![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wingedbeastOkay, I could make a Case for remaking the Transformers movie. There's enough material there for me to expound upon the problems and enough potential there for a good story to happen in its place. But, that's one of the problems of the movie that we have.
On the one hand, there's the story of a plucky NSA contractor computer tech which becomes a story that has, among other things, the bare bones of a potentially good serious M-I-B style movie. On the next hand, we have a military squad in a story that has, among other things, the bare bones of a potentially good Predator style movie. Then, there's two teens in a story that has, among other things, the bare bones of a coming of age story of self-actualization. Oh, and by the way, there are transformers doing... something.
That's four hands, four stories for a single movie. I'm not going to say that this many stories can't be done in a single movie. That has been done much better than this movie. I am going to say that Michael Bay can't do it.
Of course, he couldn't do any one of the stories right in the first place. Michael Bay lacks respect... for anybody... or anything.
Taking a glance at his filmography, I can see the lack of respect playing out. Pearl Harbor would claim to respect the armed forces and the men therein. Instead, there's a bland hagiography (a word I recently learned, aren't you proud) mixed with mistaken understandings of the navy and air force that amount to insult for the sake of cheap manipulation on screen. Armageddon would imagine itself respectful of working class men, but the images are a mixture of simplistic and cheaply manipulative.
Respect requires respecting the people. Worshiping the icons isn't respecting the people because people aren't icons. Putting the icons of American Goodness on display isn't an act of respect. It's an act of pandering.
I wouldn't say that Michael Bay does that consciously. It's just where he goes in his effort to get people to watch his movies that are, primarily, about things going boom. If Michael Bay were to make a movie about Michael Bay for an audience of Michael Bay, I imagine he would do similarly little research, pay similarly little attention to the content in favor of getting the most spectacle out of each shot, and be similarly dismissive about objections from his audience.
The Transformers movie (without even getting into the sequels) has that problem throughout. That's on top of the issue of the four different stories.
Now, I don't object to the base idea of any one of the stories. In fact, in the expanded franchise, I think they can all play out. It's just a choice has to be made and the transformers have to take a starring role in their own movie. So, between the three human-centric stories to take priority in the first Transformers movie, I choose Sam Witwicky and Mikaela Banes.
By the way, for this particular Case, you can thank Lindsey Ellis and her ongoing series "The Whole Plate" wherein she uses the Transformers movies for examination and as a means of discussing various film criticism theories. She got me thinking on the topic and gave me a wealth of points for consideration. Link below*.
In the interest of giving full credit, it was the most recent three (as of the writing of this post) videos in that series that brought up the three big issues that I would like to address with this Case.
1. There's no reason for alien robots to be inherently male or masculine.
2. Sam Witwicky is a character defined by flaws that are never acknoweldged, by the films, to be flaws.
3. Mikaela Banes is, in text, the most actualized character (at least in the first movie) and, in framing, a thing made of lady parts.
(My personal theory is that the writers named her Mikaela in an attempt to convince Michael Bay to treat her with respect. It didn't work.)
The movie we have attempts a theme of "no sacrifice, no victory". Mikaela is the character who calls out Sam for never having had to sacrifice anything. Optimus Prime is ready, willing, and able to destroy himself in the name of destroying The Cube so that Megatron can't have it. And, Sam's ancestor shouted that at his employees while pulling something from the ice.
I could argue that the movie has the opposite of its intended theme. Mikaela's sacrifice is, by framing, something that makes her more ideal of a girlfriend. Despite Optimus Prime's readiness, Sam kills Megatron with the Cube instead. And, that ancestor shouts the slogan while employees do the work, the movies never suggesting any personal sacrifice taken on. The theme of the movie, as we have it, is making others sacrifice and then having someone who has privilege and feels entitled take the credit.
Instead of going to the theme of the value of sacrifice, there's something else to work with, something that would be on the minds of a group of giant alien robots becoming a part of human society. Objectivification versus personhood.
There can be a bit of the same start. I've got no issues with a slow buildup... Though, I think we can all agree that we can do without the racist jokes.
Sam starts out much as we see in the movie we have. He's nervous, shaky, unpopular and romantically unsuccessful. He imagines that he would gain something, perhaps not even something specific, with the relative freedom of movement represented by having a car.
Gaining the car doesn't immediately gain him anything. He still thinks it might, but he's left feeling all the same insecurities.
Enter the story of Mikaela. Mikaela is blocked, put in a position where she can be seen, by those around her, as feminine or seen as an automotive specialist. Being someone with a knowledge of and interest in cars, she naturally came to the company of a young man who had a similar interest and not as much knowledge. Unfortunately, he had identified his manhood through what knowledge he did have and found the idea of her having a similar or greater automotive skill to be either laughable or threatening to his masculinity.
When Sam offers Mikaela a ride home, he plies his insecurity into pathetic attempts to impress Mikaela. She is quite attractive. The car malfunctions in some odd ways that would seem, to anybody observing them as the driver causing them, to be manipulative and creepy as hell. Sam's well aware of this and is entirely unphased by her desire to check under the hood. He's worried, too, about how he looks.
That worry about how he looks is what moves him to offer her the driver's seat on the way back. He's still objectifying her (as his gaze suggests). He just hasn't attached his sense of manliness and value to automotive skill or knowledge. So, it's a small improvement for her, in that she doesn't have to choose between her interests that are coded masculine and being perceived as feminine.
Then comes the revelation. The car wasn't malfunctioning. It was a robot in disguise and it was attempting to endear itself to Sam by getting him something he wanted, namely Mikaela.
The fight with the small transformer happens quickly, with Sam on the defensive and Mikaela coming in with whatever tool that was. (I haven't attached my sense of masculinity to automotive knowledge either.)
Next comes the conversation wherein Mikaela and Sam meet and have a conversation with the Autobots. Here's where the framing needs to focus on Mikaela's perspective. The Autobots have an interest in Sam Witwicky... but why? Well, it's nothing Sam's done. It's that Sam owns something that they need.
There's a basic unfairness to all of this. She's the one with the knowledge that can help them. She's the one who's been brave and acted quickly to save his life. Sure, he's got some superficial charm, but that's overshadowed by his mass of insecurities. In personal capacities and operational abilities, he's got nothing but the fact that an ancestor owned something.
This is the point where we have the next revelation. She has a record. She has a record because she didn't turn on her father when under pressure by the police. The question is put with more forceful tone. "When did you ever sacrifice something?"
That leads to a scene in which Sam tries to communicate the nature of his difficulty with one of the Autobots and asks the question of if they have women. They don't. They don't have men. They're robots. They don't sexually reproduce.
The questions then come faster. Why do they look like men? Why are they shaped in ways that approximate the secondary sex characteristics of men? (That exact language might not be necessary.) The answer is that they don't have complete control over their shapes. They need a scanning device outside of them to design their forms, but they do have some control over it. They wanted to be seen as people to the people of Earth. And, people of Earth tend to associate "person" with "gendered person" and most closely with "masculine gendered person".
Here we have the correction of Sam's flaw and a way to address his insecurity. He's been acting entitled to a position of praise and importance and belovedness. He's been viewing everybody as objects, being interested in what he gets out of this. Now, it's his time to take an interest in not just the fact of a conflict between Autobots and Decepticons, but a question of what historically underlies that conflict. How did all this happen?
At the same time, he can start taking a real interest in Mikaela the person, rather than just being interested in her secondary sex characterstics. Speaking as a heterosexual man, it is possible to do both and to prioritize the first interest over the latter.
That interest and the value of his presence, above and beyond merely having access to some object from an ancestor, comes in a moment when the transformer he knows best is injured. A doctor transformer isn't available and the wound is harmful, but superficial. It can be corrected without too much specialized knowledge. Thus, he trusts Mikaela to do the battlefield surgery and convinces the Autobot to trust her as well.
From that point on, he takes her lead any time the issue is one of combat, logistics, or repair work. Between the two of them, she's the one who knows her stuff. When figuring out the nature of the conflict and who really is the good guy between Autobot and Decepticon, he's the one who's been finding out by asking questions. In reporting later on, he makes sure that it's known that she's the one who has experience practicing surgery on the alien robots.
As a team, she's good on muscle and he's good on diplomacy. They can respect each other for who they are and the value they represent. That makes the reason why the Autobots want to maintain their association with the both of them. They represent a capacity to work with and have an ambassadorship directly to humanity, rather than necessarily relying upon the governments thereof to be motivated to do the right thing without an informed populace pushing them to do so.
It's not much in the way of change. But, I think it makes the difference.
