• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Framing Megan Fox: Lindsay Ellis on Feminist Theory and Transformers

JCHandsom

Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKyrUMUervU

This is episode 7 of Ellis' breakdown of the Transformers series "The Whole Plate", and part 3 of her breakdown on Transformers as analyzed through the lens of Feminist Theory. In it, she makes the bold claim that Megan Fox's character, Mikaela Banes (get it?) is actually "the most well-rounded and worthwhile character in the Transformers movies."

Having seen the video myself, she actually makes a compelling case for why, in the first movie, Mikaela actually has a compelling arc about being a woman in a male dominated field and not being taken seriously...which is undercut by the way Bay uses the camera to frame her as something not to be taken seriously.

Anyone who hasn't seen this series before should do themselves a favor and check it out.
 
It's interesting - I don't think I even remembered the character stuff about Mikaela, just that she was mainly "hot girlfriend". Guess the camera framing was pretty strong in portraying that.
 

tirminyl

Member
It's interesting - I don't think I even remembered the character stuff about Mikaela, just that she was mainly "hot girlfriend". Guess the camera framing was pretty strong in portraying that.

Yep. Despite how smart, quick thinking, and useful she was, you only remember her as the hot girl sexily bending over her car.

Now as I type this I wonder if it's the framing or am I the problem for being left with that image as if she can't be smart and dress sexy. Hmm.
 

Aurongel

Member
....she makes the bold claim that Megan Fox's character, Mikaela Banes (get it?) is actually "the most well-rounded and worthwhile character in the Transformers movies."

I'm pretty sure most low brow male viewers for these films would agree that she's the most well rounded too.

Watching this now...
 
Just finished. I am so glad GAF got me into Lindsay's work with her Beauty and the Beast one. She does really great stuff, and her videos are insightful as hell.

It's interesting - I don't think I even remembered the character stuff about Mikaela, just that she was mainly "hot girlfriend". Guess the camera framing was pretty strong in portraying that.
Same. I would have answered like all of her twitter followers, claiming the character was just there as TNA.
 

caliph95

Member
Now that I think about it you can make the argument she is probably the best written character in the series (not a high bar) well on paper like she daid

Too bad direction undermines what they're going for like she said
 

zeemumu

Member
She makes a lot of good points, although I still don't think Megan Fox's acting does much to bring that character to life. Yeah you can assume that the weird kinda tired kinda frustrated demeanor that the character has is acting, but after TMNT 2, I don't think it is. I think that might just be Megan Fox's default. It's just more noticeable in TMNT 2 because you know April O'Neil isn't supposed to act like that while you don't know Mikaela at all so that could just be the character, and it actually ends up working for that character. That combined with the framing work mentioned in the video don't make the character work as well as she did on paper.

That said it's no worse than any of the other acting in those films and is far from the worst performance. Maybe I should go track down the novelization and see if that character works any better when I don't have to worry about acting and there's no camera being like "LOOK AT THAT BODY!"
 

caliph95

Member
She makes a lot of good points, although I still don't think Megan Fox's acting does much to bring that character to life. Yeah you can assume that the weird kinda tired kinda frustrated demeanor that the character has is acting, but after TMNT 2, I don't think it is. I think that might just be Megan Fox's default. It's just more noticeable in TMNT 2 because you know April O'Neil isn't supposed to act like that while you don't know Mikaela at all so that could just be the character, and it actually ends up working for that character. That combined with the framing don't make the character work as well as she did on paper.

That said it's no worse than any of the other acting in those films and is far from the worst performance.
Yeah Megan Fox acting also doesn't help along with the direction

It's likely why she said she is only great on paper
 

Fuchsdh

Member
I see her point, but I don't think the framing makes you "not take her seriously". That seems to equate sex appeal inherently with immaturity and frivolity. I don't take her seriously because I can't take any character in the movies seriously, because the film itself doesn't. The human parts are just connective tissue for a bunch of CGI slugfests. (Probably Turturro is the most terribly-served overall, but it's a deep bench of examples.)

Mostly this episode reminds me how much poorly-done stuff there is going on in Transformers movies that I totally forgot. The digression into the minor female supporting characters I had no recollection of, following into minor male characters I likewise had no recollection of, cemented that further.
 
...you should watch the video.
Yes and I should appreciate Bayonetta's "irony" more too -- except not, because I can actually have an opinion of my own, because I saw the movies and played the games myself.

Nerd culture apologia is never in short supply. I'm glad you found some that was to your liking. No matter how "human" they made her "arc," the camera was mostly interested in something else, and I'm not interested in pawing through garbage in search of plausible deniability.

Frankly, the movie is such underwritten garbage for even the male characters I'm amazed anyone is interested in this conversation. The film itself doesn't even pretend to take itself seriously. Why should we?

I don't take her seriously because I can't take any character in the movies seriously, because the film itself doesn't. The human parts are just connective tissue for a bunch of CGI slugfests.
Yuuuup.
 

zeemumu

Member
Yes and I should appreciate Bayonetta's "irony" more too -- except not, because I can actually have an opinion of my own, because I saw the movies and played the games myself.

Nerd culture apologia is never in short supply. I'm glad you found some that was to your liking. No matter how "human" they made her "arc," the camera was mostly interested in something else, and I'm not interested in pawing through garbage in search of plausible deniability.

Frankly, the movie is such underwritten garbage for even the male characters I'm amazed anyone is interested in this conversation. The film itself doesn't even pretend to take itself seriously. Why should we?

The video's not disputing that her character's focused on as eye candy and that's her only purpose. It's saying that there's an actual developed character there but because the camera is only concerned with her being eye candy, you don't pay attention to it.
 
Yes and I should appreciate Bayonetta's "irony" more too -- except not, because I can actually have an opinion of my own, because I saw the movies and played the games myself.

Nerd culture apologia is never in short supply. I'm glad you found some that was to your liking. No matter how "human" they made her "arc," the camera was mostly interested in something else, and I'm not interested in pawing through garbage in search of plausible deniability.

Frankly, the movie is such underwritten garbage for even the male characters I'm amazed anyone is interested in this conversation. The film itself doesn't even pretend to take itself seriously. Why should we?

As out of touch as ever.

Going in a thread about a video analysis, while being unwilling to actually watch the video is pretty damn pathetic.


Her video essay are in NO WAY claiming that the movies are good (which you would know if you were willing to do something other than revel in your own ignorance), or anything more than trash. She is simply looking at them from various screenwriting perspectives.
 

Kthulhu

Member
Great video as always. I never thought I'd get excited for a new episode in a miniseries about analyzing the Transformers movies.
 

JCHandsom

Member
Yes and I should appreciate Bayonetta's "irony" more too -- except not, because I can actually have an opinion of my own, because I saw the movies and played the games myself.

Nerd culture apologia is never in short supply. I'm glad you found some that was to your liking. No matter how "human" they made her "arc," the camera was mostly interested in something else, and I'm not interested in pawing through garbage in search of plausible deniability.

Frankly, the movie is such underwritten garbage for even the male characters I'm amazed anyone is interested in this conversation. The film itself doesn't even pretend to take itself seriously. Why should we?

iu


I just, what?

Her entire point is that framing trumps text. She's arguing that Mikaela is the most worthwhile character on paper, but that the way the camera treats her supersedes any arc she might have had otherwise. It's still bad.

There is no substantive disagreement here, just a further acknowledgement on Ellis' part that there was potential there that was wasted, and that Megan Fox's departure from the series and wholesale replacement with another love interest is evidence that women are treated as replaceable and disposable in these films.

As for your final question, she actually answers that in the first episode of this series; Transformers has been going for 10 years, at an average of 2 per year, all directed by Michael Bay. Here's what she says

"Why Transformers?" To which I say, aside from the surprising dearth of any real academic study on these movies considering how influential and lucrative they've been, Transformers is rife for every kind of theoretical reading: Auteur Theory, Feminist Theory, Critical Race Theory, Marxist Theory, Queer Theory, Transformers has everything! But more noteworthy is Transformers' success...

