watching. Now, one thing I will say is that all the actors in it did remarkably well, I just didn’t like any of them.”
This would be a problem, since the whole point of the movie is that the characters are very flawed. Although I still liked some things about them. I have a similar problem with Nip/Tuck. I hate al of the characters. And CSI: Miami, I’m rooting for the criminals in that show.
“In that same vein, I had a friend in high school that swore Spaceship was an excellent movie with brilliant special effects.”
I’m not sure I recognize the reference.
“But then, what do I know? I liked the Highlander sequels and Generations.”
Generations? Are you refering to Star Trek?
As for Highlander, I barely liked the first movie. And I enjoyed the series but never considered it good. The thing with highlander is that it has a really good idea, but the execution always felt to may like second or third rate. O well, to each his own.
iteration, n.
I’m using “reiteration” appropriately. When you reiterate an observation I’ve disqualified, you resurrect the value of the disqualification, and validate my reiteration.
How was Melvin “I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability” Udall less likable than Nathan “I eat breakfast 300 yards from 4000 Cubans trained to kill me” Jessep, Randle “she told me she was eighteen” McMurphy, Jack “Give me the bat” Torrance, or Robert “hold it between your knees” Dupea? Was it all the law-abiding?
Reprinting others’ posts half a dozen or more times qualifies as reiteration. Saying something Mike insists is not so is something entirely different (common sense, perhaps). Reiteration is iteration again, as anyone familiar with the prefix “re-” should know. You have it confused with “argumentation.”
The real crux here is that Mike does not have the authority or intelligence to disqualify any observations he chooses purely on his own say so. Even when he states his case clearly (which may have happened sometime, but I don’t remember it) that creates no obligation to agree. Megalomania and stupidity are an unattractive combination.
I don’t have any problem with flawed characters. The thing that turned me off with As Good As It Gets wasn’t that the characters were flawed, it was that they were acting like a-holes, as I recall. Great. Now I am gonna have to rent the stupid thing just to make sure. It was as though I was watching a movie about Mike, X-ray and my ex-girlfriend, who, if you knew her, I’m reasonably sure you’d agree a shriller harpy never lived.
Now, one thing even I’ll admit with both the Highlander movies and the misbegotten series, they should’ve stuck with the central theme of the first movie and left it at only one. Part of the appeal, for me at least, is my ancestors came from the Highlands. Throw in Nasty Bad Guy One with a sword longer than most VWs and some good Queen music, and you got yourself a movie. (BTW, I think it’s extremely ironic that Kurgan does the voice of Mr. Krabs on Spongebob, but that’s a whole other story.) And, Micha, I’m SHOCKED that you missed getting aboard Spaceship. I mean, a movie where the alien has a song-and-dance number called I Want To Eat Your Face? (Actually, if you see anything for this movie, RUN FAST THE OTHER WAY.) And yep, I was referring to Trek. Most people look at the TNG movies as garbage, but I like ’em. If you look at them, collectively, they’re expanded episodes.
“I don’t have any problem with flawed characters. The thing that turned me off with As Good As It Gets wasn’t that the characters were flawed, it was that they were acting like a-holes, as I recall. Great. Now I am gonna have to rent the stupid thing just to make sure. It was as though I was watching a movie about Mike, X-ray and my ex-girlfriend, who, if you knew her, I’m reasonably sure you’d agree a shriller harpy never lived.”
I think the characters are supposed to become more likeable as you get to know them better, later in the movie. But, If you didn’t enjoy it the second time, you’ll probably not enjoy it the third. So don’t worry about it. It’s not like there is a shortage of good Jack Nicholson movies. Although I really didn’t like Schmidt. Liking movies is subjective.
“Now, one thing even I’ll admit with both the Highlander movies and the misbegotten series, they should’ve stuck with the central theme of the first movie and left it at only one. Part of the appeal, for me at least, is my ancestors came from the Highlands. Throw in Nasty Bad Guy One with a sword longer than most VWs and some good Queen music, and you got yourself a movie. (BTW, I think it’s extremely ironic that Kurgan does the voice of Mr. Krabs on Spongebob, but that’s a whole other story.)”
I bet you like the first part of the first Highlander the most. Before he got that snooty Katana. Let’s face it, it’s not great cinema (to say the least), but we just like the swords.
