Do you think any Bay movie will become a "Classic"?

[alexsm]

At least here (Spain) Armageddon seems to be on the way to achieve the "Classic" status, and well, The Rock is alredy considered a classic of action.

[MitP]

It depends on how well a movie stands the test of time. If people are still talking about BAD BOYS II twenty or thirty years down the line, its chances of being a bona fide classic will probably be much higher. Till then, let's just watch 'em and eat our popcorn.

[Mobe1969]

BB2 will be a standout 20, 30 years later. Even now I still can't think of an action cop flick that even comes close. I love the Lethal Weapon films, and Clint Eastwood's The Rookie, and BB1, but none of them even come close to BB2.

And personally, although this might loose me credibility, I think Pearl Harbor will be appreciated more, especially the Directors cut. It is a powerful drama covering the events of the time, not taking too many artistic liberties.

[Icon]

Honestly do not know but he is tops in my book. I started seeing all my favorite movies were directed by one guy so I trust his movie decisions and they become classics when I get them on dvd.

[alexsm]

Well, here at least Bay is becoming a Christmas classic

Day 25, Armageddon in two channels (of 10 wich are playing movies) at the same time.

Day 26, Pearl harbor and Armageddon

Day 27, Bad Boys

Day 1, Armageddon (movie chosen due to public vote)

[King of Kings]

I think Armageddon and The Rock could be seen as classics in the future.

[LadiesMan217]

The Rock is an action classic. It's always mentioned when you talk about the best action movies of the 90's. Transformers has a chance of being a great franchise if the second one is as good or better than the first.

[darthrage]

The fact that Armageddon and The Rock are in the Criterion collection make them classics

[StefsChemicalRomance]

These holidays Armageddon, Pearl Harbour and Bad Boys 1 have playd on tv. [Armageddon and Pearl Harbour ont he same night, differant channels.]

The best part in Armageddon Was.... The Advertisments for when its on LOL Only coz the TV Voice goes "From the Director of Transformers" It was awesome

[Chemical Superfreak]

for me i like Arm. only when i want a purely visual Bay ride. I really think they should of edited down the romance in the film. I do LOVE the scenes were they're being trained by NASA. Hysterical stuff. But the crashing-on-the-asteroid scene i want to skip over everytime, it's Bay at his worst, to spazzy with the camera, like he's having a seizure. Naseua enducing.

[Ricardo]

Armageddon and The Rock could be yes, for me they are classics.

[Bayhem]

Do you think any Bay movie will become a "Classic"?

Tough one to answer, because these days "classic" is a pretty broad term.

"Armageddon", "Pearl Harbor", "Bad Boys I", "Transformers I" and "The Rock" are, as far as my observation goes, pretty damn popular among the general public and people seem to really like them. And to be honest I can't think of a single person around me who doesn't like at least two of these movies. For example, my mother is known to be very picky and doesn't like a lot of movies, but she absolutely loves "Pearl Harbor".

And one of my old friends from college is literally obsessed with "Armageddon". In his own words: "That movies is my medicine. I watch it every month."

So I don't know about "classics", but obviously a lot people enjoy these movies.


Personally, I'm disappointed that there's not much talk about "The Island"...which is, in my view, Bay's most underrated movie. It deserves much more.

[greensmoke]

I think The Rock is already classic of action genre. Also we can see so many people around the world loves Armageddon & Transformers 1 & Bad Boys 1.
And truly believe Pearl Harbor & Bad Boys 2 are unfairly underrated by critics & (too serious or simply pseudo) cinéphiles. And yes, many people (& me) loved them too.

But like it or not, I think being classic needs critic's revision about Bay and his works. So I don't know. I just hope they will appreciate bay's films.

[Bayhem]

But like it or not, I think being classic needs critic's revision...

Far from the truth.

Film critics are a very, very small group of people and the notion that these people somehow "control" and decide for all of us what movie is a classic and what movie is not a classic is....well, pretty ridiculous. As a normal, thinking person I don't really like the idea of other people deciding for me what's good or bad, or what's classic and what's trash.

