The Instigator
Bread_Called
Pro (for)
The Contender
BezoomnyBratchny
Con (against)

Michael Bay should be banned from making new movies

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Bread_Called has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/2/2018 Category: Funny
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 711 times Debate No: 110045
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Bread_Called

Pro

Every movie Michael Bay has turned to crap in every way. Nobody likes any of the transformers movies or the new Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies. He has won 2 golden raspberry awards.
BezoomnyBratchny

Con

It's unclear if Pro is stating that Michael Bay should be banned from making movies by the government or by production companies.

If it's the former, there's a long history of shaky legal grounds for banning movies. Even when there's a seemingly legitimate legal basis for a ban, decisions often fail or end up being overturned later on. For example, the movie The Tin Drum which depicted 11 year old actor David Bennent ogling the 24 year old actress Katherina Thalbach's naked body and then running up and burying his face against her, eagerly performing oral sex. State District Court Judge Richard Freeman cited the state's obscenity laws (which prohibits "any individual under eighteen years of age who engages in the original or relayed transmission of obscene material or child pornography via electronic media in the form of digital images, videos, or other depictions of real persons under the age of eighteen years"[1]) in order to ban it. Copies of the film that had been distributed to video outlets were subsequently seized by state police as a result[2]. A week later, a lawsuit was filed against the officers[3] which snowballed into a number of hearings and the ban ended up being lifted[4]. And this was a case where a state law could be cited as having been violated. I know of no such law that could be cited to ban a movie on the grounds that its aesthetic value is questionable. So what chance would any attempt to ban movies on such a basis have? Even less of a chance than those that appear to violate a state law. I therefore conclude that any attempt to ban Michael Bay movies would be a waste of time and resources and should not be done.

If Pro meant that it's the production companies that should impose such a ban (or, more accurately, a boycott), I would argue that this would also be pretty futile. Michael Bay founded his own production company Platinum Dunes in 2001 and it has played a big role in the production of a lot of his movies ever since[5]. A boycott from the likes of Paramount Pictures would be a setback to be sure, but it would be unlikely to stop him from making movies. It's also important to note that production companies are businesses. Their primary concern is profit. Michael Bay's movies make a lot of money. To use the 2 examples that Pro gave, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles had a budget of 125 million and grossed over 493 million worldwide[6] and Transformers had a budget of 150 million and grossed over 709 million worldwide[7]. Good luck convincing a business to boycott a cash cow. It would be a waste of time to try and therefore should not be done.

Now, I've dealt with how futile any attempt to impose a ban on Michael Bay movies would be. But I want to pretend that this isn't the case for a moment. Let's say that we can know for certain that a legal ban would be successful and/or that a production company boycott would force Michael Bay into retirement. Should it be done? The answer is still no. The elephant in the room here is the cliche that everyone has an opinion and every opinion is equally as valid as another when it comes to matters like preferences for certain musicians and films and so on. I acknowledge that this isn't the case and don't intend to pander to such nonsense. I'm fairly well versed in cinema and I hold my opinion in higher esteem than a casual movie go-er that doesn't analyze various aspects of a movie like the choice of shots, elements of cinematography, the quality of the dialogue, the structure of the narrative, the presence of exposition and so on. Likewise, there are many people that are much better versed in the history of cinema than I who are able to spot things that I may miss like the presence of avant-garde techniques, the influence of certain movements (Italian neo-realism, french new wave, dogme 95 etc) in a given film and lots of other things that I'm not educated enough on cinema to properly decipher. And I hold the opinions of those people in higher esteem than my own. So there is a certain amount to be said about some films being (somewhat) objectively better than others. However, one thing that IS completely subjective is the level of enjoyment that can be garnered from any given film. I think it's reasonable to assume that anyone that would rate a film 7 out of 10 or above enjoyed the film and that anyone that enjoyed a film liked it to some extent. Pro claims that no one liked Transformers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. As of 03/03/2018, 547,859 people have given Transformers a rating out of 10 on IMDB. Of those, 395,199 people have given it a rating of 7 or above[8]. That amounts to over 72% of the people that saw the movie and took it upon themselves to rate it on IMDB that enjoyed, and thus liked, the movie. As of 03/03/2018, 184,409 people have given Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles a rating out of 10 on IMDB. Of those, 77, 449 people gave it a rating of 7 or above[9]. That amounts to almost 42% of the people that saw the movie and took it upon themselves to rate it on IMDB that enjoyed, and thus liked, the movie. So Pro's claim that no one enjoyed these movies is demonstrably false. To ban Michael Bay movies would be to deprive a lot of people enjoyment simply on a matter of personal taste (however superior that taste may be). This is patently absurd and a tad fascist. I would suggest that instead of wanting to ban Michael Bay movies, they should instead opt to do what I do: refrain from watching any Michael Bay movie that they can be pretty sure that they won't enjoy and refrain from watching any sequels to Michael Bay movies that they didn't enjoy. Or, they could take it a step further than I would and enact a personal boycott of Michael Bay movies altogether. I wouldn't recommend this though because Michael Bay can actually make a decent film from time to time (shout-out to The Rock).

