40,000 reviews of Michael Bay's THE ISLAND...

damn i skippe don seeing this with a hottie. i have lost twice!!

bay has finally clicked?

still not looking foward to it

I'd say that this sounds like something a plant would say, but the studios don't tell you to sound like Gene Shalit. That line is about as cheesy and Bay's hammer-you-over-the-head filmmaking. There are only two reasons I'm planning on seeing this film: I will see anything Ewan McGregor, who seems to choose his scripts pretty carefully, and because the concept, while certainly not original, does sound interestingl. I mean, if we were all willing to see Crowe and Spielberg water down Vanilla Sky and Minority Report we should be game for this one as well. I'm just going in a lot more skeptical now. Most of those positive reviews were from self-describing Michael Bay fans, and that's like a dog telling you you'll enjoy licking his asshole as much as he does.

Good for him. He's actually a genius. He makes films with commercial lighting to give it that high contrast "plasticity" look, and he can reel anybody in to see his films. That, and the incessant camera movement and quick editing draw audiences in repeatedly. But his films will not endure like Hitchcock, Scorsese or Welles.

it really is, and i never thought i'd be saying that

I mean, seriously?

The studios can make 500 shit comic films in a row that tank and not think for a second about improving the quality, but when one shit comic flick slips through they say THIS IS WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT! They sit there like vermin and wait for the disgusting average filmgoing public to affirm their belief that they want shitty mindless comic book dreck and now that they have with Fantastic Four we are gonna get NOTHING but horrible garbage until the movies get so bad that the whole trend finally eats itself. But even knowing that some of you stupid assholes just had to go see every comic film that comes out no matter how awful you know it's going to be, even know that you do an incredible disservice to the film community by condoning this garbage. Well then enjoy your god awful RATner directed X3, you have certainly fucking earned it. I'll probably be crucified for saying this in a talkback where there will inevitably be people praising the abhorable Michael Bay, but fuck it they are the ones who are wrong.

And the Fantastic Four is #1 at the box office. Head for the hills.

Pardon my french but this fucking sucks. This was the only thing I was looking forward to this weekend and since I HAD to move to fucking Utah I was assed out. There was no nationwide sneak of this movie unless I live in a nation that doesn't count moron. . . err mormon land (and who could blame the powers that be if that were the case)because it wasn't playing anywhere out here. And thus. . . FUCK UTAH!

did anyone notice that they didn't make the headline "tall" enough so instead of it saying "spoiler" it says "poile". Just one of those things I guess. Oh yes fuck fantastic four also.

WTF? there was nothing good about pearl harbor. bay the best director working? um...no. i dare you to watch "bad boys 2". i DARE you!!! this movie may not be as fun as "MSTK: the clonus horror" but it pry is better than "fantastic four". watch B.O. drop to nothing next weekend for FF. sheesh...where to begin...bad lighting, bad acting, no script. why bother with making it, movie studio? might have been interesting to try and do it period, in the late 60s. WAY too many wise-ass modern NYC superhero movies these days. jessica alba sucks...former actress and current "abs" model? sheesh...are she and gwen stefani becoming the same entity? B.O. will drop next friday...all sentient life forms will be watching season 2 prem. of BSG. i hope FF does kill superhero movies...studios abuse the genre and are not funding or developing story correctly. no good.

You'll love the hell out of it.

And Fantastic 4 is number 1 too!

Not that I saw it, but its rating on IMDB is decent, so that means at least a few people liked it. Is that so wrong?

I thought it would fall flat on its face also, especially given the horrific ratings it has on Rotten tomatoes. But then I forgot and underestimated the power of the average dumber than dogshit movie audience. Then there was also the massive marketing blitz targeting pre-teens and the MTV crowd, with a sprinkling of the "2 fast 2 furious" crowd. The SBC yahoo commercial that features the 9 year old girl walking in all wide eyed and excited while her dad is daydreaming and asking "Daddy, have you bought our Fantastic Four tickets yet?!?!?!". That alone, amongst 100 other things, was a clear indication who this movies target audience was. 90% of the people who go see FF have never heard of them before and never knew (until now) that there was a comic book for FF. You plant this same audience in front of Batman Begins and you will get them raising their hands, asking dumb questions, looks of confusion on their faces, walking out to the lobby for mindless cellphone banter, with a few of the more ambitious ones signing up for remedial reading classes. And for you few stubborn fanboys that went and actually paid hard earned American dollars for this movie (because screw Rotten Tomatoes, I'll decide for myself), well fasten your seatbelts because there is another treat coming your way..."Stealth".... Gonna be a great summer for you. LOL.

PEARL HARBOR sucks! BAD BOYS sucks! ARMAGEDDON sucks! C`mon guys, you can`t take this guy for a REAL filmmaker...

I was going to write a detailed review but decided that every retard was going to e-mail Harry and the bunch, so i'll give ya my two cents here in this fine talkback with you wonderful bastards. The first half of The Island is really, really, good and is quite unlike Michael Bay. I do like The Rock a lot and like to a degree some of his other work. Let me tell you this, the last half of The Island is just ridiculous Michael Bay action that is so out of place it is mind numbingly bad..Just when you have been givin an awesome car chase your kicked clean out of reality with Lincoln, and Jordan, (Ewan mcgregor, Scarlatt Johanson)falling off of the 60th or 70th floor of a big ass building, can't remember which floor hehe. They are just holding on to R logo on the side as the building as it crushes a helicopter and falls all the way to the ground. While it's falling you can feel yourself going ok how will they get out of this one they are fucking dead. No wait NETS of course our heroes are saved by fucking random nets when during the course of the fall explosions and pieces of shit fly everywhere destroying absolutely everything but our heroes who land in a perfectly placed net with absolutely no wreckage falling anywhere near them. A thinking mans Michael Bay movie indeed. Now I am a big fan of The Rock and that crazy action is at least somewhat viable. I mean shit like that happens throughout the entire last half of the movie and Sean Bean is incredible in the movie up until they turn him into every other movie villian. This pretty much sums up what I'm talking about. In the beginning of the movie he is a psychologist. He seems to care about the people going to the island at least a little bit. As the movie keeps going he becomes more and more like the guy who's trying to play god he's such an ass hole in a business suit blah blah. By the end he actually grabs a gun and must go man to man with ewan mcgregor I'm like man what the fuck. I mean Sean Bean is still amazing but his character just becomes more and more like everybody else. It's not good when a smart sci fi movie turns into bad boys two with every single fucking person getting the slow mo badass treatment when they get out of the car. I swear they did that for every single character even twice and three times for some of them. I guess Michael Bay just can't help himself. I wanted to love this movie I truly did but it is amazing right up until steve buscemi gets killed. The second he died little bits of awesome stuff get overblown by typical mindless action shit that seem so out of place you can't help but snicker with your friends. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from seeing it but i'm trying to debunk all these people saying how amazing it is with no faults. While being an above average movie there are just too many non realistic and stupid moments for me to call it great.

