Saturday, August 22, 2009

What the What?

Over at USA Today, national enemy of thinking people, Scott Bowles, Film Editor and guy who believes that films suffer when their main character is unlikable, posted an article surveying the summer's least original movies (and, for no reason, Public Enemies...apparently someone's life is now a property) and how they fared with audiences and critics. Here's the section on Transformers 2:


Was it worth it?  Not for fans of art-house movies. But do they even watch summer flicks? "This is exactly the movie fans wanted to see, if not critics," says Paul Dergarabedian of Hollywood.com. "The Michael Bay formula works, especially for this kind of movie. You had the title and the toys for adults, and the action for the kids."

(click here to read the rest)

There you have it. Perhaps the leading figure in box office analysis (which requires about as much talent as being the leading figure in telling time) has announced outright that adults only saw the movie for the title and because they remember the toys. And his phrasing suggests that this is a good thing.

You know...I'm not that old, but I remember, as a kid, dying to see the movies my parents were seeing. Now adults want to see whatever their kids are watching, and not as a way of being involved in their kids' lives. This is where they find their entertainment.

Bill Maher is absolutely right.

1 comment:

theishu said...

Heh heh... If adults watched it only for the title, Megan Fox would still be handing out copies of her resume :)