In Defense of Hating Michael Bay

Disclaimer: As the author of this blog, I reserve the right to delete any comments that I deem offensive. In this case, I will be counting any comments defending Michael Bay or other so-called "filmmakers" of his caliber as offensive in addition to whatever is traditionally offensive.

I'm going to say this outright first: I love blockbusters. Like most people, for many years of my life I only went to the movies in theaters to see blockbusters. Even since I have become academically interested in film, I have never had a problem with film-as-entertainment. Naturally, the best films are art and entertainment, but there is nothing wrong with only being one or the other, and I will always defend the merit of film solely as entertainment. Again, there is nothing wrong with films as harmless fun. However, there are many different calibers of entertainment, and the mere fact that people are willing to watch a certain type of entertainment does not necessarily grant it merit. Let me put it this way. Some films are like court jesters--nothing very deep or life-changing attached to it, just light, fluffy entertainment for the masses. Then some films are like, oh, public lynchings--which were considered a viable form of entertainment for many years. And if you still find a public lynching a good way to spend your Friday nights, then you better put your hood back on and leave; you're going to be late for your cross-burning meeting.

Sure, it's a little extreme to compare Michael Bay films to public lynchings, but you're starting to get my point: Saying that a Michael Bay film is just mindless fun and entertainment is not necessarily a good defense. I'm not one of those people upset about his messing with the "lore" of Transformers as a franchise. I probably couldn't care less on that front. He doesn't offend me there. Where he does offend me is in the realm of good taste and good film making. I know my fellow film lovers don't need a treatise outlining why Michael Bay sucks, but I personally know many people who have no idea why this dude attracts so much ire from me and most of the intelligent world. So I will attempt to explain.


Michael Bay is a hack filmmaker who attempts to disguise poor scripts with the flash of explosions, beautiful actors, and lots of CGI. Sometimes it works; I admit that I actually have moments of enjoyment during The Island and The Rock, though I accredit any positive reactions to The Rock to the presence of Ultimate BAMF Sean Connery. I can even stomach Armageddon in an ironic sort of way. But--and take note, fellow hacks Brett Ratner and McG--special effects and all your other razzle-dazzle do not a good movie make.

Again, I love blockbusters! I love my mindless action movies without any deeper meaning or substance! I know not every film can be Citizen Kane, and I don't demand that they be. (In any case, I hated Citizen Kane, but that's another discussion.) Case in point: Die Hard. I. Frakking. Love. Die Hard. Who out there will disagree with me that Die Hard is little more than fight scenes and explosions every so often broken up by useless dialogue? And those groan-inducing sequel titles: Die Harder; Die Hard: With a Vengeance; and my personal favorite, Live Free or Die Hard--fabulous! Light, fluffy stories that don't require many neurons to follow; big-ass explosions; completely impossible stunts; special effects out the wazoo...This is the definition of a blockbuster! And I love it. So do not criticize that I don't know how to "turn off my brain and just enjoy a movie"--I can and have for movies that deserve it.

There is, in fact, no lack of good, clean blockbuster fun. Speed. (Ignore Speed 2.) Indiana Jones. The Harry Potter franchise. The first 2 Pirates of the Caribbean films. The first 2 X-Men and Spiderman films--Let's not turn this into a discussion about trilogies...That's another blog...--and in fact most of the films of the superhero bent. I throw Watchmen and The Dark Knight into another category--blockbusters with intellectual content--and even Iron Man sort of edges into there. Sure, in general most of the comic book movies contain some deeper contexts that typically come through more fully in print rather than onscreen, but for the most part audiences can count on comic book movies for quick catchphrases, lots of fight scenes, and spectacular CGI. In most recent history, Star Trek is a phenomenal franchise reboot action blockbuster! Is that even proper grammar? It doesn't matter! It's not perfect; my aesthetics-obsessed friends rightly complain about J. J. Abrams' penchant for handheld cameras and lens flares, but Star Trek remains nevertheless a rip-roaring good time.

As you can see, there's nothing but love here for the blockbuster. So what makes these and others that I don't have room to mention different from the films made by our good friend Michael Bay?

First of all, and I'm thinking of Die Hard in particular, good blockbusters don't pretend to be anything more than they are. They know the only categories they'll be considered for in the legit awards shows (sorry, MTV Movie Awards) are in visual effects and sound editing/mixing, and possibly soundtrack, though the occasional Johnny Depp will sneak into Best Actor. Michael Bay, on the other hand, thinks he is Orson Welles. I've been told that this is nowhere more evident than in the director's commentary track for Pearl Harbor, but I can also direct you to his bratty email rant about the apparent disrespect being given to Transformers 2. Ignoring the terrible grammar, he is apparently pissed that more millions weren't spent marketing poor little Transformers 2 to be the "event movie" of the summer. Perhaps Paramount has realized something that Michael Bay can't: That his movie is going to suck, so why waste money marketing something that is certain to be panned critically when they can market something like Star Trek that, a month later, still has a 95% positive critical rating on Rotten Tomatoes? (In case you were curious, Transformers 2 hasn't even been released yet and already has only a 39% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes...)

