The Exterminating Angel

What is Michael Bay trying to say? We know he’s an entertainer, first and foremost (or so he thinks). So if one asked him directly, he’d more than likely answer: "I’m just here to blow your minds with these amazing transforming robots created by Hasbro, OK?" Of course. Whether through his not-so-exciting, yet oddly watchable misfire of Pearl Harbor or the weirdly invigorating carnage and surprising cleverness of Bad Boys II, the man is the Ethel Merman of action movies -- the hostess with the mostest (and biggest budget) on the ball. And with Transformers 2 he’s definitely in Ethel territory -- he wants to please everyone.

But again, what the hell is this man trying to say? And furthermore, what is his aesthetic? While watching the second installment of Transformers (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen) my mind reflected on this for a good, long while (the picture is 2 hours and 24 minutes after all). While staring at a multitude of muddy looking robots flying by, or smashing about, in strangely (one would say poorly) crafted action sequences, or John Turturro revealing his rear-end in a g-string, or Shia LaBeouf running around Egypt yelling nonsense like “Bumble-bee!” or his continual hyperactive stream of “no, no, no, no, no!" my eyes scanned the enormous IMAX frame,  searching for…meaning, for the Bay way.

And after settling into the second hour of the movie, dismayed I had over another hour ahead of me, it started to come to me: Michael Bay is a surrealist. He may not know he is, he may not like that I’m calling him one, but the money sucking action filmmaker extraordinaire would do well by Bunuel or Jodorowksy or Gilliam or hell, Aqua Teen Hunger Force (which is absurdist surrealism at its finest, especially the ingenious movie, and the characters would have featured brilliantly in this picture). If the filmmaker had some chutzpah, if he truly tapped into the melting pocket watch corner of his brain, if he understood his full dream weaving potential (because I do believe Michael Bay can get me through the night), the next Transformers would be titled Un Chien Andalou LaBeouf.

The story? OK…well…there’s a prologue set in 17,000 B.C., which is truly bizarre, and strangely gorgeous, and then we’re thrust into U.S. Army world, via Capt. Lennox (Josh Duhamel) and Sergeant Epps (Tyrese Gibson), whose elite squad (called NEST) use real live people and Autobots to smoke out Decepticons. If you understand the Transformers universe, you’ll know what the hell I’m talking about. If not, no matter. After aqua imprisonment at the bottom of the ocean, the bad transformers seek to free their leader, Megatron (voiced by Hugo Weaving), and then something about shards of a cube (called “the Spark”).

Enter Shia, or rather the ridiculously named Sam Witwicky (is he a character from Dickens?) who is trying to simply attend college like every normal kid but just can’t shake these damn deceptions. In this case, one comes in the form of a sexed up freshman girl (freshmen girls are deceptions…oh…that’s saying something). After Sam goes off on some nutty Rain Man prophesying created by the Spark (Rainn Wilson shows up as a college professor un-amused by Sam’s tic-like compulsion to save the world) he’s eventually pushed out of school and into Egypt where much scrambling around occurs. Yes, there’s a story, there’s a mythology, there’s even an ending, but you can decipher that for yourself. That, and just how Megan Fox’s white pants never, ever get dirty. OK, they get dirty, but they manage to magically clean themselves.

But then why should they stay dirty? In the Bay universe, time and space are suspended, action is indecipherable and sense isn’t important. Sensory overload is, albeit occasionally beautifully shot sensory overload, and again, surrealistic sequences of elegance that I noticed in the corners of the frame, almost as if Bay had sprayed acid in the theater -- something Gaspar Noe would heartily approve of. There’s a scene very near the end, in particular, in which Sam stands in some alternate universe talking to the robots that could have hatched from one of Hunter S. Thompson’s drug benders. But is that the point Michael Bay? If so, you’re on to something. And I want more of it.

But will he ever give it to me?  The Wachowski’s did with their underrated and misunderstood Speed Racer, Ang Lee did with his gorgeously over the top, ridiculously maligned Hulk, Mel Gibson did with his compelling, gloriously insane bit of the old ultra violence, The Passion of the Christ  --  better pictures, and ones many could not understand or get behind because, well (and I’m speculating here) they were actual works of art. Bay has artistry (or hires others to), and he has more power than the aforementioned directors so he could get away with murder, as he did, almost quite literally with the great Bad Boys II. I just wish he would have pushed it further with Transformers. Throw in a tiger emerging from a fish, give us an Elephant Celebes, make Meatwad the hero. Please -- you have the sensibility.

If, in the next Transformers he replaces Megan Fox midway through the movie with Jessica Alba (a la Bunuel’s That Obscure Object of Desire) I will have faith in him. As for now, I’m just waiting for his newest treachery of images.  And if you dig Magritte, you’ll know I mean that as a potential compliment.

Comments

[Paul D. Brazill]

Great review. Mainstream entertainment just gets stranger and stranger.

[Katie]

I've on;y seen the first transformers but I was completely disappointed. I think you're right that more went into the look of the film than in any actual plot or character development.

[Nick]

"the next Transformers would be titled 'Un Chien Andalou LaBeouf.'"

Oh, man, that made me laugh so hard.

[Andy]

Firstly I have to say you just reminded me of something. I watched That Obscure Object of Desire at university. Half the class didn’t notice the change of actress! Were they not paying attention or are you in such a state of suspended disbelief whilst viewing a film that you shut out the possibility of things like that?