Critics have their classic/cult films (mainly older titles) and the regular people have their classic/cult films too (usually it's a mix between famous old films and newer mainstream titles that are ignored or trashed by critics and film snobs).

I also wanna point out that a lot of the old movies that people these days call "classics" were trashed by the critics when they were released for the first time. Two famous examples: "The Shining" and "Blade Runner".

Critics can have their opinions just like everybody else. It's a free world. But when it comes to the public's perception of movies, they (critics) are absolutely useless and they should not be even mentioned. As the saying goes: "A movie is a conversation between the filmmaker and his audience. There's no room for other people."

[greensmoke]

Far from the truth.

Film critics are a very, very small group of people and the notion that these people somehow "control" and decide for all of us what movie is a classic and what movie is not a classic is....well, pretty ridiculous. As a normal, thinking person I don't really like the idea of other people deciding for me what's good or bad, or what's classic and what's trash.

Critics have their classic/cult films (mainly older titles) and the regular people have their classic/cult films too (usually it's a mix between famous old films and newer mainstream titles that are ignored or trashed by critics and film snobs).

I also wanna point out that a lot of the old movies that people these days call "classics" were trashed by the critics when they were released for the first time. Two famous examples: "The Shining" and "Blade Runner".

Critics can have their opinions just like everybody else. It's a free world. But when it comes to the public's perception of movies, they (critics) are absolutely useless and they should not be even mentioned. As the saying goes: "A movie is a conversation between the filmmaker and his audience. There's no room for other people."

I don't know. Like you said, everyone has own taste/opinion and critics are just small group of people. And yes, sometimes critics have misunderstood many great films.
But it's truth that critics have been significant role in film history. For example, auteur theory from French critics made opportunity that realize Orson Welles & Alfred Hitchcock & Howard Hawks & John Ford are not just genre directors, but unique & important artist who are so true to their nature. You know, Citizen Kane was commercially failed in 1941. But today, every film-lover knows Citizen Kane. And everybody calls it freakin' masterpiece. That's sheerly audience's credit? I don't think so. I think influence of critics are still not that negligible.

[Bayhem]

I think influence of critics are still not that negligible.

Back in the day, yes, they were indeed influential. But right now, with the Twitter and Facebook madness, they are absolutely useless. Right now every person with a keyboard can be a critic.

With the modern technologies these days you can read/hear what you friends (or just random people) think of a certain movie literally seconds after its premiere. You don't have to wait for a film magazine or a review on paper just to learn more about the movie. You're now communicating with regular viewers like you. Which is awesome.

Critics were powerful figures back in the 50s, 60s and 70s but nowadays they're only good at shining light on small, independent movies - movies that need a critical support in order to reach a broader indie audience. When it comes to mainstream Hollywood though, critics are the last people you should care about.

And again, you shouldn't let critics, awards or film snobs decide for you what movie is a classic and what movie is not. Movies are made for the ordinary people. So listen to the ordinary people. Focus on the collective opinion.

[greensmoke]

Back in the day, yes, they were indeed influential. But right now, with the Twitter and Facebook madness, they are absolutely useless. Right now every person with a keyboard can be a critic.

With the modern technologies these days you can read/hear what you friends (or just random people) think of a certain movie literally seconds after its premiere. You don't have to wait for a film magazine or a review on paper just to learn more about the movie. You're now communicating with regular viewers like you. Which is awesome.

Critics were powerful figures back in the 50s, 60s and 70s but nowadays they're only good at shining light on small, independent movies - movies that need a critical support in order to reach a broader indie audience. When it comes to mainstream Hollywood though, critics are the last people you should care about.

And again, you shouldn't let critics, awards or film snobs decide for you what movie is a classic and what movie is not. Movies are made for the ordinary people. So listen to the ordinary people. Focus on the collective opinion.