NOW, NOW YOU`VE GONE AWAY, GUESS ALL I`M TRYIN`TO SAY, IS PEARL HARBOR SUCKED AND I MISS YOU. WHY DOES MICHAEL BAY GET TO KEEP ON MAKING MOVIES? I GUESS PEARL HARBOR SUCKED JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN I MISS YOU!

When in fact I'm spot fucking on and I have every right to be angry. Yes, it is so wrong that people liked it, because it effects films as a whole by making studios think this is what we want. And if it is what you want, you have bad taste in films. It's as simple and plain as that. If you are incapable of seeing a film with a capacity above that of a 7 year old, stay the fuck out of this site.

SPOILER SUCKAS!!!!

?

Because obviously when Ewan speaks with his normal accent, it means he's an evil troll in real life and if we find him in a gutter we should kick him to death with no hesitation.

I haven't seen this many plants overtake this site in a long time. Haha. Just kidding.

man, I've spanked it to her ass in the opening shot of "Lost in Translation"

These clones are medical investments. They would naturally be kept in as clean an environment as you could devise. Who wants to call their doctor and say, "Time for that new liver" and you end up getting the liver of some clone that has been living in a trailer park, drinking Pabst and doing meth and getting hepatitis from the Tommy Lee clone?

And my friend dragged me to Cinderella Man, which was good, but not great. Zellwegger SUCKS. -------------------------------- Check this out: http://www.intrepidmedia.com/column.asp?id=2235

Ahhhh you stupid Yank.

"Mc Gregor is impeccable as always. So is Scarlett Johansson (it seems to me that Bay asked her to hit the threadmill since Lost in Translation: she is unbelievably hot here)" - Starwarrior. OH, DID BAY do that? because i remember what a tub of flabby shit Scarlett looked like in Lost in Translation. jesus man - ever think Scarlett's appeal comes from how she doesn't look like a glamorized, plastic piece of candy? That maybe a big part of her appeal is that she's got beautiful natural curves? I wonder if anyone made a "stairmaster" comment to L. Lohan a few months ago, since they thought she was looking a little "robust" in comparison to Paris.

'cause apparently this article has some of them...

...every cliche' in the moviemaking book's thrown into his shitty "any excuse for an action setpiece" movies. Let's see: 1) Slow-mo silouhette against the sun? Check. 2) Slow-mo explosions? Check. 3) Quick cut editing that looks like it was done by Stevie Wonder? Check. 4) Inane dialogue posing as Self-Important bulldada? Check. Now, can someone PLEASE check to See if Michael Bay is Uwe Boll and Ed Woods' love child?

I'd rather watch a 2-hour Goatse documentary

I am going to go with the negative reviews instead of the positive on this one. I've seen way too many Bay films that all look the same, and all of them universally have sucked.

It does actually take some skill to direct action. A lot of genuinely good directors can't. So I wouldn't say his stuff totally sucks. I find it interesting that a lot of people who think bay is the anti-Christ jizz all over themselves whenever John Woo's name is mentioned. Not a huge difference there. So in conclusion, Scarlett Johanson is yummy.

yes, we all know that Batman Begins was great. Nolan did a really exceptional job. don't worry, there will be a sequel to Batman. it's okay. deep breathe. okay now? good. lets discuss FF. certainly FF had its faults, but its NOWHERE NEAR the unmitigated disaster many of you are saying it is. it was fun, largely dispoable, adolescent entertainment. was it a classic? no. but was it fun? i had fun. and so, apparently, did most of the people in the theatre i was in. which, i imagine, reflects the feelings of most average viewers. i think maybe some of you are expecting a little too much from this popcorn stuff. i think an even handed review would say 2 to 2.5 out of 4 stars. it certainly wasn't nearly as bad as DAREDEVIL or CATWOMAN (the two worst superheros movies since Corman). in fact, i thought FF was kinda fun and i'm looking forward to the inevitable sequel. yes, BB was better, but then SIN CITY was much better and artier, and smarter, and weirder than BB. likewise ROTS and WOTW were bettter than BB. BB was about on par with XMen 1 -- a good start. FF wasn't as good as XMen 1 or BB, but it was good enough to keep me interested. i don't know that makes some of you so frothy about the mouth, but seriously, take a pill and chill.

this week on AICN.com

Where is he when you need him?

Any review that starts out, "First off, I'm a HUGE Michael Bay fan," or words to that effect, should automatically be disqualified as even remotely OBJECTIVE REVIEWS. So that leaves a couple of people who kinda liked it or flat out hated it. Reading between the lines, we see that this is another typical Michael Bay film.

This is exactly what Im talking about. It's irrelevent what the "average viewer" think. They are the low end of the taste in film food chain. They will accept almost anything you give them. Want them to love a superhero movie? Put a guy in a recognizeable superhero costume and you have yourselves hap hap happy time at the theaters! Films shouldn't get made for these people. Why? Because they are NOT FUCKING SMART!!! Now I realize films should not be made for them is an impossibility. But what is the point of making a comic film for the public? All they fucking want is the guy int he costume doing neat things. So why not throw some content and characterization and stick to the comics while you are at it and pelase the fans as well? But no, the average viewing insect get's their dreck and the pigs all sleep soundly. BTW Marcus Brody thats headline is spot on.

maybe this is the future of film advertising. Flooding popular film geek sites with glowing reveiws of your yet to be released simmer blockbuster. It makes sense doesnt it? Thats what i would do...if i were an amoral shit head puking out halfassed cgi spectacles. Not that this movie is that bad, i havent even seen it but i plan to on my own time.

But as for how they can run around and escape so easily, I assume it's all the training they are forced to do to keep them in good health, which wouldn't necessarily explain Neelix (can't remember the actor's name, but it was nice to see him) since he's chunky, unless they are supposed to stay like their hosts or something... (Small Spoiler) as for that scene in the bathroom, I actually thought it was pretty enlightened as far as a gay scene goes because i mean think about it: They are in what appears to be a hardcore biker bar, ewan is accosting steve who's pants are down, one of the hardcore truckers/and or/bikers comes in, sees them in a compromising position, and instead of gay bashes them, says "do you guys need some privacy?" (or something)

First, I want to say say something about m. bay. I never denied his talent. never. The man, knows how to shoot, and get some descent character work. I'm a film maker, and i admit, he intimidates me. "The Rock" IS his best movie by a long shot. "Bad Boys" sucked on account of martin lawrence's take on how to be funny. And will smith's cockey ass attitude coming through in his performence. I need not tread apon the shit labeled "Peral Harbour" and "Bad Boys (shoot yourself for a change) 2". THE ISLAND, however, seems to have more dignity and sense of what an action movie can be. So "the island", give us your best shot!

they make these movies for the average audience because that's where the money is. also: it costs a huge amount of money to make these things, so it has to appeal to the people who are going to spend. the sad fact of the matter is that the "pure"comic book reader audience is very small. MOST of the people who are going to see Spiderman, Batman, what have you, are the "average viewer" -- Joe and Jane SixPack and their brood. the fact that classics like SPIDERMAN 1 & 2 slip through is pure luck mixed with pure talent. and you know, in regards to FF; one of the many complaints i've heard is the poor special efx. well, if you want movies that are made ONLY for the exceptional people, or the comic purists (like the brilliant SIN CITY, for example), you are going to have to scale that budget back even further. is that really what you want? if you wanna keep it "pure" and "real", just buy up all the Kirby comic collections you can and don't bother going to any more film adaptions. / / / i honestly felt like the character and content was there on FF -- it wasn't top drawer, but it was there "enough" to get by. yeah, they coulda/shoulda done a better job. but they didn't. that doesn't make it a disaster. i could see how raging FF fans would be disappointed, but even for them, maybe it's time to take a deep breath and think it over. and on another point about character and content -- HULK had them in abundance, and people HATED it. personally, i think HULK is easily the most underrated superhero movie ever. but ask a room full of geeks, and to a man, most of them will say they hated it. (come to think of it, ask a geek about any movie, and they'll say how much it sucked, even though they own the deluxx DVD and have watched it like 40 billion times).

