Printable View
Well um, as someone that really dislikes many aspects of the Bayverse (mostly around acting, script and directing) I'm not at all surprised by this. TLK has landed 9 Razzie nominations this year.
The Razzies are awarded for the worst movies of the year, as opposed to most awards ceremonies that award the best movies.
https://www.polygon.com/2018/1/22/16...rs-last-knight
I saw about 5 movies last year, most of those nominated I didn't see. Looking through the list it feels like there was a shortlist of movies selected and then the people filling the roles of the selected movies were automatically selected to fill each nomination.
only 9 ?
Yeah I totally agree. A very small range of movies there so it was probably ‘Well, we’ve decided TF5 was one of the worst, what categories can we fill from it? We’ve already used Baywatch to fill most of the slots’Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraMarginal
How do they think that the worst actor can be the same actor from two different movies?
I suspect they are unlikely to be THAT bad in two movies.
That list is awful
Yeah well, when your whole point is to tear down others work rather than create something yourself or look for the good in things, you don’t need to put a lot of effort in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetsuwan Convoy
Welcome to the friggin internet eh - supreme home of the Negative Nancy’s :rolleyes:
It’s a bit of fun, lighten up ;)
Just pointing out, the Razzies have been around since before the public spread of internet. (1981)Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTransformerTrev
Also, there are plenty of film festivals and award ceremonies that celebrate movies that are regarded as good, such as the Academy Awards (Oscars), BAFTA, Cannes (etc.) just to name a few. There are even festivals that focus on celebrating short indie films like Tropfest, Sundance and so on. The Razzies are the only festival that gives awards for bad films. I don't imagine that there would be too many others.
And there's nothing wrong with negative criticism as long as it's reasonably justified and ultimately constructive. e.g. George Lucas was given constructive criticism about regarding Jar Jar Binks in the Star Wars Prequels, and to Lucas' credit he did take this on board. Jar Jar has limited and far more useful appearances in Attack of the Clones, and he only made a single silent cameo in Revenge of the Sith. And I think that the Razzies are kinda like a parody of the Oscars and all the other award ceremonies and festivals for good films. I doubt that Michael Bay is going to lose any sleep over this. ;)
I think a more damning thing was Nostalgia Critic's Non-Review of The Last Knight. This is a "non" review that he made before the movie was released. Watching it with the hindsight of having seen TLK, it's scary to see how many of his predictions came true. Not all, but a fair number. He came pretty darn close to the mark! :rolleyes: And Nostalgia Critic put this video out there effectively as a dare to Michael Bay to prove him wrong. And that's the best thing you can do to silence your critics -- by making a good movie!
gesta non verba ("Deeds not words")
Well there ya go, didn’t know that. I’d read them for a few years but always online.Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAprime
Errrr.... no one said anything about not giving negative feedback to movies or constructive criticism. The most said was by me which was it’s easier to rubbish a flick online than try and make something yourself which is pretty true.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
What we were saying was it seems to be a very lazy list this year as with thousands of movies from 2017 to choose from and reference they just seemed to select a few big name ones and then use them over and over and over again. That was the point in discussion.
Really? Mr ‘The government will take your toys! The government will take you toys! Get forms! Get gun safes! The sky is falling!’ is telling others to lighten up? Hah - that’s just funny! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Wiggum
Edit: just playing mate - everyone appreciated all the research you put in regarding MP Megs :)
I'll have to take exception to this sentiment. When people say 'they should just make better movies', it implies two things:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
1. That there is some simplicity to making good movies that people in the industry with their years of experience somehow miss. If it's really so simple, why don't these armchair critics make movies themselves? Trev nailed it - it's far easier to criticise work than to make it yourself.
2. That people who are making movies are not trying to make them good or aren't putting in effort. With multimilliondollar budgets at stake, Paramount would be trying to make the movie as good as they could. Cast and crew on Michael Bay's movies have consistently described him as hard-working.
The impression I get of Michael Bay is that he doesn't care about critical acclaim. He doesn't make Oscar bait. As far as he's concerned, moviegoing audiences are his critics. For some reason or other, it's popular to hate on his work, which is why he keeps getting Razzie nominations.
Edit: sorry if the post came across as harsh, but I find that "they should make better movies" statement irksome.
Example: When Beast Wars first came out there was widespread negativity from the fandom. TRUKK NOT MUNKEE! RUINED FOREVER! KILLED MY CHILDHOOD! etc. etc.
Online arguments raged※! But BW soon silenced its critics with its quality toys and TV series etc.
Yes, you're right in that it is easier to criticise, but that alone doesn't make the criticisms necessarily invalid. After all, most of the population are unfit to govern but does that make us unfit to criticise our politicians? Criticism is fine as long as it's constructive and not unproductive criticism. Saying that Bayformers needs to have better stories that focuses more on the Transformers and treats them as characters instead of set pieces is not an invalid or unproductive criticism. I think it's perfectly reasonable. Saying, "Because it's different from G1" is not what I consider a valid form of criticism. After all, Ghost in the Shell was visually extremely accurate to its source material and that still managed to be a widely panned film. And in all honesty, a live action movie that's too G1 accurate wouldn't be very good. The robots would visually look like TV Power Rangers Zords and a disabled dude ripping up a floppy disk with his bare hands? Really? :p
I think that criticism is fine as long as it's fair and reasonable criticism. But the same goes with praise and accolade. Praising stuff without validity is just as meaningless. This is why I don't watch video toy reviews -- a lot of them lavish praise on the toys without proper justification. e.g. "POTP Optimus Prime is AWESOME!" and spends the rest of video showing off that toy but without once telling the audience why s/he thinks that the toy is awesome. That's not a review, that's a showcase! I think that POTP OP is a great toy, but I also tell people why I think it's good, and I do also address the weaknesses on that toy too (but I think that there are no unjustifiable weaknesses on the toy which is what overall makes it great). Or conversely, I found POTP Grimlock to be a rather disappointing toy, and I'll explain why (I think it's a toy that's very much compromised by having to be a gestalt torso, but admittedly the gestalt robot has zero appeal to me).
It's just like what I teach my senior students - you can agree or disagree with the statement in a question. When I mark their responses I gauge it according to how they've justified their response and not if I happen to agree with it or not. Many times I award higher marks to students whose opinion I personally disagree with, but they presented a better argument than other students who I personally agree with. The marking criteria never says, "Candidate agrees with the marker." :p :D :p
---------------------------------------------------
※Maybe these arguments haven't stuck in your mind as much as mid-90s internet discussions were generally more civilised. :o Aaah, remember what the internet was like before AOL? ;)
May TLK get all the Razzies that are coming to it. Mr. Bay has done little to rectify the fiasco that truly started with AOE. The completist in me will not buy TLK and if he does he'll say to the worker across the counter, " Could you please put that in a brown paper bag. " or " Oh it's not for me, it's for a friend. " :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAprime
That's just it, Michael Bay's movies are typically incredibly light on substance whilst being incredibly high on style.Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAprime
If Michael Bay's movie-making method were a mathematical formula, it would typically be:
Hot women+car chase set pieces+low-brow jokes+explosions = runaway box office financial success.
Michael Bay movies are typically movies where you go if you want the film equivalent of a roller coaster ride - no intellectual substance but alot of adrenaline-pumping action.
Look at the number of Transformers fans who said that if you just switch off your brain (yes, I remember those exact words being used on more than one occasion and by more than one person) you'll enjoy them.
The problem is, as the current declining state of play has proved with AOE and TLK, and as the writers strike proved with ROTF, is that after a while, the hype and excitement wears off and becomes stale, or if it's poorly executed, people see how little there is there.
When Michael Bay was signed on and his approach to film-making became the one which drove these films, this situation was always going to be a matter of "when", rather than "if".
It's not the first time it happened note this fun fact about the 2015 Razzies:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetsuwan Convoy
Sure, you could argue that it's spite, but it could also be a string of poor career choices, or blatantly obvious, cash-grabbing phone-ins. Either is going to be treated mercilessly by the Razzies.Quote:
Kelsey Grammer in The Expendables 3, Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return (voice only), Think Like a Man Too and Transformers: Age of Extinction as Bonaparte, Tin Man, Lee Fox, and Harold Attinger[7]
Wrong, what Paramount and other movie studios are trying to do, is make movies which will make them the biggest box office return for their investment. As AOE, in making over a billion dollars, whilst earning 7 Razzie nominations, proves, an incredibly financially successful movie, and a good quality movie, aren't necessarily the same thing and can even be worlds apart from one another.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus
Well I guess there was a bigger steaming pile of cinematic garbage this year.
TLK won a big fat 0 Razzies.
http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/03/02/t...ds-2018-360330
Congrats to The Emoji Movie I guess???
But tlk was worse than emoji movie!Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAprime
The "why don't you do better" defence is a classic.
Oh dear. I guess Michael Bay will be breathing a sigh of relief after this result.Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAprime
I am not happy about this result. Not one bit!:mad:
Well I admit, I didn't see any of the movies that beat TF5 for their Razzie nominations so I'm not in a place to say with any finality that the likes of The Emoji Movie, Fifty Shades Darker etc were indeed worse films.Quote:
Originally Posted by shockNwave
However as a hardcore TF fan, I personally find it's nice to think that a movie that has the likes of Optimus, Megatron and Grimlock in it, is not thought by the public to be the worst film in all those categories.
Out of interest, why does this result anger you so? Had you seen those other movies and thought TF5 was worse? Or did you want the Razzies to punish Michael Bay specifically? Just surprised by the vehemency of your reaction so wondering from whence the anger stems.
Last Knight was robbed!! All their razzie noms were deserved, sad they didn’t win this year!Quote:
Originally Posted by shockNwave
My anger is directed specifically at Michael Bay to start with and the studio that backed him to come up with this turkey and the previous one. A clean sweep of the Razzies would send quite a message to him and the studio. "That it's time for a new and innovative director to take the chair."Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTransformerTrev
Cheers for the explanation :)Quote:
Originally Posted by shockNwave
Well ya will get at least one of your wishes, considering that after this years Bbee movie they are going to have a break for a couple of years then come back with a reboot, which I am sure will have a new director ;)
I typically blamed the writer Ehren Kruger for the POS 2, 3 and 4 movies but after TLK...it became clear that Michael Bay and the studio ran this film franchise into the ground.