Jump to content
N-Europe

Recommended Posts

Posted

Even though I dislike many of Michael Bay's recurrent tropes, I admit this movie looks better than the first (probably because it doesn't look like it's trying to be anything more than a goofy affair).

 

Now, their truck says "Tartaruga Brothers". I have no idea why the gratuitous Portuguese, but I like it.

Posted

I can't really believe anyone liked the first film, it was such an abomination to the comics, the cartoons, the movies, every iteration that came before it.

 

This one at least looks a bit more fun....

Posted
  Shorty said:
I can't really believe anyone liked the first film, it was such an abomination to the comics, the cartoons, the movies, every iteration that came before it.

 

This one at least looks a bit more fun....

 

I didn't mind the first Bay Turtles film.

 

This was the worst Turtles movie I've seen.

2007_movie.jpg

Posted

Turtles 1 was great, loved it. Don't 100% understand the criticism honestly. They got the personalities of the Turtles correct and there was good action. I personally like the roided look. Love other things. Nay bother.

 

Second one looks tremen.

  • 1 month later...
Posted

The first film was pretty terrible, but I sort of loved it because I love the turtles. I expect this to be the same. Everything Bay touches is just awful so we can only expect so much.... Nothing touches the original film!!

 

I'll reboot it properly one day :)

Posted
  dazzybee said:
The first film was pretty terrible, but I sort of loved it because I love the turtles. I expect this to be the same. Everything Bay touches is just awful so we can only expect so much.... Nothing touches the original film!!

 

I'll reboot it properly one day :)

 

I love Bay movies. Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon, Transformers, Turtles, all great popcorn films for the masses. You get loud explosions, one liners and usually a bit eye candy on screen. If you go to a Bay movie expecting anything different then you've got no one to blame but yourself if you leave disappointed.

Posted

I still think the first movie was absolutely terrible but at least this one seems to be leaning into the crazy aspects of the Turtles (more-so than them being Ninja Turtles of course!). Just seeing Megan Fox though in the trailer brings it right down. She looks rediculous.

Posted

Yeah Megan Fox is about as un-April as it gets, such a crazy casting choice, but you know why Bay did it...

 

Kinda looking forward to this film. The first was alright.

 

I do largely enjoy Michael Bay films as well, but I do think he's progressively got worse.

 

Guess that's the 'Technodrome' then?

Posted
  Hero-of-Time said:
I love Bay movies. Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon, Transformers, Turtles, all great popcorn films for the masses. You get loud explosions, one liners and usually a bit eye candy on screen. If you go to a Bay movie expecting anything different then you've got no one to blame but yourself if you leave disappointed.

 

Haha, I'm not disappointed, I know exactly what I'll get - a sleazy leery director who cares more about explosions than character or story :)

 

Turtles isn't even Bay, but he hires absolute hacks (rather than the Marvel/Disney route of interesting directors to really bring something to the films) so even his produced films have his cum-drenched finger prints all over them!

Posted
  dazzybee said:
Haha, I'm not disappointed, I know exactly what I'll get - a sleazy leery director who cares more about explosions than character or story :)

 

Turtles isn't even Bay, but he hires absolute hacks (rather than the Marvel/Disney route of interesting directors to really bring something to the films) so even his produced films have his cum-drenched finger prints all over them!

 

Why watch his movies if you dislike him so much?

Posted

Tbf I think you're misinterpreting that. I have a similar view. Bay makes shit movies. But that doesn't mean you won't be entertained or that the visuals won't be very pleasing. You know what you're getting, which is something that will never do a franchise justice, never be a 9/10 on IMDB, but will still be a good popcorn flick.

Posted
  Shorty said:
Tbf I think you're misinterpreting that. I have a similar view. Bay makes shit movies. But that doesn't mean you won't be entertained or that the visuals won't be very pleasing. You know what you're getting, which is something that will never do a franchise justice, never be a 9/10 on IMDB, but will still be a good popcorn flick.

 

From the sounds of it, and past posts about Bay, it seems @dazzybee doesn't enjoy Bay's films on any level. I just find it daft if you are willing to spend more on a product that you know you won't enjoy. ::shrug:

Posted
  dazzybee said:
(rather than the Marvel/Disney route of interesting directors to really bring something to the films)

 

The irony being is that Michael Bay actually has a style – as egregious as people may find it – and Disney's Marvel films are some of the most sterile films ever pumped through a production line, all adhering to an absolutely totalitarian in-house style regardless of director or writer or DoP.

 

From Pain & Gain to Transformers to Armageddon to The Rock to 13 Hours, there's more variety in Michael Bays' portfolio than there is in the whole of Disney's Marvel universe combined.

 

And I really object to the view that @Shorty has, just because he makes quite shallow films doesn't make them shit. I think that's a bit snobbish and does a real disservice to the work and effort put into those films. There are plenty of popcorn flicks that are nowhere near as entertaining as the ones Michael Bay creates.

 

And that is coming from someone who – bar having a slight soft spot for the rock-opera Armageddon – has been more than indifferent to Michael Bay. Actually, I found the first Transformers film literally unwatchable (I actually enjoyed Dark of the Moon most – probably because I find Amir Mokri's cinematography actually pretty solid).

Posted
  Hero-of-Time said:
Why watch his movies if you dislike him so much?

 

Well I watch most films. I watch a lot. I watch Transformers because I hoped it would be good, same with Turtles; his earlier ones are reasonable fun. Others I've just ended up catching.

Posted
  Daft said:
And I really object to the view that @Shorty has, just because he makes quite shallow films doesn't make them shit. I think that's a bit snobbish and does a real disservice to the work and effort put into those films. There are plenty of popcorn flicks that are nowhere near as entertaining as the ones Michael Bay creates.

I don't find them shit because they're shallow, usually it's strained plotholes and bizarre pacing. I gave up watching the last Shia Transformers at some point he was having some weird job interview and the script was bizarre and I just didn't care. Turtles I was mostly disappointed that they dropped one of my favourite features of TMNT very quickly: subtlety, hiding in shadows etc.. And some awful forced plot progression with April being a) tied to the turtles in the past and b) just stumbling across an attack in the whole of NYC - as well as the whole "they're nearly dead, just give them some adrenaline" thing. You can make fantastic action and you can keep it positively simple without insulting your audience like that.

Posted

That's fair enough that you have specific complaints, it just sounded like you were making a broad statement. My bad if I misinterpreted.

Posted
  Daft said:
The irony being is that Michael Bay actually has a style – as egregious as people may find it – and Disney's Marvel films are some of the most sterile films ever pumped through a production line, all adhering to an absolutely totalitarian in-house style regardless of director or writer or DoP.

 

From Pain & Gain to Transformers to Armageddon to The Rock to 13 Hours, there's more variety in Michael Bays' portfolio than there is in the whole of Disney's Marvel universe combined.

 

And I really object to the view that @Shorty has, just because he makes quite shallow films doesn't make them shit. I think that's a bit snobbish and does a real disservice to the work and effort put into those films. There are plenty of popcorn flicks that are nowhere near as entertaining as the ones Michael Bay creates.

 

And that is coming from someone who – bar having a slight soft spot for the rock-opera Armageddon – has been more than indifferent to Michael Bay. Actually, I found the first Transformers film literally unwatchable (I actually enjoyed Dark of the Moon most – probably because I find Amir Mokri's cinematography actually pretty solid).

 

He does have a style, of a 15 year old boy who doesn't know whether he wants to fuck the women in his films more or the camera. He has an action style, but it's so shallow, superficial and cliched with absolute no care of for character, story, or scene logic. Although it sounds like strong opinions, I don't actually care, but he is one of the sleaziest, leeriest directors there is.

 

As for Marvel/Disney, interesting, for me Thor, Iron Man, Avengers, Captain America, Ant Man, Guardians all feel very very different to me. Not that I love them all, but I respect them a lot for what they're doing. Do you really hate them then?

 

As for whether his films are shit, obviously it's subjective, but for me films should always serve story, character and have a design style (from production through to the grade) that is a cohesive whole that fits into the world logic of whatever it is. Bay doesn't have any of that, he just has gross shots of womens arses, obsessed with bollocks slow mo, who thinks a scene is more dramatic if you have the loudest cracking sound going on over the action.

 

But if you like action porn and... well porn. I can see the appeal.

 

Saying all that. I am still quite excited for Turtles 2 #neverlearn

Posted (edited)

Well I don't think we're quite disagreeing. I don't like he style but I think he knows what he's doing and he does it very well.

 

I don't hate the Disney Marvel films. At worst I find them bland. There are a couple great ones, Iron Man and Avengers, to name a couple. There is probably only one I would say was intriguing as a bit of filmmaking, Ant-man – and ultimately I think it fails to really try something new. And the rest I am pretty indifferent to.

 

I think Thor is atrocious and an insult to the medium of comics.

 

In fact I find Disney's whole approach flies in the face of what makes comics great, I see no individuals with visions. The author's voice is lost in all of Disney's films – except maybe The Avengers, which is Joss Whedon all over. People may hate Zack Snyder, but I'd rather watch his failed experiment than an asinine Thor film or another Age of Ultron. I love Warner Bros choice of David Ayer, he's an exciting director with a strong style. Patty Jenkins, James Wan, both are going to do something interesting (it's telling that Jenkins couldn't work with Disney on Thor but can work with WB on Wonder Woman). Even Fox attempting to try something with Josh Tank – as big a car crash as FF was, or Matthew Vaughn for X-men First Class and going with Tim Miller on Deadpool; I find those choices much more interesting than Disney's rent-a-director approach.

Edited by Daft
×
×
  • Create New...