The Monocular Group Encourages You To Reconsider Michael Bay And TRANSFORMERS 3

Founder and Editor; Toronto, Canada (@AnarchistTodd)
Sign-In to Vote
The Monocular Group Encourages You To Reconsider Michael Bay And TRANSFORMERS 3
With Michael Bay's third big budget live action take on Transformers freshly premiered in Moscow the fine folks at The Monocular Group have released a new video asking that people reconsider the merits of Bay and his big robotic toys. Because, after all, we don't complain about the lack of subtlety in opera, now do we? So why must Bay be held to a higher standard?

It's actually a somewhat valid point made in very amusing fashion and then followed with a truly kick ass promo for the film. Which is interesting because it's not actually a promo for the film but a promo for Monocular, a company that specializes in viral advertising. Mission accomplished, good sirs.
Sign-In to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.

More from Around the Web

Thanks to Mark for pointing it out

More about Transformers 3

JustinJune 26, 2011 11:38 PM

I'm a huge Bay fan: I enjoy Armageddon, genuinely love THE ROCK as a solid film and BAD BOYS 2 as nothing but pure excess.

I'll take the viral marketing suggestion at heart and strip character, plot and concentrate on pure spectacle in comparison to Ballet or Opera...Problem is, Transformers 1 and 2 fail because the action itself is incredibly muddled. Bay's decision at over complicating the design of the robots and shooting nearly everything at human eye level results in over complicated carnage that results in nothing but numbness. In Opera or Ballet, even if I don't know the story I can automatically latch on to the person doing the actions and the story those actions create. In TRANSFORMERS (1 and 2) I have no idea what's going on at one time which results in an added spectacle meaning of nothingness. One car crash is impressive, but interecut a bunch of car crashes in the middle of actions, and while fun for 30 seconds, after a while I start to yawn. It's like being caught in a snowstorm and calling it a spectacle. The only truly scene of action in TRANSFORMERS 2 is the Optimus Prime forest fight - and that's only because we're aware that there's one protagonist, everyone else is a generic antagonist, and we're treated to wide shots of one continuous sequence instead of mass inter cutting between everyone.

Peter K.June 27, 2011 12:22 AM

Not to mention these films always make far too much effort to convince us that a coherent plot is being told and we should be caring about these characters. Why must this spectacle always be burdened with such pretenses - why straddle the line, when you know your trashy fun. Its a real trick to make a fun dumb movie, a movie that while vacuous is able to thrive on the sheer momentum of its spectacle. Bay achieved this in films like The Rock or Bad Boys 2, but with Transformers everything is just so damn muddled it begins tripping over itself. I'm always of the opinion that these films need even less character, less plot and even less "subtly".

JimJune 27, 2011 5:06 AM

Attempting to watch the first Transformers film just put me into a deep sleep. Both times. Learning from this, I've made myself a simple rule: No Michael Bay. It's working out really well. I never truly liked or owned any of his previous output so it isn't all that hard. They're all kind of one time only (or never (TF2, Pearl Harbour)) viewings because there are no hidden depths. The continued success of Bay is baffling and only encourages studios to finance McG Zach Snyder dross. Another couple of 'directors' to avoid. So even if this film '"changes everything", it won't for me because I won't see the fecking thing.

leonJune 27, 2011 8:04 AM

I really dig most Micheal Bay films and totally agree with this post. You want to nag and complain everytime Bay makes a movie just don't watch them! Complaining about substance and pretences???

The man is making action movies to entertain people and he's very good at it. Yes transformers is a little muddled but these movies are a lot more fun than Thor or the horrendous Green Lantern or Priest.

JimJune 27, 2011 9:26 AM

I will continue to nag if the situation warrants it. It's my right as a Brit and a film fan. Thor was ok. Not seen the other two but you're probably right.

VargasJune 27, 2011 9:36 AM

whats that song ?

icn1983June 27, 2011 9:43 AM

Better than "Green Lantern" or "Priest?" Okay, so how do the "Transformers" films stack up against "Die Hard," "Raiders of the Lost Ark," "Hard Boiled," "Heat," "The Matrix," the "Bourne" series, "Aliens," "Terminator," "Terminator 2," "Boondock Saints," or any number of great action movies that are substantial yet entertain.

Or more recently, films like "Inception" or "Taken" or "Ip Man" or "The Good, The Bad, and Weird" or "I Saw the Devil" or "13 Assassins" or even "Hobo With a Shotgun" (well, maybe that last one is a stretch). The problem with your argument is that there are some great action movies being made right now that respect the audience's intelligence, ooze style yet never fail to clearly illustrate what's going on at any given point, and are filled with so many more awesome moments. Meanwhile, Bay gets away with making silly, incoherent, racist movies because of his special effects and pyrotechnics budget and Megan Fox. Oh wait.

Bottom line is that maybe you and millions of theatergoers think Bay is good enough for you, but for what they're charging at the multiplex, you deserve better.

DragunJune 27, 2011 11:31 AM

I agree with Justin. I only saw the first Transformers, but I thought it was a giant mess. I couldn't tell which hunks of metal I was supposed to be rooting for, and I zoned out after a few minutes of them clanging around.

Also, why do these movies need to be two and a half hours long? These should be 100 minutes, maybe two hours long, tops. And yes, let's drop the pretense of having these films be overly plotted. Give us enough of a plot on which to hang some cool action sequences, and let's not pretend these films are more epic than they are.

MarsHottentotJune 27, 2011 11:50 AM

Well, I like to say there's a difference between movies and film: 'Movies' don't have to make you think but, rather, entertain. Conversely, a 'film' doesn't necessarily be entertaining but it should, at least, provoke thought or emotion.

I haven't seen any of the Transformer franchise as, as others have said, I have no clue what I'm looking at. I see digital chaos - a bunch of metallic junk jumping around in exploding stuff. The thought of enduring that for an entire hour and a half is kind of repellent.

blackula jonezJune 28, 2011 1:05 AM

Hater's gonna hate.

MarsHottentotJune 28, 2011 9:53 AM

This is the part where you use your vampire enhanced, street-learned kung fu skills to kick all of our snooty asses, right? NOT THE FACE!!

adlJune 28, 2011 5:13 PM

See, the film is about robots from space and the action is intricate and beautiful enough that the plot and character development....oh wait...the film is about ROBOTS FROM OUTER SPACE!!! Who would complain about the plot development from a film that everyone knows is about that??? Mostly Europeans I'm guessing.

As far as the "I can't understand what I'm seeing" whines, the films are meant to be watched more than once specifically for the ridiculous ott battle sequences.

Peter K.June 29, 2011 3:59 PM

I ain't complaining about character development, in fact when the concept is "robots from outer space" I don't need any characters really whatsoever - but these films think I do and give us terribly irritating characters. These films would be so much better if there simply wasn't any attempt at creating a compelling story. If this film wants to give me robots fighting, just give me that - Bay's clearly not interested in the other stuff, so why does he even try to include it?