Cheat Sheet
The Best In Brief
Michael Bay Blasts Megan Fox
Megan Fox apparently didn’t know what she was signing up for when she agreed to star in the Transformers films: The 23-year-old actress criticized director Michael Bay for relying on special effects instead of acting in an interview with Entertainment Weekly. Now Bay has hit back: "She says some very ridiculous things because she's 23 years old, and she still has a lot of growing up to do," Bay told the Wall Street Journal. "You roll your eyes when you see statements like that and think, 'Okay Megan, you can do whatever you want.'" He went on, "Nobody in the world knew about Megan Fox until I found her and put her in Transformers. I like to think that I've had some luck in building actors' careers with my films." Back to you, Megan.
Partner Sites: Expedia| Hotels| Hotwire| Urbanspoon| Vimeo
Actually Bay films ARE special effects driven. You can watch any of his films and they focus less on acting ability and more on the effects. That is what film critics ding him on and what the crowds go to see. I'm not so sure that Fox was slamming Bay or that Bay was slamming Fox. One can't direct without computer generated backup and the other is not the best actress in the world so the effects actually enhanced her performance.
If Bay could read this comment.
find him the king of suck at
mike@michaelbay.com
If Fox wants to be a movie star, she'd better get used to special effects driven movies because that's what Hollywood makes, these days. Bay is right about her not knowing anything because she's 23. What context could she possibly have?
Her criticism mirrored the opinion of pretty much every qualified film critic in the country. She's young but she's right.
This user is no longer registered.
Sorry the critics who count(those that pay for tickets) like the 5 year old who is staying with us and has forced me to take him twice to see this crappy head ache inducing movie enjoy the special effects much more than the allleged acting.
Certainly it's naive to expect a Michael Bay movie to rely on strong acting rather than FX. I had no idea who Megan Fox was until Transformers, so that's valid.
But it would be nice if movies could, as Fox suggests, rely more on story, character development and talented actors. But anyone who pays attention to weekend box office numbers knows that good movies don't make as much money as flashy movies. She may have to decide whether she wants to be a good actress or a famous one.
This user is no longer registered.
Michael Bay is an asshole. He's just embarrassed that critics are panning his movie for the same reasons she pointed out.
I enjoyed Transformers 2 but let's face facts, it was a one and a half hour long "Michael Bay Salutes The U.S Armed Forces for Being Awesome" special. You could have taken out the good robots entirely and most of that movie would still have worked.
This user is no longer registered.
Michael Bay made $80 million off of Transformers 1. He'll probably make more off of Transformers 2. You'd think that a guy that rich could relax on the "crank out an ugly piece of nonsensical explodo baloney" front and focus on making something with some good acting in it for once. Oh, wait, he tried that with "The Island" -- Spielberg bought him a $2 million dollar script by Crispin Treadwell that was subtle and well thought-out, and so Bay hired his two lackeys Kurtzman & Orci (Transformers, Transformers 2, The Island, the new Star Trek) to come in and rewrite it into a stupid Explodo Michael Bay movie packed to the gills with product placement. Then when it didn't do well, the studio blamed the stars because no one has the guts to ever say what's so amazingly apparent to anyone with a brain: Michael Bay is a horrible director with NO understanding of story.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.