More importantly, however, what I consider "good" blockbusters can be rip-roaring, action-filled, special effects-laden good times without relying on offensive stereotyping, toilet humor, or complete sabotage of historical tragedies to carry them. As I wrote in my current Facebook status,* Michael Bay is an insult to intelligence, and I mean it. As my case in point, I give you Pearl Harbor.

Now, here's the time for full disclosure: There was a period of time in my life when I actually liked and defended Pearl Harbor. I am ashamed of my sins, and, believe me, I think I'm still paying penance for them. But let me explain myself--this was during the years when my only criterion for liking a movie was that it starred hot actors, and Pearl Harbor was awash in them! The moment I started learning things about World War II and the actual events about Pearl Harbor, I realized what a horrible, horrible mistake that was. The historical inaccuracies in Pearl Harbor are insulting not only to any discerning moviegoer, but also to all those who served and lost their lives in WWII. Perhaps--perhaps--if Michael Bay had only decided to remove all references to the real WWII and made the film about some fictional war in an alternate universe, it could've passed as a relatively harmless, over-the-top action flick. After all, the actual bombing of Pearl Harbor in his movie could've been lifted from any bad disaster film. But he didn't.

As for the offensive stereotyping and toilet humor I was referring to, you don't have to look any further than Transformers 2. The bloggers over at Topless Robot and Movieline have already outlined this much better than I can, considering they've actually seen it, but for those who don't want to click the link I'll paraphrase: 2 new Transformers, Mudflap and Skids, are the Jar-Jar Binks of the Transformers franchise. Just what cinema needed, more characters portraying negative black stereotypes! In the words of Topless Robot, "there are illiterate robots who speak in ebonics in the movie and one of them has a gold fucking tooth in Transformers 2." And if you don't know about the toilet humor, you clearly haven't seen the picture of Devastator's testicles. Click that link. You may regret it, but at least you'll believe that we aren't making this up.

Are we that stupid? Have we, the American (and worldwide) movie going audience actually sunk so low that we're supposed to find anatomically-correct machines funny? It's not a cute joke, it's actually somewhat insulting to the concept of human intelligence! And did Michael Bay learn nothing from the backlash against George Lucas and Jar-Jar Binks? It's 200-frakking-9--minstrel shows portraying racial stereotypes are not cool! The same goes for you, Brett Ratner, Mr. Rush Hour. I admit, I have the DVD for Rush Hour, and it's a testament to how starved I am as an Asian-American for an Asian presence in cinema that I am able to turn my brain off forcibly for the 98 minutes of the film in order to ignore the blatantly offensive Asian and black stereotypes bombarding me from the screen. And yes, that's what it is. Oh, hahaha, it's a Chinese guy who does kung fu and speaks broken English! Bwahaha, it's a loud-mouthed black guy obsessed with Michael Jackson! Hilarious! Shame on me, I know. And shame on everyone else who defends and supports this type of film making. This is not, no matter how you try to spin it, harmless, mindless fun. I'm the first to voice my opinion about how political correctness often goes too far, but Transformers and Rush Hour aren't being politically incorrect ironically. They're exploiting racial stereotypes for a cheap laugh. And it's not funny.

Let me reiterate: Michael Bay isn't doing any of this in an ironic sense or to make some sort of commentary on anything. He honestly believes he is being funny, creative, and artistic, and he must be stopped. So I'm begging you: On June 24, do not go see Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Withhold your hard-earned money from the likes of Michael Bay. Go see Star Trek or Up again. I'll even give you permission to see Terminator: Salvation or Wolverine: Origins. If you want to see the film, like I do, solely to justify your undying hatred for Michael Bay, this is the one time you will find me advocating illegal downloading. Do your part to make this film a financial disaster. Bay will surely blame it on "bad marketing," but we know the truth, and maybe, just maybe, we can put a stop to the madness that is supposed to be his remake of The Birds...

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

*Read this article. And then, everyone, PLEASE STOP asking me in excited voices if I'm going to see Transformers 2! I'm not excited, and I'm sad that YOU'RE excited! Transformers 1 was awful, it's all Michael Bay's fault, and you can just BLOW ME if you're actually going to defend him or the movies. Michael Bay is not just a hack, he is an insult to films and to intelligence. That is all.

Reactions: