So you're saying 'corny film targetting young girls' = outstanding contribution to cinema.
'corny film targeting young boys' = apalling waste of time.
Yep, that's about the gist of his case too.
And just to clarify, you're saying one of those films should also be judged on its endless parade of tired sequels and the other shouldn't?
(
joefish It's hard for thee to kick against the pricks, Tue 18 Apr 2017, 14:17,
Share,
Reply)
I got the impression that HSM is considered "Good, if you like that sort of thing."
whereas Transforms isn't good, even if you normally like that sort of thing.
(, Tue 18 Apr 2017, 14:31, Share, Reply)
I'm not sure how one self-identifies as 'normally liking that sort of thing'
When one doesn't like the 'thing' in question.
By what category do you classify a thing you don't like as thing you normally would like?
Personally I think the two films are roughly on a par, with obvious hooks for the target audience (in the case of Transformers, flash, bang, wallop, tits, and High School Musical has shallow social drama, perfect coreography, and unattainable late 20s boyfriends). Their success and sequels are almost perfectly matched. To laud one over the other is simply the bias of inauthentic liberalism.
(
joefish It's hard for thee to kick against the pricks, Tue 18 Apr 2017, 15:14,
Share,
Reply)
You might be someone who normally likes
big budget action films with lots of special effects, or someone who just digs the work of Michael Bay generally, and then hate Transformers because the effects were uninterpretable garbage and because Bay massively over-indulged himself.
(, Tue 18 Apr 2017, 18:30, Share, Reply)