Box Office 2009: The Year Stories Didn’t Matter
by John P. HanlonThe two highest-grossing movies in the United States from 2009 were “Avatar” and “Transformers 2.” The special effects and the anticipation before both films helped propel these films to earn hundreds of millions of dollars. Much of the media coverage about both films (especially “Avatar”) focused on their special effects rather than their stories. With that in mind, one of the unfortunate legacies of 2009 at the movies may be that strong stories and great characters are seen as no match for visual excitement at the box office.
At the end of December 2009, Yahoo compiled a list of the top grossing movies of the year domestically. (Because the list came out in December, “Transformers 2” is featured as the highest grossing movie of the year, rather than “Avatar.”) The Yahoo list featured four sequels, one franchise revival (”Star Trek”), and one James Cameron movie about a planet with blue aliens on it. That latter film, along with “Transformers 2,” will not likely be remembered for its story or its characters, a disappointing realization for moviegoers who want great stories to go along with grand special effects.
“Avatar” may be beloved by some movie critics but few could argue that the story of that movie and its cliched characters and plot are as great as its visual effects. “Transformers 2,”on the other hand, had some good visual effects but its story was boring and many critics hated it, for good reason. It was a really bad film.
Compare those two films to the top two films of 2008: “The Dark Knight” and “Iron Man.” At the end of 2008, Yahoo compiled a list of the top ten movies of that year with “The Dark Knight” emerging as the top domestic motion picture of the year. The two top-grossing movies in the United States in 2008 and 2009 all feature a lot of special effects. However, one of the main differences between the top two movies of 2008 and 2009 are the stories (or lack thereof).
Both “Iron Man” and “The Dark Knight” had good stories to go along with their special effects. “Iron Man” was about an unlikely superhero with a lot of personality who made himself into a hero after being held hostage. “The Dark Knight” was about the Caped Crusader fighting against a monstrous villain, played by Academy Award winner Heath Ledger. Both of those films had special effects but those were used to supplement their strong stories, rather than replace them. Along with the special effects, “Iron Man” received recognition for its appealing story and Robert Downey Jr.’s performance in it. Likewise, “The Dark Knight” was known for its great story and Ledger’s grand performance in it.
This is not to say that all of 2009 highest-grossing films lacked good stories. Although I have not seen “Ice Age 3” or “Twilight: New Moon,” I do know that a lot of the top grossing movies on the Yahoo list for 2009 had far better stories than the disappointing “Avatar” or “Transformers 2.” “The Blind Side” had an inspiring story about a family that takes care of a complete stranger and helps him succeed both in sports and in his life. “The Hangover” had a fun story about a group of guys who wake up in Vegas and then try to figure out what transpired the night before. Lastly, “Up” had a fantastic storyline about a man trying to make up for lost opportunities in life by moving his house to his and his wife’s dream vacation spot.
Each of those movies had good stories and strong characters going for them. “Avatar” and “Transformers 2” did not.
It is no surprise that bad movies ended up of the top ten list of the highest-grossing movies of 2009. Look at “Hancock” as one of the higest grossing movies of 2008. That was an awful movie that did well at the box office. However, 2009 was a year when movies with great special effects proved that they can seriously overcome far better entertainment with stronger stories and better characters.
It is still too early in 2010 to determine if people at the box office are going to prefer mindless entertainment like “Transformers 2,” bad storylines accompanied by great special effects like in “Avatar” or movies that have great stories, strong performances and grand special effects like “The Dark Knight.” I am definitely hoping for the latter as sitting through another movie like “Transformers 2” sounds like a terrible way to spend part of the new year.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
122 Comments
These kind of movies are what Generation ADD wants. My 20 year old step son said that Transformers 2 was the greatest movie ever. Pretty lame, eh? Give me some John Wayne or Bogie anytime.
"Transformers 2" was soooo bad, but I'm not sure it came close to being the stink-fest that was "G.I. Joe." I can't believe I tried to watch that. Sure, I walked away in less than 15 minutes. But I still resent that much of my time was wasted on that drek.
I am soooooo picky about what I will pay to see in the cinema. Avatar is not even on my radar in spite of being a fan of sci-fi in general. Transformers 2 was awful. Not only was the story inane but, the much vaunted special effects were too "noisy". My eyes couldn't handle the input and they literally hurt from the effort to watch. As I waited for the DVD release before I saw it, I didn't think I wasted $2.00 in the bargain bin. Star Trek, on the other hand, had a good story and solid acting performances ahead of the special effects. The Book of Eli is the only film on my list, so far.
I haven't seen Transformer 2 yet but my friends keep telling me, "Don't bother." G.I. Joe was surprisingly not terrible. I never watched the cartoon so maybe I just didn't know what I was missing.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who didn't like Hancock. I like Will Smith but I though that film was just a colossal waste of time.
Avatar had a story, but it was predictable and rather unimaginative. Elements within the story were creative, but not the overall plot.
The Dark Knight did not have a great story. It was largely a string of conflict-resolution-conflict-resolution with a thread of Batman/Bruce Wayne's self-doubt thrown in and some relationship subplots. A good, entertaining movie, but not nearly as crisp and meaningful as the story in Batman Begins. And Heath Ledger won the Oscar mostly because he died. His performance was good, but Oscars are not about what or who is truly best, but about politics and real-life story lines.
This 20 (Year old when it came out, now 21) loved Transformers 2 because he was expected it to be like a rollercoaster or a fireworks show: Whoooo! Fun!
Maybe your stepson means that in a half-humor way. I've said that same thing about Transformers 2 under that criteria many times.
Too much of "good writing" today ends up getting wasted on self-important Quircky Irony Arthouse tripe that is made just to be Oscar-bait rather then telling a good or compelling story.
Dark Knight and Ironman definitely hit it out of the park. They are so good in fact that they can withstand multiple viewings.
I enjoyed the first Transformers movie a lot, but the second one was a total waste of time. Avatar wasn't a total waste of time, but there's no way I could sit through another viewing of it. It was completely lacking in the story department. the dialogue was weak and predictable, and man was it loooooong.
The special effects in IMAX 3D were outstanding but not enough for me to consider this a good movie.
I do enjoy entertaining, smart movies. Tastes differ, but even my kids agreed (they walked away before I did) about Transformer 2. Overlong, overload, over-boring, per my 12 year old. Maybe if you are stoned?
Big special-effects shows are what people seem to want of their movies these days. Bear in mind, it's a visual medium.
Of course, the greatest effects medium is the imagination. Despite the pretty good job the moviemakers did, my mental images of IT will always be superior.
I've long come to terms with the fact that I'm not an American movie goer. At least in the sense that I'm not in love with special effects. Honestly, a lot of the "blockbusters" in the US are pretty bad if not downright terrible.
Avatar has a great message about all living things being connected. It's an ancient belief, far older than any religion. If you have no knowledge of this you will probably miss out on the depth of this story and consider it a special effects only film….which is really sad. I've found only the very shallow or uneducated are least likely to understand the depth of the movie.
I won't apologize for loving "Transformers 2" at all.
But for me, if I'm going to plop prime-time movie-ticket money – I better get my money's worth.
The story is lame, some of the jokes were too frat-boy humor, but the visual effects were AWESOME!!!
Does it hold up to John Wayne or Humphrey Bogart (or even Robert Mitchum and Clark Gable)? No. But it made 2009 – the Year of Obama absolutely bearable. And for that, I will always be grateful to Michael Bay.
Right, just like Dances with Wolves… FernGully… Pocahantas… Princess Monoke…
Well, spooney did say it best.
http://spoonyexperiment.com/2009/12/20/vlog-12-19...
Also, you really should have read Dan Gagliasso's pair of articles.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dgagliasso/2010...
If I have to watch cartoons, give me Chuck Jones, Jay Ward and Tex Avery. They could fit more wit, heart and genuine humanity into five minutes of slapstick than James Cameron and his colleagues provide in three hours of tendentious sermonizing.
I can't decide if Transformers 2 was worse than Transformers or as equally bad, but they were some of the worst movies I have ever wasted money to rent.
Transformers 2 was better then Avatar.
At least I didn't leave it swearing at the screen.
I LOVED "Star Trek" and I am not a Trek fan by any means. Great job done by Abrams in making it cool!
Sorry – That sounds like one of those freshman level solopisms that seem deep and profound to a teenager but are actually, well, pretty lame. When I was that impressionable the way you demonstrated your philosophical bona fides was to read Carlos Castaneda and engage in long bull sessions on the meaning of his work. James Cameron has just cut out the reading part.
DON'T SEE TRANSFORMERS!!!! Either one. Awful acting, idiotic, juvenile dialogue and puerile humor. Utterly stupid.
Let me translate your message into reality…
Avatar has a terrible message about how all human begins must die for everyone else to be fine and dandy. Its a modern belief, concocted by aging, cynical hipsters who hate religion as much as anything else. If you have a brain in your skull this ham-handed message will gall you to the point of insanity.
Everyone who doesn't like blue aliens is a red-neck, racist, republican.
What did you enjoy about the 1st Transformers movie? I hated almost everything about it.
I think if you watched it while stoned it would just seem to go on forever.
Kinda like if you were NOT stoned, but twice as bad.
They believe in razzle-dazzle just like the Obama admin.
Their product is turning to crap too…
My wife and I go to the movie theater occasionally when something interesting comes along. Recently we saw The Book of Eli, which I thought was a good, thought-provoking story and had a praise-worthy performance from Denzel Washington. Before that we saw Sherlock Holmes. It had a pretty weak story but strong performances from the leads. All in all I go to the movies to be entertained, and that's what counts for me. If the story is weak but other factors make up for it then fine. If the story is strong but the acting is horrible, well I'm not Mr. Happy. At the end of the film if I enjoyed the ride then I feel the price of the ticket was worth it.
Regarding Hancock, the first 2/3rds of that film were terrific. The concept, story, acting, effects…all were very good. The last 1/3 of course ruined it. Is there an award for partially good movies?
I bet that line works really well on college girls, especially with some frozen drinks.
It was more nostalgic for me I guess, having grown up watching the cartoon. I liked the fact that they used the original voice for Optimus Prime, I liked that they showed American soldiers in a positive light. I found some of the dialogue to be funny. And the special effects were impressive.
Some of the things I didn't like were that the Transformers themselves were too busy looking. The other parts of the dialogue were lame. Megan Fox is very easy on the eyes, but unfortunately they gave her a speaking role. I'm not saying this was the greatest movie of all time or anything, but I liked it well enough.
You're confusing me.
You mention 4 actors of the 40's-60's who helped carry stories with their acting abilities. There wre no big FX in these actors' movies. But you say the Transformers movie does not "hold up" to them even though you stated that the only thing you liked about Transformers was the FX.
So… if the FX are big enough, they will trump a good story or deft acting?
Giving federal money to ACORN is like giving Tweety bird a Jeckyll 'n' Hyde potion that turns him briefly into Monster Tweety.
GIJOE? They Killed StormShadow THEY KILLED STORMSHADOW! I will never forgive them. Did they even watch GI JOE ? or transformers for that matter? Im still waiting for them to ruin M.A.S.K.
Okay. Im looking at films that will entertain me. I honestly dont care about what the old people want. Avatar and Transformers 2 are 2 of my favorite movie…Avatar being my first favorite. I love anything Sci-Fi, and Avatar was like the golden ticket for me. Im looking for a movie that has everything in it love, humor, adventure, thrill, and action. And honestly both these movies had it for me. The Dark Night was one of the worst movies i have ever seen, i fell asleep during the first hour and wanted my money back. Iron Man was okay, but it didnt excite me as much as Avatar did. *SPOILERS* I was on the edge of my seat whenever people started dying and they were real close to getting to the tree of souls. But they didnt. Of course. Every single movie is like that, there is a good guy and a bad guy.
The good guy wins, and if they dont then we cus at the screen and yell because deep down we all want the good guy to win even though its predictable. Just like a TV show of mine, Supernatural, its about 2 brothers that fight evil and almost die in every episode. You know they arent going to die, because that would kill the show. And thats just like movies. Predictability is needed in order to make a movie, unless you want to twist it up and confuse everybody which is acceptable, but not exactly liked. Avatar absolutely blew my mind, i can watch that movie again and again….and again and still not be tired of it. Unlike Titanic, that i watched once and said okay, thats neat…..next. Im 18 years old im looking for a movie that will go to the top of my list and can be my favorite for the rest of my life. Right now i have two, Avatar and Transformers. And like i said im looking for the whole package, which these movies just have.
Plus through all of it, it has a meaning to the movie. What meaning did Titanic, Iron Man, or Dark Night have? Dont come close to a ice burg, dont be stupid enough to leave you energy source ungarded, or dont piss off a clown. Come on. If you people think these movies are the greatest of all time, there is seriously something wrong with you.
THANK YOU
I recently reread Danniel Mannix's book The Way of the Gladiator, which describes the Roman Games in lurid detail. Mannix makes the point that the games began as contests of skill, but degenerated into mindless spectacle as the taste of the noisy Roman mob became ever more debased.
I think the same thing is happening with American pop culture. Thoughtful, intelligent films go nowhere because they don't appeal to the dumbed down, brain-dead mass audience (which, for movies, consists mostly of teens).
Plot and characterization are too challenging for this audience, so the emphasis is on spectacle, the more outlandish and over-the-top, the better.
To a certain extent the same thing is happening in publishing, with publishers looking for dumb high-concept books like The Da Vinci Code rather than serious thrillers of the type that were fairly common in the past. Could The Day of the Jackal even be published today?
[...] the original: Box Office 2009: The Year Stories Didn’t Matter This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
The only reason that I saw Transformer was to see Megan Fox run .. and run … and run … Not talk, just run.
And just one last note. What is with people saying they have "bad characters" and "bad script". They are trying to get these characters to be able to link with the audience, be able to talk and act as the audience would. And nowadays this is exactly how people act. If you act real upity and dont cus and think you are all "first class", thats great but the world isnt with you. I related with Jake Sully and Sam Witwicky in both movies. I mean, who wants to watch a movie about prude, jerk people? I sure dont
Megan Fox has one expression and no depth of character. LaBooeuf wasn't much better. There was no development of character to explain the love story element- the characters were in love only because Fox was attractive, I guess? And what was that stupid "I can fix vehicles 'cause my daddy was a booster" garbage? An excuse to have Fox bent over machines in skimpy clothes. And as for the Autobots, how are they hiding up under bridge spans??? They must weigh, what, at least 70 tons? The concrete is supporting that? They're not tearing up the roads with their metal feet?
I couldn't suspend disbelief enough. One really has to have the magical thinking of a 12 yr old boy to like this movie and since you are a male, you have this magical power. I don't.