THE QUOTE: "poor pacing, unnecessary slow motion, gratuitous T&A shots, stilted dialogue, homophobic humor, shaky camera work, motor vehicle chases, and the list goes on." This sums it all up for me about Michael Bay who's style defines the sea of vapid MTV-paced blockbuster movies we are (or should be tired) of seeing year after year: movies as disposable as all the products they endorse. The idea from the Island, though considered "new" is not so new at all as many have pointed out here. And I can't take anyone seriously who says this movie is great like Pearl Harbor (which was butt-numbing, not great). You know, I'm not the only one who is sick and tired of incipid shit with zippy the pinhead special effects that aren't all that "special" anymore when they appear constantly in every friggin movie. Nineteen straight weeks of declining box office should attest to how people really feel.

Here's what I don't understand: "The masses" will see anything. You can advertise the hell out of shit sandwich, serve it to them and they'll gladly slurp it down at least for opening weekend. (For more on that, see Fantastic 4 or Herbie). So if this is a given, why don't the Hollywood schlockmeisters make really good movies and advertise the hell out of those? THEN EVERYONE WINS. Is it really mission impossible to have a well-scripted Mission Impossible? You can have things that go boom AND a decent film, it's not too difficult. So then WHY doesn't this happen more often?

So you are saying that if the Fantastic Four didn't absolutely ruin Dr. Doom and wasn't a retarded cartoon with horrible special effects and early 90's quality action design the average moveigoing audience would have liked it less? Bullshit. Im not advocating a dark moody piece about family discord, I'm asking for some decent writing and a fair budget with a director that understand the concept of having a vision. Sheep will like it no matter what, all they need is a guy in a costume. So go that extra mile and do it for the fans and you will make even more money. ZombieSolutions you are telling me The Hulk had "character in abundance"??? HAHAHAHA. Awwwww it's cute that you think that. It fascinates me that all a film has to do is mention child abuse and all of the sudden it "deals with issues of child abuse" The film doesn't DEAL with anything. The relationship between The SEnior banner (a performance for which Nick Nolte should be shot) and Bruce is paper thin with one character so overstated he makes Jeremy Irons in Dungeons in Dragons look like Russel Crowe (in just about anything) and the other being so bland and two dimensional that I swear he is addicted to sedatives. But ridiculous character motivations be damned! The Hulk is a searing glmpse into the life of a broken family to the uninitiated "fans". And with it's terrible faux comic book interludes between scenes, total cop out during the Hulk scenes (hey we are finally in a city can't wait to see Hulk smash, oops he gets caught immediately), and a final showdown that all the LSD in the world couldn't make sense of......yup I can totally see how some would think it's a modern classic. *Rolls eyes as The Hulk once again fades from my mind*

At least someone understands. Read his post people, what I'm saying isn't rocket science. It's a pretty easy formula.

Not that he more than likely wasn't anyway, but this would clench it.

ouch. and thank you! not only for proving my point, but by saying that i'm cute. good night.

valiens, Industry Killer, and others along the same lines are almost right. Advertise the shit out of something and they will eat it up works better for vapid formulaic movies than for well-constructed plot/character driven fare. I find most "sheep" cannot handle thoughtful and insightful films because they tend to say things like, "It was kind-of weird" and "I don't know, I just didn't like it". I think what it comes down to is Hollywood makes movies by committees of marketers, researchers, and VP-types who know nothing about the art of filmmaking. They look for the tangibles in films like the visuals, the actors, and the hooks that make the properties new and fresh and they just don't feel good storytelling is economically viable. That, and I'm sure these nonfilmmakers don't really understand good storytelling. Beside Michael Bay and his kind, my main pet peeve about modern film is the shaky close-up action shot where the camera is so tight on the action and moves so much and is so quickly edited, I can never tell what's going on. I mean, two actors could be playing patty-cake in this cinematic style, and it would look like a Gladiator battle. The epitome of this is Bourne Supremacy where the whole film is like this. Ironically, the film is actually one of the better recent large studio fare, I just wish I could've seen some of it.

thought it was really good, a little formula at the end but WAY better than I expected. I'll see it again. Its too long though

I don't know why they're passing it off as an original story, but seeing the still with him and the bottle kinda confirms it (Like in the original where he finds the Old Milwaukee can)- http://tinyurl.com/8h6mn

ever since I saw the first ad for The Island, I knew it was Parts...I will proudly claim the first post on that for months to come. I never saw the Mystery Science Theater 3000 skewer of it, but I did see it as a kid on Sat. morning TV. I couldn't even swallow it then, but thought it could make a decent movie in the right hands; c'mon Bay...you don't have an origninal idea in that funny shaped head of yours. Industry Killer...you have some valid points. But understand. The movie executives, after getting a handful of choices right with a certain fan core in mind, then see nothing more than the fistful of dollars in front of them when a few hit the mark. The directors become secondary, and they try to squeeze as much blood from the stone as they can. Fantastic four could have been a lot better. It definitely felt rushed. But two counter arguments. The Fantastic Four, unlike Spidey, Bats, Supes, and a few others, are also rans; a cool concept the studios hope to make a profit on with cheap talent and effects. Personally, I was never that interested in them. I believe they are more of a true comic fan's love, rather than a mass media love. The Hulk, however, was ruined by a TV show starring Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno. I'll never forget how many people were ignorant of a pretty cool comic, and didn't understand why the Hulk was running and jumping half a mile, or had childhood "issues". A lot of people left that movie saying, "Who was that guy?". That was the problem there. I enjoyed that movie, though Nolte was an eyesore in it. I appreciate your anger at wanting a more "pure" universe in terms of film adaptation...but unfortunately, Big Brother(aka Producer with Backing Dollars) doesn't give a shit about you and me. Just making money...but it also helps the few gems, like BB & Spidey I&II slip through the cracks. I'll take what I can get. But keep up the good fight, dude.

Michael Bay lover or not it is so asinine, saved by nets! I'm always going to carry a net around everywhere I go if all I need is a net to save my ass from flaming wreckage and a 70 story drop. After that the whole movie turns into one big cliche and every crappy michael bay movie since. Like crashing through 5 windows on a flying contraption only to end up flying off unscathed next to a ledge and having to be grabbed with one hand and pulled up, yes it's so realistic I'm thinking about doing it myself. At least in Batman begins it looks like it is taking absolutely all of Bruce's energy to pull him up. He only crashed through one window though hehe. I really wanted to love this movie. I don't think liking or hating a director should sway your opinion in this matter.

