{"id":2225,"date":"2013-05-22T00:00:14","date_gmt":"2013-05-22T04:00:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/smugfilm.com\/?p=2225"},"modified":"2013-05-22T00:51:10","modified_gmt":"2013-05-22T04:51:10","slug":"michael-bay-is-andy-warhol","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/michael-bay-is-andy-warhol\/","title":{"rendered":"Michael Bay is Andy Warhol"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"bay\"
\n

\nLet me preface this by saying that Michael Bay has not only never made a good movie, he’s basically a bad director.\u00a0 And yet, I have a real affection for him.\u00a0 Probably more than I do for any other crappy director.\u00a0 And here’s why.
\n
\nMichael Bay’s movies are stupid. \u00a0Many of my most beloved movies require a lot of suspension of disbelief. Part of the beauty of cinema lies in being taken to a totally illogical place and believing every minute of it. \u00a0A guy hears a magic voice and doesn’t see a doctor about it\u2014instead, he tears down his corn crop to build a magic baseball field. \u00a0Sure, I’m down!<\/p>\n

But when it comes to Bay, it starts to get a little sketchy. \u00a0You can pretty much see the excited eighth grader, wide eyed, explaining his ‘badass’ movie idea.\u00a0 \u2018But then, an asteroid is going to destroy the earth, so they send a ragtag group of oil drillers to burrow a nuclear warhead into the center of it, because the smartest man in the world says it\u2019s the best idea, because of something about a firecracker and ketchup bottles.\u2019<\/p>\n

In the hands of a better director, maybe.<\/em>\u00a0 But I doubt it.<\/p>\n

On the Criterion commentary for Armageddon<\/a>, the fucker literally says (I’m paraphrasing, but barely) ‘they took us on a tour of NASA and it was so dull I had to sexy it up’. \u00a0That kind of brash insanity almost makes me think the guy is a plant\u2014a conspiracy concocted by hipsters to give them evidence that Hollywood really is a fluff machine.\u00a0 But you gotta love it.\u00a0 Do we really need to hear more stories about how in awe Ron Howard was of the hard-working men and women at NASA?\u00a0 Or about the expert teams that so skillfully took James Cameron to the ocean floor to move shit around in the Titanic?\u00a0 If Michael Bay wants to sexy up NASA, be my guest.<\/p>\n

But again, the guy really is the epitome of Hollywood cheese, from his chiseled jaw and coiffed long hair, to that sports car driving smirk plastered on his Fabio-esque face. \u00a0You just know he’s yelling at people on set through the bullhorn. \u00a0A tyrannical dictator with lowly assistants carrying Cokes and only blue M&Ms around on a platter\u2014five feet away at all times, and no eye contact.<\/p>\n

But ultimately, Michael Bay’s movies don’t suck because the stories are so stupid\u2014although that certainly doesn’t help. \u00a0They suck because his auteurism shoots itself in the foot.<\/p>\n

There’s no question that Michael Bay is an auteur, in fact his movies are probably more visibly recognizable than any other auteur in history.\u00a0 The problem is, his style doesn’t lend itself to any kind of reality, drama, story beats, or really anything. \u00a0Dramatic dynamic range is sucked away by fast cutting, cutting that happens during both simple dialogue scenes and \u2018high octane\u2019 action sequences.<\/p>\n

“Actors have often noted that he places more importance on visuals than on his characters and actors. \u00a0He is also known to do very few takes of intimate character-driven scenes, as he prefers to spend more time on action sequences and visually-interesting moments.” – IMDb Trivia<\/a><\/p>\n