Now Transformers. This is a tricky one. I saw it last weekend (we got it a week early in the UK) while there was nothing particularly wrong with the film it did fall a long way short of being good. The big problem is that there is never a real sense danger around the main characters. This is partly that they have set their sights too high, they won’t destroy the world as we know it in a family film. I also found the charters a bit one dimensional, because the film is set in such a short space of time we don’t learn anything new about the characters and they have no arc. I think directors who want to make an action film should sit down and watch Die Hard, The Terminator or Even Point Break to remind them the importance of good charters in action films.

Conclusion. Not a disaster but not a film that I am rushing to see again. It won’t find its way into my DVD collection.

[mister muleboy]

The Mythical Monkey's recent discourse on surrealism,
http://mythicalmonkey.blogspot.com/2009/06/dadaism-surrealism-and-anti-narrative.html

reminded me that modern commercial directors churning out summer blockbusters can undermine or ignore the system any time they want -- the system isn't paying attention! They could each bite the hand of the [Andalusian] dog that feeds their tiger fish, and ninety percent of the audience in the theater would let it wash over them.

Of course, if they want to undermine or ignore the system, they might be surrealists, but they'd lend themselves to a sub rosa narrative -- a true no-no.

Goddamnit, now I have to go to this stupid Transformers 2 movie . . . . Thanks a LOT, Kim [ *sigh*]

[Encore Entertainment]

This was a very comprehensive and strangely intelligent review of a film that I consider to be trash.

[Bill Stankus]

Sometimes a toy is simply a toy.

[Mike Pearson]

I knew nothing about the Transformers-verse, but since I teach robotics to middle schoolers and high schoolers I expected to have some affection for the robots in the first movie. And I just didn't. I liked Shia LeBeouf in The Greatest Game Ever Played, so I expected to at least find his character interesting in Transformers. And I didn't.

However, my daughter loved the movie and we'll go see the second one later today.

Now, thanks to your review, I have a context that may make the movie enjoyable - or oddly tolerable.

Maybe Michael Bay took to heart the opening quote in Annie Proulx' Close Range: Reality's never been much use out here.

[Andy]

I also forgot to mention the movie is product placement central! It looks like an advert for GM.

[json]

Michael Bay is a Christian moralist. Calling him a surrealist, to be honest, seems a little ingratiating. I haven't seen Transformers, but from what I've read and seen the flick is filled with obvious religious subtext. Look at The Island. My god, man, it's a patently ridiculous argument against stem cell research. The guy is nuts...and dangerous. POST THIS

[Flickhead]

I'm sorry, but you lost me at "John Turturro revealing his rear-end in a g-string."

[C. Jerry]

You make a lot of good points, Kim. (I'm totally with you on Speed Racer and Ang Lee's Hulk.) I only wish that Jodorowsky had Bay's budgets. And that Bay had Jodorowsky's.

[555]

Excellent article, love the perspective (and the daps for Speed Racer).

[Mike Pearson]

Through the lens of surrealism, I enjoyed the movie. I was thinking of your review particularly during the shot of Megan Fox looking down at Shia from his POV while the improbably timely medic helicopter is passing overhead.

Thanks for the key, Kim.

[Warts and all]

This is what cellphone movie technology is all about. The true test is to see if the biggest, most stupendous cinematic garbage can turn into glistening diamonds from the palm of one's hand.
I partially think that, (if another sexual innuendo analogy is to be used), this size of blockbuster balls has perhaps a surrealist taint because it's like the stone spear gets a bit dull each time in killing and shards are wacked off and parts are added and taped on and screwed in place for continuous killing, thus deforming the sharp utilitarian original form, but serving an accentuated platter.

The action of spear to machine.
Art as Movie Machine Deformity.
Or maybe language as different cloud formations.
But this could be scratched out entirely and say that Bay is an Action Movie Barker who is able to gather a body of individuals to create his "Awesome Delivery Shots" and it probably doesn't matter to him as to how all the parts finally fit together. "I bought this and this and this and this. I am the General and this is my war".

[Mick Shimmer]

Kim, you never cease to surprise & fascinate with what you pick to write about in film each week. You have a way of salvaging & defending credibility for some in "the biz" that the public have catagorically deemed hopeless.
Always a great read...were you on your high school Debate Team, by chance?

Anyway, one trivia fact correction on your referencing to Ethel Merman being the "hostess with the mostess on the ball". Um, that was actually a song bit done by Tallulah Bankhead, not Ethel "No Biz Like Show Biz". (I know, cuz I'm gettin' old).

[Kim]

Thank you for your nice words Mick. However, Ethel also sang Hostess with the Mostess. I know cuz I actually own this LP : http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3176/3083211773_db007deb63.jpg?v=0

Thanks again,
Kim

[EGS]

many of the great artists farmed out work to their students or had studios where other artists did the work perceived and prescribed by the conceptulists; Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni being one of the post modern era and George Lucas and his Lucas Arts of the modern. Maybe he is teaching a new generation?

[Federico Gianotti]

I started thinking aboout surrealism in this movie the meet Jetfire... it seems that from that point on the movie went out of it's own universe.

SPOILER ahead:

And it also reminded me of That Obscure Object of Desire when they land on Egypt and out of nowhere Sam Witwicky has a cast on his left arm for the remaining of the movie... several people didn't realize this that saw the movie with me, curiouly enough what also happens with a lot of people not noticing the actress change in Buñuel's movie.