"I really wanted to love this movie. I don't think liking or hating a director should sway your opinion in this matter." I hear ya, Alucinor11. Man, I've definitely given the benefit of the doubt to so many films only to leave disappointed. But then there's that one gem every once in a while that catches you off guard and blows you away. It reminds me of one of the best movie lines of all time from the Shawshank Redemption. "Andy Dufresne - Who crawled through a river of shit and came out clean on the other side!" Unfortunately, that river gets longer and deeper all the time, now that fifteen commercials start off what used to be an "escape" into a dark theater, away from Madison Avenue's product force feeding. Ugh! Make it stop! We should start a petition to end that, if anything! I mean, who ever wanted a Fanta in the first place?!!

I went to see war of the worlds over the weekend, and I swear, the audience groaned through the trailers for the Island, that top gun-type sci-fi movie with jamie foxx, and some other bruckheimer type film. In the last 5-10 years, with overseas markets, dvd's, and insanely overhyped opening weekends, Hollywood has truly figured out how to make it so that the quality of the movie doesn't matter. They really CAN turn a profit on just about any turd that comes out of their system. But with this latest crop of retarded sci-fi/action movies, there's GOTTA be a drop in opening weekend ticket sales AND dvd rentals and sales. The key to studios actually caring and nurturing a good portion of their product until it finds the right audience really will be whether or not things get so bad that people won't even rent or buy these turds at bargain-basement wal-mart prices. When a lot of these pieces of shit come out on dvd, they're like 14 bucks at wal-mart, and with the whole monthly billing thing at blockbuster and netflix, people like my parents will just take ANY four pieces of shit and string at least two of them together for a friday or saturday night of viewing. They hate a lot of them, to be sure, they don't even get through at least 30 percent, but the point is the studio is making back its money NO MATTER WHAT. Many moons ago, it was thought that movies, like novels, music, and other commercial arts, had to at least be good and entertaining to an audience in order to turn a profit. Whether or not you had something good or that would create a cultural touchstone depended on a quality film combined with a whole lotta luck and a whole lotta good timing. What the executives and conglomerates... publicists and marketing departments... agents and 'actors' have all managed to do is create an environment where it's as easy as selling soda or potato chips. NO, it's BETTER than selling soda or potato chips, because those actually have to taste decent to make money. What they've done is created an enviroment where if you throw enough money at creating something by which you have enough cool fx shots and one-liners for the trailer along with some pre-sold tabloid publicity, such as with Mr. and Mrs. Smith, then you have a hit. Hands-down. It's become impossible to fail. With the 19 week box office slide, those adult exit polls I've been hearing so much about(do you feel hollywood has abandoned adult audiences), and the moans and groans I heard during those trailers this last Saturday afternoon, is it within the realm of possibility that this system might actually be defeated? Is it possible that people like Brad Pitt will realize that the reason a hero of his, like Jack Nicholson, got Cuckoo's Nest made is because he had forgone a huge payday in favor of final cut, which consisted of letting Foreman do whatever he wanted, Nicholson okayed it, and you have a masterpiece made on a budget WITH a huge star? One that isn't like a lot of the equally terrible trash we see in 'boutique', independent, and King-Kong-sized 'searing' Hollywood dramas? Sure War of the Worlds had some insanely terrifying and dramatic moments and a movie like Million Dollar Baby proves that there's still hope, but there really ISN'T any hope unless things turn around AND we get a crop of new directors and actors that think like the first 20 or 30 that kicked down the Hollywood doors the last time this happened, in the late 60's. War of the Worlds and Million Dollar Baby were made by Spielberg and Eastwood, both a couple of decades into their respective careers and they're STILL kicking the ass, in my opinion at least, of our last crop of up-and-coming directors. I don't really believe that any of them, (Fincher, Nolan, Russell, C. Crowe(who succeeds at being more self-satisfied and syrupy with his dogshit than even Spielberg's turn in that Twilight Zone movie), Tarantino, P.T. Anderson(a slight exception), etc.) are capable of infusing their films(and this is also partially due to their pool of young acting talent) with the realism, energy, and indelible something that amounts to 'art' that we saw in Scorese, Coppola, Spielberg, Hal Ashby, Kubrick, Penn, Eastwood's, Lumet's, etc. etc. etc.'s early work... even all the way up on through to their recent films. Even Lucas came up with something more relevant than nearly every other sci-fi or action director of recent years for ROTS. Even among all that cheesy dialogue and CGI, it had some insanely good moments. I don't know... it's just kind of depressing to me, because I love movies, and I feel like I occasionally get fooled, like with American Beauty, which is so melodramatic and not what it first appeared to be lo-these-many years later, but for the most part, these guys don't seem to have any life experience or something. So... lol, to end this rambling, depressing post, maybe it will never turn around. Not unless those two major things happen. 1)People stop buying or renting total shit on opening weekends at the theaters and just to get through a potentially boring weekend at home when the turds hit dvd AND 2) We get a pool of actors and directing talent who actaully have lived a little, aren't the best-looking people in the world, and aren't know-it-all nerds or people trying to prove to you how clever they are. One last thing I wanted to say about that is that maybe some good new acting talent WOULD come to the fore if people like Alexander Payne and Christopher Nolan weren't so concerned with getting to make a film with dinosaurs who are well past their prime, like Jack Nicholson and Al Pacino. I don't recall Spielberg, Scorsese, and Lucas DYING to work with and cast the aging Cary Grant or John Wayne in their early films. You don't want the Nicholson of the 70's, you want the NEXT Nicholson of TODAY. And that next Nicholson is................Frank Stallone. Anyway, just a lot of thoughts on the state-of-the-industry and how I think things could possibly get better. When pigs fly, I guess...

Brilliant my friend. You didn't just hit the nail on the head, you clobbered the hell out of it. Especially with directors of today needing to find and nurture new talent and greedy movie stars ruining films by demanding insane amounts of money. I mean how much money do you need? You would think after the first 50 million you could just relax and do it for the art. I only disagree with you on one point and that's that ROTS had some insanely cool moments. There wasn't a single human moment in the film. Anakin going to confused kid to merciless child killer in a period of 5 seconds with almost no motivation for doing so.(although I LOVE hearing apologosts try to justify the switch, its like watching a monkey fucking a football). But seriously man good show.

Deep down I knew it aws gonna be good. Ya know why? Cause it's got Scarlett Johannsen and Steve Buscemi. Some of my favorite actors ever. Some of the best actors ever. Seriously, they rock the cock.

The movie goes down hill having little spots of exciting brilliance along the way but overall after steve buscemi's character dies the movie goes straight into action cliche and slow mo characters getting out of car bullshit shots that just don't belong in this movie...truly saddens me how good it starts out but how quickly I could hear my friends talking shit about it ruining the movies reputation in our eyes forever. Like I said though the movie is good it's just not as great as people say it is. It's so hard to like once everyone starts becoming characters from bad boys.

Even if this movie does suck, Steve Buscemi and Scarlett Johannsen will give great performances. Whew. Glad I got that off my chest. When I first started reading this, I was not familiar with Michael Bay. Whos he? Oh, that loser who made Armeggedon and Pearl Harbor. How horrible. I'm not seeing this film now for more than the usual reasons. Usually I don't go to the movies because I don't have enough money, but now I've got some boycott/crusade ideas in my head. Thanks cynics and bitter people. Especially you SK909. That was beautiful.

Look on the bright side- maybe the *second* FF movie will be better.

Utah, Salt Lake City specifically, had TWO free screenings. One was Friday and one was Monday (tonight) and I went to it. I don't know where it screened Friday but on Monday it played at The Gateway. If you love film so damn much hook yourself up with the Utah film society so you know where to see a free Bay movie. Get some culture and quit blaming Mormons for a perceived slight from Hollywood........AND the movie was pretty good with moments of greatness. The action was overdone in places but GREAT in others and it was just a tad too long, but this is Bay's best movie BY FAR! I was happy to tell the studio schmucks taking opinions after the film that "It made me not hate all Michael Bay movies."

I will be first in line. This looks leagues better than F4 especially visually. I just don't get fanboys who will defend to the death even bad comic boom movies, but then contradict themselves completely and bash a film just like it. If you defend F4 you have to see The Island and Stealth and not complain, they are all pop corn films.

"I love streams of piss and Michael's latest one felt warm and refreshing on my face. If you don't agree that Michael is great, you don't know my anus from my lover, i.e. a hole in the ground!"

Now that I think about it nobody has mentioned (that I have seen) that this looks/feels like THX but with more emotion (THX was emotionless on purpose thats not a bash) I don't think I have been totally fair to The Island because it has a lot of funny moments, great acting, the special effects were really well done but nothing award winning, and the music was fairly good as well. Well wait for the ending with djimon hounsou you will know it when you see it sounds just like gladiator as the music plays and while that's ok, I just can't seem to wonder why the Hans zimmer composer team as I like to call them, keeps making endings that sound like that. Now Man On Fire I truly love and I think it's very effective there but here it's just out of place like everything else negative in the last half it's out of place. Also I don't know why critics for the most part never mention how good the music is in movies. It's no coincidence that pretty much every classic movie or even great movie has an awesome musical score. Fuck even Tarantino has incredible non-original music that make you remember the music from that movie and not from anything else. For instance, I will forever remember the song from twisted nerve as being in Kill Bill. I think that's truly amazing. Not just that song there are others but you get the idea. I think music should be commented on in every critique for a movie. Am I alone in thinking that music is as important to a movie as dialogue? At the end of the day, music and dialogue is what we remember most when we leave the theater.

What?What?I'm typing.Scarlett,I'm typing!...Don't start....I'm...hey...HEY!!Look,It's sunny,we'll go out...what?WHAT?Ahhh,okay...I know.I know...yeah,yeah...mmm.mmmm.....yeah....hold it,hold it...yeah,there...yeah..ugh..ugh...oh,scarlett.oh scooter...ugh...oooohh.mmm...mm...WHAT?CALL YOU WHAAA....mmm MMMM...ahh,you dirty bitch...you like my thumb WHERE???wha...ugh..yh,oh yeah.yeah...put your hands on my ass...ugh.ugh.yeah yeah..Ugh...ugh...ugh..UGH..UGH...UGH.UGHHHH...UGHHHH.....UGHHHHH...A..Ahhhhhh uhhhhh....... .................. ................. .......YEEEEeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaAAAH!!!??.........................of course I love you baby!...............aww,I know...I....oh don't start crying..Ah,c'mon honey...it aint that bad.I know,I know.C'mere I;m here.Look people won't think any less of you for working with Bay.Ohhh,c'mon...c'mon....stop crying.Wha???Wha???Ummmm..Do I ??Do I think it looks good??Wha...??The Island???...................................................................Honestly??..........And you won't get mad?.................It looks like shit Scarlett.....HEY?HEY?Wher...What're ya...Don't go!?Where you going??Awww,C'mon baby I was joking....Aww,I was joking....Ahhh,Fuck ya then.I tell ya something babe,you'll be back...yeah..yeah...yeah!!Whatever..Whatev...uh..uh..oh I am am I!!??Hell yeah?Well at least I didn't work with Michael Bay!!!Yeah and don't forget your fuckin; panties on the way out................................ ........fuckin''......Bay..Jeseus Chri....Ahhh,phew.....fuckin'...Where was I?!?

as in AWWW CRAP, I paid money to see this shite? Fortunately, the last 'plant' seems to have some sort of reasoning capability...

It almost makes me want to throw up to defend Michael Bay, but here I go. I think Michael Bay SHOULD have product placement in his movies, all over the place, probaly even more than he apparently has in this one. Because to Michael Bay, corporate logos and consumer products are deeply personal. That is his life. That is his heart. That is his blood. That is him dripping his soul directly onto the celluloid. He has a KFC-Pepsico-TacoBell.com tattoo on his heart. His Lamborghinis are what makes him who he is. Hopefully THE TRANSFORMABLES will have all kinds of car phones and drive thrus because it will be his ultimate personal statement to do a movie starring cars that buy products. * * * Secondly, some individual above said that Michael Bay and John Woo are "basically the same thing." Buddy, you're out of line. Yes, John Woo has lost it since coming to Hollywood, and yes, Michael Bay (like many others) has copied many of the techniques that used to be Woo's trademark style. But the reason the people you refer to used to worship Woo is because of movies like A BETTER TOMORROW, BULLET IN THE HEAD, THE KILLER and HARD BOILED. And even FACE/OFF. These are all movies about ridiculous over the top violence AND about emotion. The good guys and bad guys both have their grey areas and Woo has sympathy for all of them. HARD BOILED is like the biggest, die hardest american action movie ever except at the same time, you really care about the characters and the bonding between them. Michael Bay has never made a movie even remotely that effective. And maybe even more important is a difference in the action. Bay's trademark is that he removed the connection between action and the viewer. Now, post-Bay, the audience is not supposed to understand where characters are standing or what they are doing. There is just supposed to be a camera flying around in circles and people doing something or other, not exactly sure but I get the sense it is supposed to be awesome. John Woo is the opposite. In HARD BOILED there is a huge shootout that takes place in a warehouse. There are motorcycles crashing, Chow Yun Fat swinging around on chains shooting people and that kind of thing. They spent weeks filming and staging it very carefully and it's orchestrated like a piece of music. You're involved in every little thing that happens. In ARMAGEDDON, there's a scene on a space station where there is a computer screen, basically a fucking MAP, showing you where everyone is standing, and you STILL have no idea what is going on in the scene. That is a huge difference even between the horrible movies Woo makes now (didn't see PAYCHECK but WINDTALKERS was pretty fuckin low) and Michael Bay. The action is still clearly communicated in Woo, even if he has a script ALMOST as retarded as Michael Bay.