Wow, you REALLY loved that movie didn't you? Why exactly is there something wrong with people who like the other films? Doesn't the fact that you think that speak more to your own closed-mindedness than anything else? "I love Avatar, and if you don't think it's the best movie ever then there's something wrong with you". Come on, you come across like a whiny 10-year-old. Everyone has different tastes. Some will love a movie, others will hate it, and most of us will be somewhere in the middle.
Try to grow up a little and accept that not everyone is going to love everything that you do. Movies are made for everyone to enjoy, not just you.
Hey I'm not arguing any of that, I agree with you that it wasn't a deep movie on any level. I mean c'mon!! It's a Michael Bay movie. He's more interested in blowing things up than developing a character.
But no one was tauting Transformers to be a movie that "Changes the way we watch movies forever" like Avatar did. I went into Transformers knowing that it wasn't going to be Shakespeare. I went into Avatar thinking that I'd be blown away and…..meh. The IMAX was cool, but it makes Transformers look like Citizen Kane….
This comment perfectly illustrates my point about the dumbed down, brain-dead audience that loves Avatar. Here we have someone who is obviously uneducated, a borderline illiterate unable to spell, punctuate, parse a sentence, or communicate above the level of Koko, the trained gorilla. He or she would have been perfectly at home in the cheap seats of the Flavian Amphitheater, and he or she is exactly the audience Hollywood aims for today.
C.M. Kornbluth's sci-fi story "The Marching Morons" is looking more prescient every day.
Yeah I bet it's real popular with the hairy pit girls…..
Are you not entertained?
These movies are being mass produced by the first and second generation of film school graduates for the ADHD/Ritalin generation. Don't look for a modern-day Citizen Kane or even a re-imagined Plan 9 from Outerspace.
Amen to that!!
SHOOT HIM NOW!!! SHOOT HIM NOW!!!
Agreed. He/she sounds like a perfect example of the product of our public schools. Barely literate, everything abbreviated for easier texting, thinks the world revolves around him/her. Just think, this is an eligible voter.
I saw Transformers 2, and I do not exaggerate in saying it is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I keep a file of personal ratings for all movies I see and I gave this on a 5 out of 100. Michael Bay only wants to be a visual artist. I thought he reached that peak with Armageddon, which I was as hard on as some other people because I saw it as an exercise in visual and action film making, and however distasteful it may have been to Bay there were a few drops of emotion squeezed out of it. I literally cannot tell what is ever going on in Transformers 2. Sunshine by Danny Boyle is something of an exercise in visual inventiveness, but it's a great movie. Transformers is an insulting, careless, crass, ignorant, cynical explosion of multi-color vomit. Some other reviewer said the transformers themselves looked like walking trash heaps, and that fact typifies Bay's style–he didn't just design the transformers, he OVERdesigned them, like he does with everything. I say all this as someone who grew up with the cartoon and the toys. It simply doesn't make any sense that Bay altered the transformers' appearance so dramatically. I saw the first film and it was a complete insult to people who grew up with the transformers as kids, depicting the transformers as the three stooges. Another major problem is that the Transformers themselves have no character–some of them don't even speak and you never know who they are. In the show, the transformers themselves WERE the characters, and humans played a supporting role. I can't believe Steven Spielberg put his name on these atrocities. If only he had agree to direct then. Then again, the obsession in Hollywood is with the HUMAN element, we need to know the HUMAN characters; there's no such thing as a non-HUMAN character, except in Pixar flicks.
"Thoughtful, intelligent films go nowhere because they don't appeal to the dumbed down, brain-dead mass audience (which, for movies, consists mostly of teens)"
Just read the posts above and below from a teenager. Someone might want to give him\\her a book, preferably one without pictures….
The only movie I really enjoyed last year was Star Trek. It had plot holes you could pass a big mac through, but watching Simon Pegg playing Scottie was a treat.
Good quality movies are still being made. The difference is that now they aren't the ones marketed to the masses. Studios focus on profits. They study demographics, determine what the mass audience is most likely to consume, and produce accordingly. There are of course always exceptions, but as a general rule a studio is going to do what will bring in the most profit. Capitalism 101.
I haven't seen Transformers 2 (don't plan to either) but I've certainly seen my share of "I want those 2 hours back!" films. Its ironic that so many pick on Michael Bay for making awful movies…why wouldn't he? He's gotten rich doing it and the studios continue to throw money at him. If I was in a position to turn out an awful movie every couple of years and get paid millions I'd probably do it too. Don't judge Michael Bay too harshly. After all, he wouldn't be doing what he's doing if MILLIONS of people didn't flock to the theaters to see his latest "epic".
You think that "dont piss off a clown" was the message of "Dark Knight" and THAT is what's wrong with YOU.
"I honestly dont care about what the old people want. "
That really just sams up "Avataristhe best" and his mindset, don't you think?
He would never bother with it. Even reading a graphic novel would be too taxing.
My husband has a respectable collection of Sci-Fi books and I will look for that story in the library. "Avataristhebest" makes me depressed about our posterity but I gain comfort from expecting that he doesn't bother to vote. Especially in mid-terms and primaries.