* https://youtu.be/PRXI__Wixas
On the one hand, there's the story of a plucky NSA contractor computer tech which becomes a story that has, among other things, the bare bones of a potentially good serious M-I-B style movie. On the next hand, we have a military squad in a story that has, among other things, the bare bones of a potentially good Predator style movie. Then, there's two teens in a story that has, among other things, the bare bones of a coming of age story of self-actualization. Oh, and by the way, there are transformers doing... something.
That's four hands, four stories for a single movie. I'm not going to say that this many stories can't be done in a single movie. That has been done much better than this movie. I am going to say that Michael Bay can't do it.
Of course, he couldn't do any one of the stories right in the first place. Michael Bay lacks respect... for anybody... or anything.
Taking a glance at his filmography, I can see the lack of respect playing out. Pearl Harbor would claim to respect the armed forces and the men therein. Instead, there's a bland hagiography (a word I recently learned, aren't you proud) mixed with mistaken understandings of the navy and air force that amount to insult for the sake of cheap manipulation on screen. Armageddon would imagine itself respectful of working class men, but the images are a mixture of simplistic and cheaply manipulative.
Respect requires respecting the people. Worshiping the icons isn't respecting the people because people aren't icons. Putting the icons of American Goodness on display isn't an act of respect. It's an act of pandering.
I wouldn't say that Michael Bay does that consciously. It's just where he goes in his effort to get people to watch his movies that are, primarily, about things going boom. If Michael Bay were to make a movie about Michael Bay for an audience of Michael Bay, I imagine he would do similarly little research, pay similarly little attention to the content in favor of getting the most spectacle out of each shot, and be similarly dismissive about objections from his audience.
The Transformers movie (without even getting into the sequels) has that problem throughout. That's on top of the issue of the four different stories.
Now, I don't object to the base idea of any one of the stories. In fact, in the expanded franchise, I think they can all play out. It's just a choice has to be made and the transformers have to take a starring role in their own movie. So, between the three human-centric stories to take priority in the first Transformers movie, I choose Sam Witwicky and Mikaela Banes.
By the way, for this particular Case, you can thank Lindsey Ellis and her ongoing series "The Whole Plate" wherein she uses the Transformers movies for examination and as a means of discussing various film criticism theories. She got me thinking on the topic and gave me a wealth of points for consideration. Link below*.
In the interest of giving full credit, it was the most recent three (as of the writing of this post) videos in that series that brought up the three big issues that I would like to address with this Case.
1. There's no reason for alien robots to be inherently male or masculine.
2. Sam Witwicky is a character defined by flaws that are never acknoweldged, by the films, to be flaws.
3. Mikaela Banes is, in text, the most actualized character (at least in the first movie) and, in framing, a thing made of lady parts.
(My personal theory is that the writers named her Mikaela in an attempt to convince Michael Bay to treat her with respect. It didn't work.)
The movie we have attempts a theme of "no sacrifice, no victory". Mikaela is the character who calls out Sam for never having had to sacrifice anything. Optimus Prime is ready, willing, and able to destroy himself in the name of destroying The Cube so that Megatron can't have it. And, Sam's ancestor shouted that at his employees while pulling something from the ice.
I could argue that the movie has the opposite of its intended theme. Mikaela's sacrifice is, by framing, something that makes her more ideal of a girlfriend. Despite Optimus Prime's readiness, Sam kills Megatron with the Cube instead. And, that ancestor shouts the slogan while employees do the work, the movies never suggesting any personal sacrifice taken on. The theme of the movie, as we have it, is making others sacrifice and then having someone who has privilege and feels entitled take the credit.
Instead of going to the theme of the value of sacrifice, there's something else to work with, something that would be on the minds of a group of giant alien robots becoming a part of human society. Objectivification versus personhood.
There can be a bit of the same start. I've got no issues with a slow buildup... Though, I think we can all agree that we can do without the racist jokes.
Sam starts out much as we see in the movie we have. He's nervous, shaky, unpopular and romantically unsuccessful. He imagines that he would gain something, perhaps not even something specific, with the relative freedom of movement represented by having a car.
Gaining the car doesn't immediately gain him anything. He still thinks it might, but he's left feeling all the same insecurities.