And that’s really his trademark, the fast cutting. \u00a0Fast cutting, insanely vibrant color, and hyperactive camera movements.\u00a0 His average shot length is about 2.5 seconds\u2014which is less than half that of a traditional movie.\u00a0 What’s interesting though is that despite the high cut rate, I suspect that to the layperson his movies are less stylized and more accessible than your average Tony Scott flick. \u00a0Underneath the stupidity, Bay’s movies are actually very well constructed. \u00a0His camera movements are much more bombastic and visceral than anything in any Scorsese movie, but they aren’t as distracting. \u00a0Scorsese is a genius, and this is not a value judgement, but my point is that Scorsese’s style is more visible because he uses jagged editing and varying compositions during dialogue scenes, whereas Bay’s style is usually masked under intense action sequences where they are more hidden.\u00a0 And therein lies Bay’s <\/i>particular genius.\u00a0 His action sequences are so well designed you are often left feeling as though everything that preceded was somehow organic, despite being absolutely insane.\u00a0 And if I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a trillion times\u2014the more invisible your style, the better your movie.<\/p>\n

The real problem is that his style never lets up. \u00a0I suspect it’s because he’s bored by his expository scenes, and why not? \u00a0They aren\u2019t the point of the movie. \u00a0They\u2019re a trivial necessity that serve as downtime between action scenes.<\/p>\n

People have this stupid thing where movies like Transformers<\/a> aren’t \u2018supposed\u2019 to be good, or are somehow deserving of a pass when they’re bad, because they’re just \u2018entertainment\u2019. \u00a0That’s dumb, because all<\/i> art is just \u2018entertainment\u2019. \u00a0What’s entertaining about great art is its craftsmanship and ability to subdue you into the bliss of being overtaken by something. \u00a0Action movies or comedies or whatever aren’t allowed<\/i> to be fluff\u2014if they’re fluff, they’re bad movies. \u00a0Indiana Jones<\/a> is proof positive that action-adventure can be transcendent. \u00a0\u2018High art\u2019. \u00a0The bar has been set. \u00a0If Transformers isn’t as good, or at least original or refreshing in some way, then it sucks.<\/p>\n

Anyway, with the bar that high, it’s no wonder that most movies suck, Michael Bay\u2019s obviously included. \u00a0However, it’s hard to ignore his blatant stylistic tendencies. \u00a0And as a movie nerd, it’s certainly interesting to follow.<\/p>\n

My first experience with Michael Bay was Armageddon, which I saw in the theater with my parents the day before I got my braces. \u00a0Armageddon is an effective study at how well generic movie tricks work at making you cry. \u00a0It’s almost like how in music, \u2018minor\u2019 equals sad and \u2018major\u2019 equals happy. \u00a0That\u2019s a reductive statement, and not always true, but when done the right way (or you could say wrong, there are no rules) it works. \u00a0In movies, just have a dad sacrifice himself for his daughter, have her cry, and put sappy music under it. \u00a0The whole movie can be retarded and I’ll probably still get misty. \u00a0It’s effective emotional pandering.<\/p>\n

One interesting thing about Armageddon though is the cast. \u00a0It’s like a who’s who of indie actors, and is actually Ben Affleck and Owen Wilson’s big break. \u00a0You have to put yourself back in the time\u2014creating an ensemble made up of Steve Buscemi, Peter Stormare, Michael Clarke Duncan and the aforementioned duo is pretty remarkable.\u00a0 And like any auteur, he certainly has a stable of actors he dips into time and again, with Buscemi, Stormare, Duncan, and Ed Harris showing up in other films.<\/p>\n

My theory is that Bay, smartly, populates his pictures with great and distinguishable character actors because his movies are littered with small roles that need to be instantly identifiable, and because he won’t have to pay too much attention to them on set. \u00a0He has to worry about the hugeness of the next explosion\u2014he can’t be concerned with character motivations.<\/p>\n