Thanks for noticing my post. I think a lot of people feel the way I do, but sometimes I'm not sure and it's great to hear that someone agrees. Especially about the part that the actors and agents play in this mess. They have the power to get films greenlit, and instead, they use that power to demand ever-greater sums of money, which, you can't BLAME the studios for doing whatever they can, including dumbing down a film, to insure their investment. They're IN IT to make money. It used to be like a silent agreement... you bean counters can make insane amounts of money if I get to practice my 'art' and life a pretty comfortable life. Now we have actors and directors who, when they're divorced, we hear of sums of hundreds of millions of dollars needing to be split up. Exactly... how much money does an ACTOR need? My point is that better films would be made if they cared about acting and controlling the quality of a film and its story, which they could use their power to do, and then the studios wouldn't have to worry so much. Of course, blame goes all around, so its also the fact that they're huge conglomerates, with boards to report to. Anyway, about ROTS. I really do believe that that everything on the 'beach'(some beach, huh? get a tan from the 'water') by the lava was an insanely good moment, if you can sit there and just view it as a moment that you imagined years ago, and not as the culmination of the 5.5 hours of dogshit preceding it. Some of the stuff with the emperor was great. I'm not an apologist, believe me, but I'm not gonna lie and say I didn't get excited by a few moments in the film. Thanks again, and here's to hoping things turn around at some point.

No, not this movie, i was referring to the HAIRBALL!! studios got tired of their popcorn pushing, mind-numbing turdfests not selling out, so they got harry to!!.. sorry truebelievers

You are an ass and a fuckface. I was SPECIFICALLY talking about the NATIONWIDE saturday sneak preview cock-knocker. FYI I called the Gateway saturday and the person I spoke with barely even knew what movie I was talking about. So I will need to look into the Utah film society. Also the rant was a bit over the top I admit but that was all i had planned for saturday and I wasn't about to spend my money on fantastic four or dark water (even thought Ebert gave it 3 stars)

I really don't see where Woo's films have more emotion or humanity than Bay's. I mean Face/Off? That inspid thing where everyone kept running their hands over people's faces, that was human drama? And maybe the depth of The Killer and Hard Boiled was lost in translation (no pun intended) but if it was, I missed it. I would put Woo's Hong Kong films ahead of Bay's and give him the "he did it first" props but that was a long time ago. Hard Target, Broken Arrow and Mission Impossible 2 are what he's about now. So yeah, I'll stick my my original statement. As of right now, what you get from Bay is about the same as what Woo is laying down.

...but it wouldn't be a TB without Lucas bashing, no matter how irrelevant.

It would be a great place. I seriously think the majority of you guys are very intelligent and are, like myself, tired of all of these years of spoon fed recycled ideas and marketing. Occassionaly we get a good movie but it's all going down-hill and we all know it. How many comic book and old tv show movies are we going to get? what happened to original ideas? The Dukes of Hazzards trailer looked like a spoof trailer you see at the MTV movie awards or something. Anyways, good talkbacks. Hopefully one day Hollywood will listen.

Face/off is classic woo and I think The Rock has a lot of Woo in the style. I dunno The Rock and face/off are two of my favorite action movies of recent years you can't tell me those movies were badly acted like every fucking action movie we get nowadays, the music rocks in both, the villians are over the top and the heroes are larger than life... I'm gonna touch on Keanu Reaves as well this has nothing to do with those two movies but I think he is underrated I mean when he says "woah" in the matrix everyone seems to see ted and stereotype him as a bad actor. I see a quiet, keeps to himself hacker who is just now discovering that life just got a bit more complicated. Oscar winning actors, actresses, have said some of the worst lines in movie history, which I will not utter here (Gandalf voice hehe) and what about Speed huh? Keanu was awesome in that. Think about how crappy of a premise that movie has but how well it pulls it off. Another underrated action movie in my book.

Marcus Brody! don't get lost in your own museum man and remember X never marks the spot...well mostly never :)

Let's see Michael Fey do this---no cuts in a shot that tracks in, out, has slow mo's, at least 25 confirmed kills, acting and emotions (Tony Leung shoots a fellow cop), gunshots, explosions, a P.O.V shot that was stolen by any first shooter game ever...all in 2min 43 sec. To paraphrase Max Fisher...John Woo saved action. What the fuck has Bay done? I'll take this one shot over the entire Michael Bay filmography any day.

Plus at least Woo grew as a director. It's neat to see how the static camera, quick cuts in the Killer turned into longer shots with sweeping camera movements in Hardboiled. Let me some some growth out of the man. I cut him slack early on (Bad Boys, The Rock) but after that, c'mon man. He never will but he should try shooting something low-budget, or try a stunt like Hitchcock did in Rope...what were there like 9 cuts in that? They shoulda put this go on trial for war crimes after what he did with Pearl Harbor.

http//www.shillpages.com/movies/lostintranslation2003dvd.jpg

Hey Fey lovers did you know that he started out directing videos for the likes of Tina Turner, Meatloaf, Lionel Ritchie, Wilson Phillips, and Donny Osmond. What a talent!!! What integrity, what fabulous taste!!! Oh yeah he also directed the classic Got Milk/Aaron Burr commercial (alright, it was kinda funny, but isn't that because it was well written?). That must be why there's all that product placement in his films...he's simply giving an homage to his previous brilliance!!! I wish I could just call him a hack but the man's got some skills with the camera. I wish I could just ignore him but ALL of his films have made over $100 mil at the BO. I just want all of you to realize that a guy from LA (who claims to be the son of John Frankenheimer (DNA tests say no, Frankenheimer said no (to bad he didn't say yes and then ask if it was too late to abort the fucker), Bay says yes) who went to fucking Wesleyan U. (school for rich kids not bright enough for the Ivy League) DUMBS HIS STUFF DOWN BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HE THINKS WE LIKE. I don't know what to be more pissed off about-his pandering to a "middle America" the guy knows nothing about, or the fact that we eat his shit up and order more (yes I'll take TWO McWhoppers, two large curly fries, two "we can't call it chicken" type of things...and oh, yeah, a jumbo diet cola). And fuck, I'll probably end up seeing this thing anyway (Scarlett, sweet sweet Scarlett) but I'll only go to the 2 tickets for $5.00 show at the independently owned Parkway Speakeasy theater here in Oakland where I can sit on a couch, order pitchers of beer (might need two for this one) and not feel like a total fucking hypocrite.

Clearly you don't hate Bay, but you hate yourself for enjoying his movies. You admit that you're planning on going. Pathetic. This one's not even that bad and it's not "dumbed down" either (in fact, I'd probably have enjoyed it more if it were since it needed more action.) Also, Wesleyan is a great school and, while it's full of rich kids, the student body is pretty diverse. Just because you weren't smart enough to get in doesn't mean you can insult it, and it's better than Cornell at least, although it may not be up there with Harvard and whatnot. Just because you don't like the guy's movies doesn't mean you have to hate everything associated with him. Besides, there are tons of movies coming out of Hollywood worse than The Rock (and even worse than Pearl Harbor); the only reason those movies bug people is because they're good enough visually for people to expect more substance out of them in other areas. Fantastic Four probably sucks but no one's calling Tim Story the anti-christ because his work is consistantly mediocre in all regards.

I have never seen a Bay movie. But I like Ewan. So I will see this one. Donna A.

"...just because you weren't smart enough to get in doesn't mean you can insult it", um I can insult anything I damn well please. I flat out admit to being a hypocrite and with that of course comes some self loathing. Who said Wesleyan wasn't diverse? (FYI, I dated someone who was the soccer coach at Smith so there's some of that rah-rah my school's better than yours type of razzing in my distaste of Wesleyan) If you read my earlier posts I liked Bad Boys and the Rock; all the rapid montage, quick pans, shaky camera were new at the time and I like anyone who shows a hint of style. I admit that I plan on going but only paying $2.50 to see it on a big screen instead of spending more to rent it and watch it on my tele. And yeah, good point with the "they're good enough visually for people to expect more substance". But c'mon, don't try to flame on me, defend the Bay man's work. Defend those music videos. Defend the fact that actors say he "places more importance on the visuals than on his character and actors...that he spends more time on action scenes and visually-interesting moments". Defend how he hasn't shown a single glimpse of moving beyond his now cliche style. Plus how else can I bash the guy if I don't see his films "Know your enemy" and all. I was just gonna flame you right away for the "pathetic" line, but then I just figured that would just prove your point. So let's debate the Bay. The reason I started the rant was because someone actually mentioned Bay and Woo in the same sentence. Now Woo digs spectacle, spends a lot of time working on his set pieces, but at least (and this is in HK only...I mean he made the best Van Damme film, Broken Arrow and Face/Off are fun but they're mere shadow of his HK brilliance)he makes the small stuff (like performance, nuances of character) just as important. But c'mon man, Richard Marx videos??? Taste is subjective and all, but geez!

I've got to admit I'm pretty biased, too. I'm a Wesleyan film studies major so what was intended as a rant came off as a personal insult. Regarding Bay, I see where you're coming from but I still don't agree. The Island is very different from a Bruckheimer movie, so he has tried to go beyond spectacle. You can understand why Bruckheimer wouldn't want Bay to change his style, too, since his formulaic movies made huge protits. Beyond that, his movies consistantly have decent acting. Ed Harris is great in The Rock, and as melodramatic as his movies are, there are far fewer cringeworthy lines than in Star Wars or something. A lot of my favorite directors (Spike Jonze, Chris Cunningham) have made vidoes for mediocre artists, so that's not really fair, either. A paycheck is a paycheck. What is fair is to say that Bay is so good with visuals that it makes the acting seem underwhelming and this is an issue even in The Island. The performances are good, but totally outclassed by the chase scenes. And the whole thing is beautifully shot. I don't think Woo is much better with actors, either. His American movies are fun but stilted, and it's hard to tell how well people act when you see them in a foreign language. Crouching Tiger had horrible acting, for instance. I can't tell--but in China the acting was a joke. All I've seen of Woo's from Hong Kong was A Better Tomorrow, but it was melodramatic and had next to no emphasis on story or character. In fact, the HK industry is based more around action than story to an incredible extent (just like Bruckheimer movies are). I think it's a totally apt comparison. Both of them had a major influence on how action was shot in their respective countries and both have made some good movies and some awful ones. Commercial doesn't necessarily mean bad, and foreign doesn't necessarily mean good.

It either doesn't live up to most of your inconsistant expectations on what a movie should be, or you're prob gonna love it and have to say it sucks because it'll make you look smarter. IMHO, Michael Bay has directed some pretty entertaining movies, and I'm lookin forward for another fun summer popcorn flick, and most of the time Mr. Bay delivers. Pearl Harbor sucked. But was Armageddon, and The Rock that bad? Sure they were dumb loud flicks, but who cares they wre fuckin fun as hell. If i want to see fuckin War and Peace or Shakespeare, I won't go to Michael Bay for that. On the other hand, If I want to escape from the real world for a couple hours and have a good time watchin shit blow up, laugh at cheesy dialogue, and turn my brain off for a little bit, he really delivers. But according to you guys I'm going to be a "movie dumbass" because I like these kind of movies here and there. Do I think this movie is going to be along the level of Batman Begins or Sin City(my 2 faves of the year)? FUCK NO. But hey it might be. I'd rather slam a movie after I see it than slam it before because it's directed by someone who makes dumb fun. What if he surprises the shit out of me and makes a very good movie that blows the shit out of his past flicks.

Ah shit, sorry about that. I was gonna ask, does anyone know if the story about Bay's meeting for PHONE BOOTH is true, or is that an urban legend? I heard it from the only Michael Bay fan I know. You remember that the script that went to Bay's fellow Worst Living Director candidate Joel Schumacher was at one point gonna be Bay's. It was a big deal, here is Michael Bay, the poster boy for ADD camera bullshit, restraining himself enough to do a movie that takes place entirely in a phone booth. So Bay goes in to meet with the producers or whatever, they all sit down and Bay says, completely serious, "So... how do we get him out of this fuckin phone booth?" True or false? I'm guessing true.

Glad to hear your studying film, here's a quick lesson. The melodrama for Woo is used to maintain the pace of the film...huge emotions (think Sirk) coupled with ridiculously sublime moments of kinetic violence (think Peckinpah, Leone). QT hisself used a clip from the stone cold bad-ass ending of "A Better Tom.pII" in his script for "True Romance" (before Slater goes off to get Arquettes stuff from Oldman). "The Killer"...now, what, your stil reading this, go out and see this movie like yesterday. (It's more fun than advanced film theory, TRUST ME) If your a Bay fan I'll assume you jizz over the action set pieces yes...watch when Chow does his sniper bit, check out those cuts...when Chow's pad gets raided by a 100 or so baddies, watch the editing (through static camera, quick cuts) as it allows you to spatially follow the action...the church ending? Just watch. And then see how much he's changed with Hard Boiled...sweeping cameras, the same absolutely bone jarring cuts and yet you can still spatially follow along as to where the characters are. The 2min 43 secs. one take in Hard Boiled...do you realize that for action directors that shot is akin to the Scorsese one takes in Raging Bull and Goodfellas (and you should know what those are). And I think debates about acting are pointless but my pull quote about actors experiences in working with Bay stands. Um, why are you bringing up Crouching Tiger, Woo had nothing to do with it. And yeah, that is a really restrained performance by Chow in that one, but the guy oozes charisma, warmth, humor, sexiness and just all out BADASSERY in not only his roles in ABT and it's two sequels, but in the Killer he's just untouchable. Think Alain Delon, Carey Grant...his acting in that made him an international superstar. No emphasis on story or character in ABT??? QUA??? Did we watch the same movie...at least Woo's action scenes aren't simply done for the show of it (Mr. Bay, please insert obligatory car chase scene here please). Please tho, do yourself, your film knowledge and hopefully your desire to make films a favor and watch The Killer and Hard Boiled. Even if your said lack of character and story aren't there for you, simply watch for a maestro at work. And I haven't even mentioned "Bullet in the Head".

Thanks for the "lesson" but I've actually had classes on the Hong Kong industry and it's closer to the Bruckheimer production team than anything else in America. Scripts are fleshed-out after action is shot, and the emphasis is on fight sequences and shoot-outs above all else. And yes, I HAVE seen Raging Bull and Goodfellas but I'll have to give the "innovative use of long take" awards to Gregg Toland and Orson Welles in you-can-guess-what-movie. I know Woo didn't direct Crouching Tiger, but I'm just saying--what looks like good acting to us isn't necessarily good acting, and the acting in ABT seemed totally unremarkable even in a language I don't understand. Anyhow, I thought ABT was silly, melodramatic, and formuliac. Was it innovative? Yeah, I guess it was, but so was The Rock (to a lesser extent, mind you.) I'll still watch more John Woo, though--he's definitely an influential and talented director, but I've seen nothing of his (yet) that deserves such gushing praise. The surefire sign of a film snob is someone who dismisses Hollywood fare as below them for fear they might enjoy what "normal" people enjoy, but praises anything coming from a foreign country, which is equally commercial anyhow. Andrew Sarris wrote an amazing essay on this in the 60's (I think) and yet nothing has changed today. I'm not denying Woo's talents, I just think it's hilarious that people dismiss someone in Hollywood because he's visually inventive and has a brilliantly kinetic editing style. I'm sure if Pearl Harbor were in Chinese people would be gushing over the attack sequences instead of (rightfully) making fun of the contrived script and lame performances. And as the reactions to "Paycheck" and the Robert Towne written "MI:2" prove, if John Woo makes something in America, people think it automatically sucks.

{Sorry in advance for what you are about to read...had a rough night at the bar last night (2 fucking fights and I had to clean out not only vomit but a fucking bloody tampon from the women's loo...drunken guys are disgusting but it's the women who really fuck up a bathroom),I didn't make nearly enough in tips to support my drug habits ("Hard drugs are for bartenders" Craig Finn) and I was just in an overall people suck and should go fuck themselves kind of mood. I come home, fire up the 3footer, and nobody picked up on my thread in the Phantom/Forbidden/86845 Talkback of the best dream sequence in a film. Plus, the talkbacks generally blow after the Brits' all go to bed. I'm glad you responded and that we're doing the one thing I come to these TB's for; debating the merits of film. So while I won't go back and alter anything I said, take it all with a grain of salt, or in case you're highly offended, a saltlick. Plus, if you got the Pynchon reference in my name and then used that for your bash on Cornell, cheers. Pynchon ain't exactly a popular writer, and knowing he went to Cornell is showing ya got true geek/nerd potential. Also, the only reason there is a warning to the below piece is after I wrote it I re-read it and noticed how much of a complete asshole I was. Once again sorry. Peace and love.}{Oh and "Broken Arrow" got decent reviews and did good BO, "Face/Off" better reviews and great BO, "MI:2" might've gotten slagged, but I dug it and it did huge BO. So if you wanna do the ol' populist approach, Woo fared very well in Hollywood until "Windtalkers" and "Paycheck". Bay has grossed over $100 mil each picture but "Pearl Harbor" and "Bad Boys II" each were losers in terms of profitability. So NYAH, NYAH to that argument.} You go to Wesleyan and want to talk about snobbery? LOL. So you've taken multiple classes on the HK industry? Wow, Wesleyan's endowments must be running pretty fucking deep for a school with less than 3,000 people to offer what two, three, four classes solely devoted to HK. And you've taken multiple classes and seen only one Woo film? Hope your on scholarship. Um, how about "Sunrise" for use of a long take if you wanna try the snooty bit...I was talking about ACTION films ya fucking Tim. I tried playing nice but since it must be really hard for you to type while tossing Bay's salad (not that there's anything wrong with that) Mr. Oh, Wesleyan has diversity...you want to bring up diversity go to a state school like I did cause I couldn't afford to go anywhere else (R.U. baby!) You wanna bring up that I'm a film snob when NOT FUCKING ONCE DID I BASH HOLLYWOOD FARE AS BENEATH ME. Don't put words in my mouth Tim, it'll only lead to me putting my foot up yo' ass. Guess I don't own all these Hollywood movies, guess I don't go see all the blockbusters. I've got a love/hate thing going on with Hollywood and yes I guess I'm a snob cause I like foreign films as well...do you think the only good movies come Hollywood? KF Hustle, Kontroll, Oldboy, Nightwatch, Ong Bak, Tropical Malady...c'mon Tim your a film student, don't just fall for the flash. You wanna break down the HK industry based on your classes; bitch I was watching and promoting the 80's HK film explosion while your pops was wondering how to simultaneously throw your mom down the stairs and have her land on a clothes hanger to rid the world of the sycophantic fucksuck of a child that would waste his chance for of a wonderful education by extolling the "virtues" of one Michael Bay. You ever notice in the HK industry HOW MANY FUCKING FILMS THESE ACTORS MADE PER YEAR? Fuck, Bruckheimer hijacked the Golden Princess film model of all "scripts" having action, drama, melodrama (hope you know they're different), romance, comedy in all of their films. For fucksakes man, Bay himself has said he does limited takes of the drama to concentrate on makin' with explosions and yet your going to bring up how HK film has an emphasis on fight sequences and shoot-outs? I don't have no fancy degree or nothin but isn't that called reductive reasoning? You want to talk actors...those fuckers did their own stunts! Isn't physicality a part of being an actor? I guess Chow Yun Fat won his best acting awards in HK by just being a pretty face. Maybe 'tis you my pedantic padawan who doesn't yet grasp the knowledge of what acting is. The HK industry made stunning action movies for a miniscule fraction of what your prescious Hollywood studios did, action movies whose beats, rhymes and way of life have been coapted by Hollywood and that fucking shill Bay ever since they came out. "Emphasis on fight sequences..." fuck yeah Timmy, do you know how long it took for Chan to film the climactic fight in Drunken Master II? 4 months, and if you've ever seen it you know it's worth it. You thought ABT was "silly, melodramatic and formuliac (sic)..." um, Timmy, what do you call Bay's movies then? And Timmy have you looked at Sarris's top films of the year? (google Sarris and go to Top Ten Lists...he's got Goddard, Antonioni, Bergman, Bunuel...he basically was in total agreement with the French New Wave and your going to bring up his holy name in a defense of Bay?) HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! YOUR DISMISSED BITCH, NOW GO AND SUCK SATANS COCK LIKE THE REST OF YOUR COMMERCIALIZED MINNIONS! (paycheck is a paycheck my ass, we all make our own beds in this world and if you wanna put use your art for the sake of selling another Happy Meal, YOU ARE A SUCKER OF SATANS COCK AND ARE NO LONGER AN ARTIST (rant courtesy of Bill Hicks). Hugs and kisses.

I'm not even going to begin to argue--I'm bowing out of this one because that rant was amazing. (And the multiple classes thing was worded all wrong and a huge exaggeration anyhow. Plus, it's a terrible agument, I'll admit.)