I don't think "Classic" is personal concept. It needs some agreement from various moviegoers. I thought eventually critics are moviegoers too, then that's the why I talked about critic's opinion.
And don't worry, actually critics don't decide my verdict about films. But I agree critic's influences quite decline and just regular viewers become important variable.

[Bayhem]

It needs some agreement from various moviegoers.

Absolutely. You're right.

And in my world these "various moviegoers" are the people around me - co-workers, friends and family - and people like me - people who can fully enjoy a serious drama like "Capote" and a silly comedy like "Scary Movie". I certainly don't include critics. Yes, they are moviegoers too, but when they start insulting people who enjoy movies like "Transformers" and trash filmmakers and actors with extreme anger I automatically ignore them. And by doing so I've ignored a lot of them. No wait...I've actually ignored all of them.

In my world critics do not exist. A lot of people say that, but in my case that's 100% true. If the situation requires it I can talk about them, but they don't influence me. At all.

Before seeing a movie I watch the trailer, I read interviews, I check that movie's Wiki page for more information about the cast and the filming process...and that's it. I couldn't care less about the opinions of the so-called "critical community". Or the ratings on their beloved RT site.

[alexsm]

It's easy to spot a classic. When a movie is still popular 20,30,40 years after its release, then that movie is a classic.

[Aliafne]

Armageddon and The Rock - because they were born at a right place in cinema at a right time and they just managed to add something tot he whole cinema experience, not just simply to the action genre. They wouldnt end up to be in the top 10 movies to send out in space, but they would both be in top 10 action movies to send out into space. And they would be in the top50 of modern cinema.





And again... personal taste does not equal critical taste. And popularity factor doesn't make soemthing classic. Popularity doesnt equal quality.
"The word classic means something that is a perfect example of a particular style, something of lasting worth or with a timeless quality."
Just start whatching Eisenstein, Fellini, Godard, Wajda, Welles, Tarkovskiy etc... undying masterpieces. And I am very sure they are not "popular" in viewers/ year rate these days. Still they are the classics of classics.

[alexsm]

The classics of the classics are not those, but John Ford, Capra, Howard Hawks, Victor Fleming, Billy Wilder, Alfred Hitchcock... and critical acclaim is not the main factor. A movie forgotten by people who love cinema can't be a classic.

[Flyingheart]

Ppfff.. thats a hard one.. Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, Transformers franchise.

Because everybody remembers these movies.
If you talk about Bruce Willis blowing up the astroid saving the world everybody knows it's Armageddon, people might not want to say the title or forget what the movie is called but if you say Armageddon they say "yeah thats the one!"
Not to forget Earosmith helped Armageddon to the next level with his song "Don't wanna Miss a thing."
So many people loved it, it is unforgetable and is a personal fav. of mine.

Pearl Harbor because it is so memorabele for every couple that watched that movie and i think a lot of people are still together who watched it back then.
Michael used his succes for Armageddon again but in this movie with the song Faith Hill "there you'll be."
Michael made it unforgetable AGAIN for so many people.

Transformers franchise.
Because it is so new and refreshing for the movie bizz and idiotic that people were against the idea.
The rest you know why..

[dnn]

I agree with him that The Rock is his best movie, and I hope it'll stand the test of time just by containing Connery's last good action role (Finding forester his last good performance). I also agree that Armageddon will be a classic as one of the last and best ensemble disaster movies, and a perfect sum up of all the conventions therein. It's sad to reflect that Pearl Harbor will probably be remembered as the last big budget 3 hour WWII movie ever made by Hollywood. Hard to imagine it being made today.

[dnn]

Bayhem, I think critics do matter to some extent in maintaining interest in a non-children's film that's more than 30 years old. Children movies like classic Disney, The Sound of Music, Wizard of Oz, etc. are immortal because they get passed down generation after generation. It's A Wonderful Life isn't really a Christmas movie, but it became a classic through repeat TV airings. The only movie from the 70s you can be sure everyone has seen is Star Wars. But how many people under 30 have seen any of Irwin Allen or Love Story?