Open forum question from Emily Blake:
Why is Transformers 2 the number 1 film of the year?
Those folks who have been following GITS since the summer have probably seen this – which does a pretty thorough job laying out my basic response to Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. If that doesn’t quite do the job, there is this awesome piece of satire: “Michael Bay Finally Made An Art Movie”.
But if you’re asking a serious question, I’ll give my attempt at a serious answer:
1) The movie is a sequel to its successful predecessor Transformers which grossed $709M worldwide. That translates into an enormous set of eyeballs preconditioned to be interested in a sequel.
2) Transformers has been a brand since 1984, first as a toy, then a TV series, and then a comic book series, so the name stretches across two generations of consumers, thereby, widening the potential audience for a sequel (or any future versions of the movie).
3) Michael Bay knows how to make visually stimulating movies. And even though the story in Transformers 2 may have been virtually invisible, the CGI was most definitely not, one series of eye-popping visuals after another. For young males (10 years-old and up), Transformers 2 is an end-to-end panoply of mind-churning eye candy.
4) The movie was released on June 24, well over a month after Star Trek, so that movie was pretty much played out, and in time to catch a jet-stream over the July 4th weekend to maximize its run during July and into August, thereby maximizing its potential to generate box office dollars.
5) It’s a classic example of what passes for a Hwood summer blockbuster: Pre-branded entertainment, massive visuals, tons of action, a super hot ‘chick’ (Megan Fox) for the male teen set – in other words, a Big Mindless Movie.
Now please understand: I may not like Big Mindless Movies, but that’s beside the point because I’m not the target audience for movies like Transformers 2. Big Mindless Movies most definitely have their place in Hwood (we’re about to be subjected to another one in 2012). In fact, I think it’s safe to say that no one can make Big Mindless Movies as ‘well’ as Hwood. They know what works – and every summer, they prove it over and over again.
Which is a pretty good place to close my response: The fundamental reason Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen will end up being the #1 box office movie in 2009 is that everyone involved in the development and production of the movie — from Steven Spielberg (Executive Producer) to Lorenzo di Bonaventura (Producer) to Ehren Kruger and Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman (screenwriters) to Michael Bay (Director) — knew exactly the parts they had to play in the production of a massively Big Mindless Movie.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to worship at the altar of Pixar which knows how to make Big Thoughtful Movies like Up.
Thanks. I know the reason everybody says, but I like the breakdown.
So do you think if they had released the film in November instead of the Summer, it wouldn't be the #1 movie of the year?
And while we're at it, why didn't word of mouth kill the take on the second weekend?
Re word of mouth: My guess is the core audience liked the movie, so they talked it up, and perhaps went to see it repeat times.
Yes, I think we all, or at least those of us with half a brain in their skulls, are mourning the loss of national taste and intellect when it comes to the public embracing the foul atrocity that is Transformers 2. And yet, as someone who writes screen scenarios, hopefully one day for a buck or two, I don't really let an anomaly like Revenge of the Fallen get me down too much. Simply because what WE do (write stories) and what THEY do (blow shit up REAL BIG, YEAH!) are two totally different things. As in not even mildly related to one another. I mean, sure, I suppose under all that CG hyperactivity there's a script buried somewhere (debatable, I know) but WORDS on PAPER mean nothing to bombastic schlockmeisters like Michael Bay.
And make no mistake. Bay is only, like, once removed from the hack directors who used to work for Roger Corman and Bert I. Gordon and the American International guy, whatzisname, Sam Z. Arkoff. He merely has louder and more destructive toys at his disposal. Those maniacs used to crank out sludge to play in Drive-Ins in the south and rake in the bucks.
Consider Transformers 2 the modern equivalent of southern drive-in fodder. Instead of mosquitoes and Chevy convertibles rocking back and forth, we got DTS sound and stadium seating.
So while I'm sorry that 2009 is the year of the badly written Autobot, I doubt that the obscene kind of haul for a film as lame and as BORING (to me, the biggest failing of all) as Transformers 2 will be the norm.
Let us not forget The Dark Knight was only last year and one certainly couldn't ask for a smarter blockbuster to sweep up the box office.
And, best of all, GI JOE, which was equally brain-addled and no less a whore for the nostalgic toy dollar, was, for all intents and purposes, a dud.
Yes, Emily, I agree, you'd have thought negative buzz would have shaved off some box office. Certainly everyone I know that saw it thought it was horrendous and me and my lame cronies are, God knows, the "core audience," as Scott says.
We grew up on this crap, after all.
Thanks for sharring importent information in this blog.
It was very nice.
Ask Flashlari
ask