Your Favorite Action Movies

[D_Kilkhampton Largehole]

It just depends on what want out of a movie. True, Michael Bay-movies have weak plots but who fucking cares? I find them excellent 'no-brainers', it's sit-back-and-relax-cinema. After a hard day of working, there's nothing I love more than enjoying such a movie. So if that's what you're looking for, they are good movies for you.
Apart from that I also like quality-movies with a good scenario, movies with a meaning, but I watch those on other occasions.
It's as simple as that, you're able to appreciate both kinds of movies or not. Obviously, mista_geechee is able, and Flashy is not.

 

[erratic]

You have to completely suspend disbelief to enjoy a Michael Bay movie - they really are 'check your brain in at the door' affairs. Which is fine and dandy - but not to be mistaken for 'good'.

Exactly.

I have to admit, though, he's slowly getting better. While Armageddon and Pearl Harbor were basically incomprehensible, the Island had some actual acting and Transformers was both coherent and enjoyable.

 

[8060]

I agree on Reservoir Dogs...i still LOVE that film, what makes it great is it is gritty and the lack of big stars.

Here, here. If an ordinary moe can do a role and still convey the kind of performance that we expect out of our A list actors, then the entire story comes together that much stronger. One movie that I love and consider great is The Usual Suspects directed by Bryan Singer. At its debut, I didn't know Gabriel Byrne or Benicio del Toro. I was pretty familiar with the rest of the cast. The story was very written. It didn't look too plastic like a Hollywood movie can at times. It wasn't fueled by special effects. The score was just right to keep your heartbeat going 'along with story.' You can't move until the last scene closes and the credits roll...just like Dogs and just like Pulp.

This is for you, Flashy, LOL:biggrin1:
YouTube - Randy Watson

Pretty Much. The combination of Keitel and/or Tarentino and/or Jackson is unbeatable.

This was priceless
YouTube - Winston Wolf - I Solve Problems

 

[Deno]

Bad Boys

 

[Flashy]

So opinions don't make a film great but critical reception (opinions) make Michael Bay average ? There's that paradox I was suspecting.

So, your reasong is that, since I may not like the same films you like, I can't appreciate "good" cinema ? There's more of your trademark " anyone who doesn't see it like me doesn't know jack " additude. Trying to make your opinion fact.

Funny you mention reception and success since Michael Bay has had a hand in some of the most popular films of the 90's and 00's. So, right there, you put your own foot in your mouth. He's part of some of the most recent high grossing films, which by you logic, makes them good films. Therefore, you are saying that the opinions of many make something great or not, yet I'm the one talking nonsense.....hmm.........

Oh, and I never said Armageddon and tho others were GREAT. I said they were good. Except Bad Boys. That was great. But it doesn't fit in your opinion of good film so I guess it's not. And if I did think it was "great" , again, by your own logic, the fact that you think it is "silly and stupid" does not make it so.

1. Critical opinion, i.e. the view of the vast majority of movie critics, are strongly against Michael Bay and has films. Fact. Like it or not, as i would hate to admit it, the critics are, usually, for the most part, correct. Critics want nothing more than to see a brilliant film, and considering critics are in themselves, frustrated and or failed moviemakers/actors/directors/ screenwriters, rightly or wrongly they see themselves as "guardians" of film. As such, they expect more from films, as do most people who want to see quality films made.

2. Go ahead and like the films you like...i never said you cannot enjoy them, i simply said that don't tell me they are good to great films, simply because you enjoy them, because they simply aren't and do not meet the criteria of good film-making, i.e. good writing, storyline, direction, acting etc. You may enjoy McDonalds, but do not tell me it is good, high quality food.

3. How exactly did i put my foot in my mouth because Bay's films are "popular"? Where did i ever say high grosses and popularity from the box office make a film great? Usually, it is exactly the opposite. Independence Day made nearly 10 times what There Will Be Blood made at the box office. There is absolutely no contest between the two in quality.

High grosses and popularity don't make a film good at all...see Independence Day, X Men, the Day After Tomorrow etc.

Michael Bay may have had a hand in making big budget, big grossing films, but that does not make them good at all. It means simply, that some people check their brains at the door to watch a big stupid movie. IF that entertains you, that is your business, but being entertained does not correlate to a brilliant film.

4. You said they were good? Fine. Still wrong...they are not good films. Just because you were entertained by such bad films, does not, in fact, make them good films...it just means you were entertained by them, and that you don't correlate quality with entertainment level in cinema. That is your business.

5. As for BAd Boys being "great", that is your opinion...but in all objective criteria, it really is not a "great" film. You were very entertained by it...that does not indicate greatness. The Godfather is great...Bad Boys is not.

6. The facts are that movies made by Michael Bay, are in fact garbage. They are the most base level of film entertainment, geared to draw the masses in who expect nothing more from their films then explosions, or pithy dialogue, with little to no story, poor writing, quick cut-style directing, and phony, melodramatic "acting".


7. There are plenty of films that are considered "good" that i did not necessarily like or "get", but i can see how other people would enjoy them, and do notice some things that would stick out as making that film quality, even if I did not think it was as great as some others did.

Some examples of this were movies like The Fountain, The Prestige, The Illusionist etc...I was hoping for more from these films, but i found them to be a bit lacking for me to give my best marks to...however i understand people who think the world of those films, and in terms of writing, production and idea, i salute those films for their quality and their effort, even if they did not fully deliver what i hoped...but i understand what others find great about them.

There is a big difference between a film like that, and a film which is clearly not good, such as Pearl Harbor and other Bay shower of shit -fests

 

[Flashy]

It just depends on what want out of a movie. True, Michael Bay-movies have weak plots but who fucking cares? I find them excellent 'no-brainers', it's sit-back-and-relax-cinema. After a hard day of working, there's nothing I love more than enjoying such a movie. So if that's what you're looking for, they are good movies for you.
Apart from that I also like quality-movies with a good scenario, movies with a meaning, but I watch those on other occasions.
It's as simple as that, you're able to appreciate both kinds of movies or not. Obviously, mista_geechee is able, and Flashy is not.

There is nothing to appreciate in a crap film like that. So call it what it is...mindless time wasting...not something to "appreciate". If you wish to spend your time on a film that, be my guest, but don't tell me that since id do not "appreciate" crap films, that somehow makes them good because others appreciate crap.

A "no brainer" film, is in fact crap, by definition. Just because someone else appreciates it, does not in fact make it quality film...it simply means that someone is willing to waste more time on things of a much more dubious quality. If people want to watch those, that is their business...but telling the rest of us who expect more from cinema, that it is somehow on the level of other true good to great films is just silly.

When i was young i used to watch "Red Dawn"...probably saw it a hundred times...it was a great time waster, no brainer etc. etc....but that did not make it a good or great film. It was terribly acted, totally implausible etc. etc....but it could be watched and enjoyed.

 

[Flashy]

Absolutely not! Not good films at all. They are bubble-gum of the highest order.



Well - that's a little strong and I have read the posts below these quoted - I have to say I agree with Flashy again. These Michael Bay movies are really weak. The writing is poor - poor characters, poor plots, poor story progression but jam pack full of flash-bang whollop - which is fun and easy to watch. The way he does suspense sucks because you know exactly what is going to happen he just strings it out.

I enjoyed Armageddon and the Rock - I will even rewatch them if I see them on TV, but they are not good movies - they are a means to stringing action sequences together. The plots are beyond ridiculous and even when he has good actors like Cage and Connery he makes them look bad. You have to completely suspend disbelief to enjoy a Michael Bay movie - they really are 'check your brain in at the door' affairs. Which is fine and dandy - but not to be mistaken for 'good'.

Amen. Well said as always MB.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

Soldier

'nuff said.

 

[Flashy]

Here, here. If an ordinary moe can do a role and still convey the kind of performance that we expect out of our A list actors, then the entire story comes together that much stronger. One movie that I love and consider great is The Usual Suspects directed by Bryan Singer. At its debut, I didn't know Gabriel Byrne or Benicio del Toro. I was pretty familiar with the rest of the cast. The story was very written. It didn't look too plastic like a Hollywood movie can at times. It wasn't fueled by special effects. The score was just right to keep your heartbeat going 'along with story.' You can't move until the last scene closes and the credits roll...just like Dogs and just like Pulp.

This is for you, Flashy, LOL:biggrin1:
YouTube - Randy Watson

had it in favorites for 6 months :wink:

 

[mista geechee]

1. Critical opinion, i.e. the view of the vast majority of movie critics, are strongly against Michael Bay and has films. Fact. Like it or not, as i would hate to admit it, the critics are, usually, for the most part, correct. Critics want nothing more than to see a brilliant film, and considering critics are in themselves, frustrated and or failed moviemakers/actors/directors/ screenwriters, rightly or wrongly they see themselves as "guardians" of film. As such, they expect more from films, as do most people who want to see quality films made.

2. Go ahead and like the films you like...i never said you cannot enjoy them, i simply said that don't tell me they are good to great films, simply because you enjoy them, because they simply aren't and do not meet the criteria of good film-making, i.e. good writing, storyline, direction, acting etc. You may enjoy McDonalds, but do not tell me it is good, high quality food.

3. How exactly did i put my foot in my mouth because Bay's films are "popular"? Where did i ever say high grosses and popularity from the box office make a film great? Usually, it is exactly the opposite. Independence Day made nearly 10 times what There Will Be Blood made at the box office. There is absolutely no contest between the two in quality.

High grosses and popularity don't make a film good at all...see Independence Day, X Men, the Day After Tomorrow etc.

Michael Bay may have had a hand in making big budget, big grossing films, but that does not make them good at all. It means simply, that some people check their brains at the door to watch a big stupid movie. IF that entertains you, that is your business, but being entertained does not correlate to a brilliant film.

4. You said they were good? Fine. Still wrong...they are not good films. Just because you were entertained by such bad films, does not, in fact, make them good films...it just means you were entertained by them, and that you don't correlate quality with entertainment level in cinema. That is your business.

5. As for BAd Boys being "great", that is your opinion...but in all objective criteria, it really is not a "great" film. You were very entertained by it...that does not indicate greatness. The Godfather is great...Bad Boys is not.

6. The facts are that movies made by Michael Bay, are in fact garbage. They are the most base level of film entertainment, geared to draw the masses in who expect nothing more from their films then explosions, or pithy dialogue, with little to no story, poor writing, quick cut-style directing, and phony, melodramatic "acting".


7. There are plenty of films that are considered "good" that i did not necessarily like or "get", but i can see how other people would enjoy them, and do notice some things that would stick out as making that film quality, even if I did not think it was as great as some others did.

Some examples of this were movies like The Fountain, The Prestige, The Illusionist etc...I was hoping for more from these films, but i found them to be a bit lacking for me to give my best marks to...however i understand people who think the world of those films, and in terms of writing, production and idea, i salute those films for their quality and their effort, even if they did not fully deliver what i hoped...but i understand what others find great about them.

There is a big difference between a film like that, and a film which is clearly not good, such as Pearl Harbor and other Bay shower of shit -fests

Wow. 6 paragraphs of the same thing. You're right, just because I think they were good films doesn't mean that they were good. And just because you and some people who are paid for their opinions think they were bad, doesn't mean they were bad. We all know action movies are about blowing shit up and cheap thrills, so why are you suprised that they lack drama and meaningful dialogue? That's like ordering cheeseburger and complaining that it doesn't taste like steak.

All you're saying is that the opinion of one doesn't count but the opinion of many makes somehthing fact. Borderline argumentum ad populum.

Doesn't matter what you think makes a film great, you are just one of 6.7 billion, as am I and the critics you value so much. Hell, I'd think every movie was a piece of shit to if I saw nearly every movie ever made (referring to critics).

Maybe if you read the title of the thread, you would see that this about great action movies, not the greatest movies of all time,not the greatest dramas or love stories.But action, blowing things sky high and excitement. Actioners are about cheap thrills. It's not a fact that any movie is definitively bad or good because they are judged by opinion, critic or not.

I doubt that when anyone watches an action movie, they are worried about a sequential story line, they just wanna see who gets lit up next. If they are there for the storyline, they are watching the wrong movie.

And how did Godfather, The Illusionist, The Fountsin, and The Prestige even get in teh discussion ?

But of course, the classic "my opinion is right and yours in wrong" bravado.

 

[Flashy]

Wow. 6 paragraphs of the same thing. You're right, just because I think they were good films doesn't mean that they were good. And just because you and some people who are paid for their opinions think they were bad, doesn't mean they were bad. We all know action movies are about blowing shit up and cheap thrills, so why are you suprised that they lack drama and meaningful dialogue? That's like ordering cheeseburger and complaining that it doesn't taste like steak.

All you're saying is that the opinion of one doesn't count but the opinion of many makes somehthing fact. Borderline argumentum ad populum.

Doesn't matter what you think makes a film great, you are just one of 6.7 billion, as am I and the critics you value so much. Hell, I'd think every movie was a piece of shit to if I saw nearly every movie ever made (referring to critics).

Maybe if you read the title of the thread, you would see that this about great action movies, not the greatest movies of all time,not the greatest dramas or love stories.But action, blowing things sky high and excitement. Actioners are about cheap thrills. It's not a fact that any movie is definitively bad or good because they are judged by opinion, critic or not.

I doubt that when anyone watches an action movie, they are worried about a sequential story line, they just wanna see who gets lit up next. If they are there for the storyline, they are watching the wrong movie.

And how did Godfather, The Illusionist, The Fountsin, and The Prestige even get in teh discussion ?

But of course, the classic "my opinion is right and yours in wrong" bravado.

1. Actually, yes, Bay films are bad...since when am i "paid for my opinion"? In all criteria, Bay films are, in fact, bad.

2. If you know that action movies are about blowing shit up and cheap thrills, then how can you consder BAy movies to be good? You know they are catering to the most base, garbage level, and yet then claim they are good....they are good at blowing shit up...but they are not in fact good films.

3. Nobody is saying there is anything wrong with cheeseburgers...we are talking about the crappiest lowest grade cheeseburgers...while it may satisfy you, it is simply put, in quality, nowhere near a grade A steak. There is a big difference between satisfaction and quality.

