Dear Movie Industry,

We love you – just to clarify, “we” is most of America and large portions of the world-at-large.  But you’re quickly becoming prey to your own scheming and need to be saved before you collapse from the weight of your own self-indulgence.

We’re here for you.

Over your history, you’ve produced alot of good, quality movies of all types, genres, and styles.  Recently, however, you’ve become more interested in print-to-film adaptations, sequels, and reboots than true originality or creativity – just look at the recent list of sequels announced: Boondock Saints II, Spider-Man 4, Transformers 3, and Indiana Jones 5.  This may ultimately be your downfall.

Don’t get us wrong, we love some of your sequels.  And we love the movies you’re making sequels of – Transformers 2 may not have had the approval of the critics, but us fans seemed to love it.  The problem is when you assume that the financial success of certain types of movies (like action, scifi, or thrillers) means there not only should be a sequel, but that we somehow demand one and will support it through the end.

This inevitably results in disasters like Spider-Man 3, where the series concept takes a turn for the worse and throws dirt on its own good name.  The “they just don’t live up to their predecessors or expectations” label can applied to many sequels, like The Matrix movies – although they were still pretty awesome.

Between your sequel-happy trigger-fingers and the fact that only a few months can go by before yet another comicbook is announced as being adapted into a film, it would seem that you have lost your stride.  Yes, District 9 came out recently, but guess what?  You didn’t support the script, and Peter Jackson had to step in to help raise independent financing – good move.  Gamer was an original script, sure, but it also wasn’t the best movie you’ve ever produced.  Going down the release roster for the last few years doesn’t produce too many original or creative gems of genius either.

It’s time for you to bring back the creativity.  The Matrix, Star Wars, The Boondock Saints, and the rest of your biggest successes (both financially and those with cult status) have typically been original works of creation, not adaptations – The Dark Knight is an outlier, as The Watchmen so deftly proved.  Choosing a screenplay for production, or even an idea, should be based on its actual strengths and weaknesses, rather than whether it’s associated with previously successful movies, toy franchises, or highly successful graphic novels.

Don’t stop the sequels and adaptations, though – just make sure they’re warranted.

Kyle Brady is a contributing columnist for the Inquisitr, an entrepreneur, and has a future in science fiction.  He can be found at his blog, via email, or on Twitter.

Much has already been said elsewhere about the so-called “racist” robots from the recently released “Transformers” sequel, claiming the characters Mudflap and Skids are poor and offensive caricatures of African Americans and black culture in general – everything from the voice acting to the “gold tooth” to their facial features is being used as evidence for these arguments.  However, there are a few problems with this:

1. Who ever said they were supposed to be black characters?
2. One of the two voice actors responsible for the robots’ personalities is black.
3. It’s not racist.

Let’s assume, for simplicity of argument, that both voice actors were told to portray this kind of character, with the intent of producing a “ghetto” robot, and they both obviously agreed to participate.  Does the studio asking them to create such characters constitute racism?  Or even some sort of one-sided stereotyping?  I would argue no, and the reasons are quite clear.

First, look at any number of accepted pieces in the media:  The Fresh Prince of Bel Air, most of Eddie Murphy’s work, and anything Tyler Perry has ever sketched an outline for on a napkin.  Do they not include generalizations and stereotypes?  If so, does the race of the characters’ creator somehow alter the offensiveness?  Stereotypes prevail in media regardless of race – Everybody Loves Raymond and Will Ferrell movies will easily prove this as true for those who happen to be white.

Second, how can these robots be caricatures when the behaviors and language are modeled off of reality?  Compare Mudflap or Skids to Lil Wayne, Kanye West, or most modern rappers/”gangstas” – are there discernible differences?  Does Transformers take it past the point of reality as an over-the-top portrayal of real life?  No.

Bill Cosby famously once said that the rappers and “gangstas” of the world were doing nothing but perpetuating their own stereotypes to the detriment of their race.  By these kinds of personalities being included in modern movies, and even portrayed by futuristic robots, it could be argued that the purveyors of such culture finally won the battle – they are recognized as a cultural subset worthy of big screen attention.

Is it sad to see such changes happen in the modern world, both on and off the screen?  Of course – any time people choose to be unintelligent and offensive for the simple reason of being so, it is a loss to humanity.  But is it racist for these changes to appear on the silver screen?  No – most movies are a presentation of an augmented reality, and Transformers is no different in this regard.

So let’s leave Michael Bay alone, alright?

Kyle Brady is a contributing columnist for the Inquisitr, an entrepreneur, and has a future in science fiction.  He can be found at his blog, via email, or on Twitter.

Despite promising to break box office records, Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen hasn’t won critics over, with the current score on Rotten Tomatoes reading a paltry 22%.

The reviews are so bad, we just had to share some of the quotes:

“Bay’s most unrestrained and ridiculous to date. The male teenage cinematic equivalent of snorting cocaine off a hooker’s ass.”

“I honestly wish it could change itself into a good movie, instead it ends up being one of the worst sequels I’ve ever seen.”

“Despite having lowered the artistic bar to Death Valley levels, director Michael Bay has somehow managed to figure out a way to slither beneath with the flexibility of the pole dancers-in-training that he prefers to hire as his female extras.”

“I hated every 149 minutes. This is so bad it’s immoral. Michael Bay is a time-sucking vampire who will feast off your lost time. This is why the movie is so long.”

“The dubious, tasteless humor and awful dialogue don’t help. Neither does having a leading lady who can’t act — Fox seems to be regressing in her development as a performer.”

Despite the reviews, here’s betting the draw of Megan Fox’s highly over-rated ass will still bring in the crowds. The full set of Rotten Tomatoes reviews here.