Enter the story of Mikaela. Mikaela is blocked, put in a position where she can be seen, by those around her, as feminine or seen as an automotive specialist. Being someone with a knowledge of and interest in cars, she naturally came to the company of a young man who had a similar interest and not as much knowledge. Unfortunately, he had identified his manhood through what knowledge he did have and found the idea of her having a similar or greater automotive skill to be either laughable or threatening to his masculinity.
When Sam offers Mikaela a ride home, he plies his insecurity into pathetic attempts to impress Mikaela. She is quite attractive. The car malfunctions in some odd ways that would seem, to anybody observing them as the driver causing them, to be manipulative and creepy as hell. Sam's well aware of this and is entirely unphased by her desire to check under the hood. He's worried, too, about how he looks.
That worry about how he looks is what moves him to offer her the driver's seat on the way back. He's still objectifying her (as his gaze suggests). He just hasn't attached his sense of manliness and value to automotive skill or knowledge. So, it's a small improvement for her, in that she doesn't have to choose between her interests that are coded masculine and being perceived as feminine.
Then comes the revelation. The car wasn't malfunctioning. It was a robot in disguise and it was attempting to endear itself to Sam by getting him something he wanted, namely Mikaela.
The fight with the small transformer happens quickly, with Sam on the defensive and Mikaela coming in with whatever tool that was. (I haven't attached my sense of masculinity to automotive knowledge either.)
Next comes the conversation wherein Mikaela and Sam meet and have a conversation with the Autobots. Here's where the framing needs to focus on Mikaela's perspective. The Autobots have an interest in Sam Witwicky... but why? Well, it's nothing Sam's done. It's that Sam owns something that they need.
There's a basic unfairness to all of this. She's the one with the knowledge that can help them. She's the one who's been brave and acted quickly to save his life. Sure, he's got some superficial charm, but that's overshadowed by his mass of insecurities. In personal capacities and operational abilities, he's got nothing but the fact that an ancestor owned something.
This is the point where we have the next revelation. She has a record. She has a record because she didn't turn on her father when under pressure by the police. The question is put with more forceful tone. "When did you ever sacrifice something?"
That leads to a scene in which Sam tries to communicate the nature of his difficulty with one of the Autobots and asks the question of if they have women. They don't. They don't have men. They're robots. They don't sexually reproduce.
The questions then come faster. Why do they look like men? Why are they shaped in ways that approximate the secondary sex characteristics of men? (That exact language might not be necessary.) The answer is that they don't have complete control over their shapes. They need a scanning device outside of them to design their forms, but they do have some control over it. They wanted to be seen as people to the people of Earth. And, people of Earth tend to associate "person" with "gendered person" and most closely with "masculine gendered person".
Here we have the correction of Sam's flaw and a way to address his insecurity. He's been acting entitled to a position of praise and importance and belovedness. He's been viewing everybody as objects, being interested in what he gets out of this. Now, it's his time to take an interest in not just the fact of a conflict between Autobots and Decepticons, but a question of what historically underlies that conflict. How did all this happen?
At the same time, he can start taking a real interest in Mikaela the person, rather than just being interested in her secondary sex characterstics. Speaking as a heterosexual man, it is possible to do both and to prioritize the first interest over the latter.
That interest and the value of his presence, above and beyond merely having access to some object from an ancestor, comes in a moment when the transformer he knows best is injured. A doctor transformer isn't available and the wound is harmful, but superficial. It can be corrected without too much specialized knowledge. Thus, he trusts Mikaela to do the battlefield surgery and convinces the Autobot to trust her as well.
From that point on, he takes her lead any time the issue is one of combat, logistics, or repair work. Between the two of them, she's the one who knows her stuff. When figuring out the nature of the conflict and who really is the good guy between Autobot and Decepticon, he's the one who's been finding out by asking questions. In reporting later on, he makes sure that it's known that she's the one who has experience practicing surgery on the alien robots.
As a team, she's good on muscle and he's good on diplomacy. They can respect each other for who they are and the value they represent. That makes the reason why the Autobots want to maintain their association with the both of them. They represent a capacity to work with and have an ambassadorship directly to humanity, rather than necessarily relying upon the governments thereof to be motivated to do the right thing without an informed populace pushing them to do so.
It's not much in the way of change. But, I think it makes the difference.
* https://youtu.be/PRXI__Wixas
Re: Seed of Bismuth
Date: 2017-10-10 03:17 pm (UTC)Seed of Bismuth
Date: 2017-10-10 03:39 pm (UTC)