4. where have i said the opinion of one doesn't count but the opinion of many does? Total nonsense. In fact, it is the reverse in this case...a hundred million people like yourself go out and pour their money into a crapfest like Independence Day, while the sane people prefer not to reward crap with money and praise.

5. On the contrary, if you saw every film ever made, or even half of them, you might have a better perspective on what is good and what is crap. The simple fact that you consider Michael Bay films good, shows that you need a bit more perspective. If you ENJOY them, fine...but don't tell the rest of us they are good...big difference.

6. I did read the title of your thread...however, you then went about classifying non-action films as action, and then went of on a tangent saying that "Michael Bay is good". Those aren't exactly keeping with the topic, are they? I merely disagreed with you on including several definite non-action films as action, and then disagreed strongly on you saying Bay is "good".

http://www.lpsg.org/1623551-post20.html

http://www.lpsg.org/1623744-post44.html

7. It is indeed a fact, that some movies are very bad, regadless of how you try to frame it. Gigli was awful. Just because 8% of people may have enjoyed it, still doesn't change the fact that it was crap

8. Indeed...people may not be worried about sequential or even realistic storytelling when they go see an action film...but if as you say, people are just there to see who "gets lit up next", you have pretty much confirmed the fact, that these are films that people enjoy, yet which are simply bad films.

9. You brought Bay films into the discussion...not I. You said he was good. He isn't.

10. The Godfather, The Illusionist, The Fountain and the Prestige have nothing to do with action...i was illustrating a point. With regards to the Illusionist the Fountain and the Prestige, i was illustrating that i might not fully get or enjoy a movie like them, that i was really looking forward to, that others might find terrific, but those movies and their aims, style, and quality, are still worthy of my respect and i can understand people who like those, even if i was a bit disappointed...i.e. those three films...wheras films such as Independence Day, that others may like, but that some simply don't like or don't get, is because the film truly sucks not because of some slight factors that just didn't work, but because of major differences in what constitutes good film.

 

[mista geechee]

And there we have the essence of your argument. That anyone who goes to see an action flick can't enjoy any other type of film.

I wasn't talking about you when I said "paid for an opinion", you obviously should know that and were probably responding in such a manner for shits and giggles.

I went on no tangent about Michael Bay. I simply said I enjoyed his films in teh context of action films. But you're so consumed by your own dogmatic opinions that you think they are fact and fail to see that this is about strictly action movies.

Part of your argument is that some of them are non-action films. Again opinion. These movies fit several categories.

You have shown to be nothing more than a doctrinaire conglomeration of non sequiturs. But no matter how you spin it, you opinion, which is what you have been posting all along, will never be a fact. Neither will mine or anybody elses.

So, I give the last word to you because you obviously want it and need to "right" all the time, even in matters that can be based on nothing but opinoin.

 

[Deno]

why don't people just post the damn movies they think are great and be done with it. The thread certainly isn't about what people don't think is great. God everyone is a know it all.

 

[D_Kilkhampton Largehole]

A "no brainer" film, is in fact crap, by definition.

That statement is crap, Bay movies are not crap, they're fun entertainment and I enjoy it, I love it. I just think you should respect other opinions. Furthermore I rest my case cause this is really getting me tired.

 

[Flashy]

That statement is crap, Bay movies are not crap, they're fun entertainment and I enjoy it, I love it. I just think you should respect other opinions. Furthermore I rest my case cause this is really getting me tired.

I respect your opinion and your entitlement to like Bay's films...but that does not make them good films.

They are, in fact, crap.

 

[mista geechee]

I respect your opinion and your entitlement to like Bay's films...but that does not make them good films.

They are, in opinion, crap.

Fixed it for ya. :smile:

 

[flame boy]

A film doesn't have to be good to be enjoyable - these are two very different things. Michael Bay movies are a prime example of enjoyable films that aren't ''good''. You know what you're going to get, nothing more and nothing less - a real popcorn type flick - and they do exactly what you want, they are 90 minutes of escapism.

If you want an action movie that is good and enjoyable then you can't go wrong with a lot of Ridley Scott (Gladiator) / James Cameron (True Lies, Terminator) films. Other movies worth nothing that fall in both categories are Desperado, The Hunt for Red October, Raiders of The Lost Ark, Lethal Weapon, Matrix, Aliens etc

 

[Flashy]

Fixed it for ya. :smile:

amusing, yet still wrong.

Michael Bay movies are total crap.

 

[mista geechee]

amusing, yet still wrong.

Michael Bay movies are total crap.

In your opinion, yes. In fact, no. That would imply some type of scientific evidence and unanimous agreement. That statement obviously lacks both.

 

[invisibleman]

Wherever you find Michael Bay...Jerry Bruckheimer cliches are there. Look at Bay's films and then watch some Jerry Bruckheimer shit. Same shit, different director. Okay?! :smile: