Why do bad movies succeed, i.e, TRANSFORMERS?

I have not seen the second Transformers film, REVENGE OF THE FALLEN. But I've read a ton of reviews, and spoken with people who have seen it-most of them love it to bits, hail it as epic, awesome, the works. But what I don't get is how a movie (much like the first one) with awful acting, sloppy directing, embarrassing dialouge , no character development and a convoluted plot can be so wildly popular. It puzzles me to no end, it frustrates me even though I should just accept that people will like what they like. But is it that awful of me to think a little less of someone when they tell me they thought this was the best movie ever?? I mean, come on. Bay seems to be critic-proof in the sense that , well, no amount of horrendous reviews will stop people from seeing it. But at least many recognize it only as a popcorn film with no substance, Megan Fox's glistening slowmo body, and explosions. But why are we entertained by this? Last summer's Dark Knight managed to give us a good story, great action scenes while managing to tug at our heart strings...these kind of movies are just explosions and robots, really there is not much more to them. Which is fun, once and a while, don't get me wrong..but is it that awful to ask for a little bit more? Just a little?

Here's one review I liked, among many, written by Robert Dougherty on the Associated Content site.


Transformers 2 reviews are useless because no Transformers 2 review will stop people from seeing Revenge of the Fallen. A Transformers 2 review truly means nothing, for if Transformers 2 reviews could stop big

box office, Michael Bay would be out of work. Michael Bay lives on his movies being critic-proof, and Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen reviews are no exception. But that hasn't stopped critics from decrying in their Transformers 2 review that Bay may have gone to the bottom of the barrel again.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is pretty much a remake of the first movie, for all intents. Shia LaBeouf's Sam and Megan Fox's Mikaela are on the run from evil Transformers for two and a half hours. The good Transformers, led by Optimus Prime, are again out to defend them and all humans from Megatron, and his new master, The Fallen.

The Transformers reviews for the first movie weren't that great, but they were about down the middle. That is extremely rare for a Michael Bay film, as he hadn't come close to getting half-positive reviews for his movies since The Rock in 1996. Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, Bad Boys II and The Island had helped make Bay the anti-Christ for critics.

The first Transformers let Bay off the hook a bit - especially since he introduced Megan Fox to the world. But Transformers 2 reviews are back to slamming Bay as the devil.

The expected complaints in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen reviews are that it is empty, hollow, an assault on the senseless, and brainless. That's no surprise - but many a review also calls Transformers 2 even more brainless than usual, and even downright racism with a couple of ethic stereotype robots.

Pretty much no review has anything to praise Transformers 2 for except the technology and robot battles. Since they are even bigger than ever, and will be viewed on IMAX, that's more than enough for Revenge of the Fallen.

The hope in Hollywood is that Transformers will be the biggest opening of the summer, with an opening of over $100 million expected. Previous big summer hits like Star Trek, Up, and The Hangover also had very good reviews, but Transformers 2 will outdo them all without them.

Whereas reviews were at a fair 57% for the original on Rotten Tomatoes, the Transformers 2 reviews are at a piddling 21% on Rotten Tomatoes so far, with a rating of 4 out of 10. The Rotten Tomatoes consensus reads that "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is a noisy, underplotted, and overlong special-effects extravaganza that lacks a human touch."

But if Michael Bay really needed to provide that to survive, he would have been out of the business a decade ago. So a Transformers 2 review gets doomed to relative obscurity while the millions get made this weekend.





Additionally, every review I've read also mentions how god awful Megan Fox's acting was...and I'm glad. I wanted to give the girl a chance, but it was too hard. She's just a vapid headed girl who is getting by on nothing but her looks and sex appeal (although she claimed in interviews that she doesn't like being called sexy, and resents it. okay, world's sexiest woman 2 years in a row! don't promote yourself as a sex symbol then! don't go to maxim when you've got nothing else to prove except how mind blowingly hot and perfect you are!) and who has virtually no talent.But, she's hot in Transformers, so America loves her. I just am so confused and frustrated with the state of cinema sometimes.

Anton Yelchin, my new favorite human..

Allow me to draw you in with a beautiful face plagued with the fate of humanity. Simply put, Christian Bale's epic level of hotness. I just can't. I can't take it anymore.

Since I have this awful inability to actually sit down and articulate what I think in a coherent way, I always am angry with myself. But this subject is one I really would like to blog about. I mean there's tons of things I'd love to blog about, actually. How coca cola slurpees make me feel, my mouse that is currently actually a zombie, the sun and it's majestic god like powers, Jane Austen's motifs, but let me get on topic here.

Star Trek and Terminator 4, two of the season's biggest movies, will be brought up in this post because of a charming little man named Anton Yelchin.

The Czech actor is only one year older than myself, which would make him twenty. That's another thing I could blog about, math! And in one month and in two films the young actor has played a significant part (well, not just him of course!)in revitalizing two separate franchises. We all know how well J.J Abram's Star Trek did, a washed up space ship exploit turned stand-alone action flick. I knew Abrams wouldn't let me down, not with my fervent love of Lost and time travel, which also plays a part in the film. I don't think the reviews on Terminator are so consolidated yet, it's opening this weekend wasn't mind-blowing, but personally I thought it was a great film. Some critics are saying the film lacks character development, which may have some truth in it. The action scenes really did have me on the edge of my seat, covering my mouth and gasping when a ridiculously gigantic robot would appear, etc etc. Interesting that Star Trek's cast did not suffer from any lack of character development, both Chis Pine and Zachary Quinto (by the way, their bromance is adorable) were able to establish their characters in distinct ways and introduce them to a fresh, younger audience. I mean, if it weren't for this reboot, I doubt Spock would be receiving the same level of girlish attention and battered eyelashes. He looks fierce, and attractive in some freakish way I will admit. But how anyone can pull off that haircut and have girls drooling over you is over my head.
Anyway, Sam Worthington was compelling as a half man half machine, confused, yet indestructible. I thought Bale gave a solid performance as Connor, minus the Bruce Wayne voice in some parts. I don't think Bale has actually ever been in a bad film, or has ever done a less than awesome job at what he does. The whole time I was watching, I was really trying to figure out in which scene the infamous freak-out occured. And watching the film, in some really emotional scenes in which this guy is supposed to find his then-teenage father (played by Anton) and send him back in time to secure the fate of humans while trying to fight off some pretty scary machine cyborgs (another thing was the rating, I'm pretty sure WB is getting slammed for slapping this with a PG13 when it totally deserved an R) I can imagine how vunerable an actor is at times like that, and I can sort of understand why he went so insane.


Back to Anton! I loved the screen time with him and Bale, although there wasn't much. His scenes with Worthington were great as well. I just find him to be so charming, I can't really get over it! In T4, he played Kyle Reese. He had some huge shoes to fill, I think, but he nailed it. Reese is a beloved character to those who grew up with the Terminator movies and he nailed some of his mannerisms and just did a good job in general.

I could type for hours on the topic of Star Trek, never a fan of the series, but I would love to call myself a Trekkie because of this newfound love of it due to the movie. Anton's role as Chekov was absolutely spot on, (minus the physical appearance) his Russian accent was superb, he is , generally, just an actor who really really makes me happy. One of the best in his age group, for sure.
He's young and really, his career is taking off.

And I would love to sit down and have sushi with him. Please.
I'll settle for Senor Bale if it doesn't work out, he can verbally abuse me any day of the year.

Oh and for the record, I like McG's style of directing a lot more than Michael Bay's. Although he's got nothing but some Sugar Ray videos and Charlie's Angels under his belt, I think he did considerably well. Both of these men had movies which featured action, explosions, and beautiful women, but Transformers is just an awful potluck smashup of those things in the worst way possible. I just Hate, with a capital h, Michael Bay and how everyone is drooling over Transformers 2 for the summer. It makes me a sad lady.

I really should get some sleep.



Bale & Yelchin in T4! Son and...father..how..cute?

My mice are under my bed.

I am not motivated or collected enough to sit down and actually post a real entry, and it KILLS ME. I sit in class or I'm out somewhere and all I'm thinking about is coherently shaping my thoughts into a decent blog post but I just never get around to it. Instead, this time, I'm going to post some poems I wrote..a villanelle, a sonnet, and a sestina. The sestina was absolutely the most challenging, it took days to write. The structure is peculiar because the same six words have to repeat in a different yet specific order each time. My words were Rome, Watch, Red, One, Life,  Death. It was a challenge. I don't normally post poetry or prose on the internet but I figured I might. Enjoy, leave feedback? Maybe?

Shakespearean Sonnet
Old Milk

Prematurely, crass calls takes me from bed
Resigned, sleepy, I curse white morning birds
Now more. Multiplying shrill cries bring dread
Pouring cold milk ,much too early for words.

Predictable gulls bear no surprises
Dawn carries them in, while noon sees them quit
Opaque flux rivals overgrown white flies
A sniff, the truth; I move from where I sit

Faded numbers on the carton reads "bad".
Dumping old liquid, a seabreeze comes in
I look listlessly; spot last night's salad
While aves through the window chase fish and fin

The sun gleams and glares, bellies of birds full
Tulip adorned sheets call; I am not far.



VILLANELLE
Comedian

A candle goes out, life is taken, somebody knows.
Out of jaws of death, queries spring
Yet demise for us breathing creatures; natural as having ten toes.

Throat tightened, blood flowed, eyes closed, breathing slowed
Old scars collected blood like craters in rain
A candle goes out, a life is taken, somebody knows.

His enemies left roses. No wife, kids at his funeral, only friends turned foes
Cigar burning, menacing grin, "It's all a joke," he knew best
that demise for us breathing creatures; natural as having ten toes.

Each hit well calculated, each bloody, crushing, blow,
Cigar smoke smouldered, heavy bones snapped, twisted
A candle goes out, a life is taken, somebody knows.

Glass breaking, people screaming, buzzers dinging, t.v game shows
Screen flickering ,body thrown, twenty stories falling. Greeting wet pavement.
Yet demise for us breathing creatures; natural as having ten toes.

Reporters ask questions, one old wax candle still glows
Entertainer terminated amongst smoke and game shows,
A candle goes out, a life is taken, somebody knows
Yet demise for us breathing creatures; as natural as having ten toes.

(this one is vaguely based on a character from the graphic novel Watchmen..)






Sestina

Founded in brick, left in marble, if only I were there to watch!
One time capital of the world. Birthing greatness, life, war, death
Art, wine, food, chariots and love, love, love
Golden helmets adorned with feathers colored red
No doubt in any man's mind that only one
Empire, towering over all in mankind's narration- it can only be Rome.

Once golden and marble; industry, ruins, graffiti now inhabit streets of Rome
Hawaiian shirt wearing tourist halts at McDonalds. Flavian Amphitheatre can wait; checks his watch
He doesn't know the Great Fire,the Senate, nor Nero's hysterics. Simply wondering: if he were a gladiator, would he have won?
No heed paid to the Punic Wars, or Carthage, yet remembers reading in high school Ceasar's death.
Big Macs, to him romantic as the small italian eateries around the city; ketchup dribbled onto his belly leaving a stain that's red
Waddling down the Roman forum, no notice to aged, chipped Venus, goddess of love

Some creatures must value this place; history begs to be idolized, loved
Blood thirsty, never ending conquests for land; none could match the civilized brutality of Rome
Men at war, leaders power hungry, uncompromising, land stained crimson red
Blood tinged winter and summer grounds, snow and sweat, only charcoaled ravens stay to watch
Metal on metal. Breathing, clashing, burning, yelling, laughing, drinking, sleeping, choking, death.
Ink stained feathered creatures pick up the battered bloody pieces at their pleasure, one by one


Farms, cities once littered with corpses rose up when a call trimphant and shrill came at once;
Fathers, sons, men to arms. Defend the ever growing empire, sacrifice freedom,old age , love
Years pass, we all live the same lives, each and every single path ending in death.
Yet try and show me another city whose beauty no living imagination can picture, there is only Rome.
A refined she-wolf, under the burden of expectation, keeps on. Smirking, stalking, watching
Laughing at the prospect of anything but greatness, bearing white fangs and a muzzle coated red.

Love of God, not of Zeus took root ; blood dripped from a crown of thorns, thick and red
New Emperor; first of many, Constantine worshipped not many but one
Every sacrifice of blood, sheep, virgins, cattle, sodden eyes watched
as daughters, companions, gold earning posessions which garnered love
were taken for Jupiter, Juno, Apollo, Diana, once guardians of Rome
now discarded for a carpenter, how bitter we now rejoice in his birth and death!

Paved streets, haunted with Roman ghosts and stories of their deaths
skin tingling, mind wandering, remembering what's been read
of gladiators, fine architecture...unhinged satisfaction in Rome.
Laughing, praising a city which raises her head under neighboring stars, anyone
can see constellations today; sky lit up, glowing in idoltry and love
My tired eyes look past conspicuous McDonalds, I take off my watch

An old ivory fountain draws me near, I like this one
with age, she remained smooth and sleek, fast food, tourists slowly fade into Roman
obscruity along with every girl who ever sat upon this same seat; Into the water, I toss my watch.

(I also had a hard time making this flow more poetically and read less like prose...but it's my fault for picking a loaded topic for a poem which structure demands simplicity. whatever.)


And just for fun:

Keira Knightley still looks better than I ever will, even with no make-up...

Keira was recently spotted at Heathrow Airport, on her way to Canada. Personally, I think she looks great with little makeup and tousled hair. I wish I could go out looking like that and not feel super gross.

It's amazing what a ton of makeup, excessive styling and photoshop can do, huh?

Regardless, I'm still madly in love with her. She's got some pretty exciting projects coming up. My Fair Lady, the remake of the classic with Audrey Hepburn brings no new real news.

The Beautiful and the Damned, in which she's set to play Zelda Fitzgerald, wife of the famous author, is set for a 2010 release. I'm interested in how she'd tackle an American southern accent...Never Let Me Go, based on a novel about young people in London at a boarding school who ultimately discover they are being used for their organs(rough outline, forgive me I've had some wine this evening.) is also set for a 2010 release. It'll be nice to see her out of a period piece to silence her critics for a short while. London Boulevard, starring alongside Colin Farrel (This duo intrigues me). This role is promising for her, or at least I think so. I read a description:

"In the script the character is called Charlotte. A beautiful woman that looks thirty-five(as a result of a drug addiction) yet is only in her mid twenties suffers from addiction, exhaustion, nervous breakdowns, and is on the brink of having a fizzling career."

It'll be interesting to see her portray a character that is typical of our own time! To get into the mindset of characters so like her peers, especially some well-known ones in Hollywood.

Her last upcoming project, Last Night, has wrapped up filing. Some kind of romantic drama, the plot revolves around a married couple separated for one night while the husband takes a business trip with a colleague who he has feelings for, while the wife encounters her past love. It sounds sort of boring to me, but with any luck it can shape up to be the same kind of screwed up love freakshow that was Closer. Of course since my girls in it, I'll give it a chance. Obviously.

Just wondering...why does America still have a John Wayne complex?

I don't write in this blog nearly as much as I'd like to, but I got out of class early so I have some time to think.

I'm taking a class on United States and Cuba relations, and I can safely say I'm more than fascinated at the way our country has treated Cuba in the past, and even now. There's been this demonization of Fidel Castro, and I fear that American history textbooks in high schools only vaguely and briefly touch on the subject of our relationship with our little neighbor just ninety miles away.

Anyway, I barely talk in the class, because I'm intimidated of this professor- he might be the smartest guy I've ever encountered, and I have this fear of appearing stupid in public. He probably thinks I'm some ditzy teenager, but in reality I can't keep my mind off this stuff. We've read a ton of books so far, the most recent being The Politics of Illusion, which deals with the Bay of Pigs and operation Mongoose. I'll get back to that book in a second.

To say the least, we royally screwed up. But it wouldn't be the first time our country has taken on this "We're big, we're mean, we can do anything we want in the sake of our own national interests!" attitude. We get this notion, particularly recently, in the Bay of Pigs, that we can just go into whatever country we please and do whatever we want- in this case, overthrow Fidel and establish a government more in the 'interests of the cuban people'.(Even if we weren't using American soldiers but instead Cuban exiles-yeah, that worked out swell.) What the hell did we know about the Cuban people's interests? Zero, we had been squashing their hopes of domestic economic development ever since the Platt Amendment. Then in Vietnam, later in Afghanistan and today in Iraq, for example. But the reason why our country has this complex, the reason why Americans in the past few years can travel anywhere and be judged around the globe, is because the American people will support almost any military expenditure we go on. Because we can do it. We're America! Guns blazing, horse riding off into the sunset, with that romantically rugged cowboy drawl. Those big foam hands at football games. Yeah, we're number one. Although there will always be liberals opposing military involvement, the American public virtually always initially supports the government when it sets out to do anything. Because WE CAN DO IT.

There was an interesting passage which addresses the 'John Wayne' complex that America has had for too long now in Politics of Illusion:

"The film critic Eric Bentley claimed in 1971 that John Wayne was the most dangerous man in America because without him, and the mythology of his movies, America's tragic involvement in Vietnam was unthinkable. We are not prepared to claim quite this much for "John Wayne" and the Bay of Pigs ((Although I, myself am.)) It is worth noting, however, that there are far closer historical connections between the themes of Wayne's most successful films of the 1940's and 1950's and issues related to Cuba, rather than to Vietnam. According to popular North American myth, the United Sates had liberated Cuba in the Spanish-American War, and had taken care of it ever since. It is also worth meditating on the finding that polls then, and now, indicate that Wayne is-not was but is- America's most popular actor. The analysis of precise connections between Wayne's films and U.S Cuban relations in the Kennedy years would seem to be fertile ground awaiting a cultural critic with knowledge of both western movies and Cuba. For us, for now, we are satisfied if "John Wayne" serves as a useful shorthand for a particular set of Cold War illusions that, due to elapsed time, availability of documents, and the courage of the Musgrove participants, can just now be seen for what they were."

After reading texts from this class I feel a bit cheated - and I wish that kids learning about U.S history could know the real history behind U.S / Cuba relations. Why is Fidel seen as a 'bad guy?' He gave Cuba, his country, back to Cubans. It might be near impossible to get a can of cola for a decent price on that island, but you can bet that you'll never see anyone go hungry or be deprived of medical treatment. Unlike New York City, the economic and social powerhouse of our country and most of the world, you won't see people sleeping on the streets in Cuba. I'm not advocating socialism here, but I'm just wondering why the United States finds this way of life so offensive. Are we, as people, or our government, as our elected officials, jealous that schooling is completely free there? Of course, free speech is severely limited - people are still allowed to speak their minds in the street and their homes- but a common Cuban defensive argument when Castro declared communism was something along the lines of, 'when it comes down to it, we'd prefer a roof over our heads, food, and medical care over free speech.'

I'm kind of straying from my original point here, but I still can't wrap my head around us not learning from our own history. The CIA was severely, disgustingly misinformed during the Bay of Pigs invasion. They had barely any intelligence at all, and that can now be said about the Iraq invasion, but only years after- it's all dandy invading and getting ourselves in, but what do you do when you get there? How do you get out? The failed invasion made a mockery of one of our own institutions that we were supposed to be able to rely on. And of course, Kennedy was still beloved by the public, because it was the 'big bad CIA's fault, and of course Kennedy knew nothing about it..' although he did, it wasn't his favorite idea on the drawing board or anything. Regardless, we seem to disregard previous failures when it comes to military invasions, or nation building, or whatever is we're trying to do across the world.

We might have used to think we were the best. Maybe we used to be imperialists. John Wayne might have been the most popular actor in the country. Unfortunately, if you ask anyone younger than I am, I'm afraid a good amount of kids wouldn't know too much about him or his movies. So, as a country, we're moving on. Can we shed this tanned, leathery, tobacco stained skin?

Sorry I forgot about you, blog!

I haven't posted anything here for almost a year. I won't bore anyone reading with personal updates, because that's what I use my livejournal for. I just feel terribly guilty about not using this, because I DO need an outlet, I DO need a place to write coherent thoughts. I guess I underestimated this whole thing in general though, considering I came back to over fifteen comments on one of my posts, and I expected barely anyone to read it besides myself. So I suppose I'll embark on a journey - one that includes me writing things that other people might-gasp- yes, read! Maybe someone will read something I have to say!

It did feel great when I was published in Newsday. I'm conflicted about my future in journalism because of the lack of opportunities and everything going viral. It's a bit discouraging to me. But one of the only things that I'm decently okay at is writing- (and playing ddr, but where will that get me?) so someone suggested that I start a serious blog. I probably should write more, because the people I come in contact with on a daily basis generally have no idea what I'm talking about when I bring up directors, actors, or anything film related. They all want to see 'Notorious' while I need to see 'The Wrestler' 'Frost/ Nixon' and 'Revolutionary Road' before Oscar season, because, well, I need to see every movie in the best picture category before making a real prediction, duh! It's hard to express how isolated I feel on this subject. I want to break into film, I want to eventually include it in my career somehow, but I'm terrified it's too late for me. I'm studying Political Science instead, which I am passionate about, don't get me wrong, but I'm increasingly becoming aware of myself, and of how I might not be cut out for law school or anything of the sort. I'm just terrified, and I want someone to talk to about this...so I've become something of a night owl, prowling the web, reading scraps of information about Hunter S. Thompsons' novel, The Rum Diary's, film adaptation (which may include Keira Knightley or Scarlett Johansen..and will certainly be including Johnny Depp) instead of reading about Condelezza Rice's latest trip to a foreign country. I'm captivated by films. By book and play adaptations, by actors performances, by set designs and budgets and appealing to certain demographics and this and that and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, I FEEL LIKE none of this can get me anywhere, is it just going to have to be a hobby for me, for the rest of my life? Am I destined to sit back and let other people do all this work? This work that I want to do? When I say 'this work', I don't even know what I'm referring to! Directing, editing, acting, no no..I don't think that..I'm just so confused. Eighteen and terrified, that's what I am.




So when I mentioned something about being a film critic in casual conversation, this is what I was reminded of, this is where I was referred. And then I remembered that I already had one. I don't really know. It's not too late for me to post all my Oscar predictions or anything. But I need to see all those damn movies first. I will say that I've been to the movies more these past two months than any other person my age that I know. It's kind of fun, but kind of...not. It really does isolate me, though, when I try to start a conversation about how Kate Winslet really deserved that Golden Globe for the Reader..and the response I get would be along the lines of, 'Oh, she was in Titanic, right?'
Sigh. That's why I need the internet, so I know I'm not alone here. Good thing I'm reminded I'm not the only movie junkie out there. So...three cheers for the internet.

I found this on a facebook group. and laughed forever.



How Gay Marriage Killed the Dinosaurs...
Top ten reasons to make gay marriage illegal

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.