Michael Bay is the director behind a number of high-grossing action films, including The Rock, Armageddon, and most recently, Transformers. Having just viewed Transformers for the second time at a theater (on campus here), I’d like to take a minute to talk to you about this awful habit “movie buffs” and/or “film elitists” have of bashing the shit out of him because… They’re elitist.

Film programs like the one I’m in have a nasty reputation of producing folks that only like “art” films- you know, the sorts of movies that nobody sees but win all sorts of film festivals and get nominated for Oscars (Mulholland Dr./anything by David Lynch, anything written by Charlie Kaufman, Terrence Malick, etc).

I love those sorts of movies, to be honest; I feel that one of the best things about film is that not only can you tell a story, but you can do it through visual art. Sadly, the fact that visual art doesn’t always have to equal obscure what-the-fuck-is-that imagery is lost on a lot of people claiming to be connoisseurs of film.

So, Michael Bay. He directs films that have a very simple plot and very little in the way of character development. What a bastard, huh? No. Why? Because he prefers to ride on other elements of filmmaking; it’s called style. And if anyone ever shouts at you that he sucks, tell them that this is what he does well:

- Shot composition. Bay’s films are typically associated with MTV-style editing: quick cuts, very often. I’ll get to that in a minute, but here’s the thing: If you walk into a Michael Bay film looking for Kubrick-esque shots that last two minutes, you’re a moron. But if you watch them with the appropriate eye, you’ll notice something: Most of his shots are perfectly composed and beautifully lit. He’s not a hack, folks: Bay does things with camera and lighting that my professors would have a hard time replicating.

- Editing style. Anyone who thinks that quick cuts automatically equal bad is a pretentious cunt. Yes, a number of great filmmakers like Hitchcock, Lynch, Kubrick, Coppola, etc. use long takes, and extremely well. But that’s because it’s APPROPRIATE. I want you to imagine the infiltration of the island in The Rock as one long, constant take. It’d be boring. Moreover, one reason editing is there is to put you inside the character’s head; the obvious testosterone and kinetic energy of a SEAL team taking over an objective would, logically, lend itself to quick cuts. It’s common sense. But noooo, apparently because 90% of pop music videos are cut this way (for entirely different reasons) means that when movies are, they equal shit too.

- Pacing. The screenplays that Bay works with are very kinetic and action-oriented. This is a bit more subjective, but if you pay attention Bay is using a very effective formula: Tension and release. For example: In The Rock, the scene with the SEAL team entering the shower room. There’s a stand off that lasts a good 2 minutes, with cuts getting progressively quicker and foreboding music building, then it explodes. It’s appropriate. And again in Transformers- when the base survivors are attacked after escaping, the battle moves into a village, the action levels off, then slowly builds again into a climax involving an air-strike. He never overloads you with action (like say, Ridley Scott in Black Hawk Down). Furthermore, dialogue sequences are appropriately paced as well. I could cite examples all day, but I’d much rather somebody pick me one that doesn’t work in the context of the film as a whole.

- Theatrics. I find dialogue with thoughtful subtext, frames with symbolic imagery, and messages of political and/or philosophical nature to be quite entertaining. I also find things blowing up and over the top action to be a good time as well. And the latter is what Bay is and should always be known for. Transformers: That village battle sequence, once an air strike is called. You see A-10s flying in with a sunset backdrop, shots angled into the sky from below characters firing automatic weapons showing planes screeching by, etc. The same can be found in all of his movies. It’s not just “omg I can’t believe they did that”, it’s “holy fucking shit, look at this chaos”. It’s over the top, it’s often unrealistic, and you know what? It’s MEANT to be like that. Some movies are made to mimic reality, others are made to magnify it 1000x (hyper-realism).

And yeah, his movies have a tendency to throw character development at you like a file (the cliché scenes of “I read your file” or “here’s his file”), instead of reveling it as the film goes on. Could he? Sure, hell it might even work. But when the focus of your movie is so glaringly obvious chaos and explosions, high tension situations and basic good vs. evil conflict, what the FUCK is the point?

Perhaps that’s your criticism: Bay knows he’s making films for audiences that- by and large- will never see cinema as anything more than entertainment (that whole art-thing I mentioned earlier). But blaming Bay for dumbing down America is a load of bullshit. Look at our public education systems and the fact that the media will give front page attention to O.J. Simpson NOT killing someone again, rather than the situation with Iran, Iraq, and basically anything else that could potentially affect everyone’s lives. Michael Bay puts out a 2 hour movie every couple of years. Evil bastard, huh?

Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely agree that his movies reap the benefits of a culture that really can’t perform critical thinking as a whole. But just because stupid people enjoy something doesn’t mean it is factually stupid: 90% of Tool fans are legally retarded, Red Hot Chili Peppers have a huge jock fan base, there’s a lot of idiots on Halo Live!, and many LOTR fans are socially inept escapists. But I could spend another three pages arguing the validity and importance of all of those subjects, so the argument that stupid fans equal a stupid product is completely null.

It all comes down to style, which in cinema should be treated as subjective; just like taste in music, video games, or anything with genre-classifications. People who think one style is, in fact, better than another are essentially Nazis. If you dislike Michael Bay films, by all means, good for you. But have a reason that’s not “because all the other film kids do” or “he doesn’t make movies like x director is renowned for”. It’s that sort of sheep-like behavior that’s destroying humanity.

You know, it’s sad that a lot of film buffs/elitists don’t understand why Michael Bay makes chaotic, popcorn action flicks, and could care less about going deep into the involved characters. Maybe they’ve forgotten that they spent a solid portion of their childhood enjoying cartoons that do the same thing.

It’s called… Fun. Pure and simple.

Comments(4)