As Foghorn Leghorn used to say, "I say, I say that boy is about as sharp as a sack of wet mice…"
Eligible, but unactivated.
I found that both students and instructors at UCLA screenwriting classes currently believe that STORY and even CHARACTERIZATION are not important for . . . movies.
Sure they're important…they are needed to give a break and "book-end" all the 'splosions and gratuitous T&A.
Reading that person's posts is actually painful….
To even "re-imagine" Plan 9 would ruin it.
All the major characters were VERY well cast. I only hated that Abrams felt a need to put Nimoy in it and do an entire sub-plot to carry that. Other than that mis-step, a GREAT movie.
Ummm…. I hate to break it to you….
http://blog.spout.com/2008/05/27/plan-9-from-oute...
The hairy pit, patchouli-drenched, hemp necklace, Volvo-driving girls.
I couldn't agree more. If you see Michael Bay attached to a movie, you're gonna know what you're getting. But when a goof like Cameron says things like Avatar will change movie making forever, you expect a certain level of intelligence from the movie.
It was a simplistic, childish ripoff of like 6 movies. Shot in IMAX. Period.
And then pretended not to hear when it was revealed that all of Castaneda's "work" was fictional.
I'd also be willing to bet that this person has never had a date. If Avatar and Transformers 2 are what you consider the best movies ever made, I can see a long life living at home with mommy and daddy for this individual….
So far, someon'e only blogging about it. I don't need to lose sleep yet.
My wife and saw Star Trek in the theater. A very enjoyable film. It's not going to promote too many high-thinking discussions, but we knew what we were going to see when we bought our tickets. You watch some movies for fun, you watch others for intelligent commentary. I watched "No Intelligence Allowed" recently and found it interesting and thought-provoking, just as I did "Religulous". Were these "fun" films? Um, not unless your idea of fun is doing your taxes. But they were interesting and prompted more than a little conversation. But sometimes mindless entertainment is just what the doctor ordered, and that's where the Michael Bays and Jim Camerons come in. The big difference between Bay and Cameron is that Bay KNOWS he's making movies for 13-year-old boys. Cameron thinks he's directing "Dr. Shivago", and that shows just how large egos can get in Hollywood.
Agreed. But the way Hollywood is nowadays I wouldn't be surprised if it happens…..
Graham probably thinks that if any female accompanies him to a movie, or anywhere else, it consitutes a "date". I also says troubling things about his life in general. If Avatar and Transformers2 are great movies (Graham hasn't gone as wacky as "Avataristhegreatest" when expressing his love of certain movies), then toast and eggs is a superb dinner! Watching TV on the couch is the most fun way to spend a Friday night! Girlfriends love to get white hi-cut cotton panties and matching brassieres on Valentine's day, along with a special rose bud from the 7-11 counter display!
Good point- I think if I had gone into the Transformers movies realizing that Bay was purposely catering to the 12 yr old male mentality, I could've just accepted it better. '
I saw "No INtelligence Allowed" but have avoided "Religulous" because I think Maher is a boring, hateful and unfunny person. Is there any redeeming quality to "Religulous" that is worth my getting past the fact of Maher for?
Hey man, I don't mind there being a Michael Bay out there making actioners like he does; I don't like Bay because I don't really like his style most of the time. This particular film just brings to the fore all the things that are wrong with his directing. I kinda liked The Rock, and Bad Boys was ok. They're not "good" movies but worth watching because they're at least coherent, and 50% of those two movies have Sean Connery. He just completely went off the rails with Transformers 2. It would have been so much better if he had just a dash of restraint like in some of his earlier films.
I've heard that from more than a few people; that it's bad even by Michael Bay standards….won't be wasting my time on that one.
IAs a kid growing up in the 1950's and early 60's the movie business was targeted for adults so the spectacle films like Ben-Hur, Big Country, Bridge on the River Kwai, West Side Story or the Guns of Navaronne had strong stories and strong characters,however kids of 11 or 12 could watch them as well . Nowadays it seems that the movie business is bifurcated with fantasy films, super hero, comic book material, lots of CGI action and video -game formatting on one side and dramas ,usually bleak , populated with quirky and or sour characters and political or social issue themes Hollywood auteurs du jour cannot get enough of ,oh and done often with deconstructed story lines, whether the story needs it or not. I know that movies are fundamentally a visual medium but I am old-fashioned as I expect everything up there on the screen to contribute to strong story telling and if it doesn't I check out.
It's hard to say. I'm no Maher fan…the guy is as pretentious as they come, and VERY happy with himself in the film. But he did a good job of pointing out many of the silly parts of religion. After the film my wife and I talked about the experience and both agreed we liked a lot of the content but wished someone else had made it.
I have never seen Transformers 2 (or Transformers 1, for that matter), but I will venture a guess that it is not the greatest movie ever.
Who came up with the idea that robot aliens from Mars which can transform themselves into vehicles and appliances was a good idea for a cartoon? I don't mean to be a downer here, but I could never understand the logic of that.
I was going to write a longer response explaining why you are an idiot, but on second thought, after rereading your comments, I figured I'd have to use too small words to communicate the reasons. So I'll just end with the observation that if you sincerely believe "The Dark Knight" (there's a "K" in it, by the way) can't hold a candle to "Avatar," then I hope you never hold a position in politics, education, or the media, anywhere. But you probably will.
I thought this was a joke posts- but then you had to throw in Supernatural, one of my favorite shows, and make me feel like a loser for having the same taste in television…
I can see making an argument for Avatar. I really can. But there is NO ONE on this planet who could believe that Transformers 2 was an awesome movie. It's just not possible.
Hahaha…
Still trying to spin down Avatar eh?
You are better off not bringing it up at all. This movie was a big fat win against your capitalism-can-do-no-wrong-dogma.
The Lion King also had that message, and yet it managed to be conveyed with a decent story.
I can agree with you about one thing – I'm looking for films that will entertain me. And if all I have is gobs of action with the merest suggestion of a plot and two dimensional stereotypes for characters, then I just can't suspend my disbelief far enough.
Yeah, they would have to re-envision Plan 9 because the original just has way too much depth of character and plot for the modern movie audience if Avataristhebest is indicative of that group.
Try Syntax-game or mikatollah for variety. Those are grating and depressing.
Don't be confused: I used Hollywood tactics when I bloviated about the reason I like "Transformers 2."
I wanted to get out of the house. I saw "T2" and enjoyed it, completely forgetting about a socialist president for about two hours.
Good acting and good writing will always trump awesome special-effects.
Except I've played video games that have better characters and plot than pretty much any of this year's big action films. Heck, they even have some pretty great acting.
Hang on. Sunshine? A great movie? The film where Boyle spent 80% of the movie playing it as hard SF, and then decides that a desperate quest to reignite a dying sun's core isn't exciting enough, so he tosses in a psycho killer for the climax? The same film where the scenes with said psycho killer seem to have been filmed with layers of plastic wrapped around the camera lens? How is watching two blurry shapes fighting off in the distance any less confusing to watch than a gray robot fighting a different gray robot?
Now I´m depressed. The people who ruined the auto industry must have sounded very similar.
Yeah, and I wonder how much more money Cameron could have raked in had he not ran off half his audience.
A while back, I asked my brother to go see a movie with me that we both thought looked interesting. He declined saying, "It costs too much money. I refuse to pay $8 to watch something that will be just as enjoyable at home on my couch." I thought about it and came to the conclusion that there is a certain amount of logic to this. I love watching good movies, but if I am going to expend the time and money required, I need it to be worth it for me visually. Yes, that means that I am often sitting through HORRIBLE story lines- hello, 'Avatar', at least I feel like I got my money's worth.
Oh, OK- you're only the third person I've heard from who has enjoyed this movie. I like FX as much as the next person, but all the other stuff really got in the way for me.
Heath Ledger won the Oscar because he gave the best performance in his category and one of the most memorable in a long while, not because he died. There have been several actors over the years who died before the Oscars and countless others who did not even get a nomination, and except for Peter Finch and Ledger, they did not receive an Oscar. Please use logic instead of making asinine statements.
could he have made more?!
Perhaps you can answer a question for me, then:
What is the meaning of "Transformers 2"?
Anything that makes BHO bearable has to be good
Barry is Transformer None, still the same old socialist.
Hey say what you want about Avatar because it tries to pass it off as something more than it is but leave Transformers and G.I Joe alone. Anybody walking into either movie should know better since the film was based on two 80's cartoons meant for kids. Now I'm not saying that either film didn't have their faults they did. But Transformers 2 still had Optimus Prime taking on both the Decepticon and a Democrat controlled Defense Department ("ask your president, what if he's wrong?) And G.I. Joe actually in many ways did a decent job capturing the spirit of the old cartoon. Movies, especially in summer, are allowed to be popcorn flicks. So lay off. Even conservative elitists are annoying to deal with, so get rid of this twerp. Certainly Hollywood needs to have more originality and substance to their films but at the same time these movies still need to be entertainment and just not overly ridiculous melodramas that'll make only critics happy (like a film about a single mom, who got aids from sitting in the dentist chair and becomes a lawyer to take on big Dental or a composer who becomes hypnotized by his own music and sees the hidden meaning of life…blah). Plus last year you had Star Trek which was a very well made film, interesting story, and big action and this year I'm encouraged by the new Robin Hood film. Its been 20 years time for a new one. Hoorah! Oh and the Dark Knight is good…Yeah…sure but its a film I hardly watch now that I've got it on DVD. Perhaps it has something to do with Bale's larynx and Batman's over developed sense of morality and that stupid ending with the ferry boats that drags the usual comic book fun right out of the film. Iron Man was solid though.
I found that both students and instructors at UCLA screenwriting classes currently believe that STORY and even CHARACTERIZATION are not important for . . . movies. They CAN be important for television, especially cable productions like HBO and AMC (Example: Breaking Bad). Everyone, especially the industry veterans, felt that it is a tragic error to expect that an original MOVIE script would be producted on the strength of story or characters.