“Most people look at the TNG movies as garbage, but I like ’em. If you look at them, collectively, they’re expanded episodes”
Yea, that’s why I didn’t like most of them very much. I liked the one with the borg, and had mixed feelings about the next one. But in general the problem for me was with the extended part. The basic stories were not much better than a mediocre chapter, and the extended part did not offer anything but too much lame characterization. The movies did not seem to go beyond the series. In the old movies they tried to create situations that go beyond the everyday experience we were familiar with in the movies. Or so it seemed to me. but again, I guess it’s a matter of subjective taste and of expectations. Maybe a little nostalgia.
Jack Nicholson is mean and grotesque in every movie I’ve ever seen him in. As Good As It Gets is innovative in that he doesn’t destroy anyone’s life with his meanness and grotesqueness. About Schmidt seems to be based on the Book of Job, where his character comes to feel he’s wasted his life for adhering to a piety of convention and, as Job had the opportunity to denounce God to His face, the drama was in whether or not he takes the opportunity to indulge in a display of meanness and grotesqueness at his daughter’s wedding.
The only way something-I-insist-is-not-so doesn’t qualify as reiteration is if it isn’t the same thing I-am-insisting-is-not-so. Since I am repeatedly disqualifying the same denial, I am literally responding to your reiterations.
I require no authority because I haven’t asked anyone to take my word for anything. All I’ve done is contrast Peter’s post with your inaccurate portrayals of it, and challenged you to share what your pay-off is for antagonizing the rest of your species. I’ve even verbalized a virtue of arbitrary non-conformity — a virtue you’ve demonstrated is absent from your life.
How do you justify to yourself what is from all appearances your life of quiet desperation? And don’t think I’m not rooting for you to answer — you will reward all of humanity by providing a deeply meaningful and worthwhile answer, and demonstrate how, as Joseph Campbell said, the axis of the world goes through you. Even you.
Highlander…a good example of what happens when the actors start influencing the property too much. I know there’s supposed to be another film made, but after the last one…and after falling for 3, which was essentially a re-make of the first one…I just can’t support them any longer. Bad enough what they did to Conner, but they took the best parts of the series and injected an unhealthy dose of MTV to procude, well, crap.
I love First Contact. It’s got all the things a Nextgen movie should have. But Insurrection and whatever came after that really were just extended episodes, and not particularly good ones. And the joystick? I’m sorry, but if starships come equipped with a joystick, why they hëll does the hemlsman only have buttons to fly the ship? At least Galaxy Quest gave the pilot some piloting controls. After watching nearly the entire run of Voyager on DVD, it makes me wonder how the movie producers made such bad Trek films when they were making Voyager so good.
WHAT!?!?! I come strolling around here for the first time in a week and I find Micha kinda-sorts trash talking the first, the greatest and the only true Highlander film?!? Oh, the HUMANITY!!!!!!
Micha, no Christmas card this year.
The movies did not seem to go beyond the series.
First Contact did, at least in small ways (which is the one you said you liked, unsurpringly). The ways it did this help highlight the ways the others failed (or at least didn’t succeed as well). For example, they didn’t feel the need to make a big deal out of things like Geordi’s new mechanical eyes. Fans of the show could easily figure out that his VISOR had been replaced without needing it pointed out, and non-fans got that he had mechanical eyes without their previous status being an issue. Similarly, Data’s emotion chip was handled matter-of-factly, only being mentioned once or twice. Compare that to Insurrection, where Data’s characterization took a huge leap backwards to the TV series days, and…yeah. (Picard’s sudden ability to control time also bugged me largely because they didn’t put explicit limits on it–if they’d said “You can learn this ability but it only works here for this hand-waved reason,” they’d avoid ever having to deal with it again.)
The biggest thing I can point to against the TNG movies is they were still being written by the people who wrote the TV epsiodes for the most part. Thus, the expanded episode feel. And, (I’m sure this will burn up whatever respect I have around here) as much as I like Nemesis, too much was left unexplained and unexplored. As in, when the hëll did the Romulans get a hold of Picard’s DNA? What was happening with Spock’s reunification movement under Shinzon? Taking as given that B4 was another prototype, where did the Rommies get a hold of him? Also, the big problem with TNG movies as opposed to TOS movies, with TOS, you have the Big Three. If most of the back characters didn’t have much to do, that was typical. I mean, some of them don’t even have first names. Whereas, with TNG, the back characters all had extensive backstory and development over seven years. So, between the actors wanting face time and the fans wanting THEIR FAVORITE CHARACTERS to have something to do, there’s a lot to put in a two hour story. I mean, the best thing Sulu did until the sixth movie was throw a security guy and tell him not to call him Tiny. Whereas, the writers on TNG films are used to having B,C, and D storylines going. It just doesn’t make for terribly gripping cinema.
