1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Shia Labeouf takes on Spielberg, Bay

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by bigpern23, May 17, 2010.


Good move or bad move by LaBeouf to bash Transformers 2 and Indiana Jones?

  1. Good move - he's right

  2. Good move - it gets his name out there

  3. Bad move - He'll get crushed by Bay and Spielberg like an extra getting stomped on by Megatron

  4. Bad move - his criticisms are akin to Dallas Braden taking on A-Rod

  1. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

  2. Brian

    Brian Well-Known Member

    When he signs on for a movie based on talking, morphing robots directed by Michael Bay, knowing he'll co-star with a manufactured sex icon with the acting abilities of a Teddy Ruxpin doll...TWICE... he needs to keep his artistic opinions to himself.

    If you want to be considered a serious actor, go do serious films after the first Transformers film. Go build some credibility. He went for the money.

    And did he not see the mess Lucas made of the new Star Wars Trilogy? Did he think Indiana Jones was going to turn out any better with Senor Spielbergo? Did he think he was so good an actor he was going to save a movie with him swinging with monkeys and jumping on a motorcycle? Or a fridge stopping a nuclear bomb? C'mon.

    It's great that he takes some blame, but to do that years later after you've made millions and millions of dollars seems disingenuous.
  3. Double J

    Double J Active Member

    He peaked on "Even Stevens."

    Since then, for the most part, he's done nothing but come across as an unlikable douche.
  4. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    You forgot the "Who gives a fuck" choice.
  5. EagleMorph

    EagleMorph Member

    It wasn't like he called them complete trash, either. He said they basically missed the mark with the finished product, that they could have done better.

    To me, that's a sign that an actor/director/writer has his head on straight and knows that things can be improved.

    I will say that in the stuff I've seen him in, Labeouf has been good (Disturbia, his role as a teen messed up on LSD in Bobby, and The Battle of Shaker Heights). And he's getting a lot of publicity for his turn in Oliver Stone's Wall Street sequel.

    He's currently filming Transformers 3. So we'll see how this one is different (I'll admit, I never saw any of the Transformer films or the last Indiana Jones movie) and how its received. He could be blowing a lot of hot air, too.
  6. kingcreole

    kingcreole Active Member

    "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" wasn't bad but comparing to the other three ... it was a major letdown. They could have had done several other ideas, such as searching for Atlantis or the spear that pierced Jesus on the cross.

    I thought the whole story was a major swing and miss.
  7. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I agree with him and I also didn't think he said anything that is going to get him into trouble.

    He's already signed for Transformers 3 and I doubt there will be a fifth Indy film. I somehow doubt Spielberg was thrilled with the finished Indy 4 project, though that probably had more to do with the abortion that is George Lucas.
  8. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Anybody who signs on for a third Transformers film forever forfeits his right to bitch about anything on artistic grounds. Next stop is one of the Seltzer-Freidberg pumping-shitfests.

    I'm not a big Indiana Jones maven, but wasn't ONE of the earlier sequels pretty roundly panned critically? The Nazi-witchcraft one?
  9. finishthehat

    finishthehat Active Member

    I'm not the world's hugest fan of the original Indiana Jones or Star Wars movies, but CGI absolutely took whatever good there was in them out of the sequels.
  10. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I didn't like the third Indy film, but it was a masterpiece compared to the fourth.

    The first Transformers movie was bad. The second was much worse.
  11. Pilot

    Pilot Active Member

    See, I can't support that logic at face value. Why would that be true? Because a few extra alien parts moved and a spaceship didn't look like a cardboard cutout?

    No, the addition of CGI didn't make those movies suck. Perhaps the reliance on CGI did, but CGI in and of itself isn't anything that should make for worse movies.
  12. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Episode 1 sucked bantha balls and 2 was a heaping helping of meh, but Revenge of the Sith was pretty good -- better then ROTJ (no fucking Ewoks) and about as good, maybe better, than Ep. 4.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page