Instead, the consensus was that movie success must be based on either FX-CGI wizardry (which often goes hand-in-hand with pre-sold franchises) or specific genries such as horror, raunchy comedy, or thriller-caper flicks (which should have as much CGI as possible). To write drama for movies (OUTSIDE of cable) was considered the path to starvation.
I mentioned Gran Torino, Pursuit of Happyness, and Hurt Locker, drew blank stares.
Wow… Was that really necessary? He likes the film, stated his opinion, and said nothing about Transformers 2. Don'tTread and Hank, I'm talking to you. I haven't heard someone act this childish since my niece threw a fit about not getting a cookie.
As for Avatar… It had a story. It was there, plot and all. There were twists, character growths, the whole shebang. problem is, it is easy to lose it, and I'm not criticizing anyone if you didn't see it. Cameron created something so rich with visuals that it was distracting at times. There was heaps about it that was predictable, but then again, show me a movie that isn't? They all follow the same structure, and they always have. Remember, there are only seven basic plots. Look in your own video collections and you will find the same movie over and over again all throughout.
Did I enjoy the movie? of course. Will I get bashed for this? Damn right. I know for a fact that no piece of work can please everyone. I write short stories myself and know that it isn't finished until half my readers like it and half loath it.
As far as Transformers goes… seriously I felt it lower my IQ every second of viewing.
"Over-developed sense of morality"? I admit I'm a bit baffled by this as a criticism. You believe Batman should be more lackadaisical about what he does? Or that he should have been a relativist?
And the ferry boat scene was, in my opinion, the crucial scene that really gives the movie its impact. It demonstrated what many of us believe – that average people can make the hard decision and do what's right. It reminded us that, for all of the persuasiveness of the Joker's philosophy of chaos, he was wrong. In a world that often seems like it's teetering on the edge, that's an uplifting thing to be reminded of.
Without that, it's just guys in funny outfits hitting each other. Fun, maybe, but empty.
They weren't from Mars in the cartoons. They were from Cybertron. Also, the cartoon had some probe making scans of various Earth vehicles and objects and the Decepticons and Autobots were altered to look like them when they were revived. Of course, the whole energon thing….
I can't believe I remember that and it's been at least 25-30 years since I saw that originally.
Does he want to shoot you now, or wait til he gets home?
Bet he also had a "Barack the Vote" T-shirt. May still have.
LOL And you're 12-13 years old I'm guessing. Throwing the cliches of a dozen other movies (most of which sucked in their own right) in a blender and giving it a 3D (with sniy colors, yipee!) makeover is real "deep", huh?
Wow …. just wow. Aren't you the slightest bit troubled that real people are apparently that shallow?
What am I asking, of course you aren't because it would be beyond you to have that kind of thought.
Ok, maybe "great" was an overstatement. I was just trying to contrast a very visual and competent movie with Transformers and Sunshine was the first one I thought of. Maybe Sunshine wasn't great, but it was tantalizing, and like most of Boyle's work, competently made. It had a kind of aura about it that I hadn't seen before. There are probably better choices…maybe the Fountain? Although I didn't like that one as much as Sunshine.
Over the holidays Cartoon Network ran a Looney Tunes marathon. I forgot how funny Daffy Duck really is.
I just have to say that my kids both loved the movies and the special effects where mindblowing.. but they lacked substances in my opinion.. but hell a 3 year old and 2 year old like so go FIGURE!!!
I'm surprised you had enough patience, and intelligence, to write that whole paragraph. Did your mommy help you? And what is with the Spoiler? If that is the spoiler than the movie really has no value. Its like giving a spoiler alert for the sinking of the Titanic at the end of the other James C. movie. I am serious with this question: What books have you ever read? Bonus points for on your own and not a school assignment.
We need more independent movie makers. Just as importantly, we need more independent movie distributors and theaters. If Hollyweird isn't making the movies we want, then there is a perfect opportunity for someone to step in and fill the gap. I know money and time issues are a concern, but a good story doesn't need a lot of either. This is especially the case when the average Joe has the technology if not the talent.
I don't go to the movies anymore. I want to, but don't see any reason to change my current dropout. The ONLY reason Avatar was a success was because of the special effects factor. Capitalism did win out for J.C., but even the reviewers recognized the story and characters were hokey. Other than the die-hard fans, no one I know who liked the movie said he reason was story or characters. They liked the big bangs and colorful FX; that was all. Movie making is a dying art.
No, it doesn't, because you can't teach people like him anything. He knows it all already. Furthermore, everyone else is wrong, stupid, uppity, or lame because they don't cuss.
Just laugh at the little ignorant troll. That's what I do.
I think you just proved E-Dog's point. However, I will not condemn you (except for your love of the Transformers movie, but that is only because I was a fan of the original cartoon) because, when I was younger, I enjoyed craptactular movies too (Street Fighter (I still flog myself over that one), Batman Forever, and Godzilla (American version) to name a few).
You're still young, so your taste in movies might become more refined.
YOU ARE RIGHT. Avataristhebest is our future. Millions like him will be determing the course of what's left of our country when they are in charge. Thank you publick ejookashun
I've found more philosophical and religious depth in video games (Xenogears, Xenosaga, Digital Devil Saga, and Okami just to name a few) than in Avatar.
ding ding ding!!! we have a winner. I'm afraid our future really IS "Idiocracy"
The other good bit for me in the movie is the interchange between Wayne and Alfred about the bandit in Burma. The matter of fact delivery of the line, " We burned the forest down", is perfect in communicating the lengths that must be accepted necessary in opposing and defeating evil. Alfred's acceptance throughout the movie o the 'collateral damage' going on as an unfortunate but essential cost of opposing evil is masterful.
Ok, I'm tired of folks bashing TF2. I went to see it with very low expectations due to all the negative blog comments. A few things to perhaps consider:
- As stated above, it was based on a cartoon and needed to deliver to the pre-teen crowd that parents would be dragging there. I only went to see it in the theater because my 10 yr old wanted to see it and I COUNTED on there not being enough story to make it worth renting/buying and figured at least the CGI/SFX would be worth seeing on the big screen. (AVATAR also falls into this category, saw it, enjoyed it for the SFX, bored with the story since it's been done over-and-over again. I'll never rent it.) to be continued….
But, despite the simplistic story line, there were some things I caught in the film that were worth considering, Admittedly, most of the acting wasn't stellar. The initial united against an enemy hidden throughout the world, and the summary execution of the damaged decepticon after it's warining of the return of the fallen with the line, "Not today" sets up that the movie's theme as opposition to evil. I caught the not today as a commentary that evil must be opposed as we find it, it's a day to day occurence.
-Interesting contrasting of the various motivations for opposing evil from the various characters:
* Sam wrong/place wrong time, reluctant but recognizing has critical knowledge/info
*Military, job they have chosen and dedicated their lives to as routine and necessary
*Sector 7 agent wants to be recognized as a hero by his country. The glory.
*Sam's roommate, wants to be a part of something bigger than himself.
*Mikela. In it due to allegiance, connection to others
*little decepticon. seemed to a comment on followers due to cult of personaltiy
*ancient robot. Rejection of the side/values he's been fighting for . to be continued
Also, some interesting choices in the hardware chosen, specifically the US ships and the SR-71 BLACKBIRD as the Ancient robot.
- Carrier that sinks is the THEODORE ROOSEVELT. Reminded me of one of his most famous quotes: " It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." continued
- STENNIS is the carrier which launches the air strike, and passes the tasking for the rail gun to the KIDD. Stennis is named for a US Senator known as the "Father of the modern Navy" for his support of a modernized Navy centered on CVNs, to not repeat the mistakes between WWI and WWII of letting the Navy become ill-equipped and obsolete.
- The KIDD is named for RADM Kidd who paid the price for the lack of preparednes/vigilance, dying on the flag bridge of the ARIZONA at Pearl Harbor, attempting to organize a defense.
- The Ancient robot turns out to be an SR-71 BLACKBIRD spyplane, still one of the most technologically sophisticated aircraft ever produced, a prime example of the enormous resources allocated in opposing the Soviet Union during the cold war, the cost of intelligence, awareness etc. continued
Also in the Smithsonian scene
- ENOLA GAY. Ok, one of the few named planes everybody should know. The heroes walk right past it, you can clearly see the name. Interesting comment on where appeasement in WWII eventually led, the cost of not opposing Japan earlier, kind of like 'burn the forest down' – the eventual lengths that must be brought to bear to oppose evil, or equally the use of one evil to oppose another, the cost of following leaders into evil etc. etc.
- A glimpse of the P-40 WARHAWK/TOMAHAWK. Interesting contrast to the ENOLA GAY as it invokes the beginning of the conflict. This is the aircraft flown by the US citizen mercenaries of the American Volunteer Group for the Chinese government. Also known as the "Flying Tigers". Americans who risked their lives opposing the Japanese prior to the US Government and, at the time, criticised or it. (Since most were prior US military, the were called back into US forces after the US entered the war). continued
- The P-40 was also the only fighter to get airborne at Pearl Harbor in defense.
My last comment. How quickly we forget, or allow things to be forgotten. OPTIMUS prime repeats the now immortal last words from UA 93 on 9/11 "Let's Roll" just prior to going into the final battle. After the film I mentioned that to my 10 yr old son , 13 yr old daughter and their friends. They had no idea what I was talking about, so I had to explain to them where the line came from, why Mr. Bay may have been using it to deliberately invoke that image.
Yeah, it's a CGI/SFX kid's film based on a cartoon. But a lot of what you get out of stuff is based on your background and what you bring into it …
(BTW worst thing in the whole film, IMHO, is the 'robot heaven' scene, ?????)
I hope the Writer's Guild is happy they went on strike.
Hollywood has now concluded (to the medium's detriment) that story is now an option,and not a requirement.
2010 is following 2009 as some of the worst years for movies since talkies came out.
My DVD collection is looking better and better, and it beats what's on sale new at the metroplex 7 days a week.
You must be logged in to post a comment.