As for Highlander being influenced by the actors, that’s actually something I hadn’t heard before. Connery and Lambert were under contract for the sequel even when they did the first one, and all I can say is the original version of the second one…well, I still have some of the stuff I wrote when have my brain injury. Davis and Panzer must’ve had really bad brain injuries. Really really bad. We’re talking one step up from zombification. (Oh, wait, too early in the thread for the inevitable zombie reference. To quote Prime, My bad.)
Jerry, get some sleep, bud. I can only imagine your reaction if Micha had actually trashed the movie. And, Micha, don’t worry, I’ll send you an extra card to make up for mean ol’ Jerry.
Mike, most of the type Nicholson does seem to get typecast as the Grouchy Anti-society type. But, generally, in addition to a supporting cast that will offset that, he still finds a way to make you care about the character. In As Good As It Gets, all three of the main characters just really weren’t at all interesting. If I want to watch nasty people, I’ll make contact with my in-laws again. Actually, the best Nicholson movie, I think, in the last few years is the one where he plays the cop that retires and buys the gas station to solve the girl’s murder. Wish I could remember the title.
Jerry, jeez, man, put Micha down!
The Pledge.
You’ve essentially said you were most offended by what may be the least sacrilegious Jack Nicholson movie. It milks comedy over him tossing the dog in a trash chute, being forced to look after the dog, kissing the dog in public, then demonstrating the dog likes him better than Greg Kinnear.
There were no life-or-death struggles or larger-than-life indulgences. He tried to tell Helen Hunt she was so attractive their restaurant let her in wearing anything, but instead all that came out was him complaining they made him go get a tie while they let her in wearing a housedress. Most movies would have made you feel less with one of the characters punching the other. Hearing a Nicholson fan walked out of AGAIG is like hearing you like all the Pixar movies except Ratatouille because all of the suspense hinges on the success or failure of a small restaurant. It’s… interesting.
Posted by: Jerry Chandler at July 13, 2007 10:28 AM:
“WHAT!?!?! I come strolling around here for the first time in a week and I find Micha kinda-sorts trash talking the first, the greatest and the only true Highlander film?!? Oh, the HUMANITY!!!!!!
Micha, no Christmas card this year.”
I’m sorry 🙂
I like Highlander. But I think I like it more for the idea of the immortals, the historical flashbacks, the highland scenary and the sword fights than for the story or characters in the actual movie. I do that some time. I like something for what could be in it than for what is in it. Still, it’s an enjoyable movie, and I also liked the series. I didn’t like the other movies. To me it felt like they’ve had a cool idea — immortals, sword fights, scottish accents — and then ran out of good ideas somewhere along the last third of the first movie, and since then they have been trying to feed the beast with repeats of the first idea (at best) or bad new ideas.
No offence to Sean’s Scullion’s ancestors or to Jerry and the new generation of the clan of Chandler.
Posted by: Doug Atkinson at July 13, 2007 03:14 PM:
“First Contact did, at least in small ways (which is the one you said you liked, unsurpringly). The ways it did this help highlight the ways the others failed (or at least didn’t succeed as well). For example, they didn’t feel the need to make a big deal out of things like Geordi’s new mechanical eyes. Fans of the show could easily figure out that his VISOR had been replaced without needing it pointed out, and non-fans got that he had mechanical eyes without their previous status being an issue. Similarly, Data’s emotion chip was handled matter-of-factly, only being mentioned once or twice.”
Very good point. You’ve explained it very well. It seems that in First Contact they had a better blend of story, characters, aspects similar to the series, aspects new to the series. Sometimes even good ideas don’t work if you don’t find the right balance.
But I think what I like about the movies with the old cast (and I’m not in any way a fanatic of the original show), was the fact that they’ve progressed from the people they were in the show; they were out of their comfort zone, if you will. They were older. Time has past since their great adventures. They had different ranks and positions. The scenarios in the movies were beyond their experiences in the series, or shook the foundations of their earlier lives.
In the new movies on the one hand it seemed as if they hadn’t progressed that much except aquiring some new gadgets, while on the other hand they seemed not to realy know what to do with themselves, which resulted in some silly scenes. I realize they probably tried to do what I’m talking about — shake the foundations, go beyond them — in the new movies too. But it just didn’t ring true to me. I don’t know why exactly. Like I said, it’s subjective.
“As Good As It Gets, all three of the main characters just really weren’t at all interesting. If I want to watch nasty people, I’ll make contact with my in-laws again.”
They weren’t all nasty. The point is that as the movie progresses their characters unfold before you, and you realize there’s more to them than the first impression (which maybe connects this discussion to the Transformers). I like this kind of stuff. But again, it’s subjective.
“Actually, the best Nicholson movie, I think, in the last few years is the one where he plays the cop that retires and buys the gas station to solve the girl’s murder.”
I remeber it as being a hard, sad movie. It was good, but I don’t know if I can say I enjoyed it. Again, subjective. Nicolson was of course excellent. I think there’s something about the way he acts that often gets him cast as someone who is just a little outside or beyond or not completely part of human society. Something to think about.
See, that’s just it, though. Everyone I know was swearing it was the funniest movie they’d ever seen, but we didn’t find anything funny. If anything, it felt more like sitting around the great uncle that tells dirty jokes and then farts for the punchline. It was just uncomfortable and we both looked at each other and said, “Why the hëll are we watching this when we could go watch a demo loop in the electronics store?” One thing that I’ve never really bought into is the whole idea that if you’re a fan of someone’s work, you have to like ALL their work. Actually, I think the only actor that I would say I like all their stuff would be Harrison Ford, although I still debate whether or not I like Regarding Henry. Good movie, but it hits a little too close to home for me.
See, that’s just it, though. Everyone was touting it as the funniest movie ever or close to it, but we didn’t find any of it funny. It was just, if anything, uncomfortable. It was like going to your girlfriend’s house and having her grandfather telling dirty jokes and then farting with every punchline. (If anyone’s eating while reading this, I apologize.)
One thing I’ve never bought into is that if you’re a fan of someone, you have to be a fan of everything they’ve done. I think, seriously, the only actor I can say that about is Harrison Ford, although I’m still not thrilled with Regarding Henry. Good movie, but it just hits a little too close to home with me. Now, when Nicholson played Jessup, or Torrance, or Napier, even, I was enthralled not by him but by what he was going to do to the hero(es).
Oh, and Micha, apology accepted. Seriously, you don’t wanna mess with my ancestors. They’re nasty, warrior clans through and through. (My family motto-Lamb D’earg Eiren. In English, it comes out The Red Hand Of Ireland. You can imagine why it’s red. And on my mom’s side, it’s N’Oubliez, never forget. I’m thinking it’s not about remembering phone numbers and Great Aunt Tilly’s cookie recipe.)
Huh. So, maybe that’s where my temper comes from.
(Sorry about the double post up there, I got kicked off-line and I didn’t know the first one got through.)
This was mentioned on my radio show last night (thursday). “With all the tech that the Transformers had, why didnt they just make a bid on the glasses if they were on e-bay?”
Well, I’m one of the last people on the planet to see Transformers, but I finally went to see it tonight.
We liked it. It has its problems, and while I don’t need a movie to be 90 minutes, this one could’ve easily been much shorter by cutting out a lot of the ‘junk’ (such as the Autobots in the backyard sequence that ran way, way too long).
Crazy thought time: it occurred to me when leaving the theatre that GI Joe would be easy to spin right out of this film. Just take the surviving military guys, give them the code names, or go with new characters on the premise that the military guys in Transformers started up the GI Joe stuff, and say that the tech comes from the Transformers.
Well, at the very least, stranger things have happened. 🙂
“talking one step up from zombification. (Oh, wait, too early in the thread for the inevitable zombie reference. To quote Prime, My bad.)”
I think the zombie reference is coming any moment now. Don’t fight it. We already have the strange Mike discussion. It’s the obvious next step.
“Crazy thought time: it occurred to me when leaving the theatre that GI Joe would be easy to spin right out of this film. Just take the surviving military guys, give them the code names, or go with new characters on the premise that the military guys in Transformers started up the GI Joe stuff, and say that the tech comes from the Transformers.”
I actually read G.I. Joe a long time ago. But do we realy want a movie based on that? Debate.
“One thing I’ve never bought into is that if you’re a fan of someone, you have to be a fan of everything they’ve done.”
Of course not.
“I think, seriously, the only actor I can say that about is Harrison Ford.”
I am waiting with excitemen, but also with worry, for the next Indiana Jones. Is it going to be a great sequel, or a disaster?
“Oh, and Micha, apology accepted. Seriously, you don’t wanna mess with my ancestors. They’re nasty, warrior clans through and through.”
Ha, I’m safely far away from danger… in the middle east.
I actually read G.I. Joe a long time ago. But do we realy want a movie based on that? Debate.
Well, it sounds like Hasbro is already pushing for it.
But do we realy want a movie based on that? Debate.
Considering the history (and the fact that I’ve had a screenplay in my notebook since my second year of college) YES!
Micha, considering that my ancestors were in Great Britain, not all that far a hop, my friend….
If their most powerful warriors could be taken out by ice, the Autobots and Decepticons should have developed freezing weapons, and fought with water instead of lasers.
It was like the ending of X2, where the most powerful X-Man sacrificed herself to save the team from a flood, while at least one elemental capable of freezing the dam sat on the plane.
Actually, a live action GI Joe movie has been trying to get made for the last few years. It just never seems to get past the talking about it part of the process, though.
“Who is the advocate of extreme fanaticism are you people talking about?”
I know a lot of people that will go out and buy something because they’ve really liked the previous stuff. I know people that bought St. Anger by Metallica even though they hated it “just so they’ll have them all.” I also knew someone in school who bought every Batman and Superman title, but only read Action and Detective. “But, what if there’s a cross-over?” he’d say. Well, then you buy the cross-over issues, or hey, maybe read the ones you buy?
OK. I have to admit that I found it hard to imagine a G.I Joe movie. It seemed to me to be a part of a different and forgotten time (in general and also of my life) that cannot be translated well to this present time, especially given the current political-diplomatic-miltary situation. But this is probably a failing of the imagination on my part. Now that I think about it more, and as some of the memories return, the idea of a G.I.Joe movie doesn’t seem so strange to me.
Now that I think about it, how stupid do you have to be to keep a frozen Megatron without stockpiling enough condensed nitrogen to turn the entire facility into a giant block of ice? Or not prepare condensed-nitrogen scud missiles for when his friends try to spring him, or not prepare condensed-nitrogen super-soakers for the Frenzy-sized robots and smaller? Michael Bay’s salary really belongs to me.
Re: The Allspark creating only evil Transformers; my take was that the new robots had sort of bëšŧìál intelligence, not being explicitly evil. I can buy a powerful energy source creating feral transformers. And I want a Mountain Dew-bot.
So, wow. People are really reading way too much into this movie.
In listening to an interview with the screenwriters (the final two after the many many attempts at a story), they mentioned that their goal was to turn the audience back to their childhood. For me, they succeeded. I honestly felt 6 years old again as soon as Optimus Prime spoke. I’m almost 5 times that now.
No, it wasn’t in any way a great film. Could you call it a “film” at all? More of a “flick” than a film. But it’s a fun time at the movie theatre.
I agree with PAD, the fact that it went with the ridiculous is its greatest strength. It’s a movie about 25-foot tall robots that fight each other on the streets, disguising themselves as cars. Further, it’s a movie designed to sell toys. Further, it’s a movie based on a cartoon series designed to sell toys. From that “strong” source material, it’s a great adaptation.
That being said, the plot and story are ridiculous, but this is one of those movies where that’s just not the point. It was a thoroughly entertaining movie in which I could sit on a soapbox and be “above”, but really, how much fun is that?
As for the political joke – um, the joke didn’t even land. It wasn’t even funny. It’s a joke that could apply to either Bush or Clinton. Most of Michael Bay’s movies could have a right wing slant read into it (oil riggers saving the world over environmentalists and the like).
As for the shaky camera – in no way is that “cost saving CGI” – quite the opposite. Bay likes to shoot in shaky camera, a trait of his (of many) that I don’t particularly like. That camera had to be matched with the CGI cameras – and had to be so well planned – as a feat of effects, it’s quite amazing. Keep in mind, that’s part of the look for Battlestar: Galactica.
As for GI Joe:
“It seemed to me to be a part of a different and forgotten time (in general and also of my life) that cannot be translated well to this present time, especially given the current political-diplomatic-miltary situation.”
I hate to say it, but God Bless Putin for putting Russians on the Bad Guy list again. Cobra was a terrorist network, sound familiar? It’s a loose association of an terrorist organization (never really shown who was behind that mask, but that’s okay) terrorists, a powerful Boy from Brazil, Australian gang members (?!), an unspecified African arms dealer, and, of course, Russians.
And I was really kidding about the Putin remark, because that’s a terrible, terrible thing.
Though I look forward to the film.
Actually, what I always found interesting about G.I. Joe was that, for all that people tend to associate it with gung-ho ’80s Reaganism, its principal enemies (at least in the comics) were the forces of capitalism run amok. The Oktober Guard were the honorable opposition, and they found themselves working with the Joes against a common enemy more than once. By contrast, Cobra Commander was a former used-car salesman, he founded Cobra on a model clearly based on Amway, and his elite troops (the Crimson Guard) were lawyers and accountants. Likewise, Destro was an arms dealer. (He’s Scottish, not African.) Later on, the toy line added drug dealers, another example of free enterprise gone awry.