Recent Viewing Part IV

No one would accuse him of being lazy. But his films display a man with the mentality of a horny 12 year old. That's fine, I'm glad he has his fans. Bright colours and noisy explosions are bound to attract the masses. But those, mercifully few, who suggest his films are more than insipid popcorn films seem unwilling to avoid embarrassment.

I enjoy McDonalds, but I don't tend to write poorly-written, lengthy articles informing how food critics have got it all wrong.

Postmodern. There it is. The most damming praise you could give Bay, and I didn't have to say a thing!

And yet debate you do. (But to your credit you don't seem to push it as far as Thor.)

In postmodernism, "anything can mean anything", so of course Michael Bay is a genius. A cookbook could contain deep moral wisdom by this light. It's nonsense.

I generally agree with Giles here. Bay is doing technically advanced popcorn cinema and there is nothing wrong about that. "Postmodernism" and "auteur" are not words that I would choose in this context. In difference to Spielberg, Bay aims exclusivity at a young audience. It's the "PS4" generation and Bay takes that into account. Spielberg on the other side often followed the "Disney-formula" of family entertainment.
Again, if I intend to watch a movie that gives me something worthwhile to reflect upon I don't turn to Bay. Which doesn't matter since there are enough auteur directors around to satisfy that need. For careless escapism I'll watch Bay's films any day.

Volker

Seeing these dismissals and reduction of his output is nothing new (as I said, it has a lot in common with the Horner debate). I encounter it everywhere. It's also something that comes naturally with most extremely successful filmmakers. So I really just brush it off and move on. I feel I possess a key to understanding and enjoying his work and his aesthetic that these critics don't, and that is really all that matters. It's unlikely I'll ever convince these critics to identify these qualities, just as I will never accept the dismissals and reductions. Hence I've kinda tired of the old debate.

I prefer careless escapism that isn't insultingly stupid and sexist and occasionally racist and obnoxiously juvenile...but hey, maybe that's just me.

And he never claimed to be one. Not everything has to speak to one's intelligence or artistic senses. It's just whether one takes it seriously or not. And I do not, it's just mindless fun. With an occasional good score underneath.

You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

You're welcome.

True, but I think something can be insulting without necessarily being offended by it. His stereotyping of gay people is insulting ('he laughs at, not with'), but it doesn't in the least offend me. I just think he's a moron.

Thanks, Tom. I'd rather discuss Wilder and SUNSET BOULEVARD (or anything, really) than the trite Bay debate.

It is fairly low on explosions, though!

Oh dear!? Has it got any car chases? I might still watch it if it has car chases.

Rear projection was actually used extensively in Pablo Larraín's NERUDA, which I saw at Cannes this year. But then again, it was part of the 'pastiche'/meta style of the film.