Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike33
If a "notable" critic admitted to enjoying a 100% action flick that may lack in plot or has holes in the story, they'd be risking their credibility, maybe even their jobs.
It doesn't change the fact that such a movie can be very entertaining.
|
That's not quite true.
Look at Roger Ebert, for example. He gave the first Transformers film 3 stars (out of 4), Shoot 'Em Up 3.5 stars, etc. Transformers 2 didn't get 1 star because it was an action flick, it got 1 star because it sucks ass.
Compare a film to a dinner. Let's say an action film is dinner at a steak restaurant. Obviously, the main course is steak (action). But no matter how good the steak is, if the chef pisses in your drinks (the plot) or shits in your dessert (the acting), it will ruin the dinner.
And that's what Michael Bay does in Transformers 2: he pisses in the beer and shits in the chocolate mousse. And no matter how good the steak may be, having to consume Michael Bay's excrement alongside with it ruins the entire meal for many people.