First reactions from Japan premiere coming in...

[TwoFace12]

www.donmurphy.net/board/showthread.php?t=30967 (www.donmurphy.net/board/showthread.php?t=90367)
See for yourself. There should be more later.

[Mr. Earle]

www.donmurphy.net/board/showthread.php?t=30967
See for yourself. There should be more later.Oh god, the movie looks like UTTER FAIL.
Soundwave doesnt transform.
Reused animations.
"So even after Devastator forms, there are still constructicons running around. And some Protoforms."
Blackout out of ****ing nowhere.
Twins Damn it Bay, is common sense so hard to find in your crew?

[gstommylee]

And why are is it a fail based on one's person opinion that seems to only list what he thinks are the bad things of the movie. Just cause after devastator forums doesn't mean there can't be more constructions. This isn't g1.

[The-HYPE]

And why are is it a fail based on one's person opinion that seems to only list what he thinks are the bad things of the movie. Just cause after devastator forums doesn't mean there can't be more constructions. This isn't g1.

I read somewhere that Devastator actually grows bigger with more constructicons combining so that may explain why there are other constructicons running around.

[Spade]

Soundwave doesnt transform.

Soundwave only needs to collect info and send out minions, so...

Reused animations.

The cartoon did it all the time. Your next complaint is basically "why aren't they making it like the G1 I grew up with" but when they do something the cartoon was equally infamous for it's a problem? Plus, who cares? They're robots, not organic like the Hulk. There should be some consistency in their transformations.

"So even after Devastator forms, there are still constructicons running around. And some Protoforms."

Why's that a big deal? No offense, 'cause it seems like you're a G1 fan, but it makes just as much sense as the cartoon. A specific set of Decepticons with the hidden power to transform vs. a whole subset of Cybertronians that can form a greater robot given enough parts at will....gee, which one sounds better for a film universe where finality is usually in the form of death yet where fans like their favorites? This sounds like a good compromise, if you ask me.

As for the protoforms...well, it's a desert. Not every Decepticon is going to get a vehicle mode.

[chaseter]

I am only mad that the Imax is longer than the theatrical because the closest Imax theatre is 400 miles away:cmad:

[Avengers-Report]

It is hard to tell from the one review anything at all. He claims it was better than the first but only criticizes the amount of plot holes and inconsistency that is maintained throughout the film. Then he doesn't answer questions.

Wait for a review from a neutral critic. Transformers (2007) had its flaws but they were looked past because of the amazing concept of having transformers in the big screen.

That will not be here this time, and it is frustrating to hear some things about this movie because you don't have to be an amazing writer to write a consistent story that appeals to fans. Soundwave not transforming? One of the most popular characters that could easily be incorporated into a movie that is dominated by childish transformers such as Wheelie and the Twins. Why not have Barricade in this one, it wouldn't be that hard. And what really bothers me is the combination of Jet Fire and Optimus. Why not just have them power link like they are supposed to? Changing it may add some dramatic affect, but it just is not the same.

Bay tries to put his own spin on things. To be honest, the script and story for the movie is terrible, especially the direction of the films. They only succeed because the name. Transformers are awesome, they will always sell and give a reason for people to watch. However, these movies will never have the same respect movies like "The Dark Knight" had simply because the development of plot and story is terrible.

[Mr. Earle]

The cartoon did it all the time. Your next complaint is basically "why aren't they making it like the G1 I grew up with" but when they do something the cartoon was equally infamous for it's a problem? Plus, who cares? They're robots, not organic like the Hulk. There should be some consistency in their transformations.Seriously now, reused animations? And i should be happy that this flaw of an 80ies animated show is kept in a big badget hollywood movie in 2009?
Who i said i wanted G1, and if i did, i certainly wouldnt be asking for the bad aspects of it!
Why's that a big deal? No offense, 'cause it seems like you're a G1 fan, but it makes just as much sense as the cartoon. A specific set of Decepticons with the hidden power to transform vs. a whole subset of Cybertronians that can form a greater robot given enough parts at will....gee, which one sounds better for a film universe where finality is usually in the form of death yet where fans like their favorites? This sounds like a good compromise, if you ask me.Yes i am a fan of G1, but thats not what this is about. If some of the constructicons form devastator while the rest of them arent needed, then fine. If its a flaw or a plot hole, then i obviously wont like it. I honestly dont care if some of them are left out. I suppose they have to leave some behind since apart from Megs, Starscream and Ravage, there arent any other big decepticons left in the end. The field would be empty without them.
As for the protoforms...well, it's a desert. Not every Decepticon is going to get a vehicle mode.I think the Fallen creates them. So that poses the question, if he is so goddamn omnipotent, how can OP with some jetfire parts blast him?
I am only mad that the Imax is longer than the theatrical because the closest Imax theatre is 400 miles awaySame here!!! Damn!