Bay’s best movie is his most recent and most modest, Pain and Gain<\/a>. \u00a0Ordinarily in his movies, it’s the story that’s bad, but surprisingly, in Pain and Gain, the story is pretty good, and it actually matches his style. \u00a0Bay\u2019s bombastic, beach babe, big dick, macho, glossy, commercial style makes sense when applied to a story about a few meathead body builders that want to become big shots in some kind of Scarface<\/a>-y\u00a0American dream fantasy scenario. \u00a0The ultimate flaw is simply the length and overuse of narration.\u00a0 The story is so interesting, I’d rather just see it play out than listen to Goodfellas<\/a>-style commentary from the protagonists. \u00a0It makes sense that such an inept storyteller as Bay would drop the ball on a movie with a good story though. \u00a0You can tell Bay feels uncomfortable without an action beat every ten pages, and expectedly, milks every opportunity he can to overdo the action scenes it does have. \u00a0But again, this approach actually makes sense in a universe of over the top, larger-than-life characters. \u00a0The problem is I don’t think this was intentional, but instead, just an ironic accident. \u00a0Since all Bay’s movies look the same, Pain and Gain being no exception, you get the sense that no matter what the story, Bay will simply go through the motions. \u00a0This is obviously where Bay’s ineptitude is exposed. \u00a0He is, ultimately, a shallow and bland filmmaker that routinely makes very boring movies that are only as good as their scripts.\u00a0 And since those scripts are sitcom jokes surrounded by crazy action and Danielle Steele romance, they all suck.<\/p>\n

Transformers is a franchise based on a cartoon. \u00a0And Bay shouldn’t be adapting things, which is why the Transformers movies are his least fun movies. \u00a0(Well, except Pearl Harbor<\/a>\u2014nobody should ever watch or even want to watch that thing.) \u00a0The problem with Transformers is its familiarity in the culture. \u00a0Bay is actually better when he’s being \u2018original\u2019. \u00a0Armageddon and The Rock<\/a> may be stupid, but at least we haven’t seen them before in any other context. \u00a0By doing something with provenance, Bay is locking himself into further predictability, and that’s never fun\u2014especially for a guy who essentially makes two-hour coke parties (generally done off of strippers butts\u2014ever notice how all his fucking movies have an obligatory stripper scene?)<\/p>\n

Kevin Smith has a pretty great rant about Transformers.\u00a0 He asks a very appropriate and sensical question\u2014why can’t Transformers just be twenty minutes of robots fighting? \u00a0That valid question is basically everything I’ve been saying here in easy to swallow pill form.\u00a0 The answer is because years of arbitrary standards have forged a marketplace where expected movie length \u00a0is 90-150 minutes. \u00a0These running times are not based on anything having to do with the quality of the art form, but unfortunately, on marketing strategies.\u00a0 A great movie could be thirty seconds or five hours\u2014the idea that they have to be around 90 minutes is ludicrous, and unfortunate, since many movies would benefit greatly from being about 30 minutes shorter (conversely, The Big Lebowski<\/a>\u00a0would benefit from being twenty five hours long).<\/p>\n

If movies were allowed to be lengths that would make them good instead of lengths that fit them into time slots, Michael Bay might be a much better filmmaker.\u00a0 Imagine a world where Michael Bay is an iconic avant-garde filmmaker who makes twenty-minute CGI masterpieces filled with explosions and robots fighting.\u00a0 By cutting out all of the dialogue scenes in each one of his movies, you’d essentially be straining out the dumb parts, and you’d be left with a hyper-kinetic, super-intense, visceral masterpiece.\u00a0 Because again, unlike other action directors, Bay\u2019s staging and scene construction is not<\/i> lazy.\u00a0 It’s flashy and over the top, but it actually does enhance the action.\u00a0 Compare any sequence in a Bay film to one in either of the Bourne sequels\u2014handheld, passionless messes with no tension or direction.\u00a0 Bay’s action is flowing and energetic, with a clever blend of compositions, tracking shots, camera movements, all swirled together in a cohesive way.\u00a0 His color palette is saturated, vibrant, and beautiful.\u00a0 And if Transformers was allowed to be twenty minutes, it would basically just be some swirling colors, explosions, and hectic sound design.\u00a0 It would be the most epic art film of all time, and a bizarre masterpiece of exuberance and energy.\u00a0 Instead, it’s over two hours of plop, and then sometimes a robot blows up or does something racist (that’s what people\u00a0 have said, I have no idea).<\/p>\n

