Skull

Pearl Harbor.

tommyp007

ditto, although I have yet to see Bad Boys 2.

Tarantino

Bay's films suck to people here because well, they're not 'smart', they don't have a 'twist ending', they're not made on $4,500 dollar budgets, oh, and because they're action movies.

Seriously, I don't get how someone can NOT be entertained by a movie like Bad Boys or The Rock...it's amazing to me.

Oh, and I voted for Bad Boys II because the last half hour just fell apart...but I did like the beginning of it, the car chase in the beginning is awesome.

FiveO

Bad Boys 2....

I actually enjoyed Pearl Harbor.

Matthew Chmiel

If Michael Bay would stick to making films concentrating more on action and less on plot, I would like him more. Michael Bay is one of the few directors who can pull "style over substance" off extremely well. But his last three films have tried to have substance to them, which is completely unnecessary for a Michael Bay flick. If Bad Boys II was maybe 90 - 120 minutes, I would've enjoyed it a lot more. If Pearl Harbor was just 120 minutes of Pearl Harbor getting attacked, I would've loved it.

When I go see Michael Bay films, I don't want plot. I want shit blowing up. I want cars flipping, people getting shot, buildings exploding... whatever can be destroyed, I want to see destroyed. **** plot.

Rivero

What's not to get. They're headache-inducing and dumb. And there IS a difference between a dumb popcorn action flick and a good one.

Good: Die Hard, Aliens, Terminator 2, Predator, Time and Tide

Bad: Gone in 60 Seconds, Con Air, Michael Bay's entire resume

Matthew Chmiel

I would not call Die Hard, Aliens, and Terminator 2 popcorn flicks. All three films are praised by critics and audiences to not deem them popcorn flicks. Popcorn flicks are usually just mindless entertainment. Those three films are all smarter than your average action flick.

scott shelton

Tarantino

Okay, I'll agree with you on that one.

Rivero

How old are you?

B.A.

He's thirteen.

Matthew Chmiel

I'm eighteen and I also do not have a stick shoved up my ass, unlike yourself.

When I go see a Michael Bay film, I don't go in expecting something on par with an Akira Kurosawa or François Truffaut film. I expect mindless entertainment that I can just watch and enjoy. I don't go in expecting it to have a great plot or good acting. I come in to watch millions of dollars pumped into two hours of non-stop destruction put on 35mm film.

If I wanted something "smart" that I could enjoy and satisfy my brain with, I'd go pop in Rashomon or The 400 Blows, not Armageddon or Bad Boys.

And unlike yourself, I know the difference between great movies I can enjoy and shitty movies I can enjoy.

Tarantino

haha, that's what I was thinking too. Chmiel is right, not every movie has to change your goddamn life. Sometimes you just want to go to a movie to see spectacular car chases and insane shootouts. Sometimes you want to not think for a few hours and non stop destruction is the way to go!

Matthew Chmiel

Thus why I own both Bad Boys films on DVD and have no problems with owning them.

Tarantino

Me too. And The Rock...and Face/Off...and The Transporter...ect...

Trigger

I'm curious about what kind of action film Bad Boys 2 haters do like... and if they hate most action movies and all of Michael Bay's previous films, why the hell did they go see BB2??

Banky

Here we go again.

Threads like this are a huge reminder of how pretentious people are that post here. Michael Bay does NOT make bad films. Michael Bay makes some of the most entertaining action films of the last 10 years. He is also consistent, and out does himself every film.

When you sit around here and trash Michael Bay, maybe you should realize that HE is the film maker, and you are the one who sits on your ass and watches HIS work.

Dont get me wrong, I believe everyone is entitled to thier opinion, but sometimes it seems like people for thier opinions based on what they think will be 'cool' to their peers.

In conclusion, if you think you are so supeior in intellect and talent to Michael Bay, then lets see your film.

PS:
When i'm in the mood to relax and be entertained for a couple hours, I'd rather watch a Bay film than a Kurosawa or Kubrick film anytime.

Derrich

I didn't know Micheal Bay's mom posted in this forum. Cool!

D

Banky

You could have done better than that.

matome

All great flicks, except Pearl Harbor. That was just bad.

BizRodian

Pearl Harbor has no redeeming qualities in it at all. Sure, you all say the attack sequence is good... but think about it for a second, you're thinking about how cool the reinactment of a national tragedy was. Awesome guys!

Ok, if that's not enough, let's expand on it. The battle is TOTALLY cliched and crappy. Sure, there might be a few good exploisions, but it's full of crap as well.

We also have crap like the potato peeler pealing potatos thinking it's a drill, and then a torpedo lands right by him, and he looks down, and gets blown up. WTF? I couldn't tell if that was supposed to be funny or not. Another similar thing... there's the guy who stutters... the base is under attack and he's stuttering trying to warn everyone.. but he can't... and then everyone gets straffed by a plane and starts running. Again, is this supposed to be a funny part? I can't tell! Oh, one more too.. a torpedo or whatever lands by a bunch of soilders, but it doens't go off. One of the guys is so happy, exlaiming, "It's a dud!" it then blows up and kills them all! Hahaha!

I've only seen the movie once, so I can't comment that much on the rest... but I remember a whole bunch of laughable stuff in that battle sequence. Like the planes doing their neat chicken trick to fool the Japanese, what the hell? that's cliched crap. That whole battle was like watching science fiction, the battle was supposed to be over the top and cool and wow enducing.

Pearl Harbor is THE suck. I could at least laugh at Armageddon. Pearl Harbor was even too bad to laugh at. Bay tried to blend Titanic and a war movie together in order to make a lot of money by appealing to as many people as possible.

Banky

Well then he succeeded didn't he?

BizRodian

...didn't I just say that?

Tarantino

No, you didn't. You said he tried, Banky pointed out that he did, in fact, succeed.

The battle sequences in Pearl Harbor were some of the best ever, in my opinion.

Matthew Chmiel

The whole attack (prior to Affleck and Hartnett getting into the planes) was simply ****ing brilliant. The mixture of live action and CGI effects during that 45-minute segment has yet to be outdone IMO, and how the film didn't win best special effects is beyond me. I dislike the film, but that sequence (along with the fact that I got the 4-disc edition brand new for $10) is the only reason why I own the film. Because the film is a terrible Titanic rip-off without it. As I said, if the film was more like that attack sequence, I would've enjoyed it a lot more.

He could've said, "Wow, you've seen a female naked?"