Movies, especially really popular movies that a lot of people see, illuminate the dreams, desires, and values of a culture, and if Transformers is one of the most lucrative film franchises of this generation, what that means merits discussion.

She goes on to lay out the structure of this series constructed around the different realms of film study. It's less "apologia" as you put it and more of an opportunity to introduce and go into these different theories as they apply to this blockbuster franchise. If you think that she's doing this to try and defend or redeem the Transformers franchise in any way, well...you should watch the video and see that's not the case.
 
Yes and I should appreciate Bayonetta's "irony" more too -- except not, because I can actually have an opinion of my own, because I saw the movies and played the games myself.

Nerd culture apologia is never in short supply. I'm glad you found some that was to your liking. No matter how "human" they made her "arc," the camera was mostly interested in something else, and I'm not interested in pawing through garbage in search of plausible deniability.

Frankly, the movie is such underwritten garbage for even the male characters I'm amazed anyone is interested in this conversation. The film itself doesn't even pretend to take itself seriously. Why should we?


Yuuuup.


You really, REALLY should watch the video then.

Also the really why we should care is because, well the films made billions of dollars, there is some academic merit to figuring out why something like this appeals to people.
 
Its crazy

Her picking apart transformers and drawing attention to things i would never even think about is incredible

Lindsay Ellis does some standout work
 
yeah the guy from Folding Ideas said the same thing some time ago. He used Megan Fox from Transformers as an example of ludonarrative dissonance for movies (I forget the term for movies, but it's not "ludo"). Basically, she is written as a very feminist character, but is filmed as a piece of meat. Hence the dissonance.
 

caliph95

Member
I think Mark Wahlberg's daughter and her boyfriend in Transformers 4 are worse but that might be because I didn't like her performances in Bates Motel and The Last Airbender either and the boyfriend's just a shit.
It's not just the acting honestly they were also annoying characters

The daughter is the typical bratty daughter

And the boyfriend (who laminated a card how it's legal to fuck minors) really exists to make Wahlberg look good and be the overprotective father

There was at least an attempt with Mikayla

Can't believe I'm defending her
 

Paganmoon

Member
Lindsay's videos have really been eye openers for me. Her video on "The Producers" really made me, I suppose you can say, understand the argument of "author intent vs viewer perception" when she was mentioning American History X.

And this video really helps bring home the whole male gaze/framing argument. really eye opening.
 
I will say, while I have enjoyed the series from Lindsay a lot... I am really hoping it wraps up soon.

I prefer and miss her more one off video topics.
 

JCHandsom

Member
Why can't youtubers just be ordinary people?

He gets rid of the puppet in later videos due to wrist injuries and just talks to the camera. I can't remember if he used the puppet because it was easier for him to speak via a proxy instead of directly to the camera or if it was more popular to have a character speaking.
 
He gets rid of the puppet in later videos due to wrist injuries and just talks to the camera.

I'm glad that happened because his more recent videos are much more enjoyable. Dude talks super well; he shouldn't waste his talent 1. being off screen and 2. acting like a clown.
 

jman2050

Member
I’m kicking myself because I didn’t realize all this time that Michael Bay literally named the female lead after himself.
 
I’m kicking myself because I didn’t realize all this time that Michael Bay literally named the female lead after himself.
I don't think I ever remembered her name after seeing it. Reading that now goes over my head because it doesn't trigger any kind of "Oh yeah, that's what her name was" in my mind lol. I guess it was always just "Megan Fox" because that's where most of us learned of her?
 

Apt101

Member
I don't get the thing about the character's name. Is it a pun of some kind?

I haven't watched this movie since I saw it in the theaters, but I am going to watch it again from the perspective that she's the main protag.
 

JCHandsom

Member
I don't get the thing about the character's name. Is it a pun of some kind?

I haven't watched this movie since I saw it in the theaters, but I am going to watch it again from the perspective that she's the main protag.

Michael Bay

Mikaela Banes
 
Top Bottom