Bay not only has a vision of how to construct a scene, his vision is deliberate and based on a high level of cognizance of filmic editing.\u00a0 To design sequences like he does, you have to be able to visualize how your compositions will cut together in your mind:<\/p>\n

“I write my own action. \u00a0There’s a scene in The Island<\/a>, a highway chase where a pile of train wheels fall off a truck and smashes into the oncoming cars. \u00a0That thought came to me as I was driving next to a truck carrying rail wheels. \u00a0My mind is very fertile, so I’m like, \u2018That’s very dangerous!’ \u00a0I sent someone out to do research and found out those train wheels weigh a TON each.” – Michael Bay<\/p>\n

Hell, he even believes in his crappy art enough to do this: “In Bad Boys<\/a>, Bay paid $25,000 (one quarter of his fee) for the climax explosion scene. \u00a0The initial shot was made impossible by a rainstorm, and the production company refused to pay for another try.” – IMDb Trivia<\/a><\/p>\n

To make Bourne 2, your idea for action sequences has got to be, it’s handheld, he’s gonna run that way, follow him.\u00a0 It’s ironic, because in the Bourne movies the intent of the handheld style is to make the audience feel as though the events are really happening. \u00a0The handheld camera mimics the verite style trailblazer by newsreels.\u00a0 Kubrick famously used this style many times, most notably in Dr. Strangelove<\/a>.\u00a0 William Friedkin also utilized it in The French Connection<\/a> and even refused to tell his DP the blocking so he would have to follow the action as it happened.<\/p>\n

Back then the style was effective, not only because it was new but because it was executed in the same way as the footage it mimicked.\u00a0 Nowadays, its nothing more than a lazy stylistic trick, and its overuse has made it not only generic but a telltale sign of a total bankruptcy of ideas.<\/p>\n

That’s why when you reflect back on action movies of the last 30 years or so, Michael Bay’s work really stands out.\u00a0 He essentially invented the modern action movie and created a genre in and of itself\u2014the really bad Hollywood action movie with way too many explosions.<\/p>\n

Michael Bay’s movies suck in every way possible.\u00a0 From the easy, hollow one-liners to the obligatory stripper scenes to the outlandish premises and needless over-the-top sexiness. \u00a0They’re big, they’re on steroids and crack and cocaine, and they\u2019re the epitome of MTV-style fast cutting, low-attention span shit.\u00a0 Their one saving grace is those twenty minutes of action in each one that can be siphoned out and held up up with the the likes of Scorsese and Cameron, and appreciated for the masterpieces they are.<\/p>\n

Every few years, for fifteen minutes, Michael Bay is Andy Warhol.<\/p>\n

“I make movies for teenage boys. Oh, dear, what a crime.” – Michael Bay<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\"bay\"<\/p>\n

Let me preface this by saying that Michael Bay has not only never made a good movie, he’s basically a bad director.\u00a0 And yet, I have a real affection for him.\u00a0 Probably more than I do for any other crappy director.\u00a0 And here’s why.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25,17],"tags":[840,466,1600,398,641,1597,65,37,576,1592,1595,1596,997,1527,1599,1601,1594,1593,1598],"class_list":["post-2225","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allposts","category-gregsessays","tag-andy-warhol","tag-armageddon","tag-bad-boys","tag-big-lebowski","tag-dr-strangelove","tag-french-connection","tag-goodfellas","tag-greg-deliso","tag-indiana-jones","tag-michael-bay","tag-pain-and-gain","tag-pain-and-gain-review","tag-scarface","tag-the-big-lebowski","tag-the-french-connection","tag-the-island","tag-tony-scott","tag-transformers","tag-william-friedkin"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2225","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2225"}],"version-history":[{"count":15,"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2225\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2239,"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2225\/revisions\/2239"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2225"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2225"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smugfilm.com\/oldsite\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2225"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}