[1] https://law.justia.com...
[2] http://www.eclectica.org...
[3]https://openjurist.org...
[4] http://articles.latimes.com...
[5] https://pro.imdb.com...
[6] https://pro.imdb.com...
[7] https://pro.imdb.com...
[8] http://www.imdb.com...
[9] http://www.imdb.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Bread_Called

Pro

Alright this was suppose to be a fun and silly debate making it as a joke, but since my contender has made a very serious debate, I'll have to debate with a serious attitude.

Michael Bay has been the director producer of many films, depicting from the five live action Transformers movies and other war style movies. Michael Bay has made consequential actions in producing movies such as bland and basic CGI explosions, hence many people makes jokes and memes about Michael Bay. I should have argued about not allowing Michael bay produce new films not by law, but by movie corporations that are wanting to make films that fans and critics alike would enjoy. Obviously, there isn't and won't be any law that prevents the creation of a film by a specific person because that would be considered an act against the first amendment of the United States. I want to say is that movie corporations that are wanting to make money and make movies that fans would enjoy, should not allow Michael Bay to produce films as such. The ban is not a by law or by right, but a social ban by movie corporations and fans, like de facto segregation.
Michael Bay has damaged the reputation of the Transformers for many fans that enjoyed Transformers in the 20th century. With unique characters and interesting stories told, it sounds like a billion dollar idea to make transformers into a live action movie. In which they did, and they could of done much better. The characters are bland, the CGI is good in the first movie, but takes a 180 and makes it worse. Universal and other film corporations should not allow Michael Bay to produce films as such.
BezoomnyBratchny

Con

I agree with Pro that a lot of the CGI in Michael Bay movies is nothing short of ridiculous. I also agree that Michael Bay is the butt of many jokes and memes as a result of this and his many other shortcomings as a director. The amount of memes and jokes pale in comparison to the ticket sales though. The numbers speak for themselves. Love him or hate him, Michael Bay knows how to get butts on seats.

Pro mentions the original cartoon series and it's now become more clear what their issue is. As a fan of the original series, they feel let down by Bay's film franchise. I can sympathize. Not with Transformers because I saw Bay's movie and didn't care for it but I have never seen the original cartoon and don't intend to so I had nothing to lose (except for a few hours of my life). I was a huge fan of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon though and it would have been nice to see a decent live action movie of that for nostalgic reasons but predictably, I was underwhelmed by the movie. But my reaction was not to claim that the reputation of the series had been ruined. It was to simply shrug it off, boycott the sequel and pretend that the first movie didn't exist. I fail to see how it's even possible for a live action movie of an old series to ruin its reputation. A movie of the series is an addition, not a replacement. The old series still exists in all its glory for the fans to enjoy. If the issue is that the mention of the title makes the current generation picture the subpar movie instead of the old series, I don't see how that could be a problem either. If a member of the current generation immediately pictures Bay's movies when they hear the word "Transformers", it's because they haven't seen the cartoon. And if they haven't seen the cartoon, Bay's movies aren't harming the reputation of the cartoon because those people never had an opinion on the cartoon in the first place. Plus, Pro (quite correctly) states that fans of the cartoon were not fans of the movie. Logic dictates then that it would be the same the other way around. People that liked the movie would not have been fans of the cartoon. So they're two separate target audiences with little to no overlap. And this was always the intention as Bay has stated in interviews[10]. Bay was no more making a movie for Transformers fans than Zack Snyder was making the movie 300 for historians. In other words, he stole the concept of Transformers to make a huge movie of his own doing that the masses would flock to rather than pandered to Transformers fans in order to bring a faithful version of the cartoon to the big screen. The movie was neither aimed at, nor intended for, the fans.

But now to whether or not it should have been. Pro claims that a faithful version of the show would be a billion dollar idea. Is this the case? No. Transformers is too much of a niche market to make a faithful movie on this scale. The cartoon made 4.3 million dollars worldwide[11]. The movie cost over 30 times that to make[7]. That does not make good business sense and as I've said, production companies are a business first. They have no reason to invest in a movie like that and every reason not to. And on the flip side of that, they have every reason to invest in the movies that Bay DOES make and no reason not to, because they make a lot of money. And lastly I'll repeat what I've also already stated, that Michael Bay has the means to continue making movies even if production companies boycotted him and there's nothing a business hates more than watching projects that they had a chance to be a part of rake in truckloads of cash again and again and again.

So Michael Bay movies should not be boycotted by production companies and the results that are desired would not be attainable even if they did.

[10]
[11] https://pro.imdb.com...
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
DeletedUser
That was a really long response to a debate that isn't going to continue. I despise when people like this Pro go out of their way to make stupid arguments on a website that is sophisticated and meant to encourage deep thought.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.