[Mr. Earle]

It is hard to tell from the one review anything at all. He claims it was better than the first but only criticizes the amount of plot holes and inconsistency that is maintained throughout the film. Then he doesn't answer questions.

Wait for a review from a neutral critic. Transformers (2007) had its flaws but they were looked past because of the amazing concept of having transformers in the big screen.

That will not be here this time, and it is frustrating to hear some things about this movie because you don't have to be an amazing writer to write a consistent story that appeals to fans. Soundwave not transforming? One of the most popular characters that could easily be incorporated into a movie that is dominated by childish transformers such as Wheelie and the Twins. Why not have Barricade in this one, it wouldn't be that hard. And what really bothers me is the combination of Jet Fire and Optimus. Why not just have them power link like they are supposed to? Changing it may add some dramatic affect, but it just is not the same.

Bay tries to put his own spin on things. To be honest, the script and story for the movie is terrible, especially the direction of the films. They only succeed because the name. Transformers are awesome, they will always sell and give a reason for people to watch. However, these movies will never have the same respect movies like "The Dark Knight" had simply because the development of plot and story is terrible.I agree. I guess Bay just doesnt get it. The movie can have humor without resorting to the black-fat-guy analogue of the Twins. Seriously, they will destroy this movie just like that guy did to the first one.
"Naw man, its Wolverine. Snikt snikt". Look guys, he ate all the doughnuts...
Fine....i admit i laughed at the doughnuts part. :hehe:
As for Barricade, i honesty dont know what Bay was thinking. That review claims that Blackout is inexplicably alive again (only Megs is shown to be revived) when they could have used Barricade. I was gonna say they didnt use him because they needed fresh bots for new toys, but then they used Blackout. Unless... Sideways is Barricade. He sure looks like him in robot form.

[lars573]

Grindor is a different colour (brown vs. blue) than Blackout. Even if they don't directly say "I iz Grindor!"

[LightningFlash]

Seriously now, reused animations? And i should be happy that this flaw of an 80ies animated show is kept in a big badget hollywood movie in 2009?

Ehh, if they use re-used animation, I would wanna see it first. This could just be made-up *****ing if you ask me.

Yes i am a fan of G1, but thats not what this is about. If some of the constructicons form devastator while the rest of them arent needed, then fine. If its a flaw or a plot hole, then i obviously wont like it. I honestly dont care if some of them are left out. I suppose they have to leave some behind since apart from Megs, Starscream and Ravage, there arent any other big decepticons left in the end. The field would be empty without them.

And with more Constructicons out there, then we can see obviously another Devastator in the third film, if there is a Devastator that does indeed die in Egypt. It's not biggie to me, imo. I think that's actually kinda cool that there will be more than seven Constructicons in this TF universe.

I think the Fallen creates them. So that poses the question, if he is so goddamn omnipotent, how can OP with some jetfire parts blast him?

The Fallen doesn't create the protoforms. The Nemesis most likely sends them down and Soundwave just doesn't give them scans. And they're mostly there just to search for Sam in the movie. So it makes sense, they're there not to hide themselves, just to go for a search.

[Compi716]

Hmn...for some reason (I don't know what), this review just screams fake to me.

Perhaps it's the utter lack of details of something different than the novel.

[bestever23]

no it's real, Transformers 2 is a Failure

[Timstuff]

Bay tries to put his own spin on things. To be honest, the script and story for the movie is terrible, especially the direction of the films. They only succeed because the name. Transformers are awesome, they will always sell and give a reason for people to watch. However, these movies will never have the same respect movies like "The Dark Knight" had simply because the development of plot and story is terrible.

The Dark Knight is based on one of the oldest and most recognizeable characters in comic book history. Transformers is based on a toy-line that had successful cartoon and comic spinoffs, and yet you complain that it wasn't as good as The Dark Knight. Am I the only one here who does not see the flaws in this thinking?

The Dark Knight was an exceptionally good film, an it DID put it's own spin on the characters and universe it was set in. With Michael Bay, he sees Transformers for what it is-- a fun throwback to the 1980's, which is why he intentionally gave the movies a very 80's flavor. If you compare the way Transformers plays out to a movie like Ferris Beuller's Day Off or Back to the Future, it becomes pretty obvious that it's intended to feel like an 80's movie. And personally, I think that the way Bay went about making Transformers into a movie is MUCH better than if you got a bunch of fanboys together to try and give G1 "the Dark Knight treatment." It would have been an unwatchable 3 hour long fanwank.

[Golgo-13]

http://www.donmurphy.net/board/showthread.php?t=30967

Mega spoilers!

Ok guys just got back! Don't have much time to post, don't wanna miss the train but here's some quick stuff.

Movie was incredible, I liked it much more than the first! More action, more robots, less humans! Though there are some lame sexual inuendos like Wheelie humping Megan's leg.

Anyway, Bay and the actors came right into the theater and introduced the film. I was tempted to scream "Don Murphy Stooges #1" but I didn't want to get led out by security!

The VA thing in the credits was way too fast, sorry guys. The Fallen was Todd something. Welker does voice Soundwave, and Devastator too. Devastator has one line, screaming his name. Soundwave only has a few lines but he speaks English. But he never comes down to earth and never turns into a robot. Bleah. Very little screen time, but at least he doesn't get exploded which leaves things open for the third movie.

Mostly English, not much cybertronian.

The Twins were lame. As in the "bust a cap in you ass" stereotype. I could've done without them.

Jetfire was comic relief. He has a British accent and reminded me of a Monty Python character. He doesn't "combine" with Prime in the normal sense, he gets fatally wounded and rips out his spark, killing himself so Prime can use his parts.

Wheelie is nothing like G1 Wheelie. He kinda reminds me of Rattrap.

Lots of kitchen bots. One was a Samurai too. Bludgeon?

Only named Constructicon is Rampage, and he is red.

Megatron is revived by some Constructicons and "The Doctor."

Sideways never transforms, he is cut in half by Sideswipe in the first battle scene in car mode. Sideswipe is cool. Ravage is cool too.

There was a bot that looked like Blackout but he was not named. Blackout himself was never revived so I can't say it was him. He did not speak and was not named in the credits. In fact in the last battle scene there were tons of, well, "repaints," basically reused animation. So even after Devastator forms, there are still constructicons running around. And some Protoforms. I even saw a truck that looked like Bonecrusher...though I never saw him in robot mode. Scorponok is in the final battle too and is killed by Jetfire in about 2 seconds.

There are three motorcycles, but they appear to be named collectively Arcee. Not much screen time/lines for them anyway.

The term "Matrix of Leadership" is used, it's a key that operates a device to draw energy from the sun.

Ok that's enough for now, not gonna check this board again till tomorrow! I suppose this thread will be about 100 pages long by then so I'm sorry if I can't anwser everything.

Thanks again Nightbird for the tix!

[gstommylee]

no it's real, Transformers 2 is a Failure

oh good grief so you assume based on 1 person opinion that may not necessary be totally accurate that TF2 is a failure.


I think the ultimate review of a movie is rather or not you like it not based on what someone else says. Interesting the person that gave the review didn't say what was actually good about the movie only whats bad about the movie based on his opinion of what he saw.

[fullmoonmaster]

i dont post here much but i have to say..when somebody starts out saying the movie is incredible and thinks its way better then the first but u decide its a epic failure..i dont get it...lol....all movies have flaws....i would have prefered seeing soundwave in robot form and fighting but as long the rest if the movie is good..i can live with it..besides to the general audience it wont matter anyway...

[d.k.]

I don;t wanna read this thread because of spoilers, but are the reactions so far good?

[Avengers-Report]

There are no reactions yet. Just one guy who claims to have seen the movie but leaves tons of things out and doesn't explain/make sense half the time.

If he was answering questions then I wouldn't doubt him

[fullmoonmaster]

well i dont know if it is fake or not..i know that everytime i go to try to look at the thread it says its no longer there...also since micheal bay has said that he will be giving out false info the info in the review could be planted on purpose to throw people off..then again it might be completly true..who knows...lol

[S.A.A.D.]

Sorry guys,Don Murphy deleted the thread. The poster said Jolt doesn't do much and that the feud with Megs and Screamer would make fans smile,and he also said Arcee doesn't die and that the Fallen is cool. Soundwave's voice is not synthesized.

What he is saying is true,the poster,a moderator from Bay's site hooked him up with a ticket,Sora. Nelson from shootfromtheedit seems to be the reason that Don Murphy deleted the poster's thread.

[ClintF]

Sorry guys,Don Murphy deleted the thread. The poster said Jolt doesn't do much and that the feud with Megs and Screamer would make fans smile,and he also said Arcee doesn't die and that the Fallen is cool. Soundwave's voice is not synthesized.

What he is saying is true,the poster,a moderator from Bay's site hooked him up with a ticket,Sora. Nelson from shootfromtheedit seems to be the reason that Don Murphy deleted the poster's thread.

WTF? I thought they would at least get that right. Well I wonder since Frank is voicing him if he will then sound like cartoon Megatron then.

[lars573]

WTF? I thought they would at least get that right. Well I wonder since Frank is voicing him if he will then sound like cartoon Megatron then.
Without that voice effect. Which was done with something called a vocoder. Soundwave will sound like a monotone Dr. Claw.

[Serious_?]

I'm sick of reading people's stupid comments like, ''wow he is right, i hate transformers now''.

Wait until you have watched the movie and form your own opinion.

Besides, that has to be one of the worst reviews ever. No real information and stupid comments. ''coz Im da cOOL, I saw ROTF ROFL''.

Grow up.

[Nirvana]

i dont post here much but i have to say..when somebody starts out saying the movie is incredible and thinks its way better then the first but u decide its a epic failure..i dont get it...lol....all movies have flaws....i would have prefered seeing soundwave in robot form and fighting but as long the rest if the movie is good..i can live with it..besides to the general audience it wont matter anyway...

What I don't get is people who expect huge character development or much of a plot in a movie about fighting robots.

[lars573]

Or in a more broad sense huge character development from a fracking action movie. And in an action movie directed by Michael Bay no less. :whatever: It's like they somehow expect Bay to wake up one morning and be Ron Howard or something. Things like character development get in the way of s**t blowing up real good and telling fart jokes.

[protocida]

Who liked the first movie will like this, and vice-versa.

As I expected.

Transformers fans, ASSEMBLE!

[Nirvana]

Or in a more broad sense huge character development from a fracking action movie. And in an action movie directed by Michael Bay no less. :whatever: It's like they somehow expect Bay to wake up one morning and be Ron Howard or something. Things like character development get in the way of s**t blowing up real good and telling fart jokes.

Don't get my wrong, I look forward to the movie. Giant CGI Robots, explosions and a sexy female lead, of course it'll love it. But I don't expect a moving plot or real character development, either.

[ClintF]

Im calling BS on the whole Sideways doesnt transform and remains in car mode, in the trailer you can clearly see him crash through the house and leap and transform INTO car mode in mid air. Lets hope a lot of the review is bogus.

[lars573]

He does transform. He doesn't last long enough to actually fight. He just jobs to Sideswipe.

[Mr. Earle]

What I don't get is people who expect huge character development or much of a plot in a movie about fighting robots.
We had all that in a film about a dude that dresses like a bat. Why cant we have it here?
Or in a more broad sense huge character development from a fracking action movie. And in an action movie directed by Michael Bay no less. It's like they somehow expect Bay to wake up one morning and be Ron Howard or something. Things like character development get in the way of s**t blowing up real good and telling fart jokes.
ROFLMAO!!!!

[Darthkush]

Nobody really expects it to be Dark Knight(nor should it be) but I think it's odd that people are so satisfied with just "***** blowing up". The original appeal of these characters isn't just that they're "giant robots killing each other", It's that they're "giant robots killing each other...who are full of personality". That is key.

As for the review it self, I'm still cautiously optimistic. I like that the poster says that it's much better than the first and theres'a lot more robot interaction this time. I like that WElker is Soundwave and Devastator.

But there are things that worry me. Soundwave is now=Galactus. Sigh.
The worst thing? The reusing of character animations and such mentioned. That's just LAZY filmmaking and that makes me think they should've waited another 6 months or so so they had time to iron out the film more.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Nobody really expects it to be Dark Knight(nor should it be) but I think it's odd that people are so satisfied with just "***** blowing up". The original appeal of these characters isn't just that they're "giant robots killing each other", It's that they're "giant robots killing each other...who are full of personality". That is key.

As for the review it self, I'm still cautiously optimistic. I like that the poster says that it's much better than the first and theres'a lot more robot interaction this time. I like that WElker is Soundwave and Devastator.

But there are things that worry me. Soundwave is now=Galactus. Sigh.
The worst thing? The reusing of character animations and such mentioned. That's just LAZY filmmaking and that makes me think they should've waited another 6 months or so so they had time to iron out the film more.

I agree, I want explosions yeah, but I also want SOME character development and story, the first movie achieved this IMO, I'm hoping this one does too.

[lars573]

Nobody really expects it to be Dark Knight(nor should it be) but I think it's odd that people are so satisfied with just "***** blowing up". The original appeal of these characters isn't just that they're "giant robots killing each other", It's that they're "giant robots killing each other...who are full of personality". That is key.
When did transformers ever have personality? The the movie characters have about the same amount of personality as TF's have ever had.

But there are things that worry me. Soundwave is now=Galactus. Sigh.
The worst thing? The reusing of character animations and such mentioned. That's just LAZY filmmaking and that makes me think they should've waited another 6 months or so so they had time to iron out the film more.
The second Bay said 40 robots. I though reused CG models with flipped colours. Anyone who though other wise was deluding themselfs. Especially after the price tag they put on robot time from the first one.

[Dotten]

Never really cared much for Soundwave and his voice was just.. lame. But I can understand the fans of the character not liking it with the changes that's made. I felt the same way when Optimus was given a "nose" in truck mode and Bumblebee being a Camarro. But turns out it worked well, so why not give Soundwave a chance too?

The complaints of the first film was to little of Megatron and Starscream. We're getting a lot more of them in this one. So it's a bit "spoiled brat" if one also demand that they introduce Soundwave and give him a lot of screen-time. There's probably going to be sequels, so it's best to wait for it so it can be done properly and focus on giving Starscream and Megatron some much needed attention in this one. :)

[Mr. Earle]

Never really cared much for Soundwave and his voice was just.. lame. But I can understand the fans of the character not liking it with the changes that's made. I felt the same way when Optimus was given a "nose" in truck mode and Bumblebee being a Camarro. But turns out it worked well, so why not give Soundwave a chance too?

The complaints of the first film was to little of Megatron and Starscream. We're getting a lot more of them in this one. So it's a bit "spoiled brat" if one also demand that they introduce Soundwave and give him a lot of screen-time. There's probably going to be sequels, so it's best to wait for it so it can be done properly and focus on giving Starscream and Megatron some much needed attention in this one. :)IMHO, the Bay Soundwave, from what i ve been hearing so far at least, sounds very cool. He supports the troops, scans vehicles for them and does all the intel work. The satellite alt form suits him perfectly. Its just that he is away from it all. Maybe he should come down from orbit when the big battles are taking place.

Its a pity he barely appears in ROTF, but i am more worried about the twins and the reused CGI. Maybe if they hadnt spent their time and money in making the twins, they could have avoided reusing stuff. Lame.

I am also worried about the Jetfire combo. Hopefully (and most probably) it wont be permanent. 1) because it sounds like Prime becomes too hax and 2) because its not how Prime is supposed to look. I am sure that he will go back to his normal self after that.

Finally, i keep wondering how the upgraded Prime can blast the Fallen. Seriously now, he just got a bigger gun, but the Fallen is a freaking god! Anyway, i hope the Fallen doesnt die after 5 minutes of being awakened.

[Chris B]

Its encouraging at least that he thought it was better than the first film and the Megatron/Starscream is there is at least.

Soundwave having a small role isn't really news to me. While not a big surprise, him never transforming is still disappointing none-the-less. It also bums me out quite a bit that Bay couldn't use the vocoder affect.

On the topic of reused character models, that's nothing new to the franchise as a whole, and I don't have much of a problem with that. Problem is Grindor looks to be the same color as Blackout, and the same is true of who I'm assuming to be Scavenger, in the TV spot that shows a glimpse of Devastator combining, who shares the same color color as Demolisher. I not sure what Bay was thinking when it came to this one since I would think that clearly different color schemes would be a requirements if you're recycling a character model.

[S.A.A.D.]

About the Constructicon clones,I was thinking that maybe it was to appease us Tf fans because of Devastator's fate. Remember how some of us were complaining how the Constructicons got beat as Devastator easily? It's not that bad if you're pissed off about Constructicon clones and think about that what if.

[thewhyteman]

We had all that in a film about a dude that dresses like a bat. Why cant we have it here?

ROFLMAO!!!!

Not every film team assembled can be as awesome as Nolan and Co.

[protocida]

An IMDb user is saying that, altought Soundwave's role IS small, he DOES transforms once.

I know IMDb's reputation, but you never know, right?

[Golgo-13]

Never really cared much for Soundwave and his voice was just.. lame. But I can understand the fans of the character not liking it with the changes that's made. I felt the same way when Optimus was given a "nose" in truck mode and Bumblebee being a Camarro. But turns out it worked well, so why not give Soundwave a chance too?



The complaint about Soundwave is more so that his robot mode is not in the film. From the time TF2 went into pre-production...yell, even while TF1 was finishing up, the writers and Bay were promoting the fact that Soundwave was gonna be in TF2. Yes he's in there, but what's the point of having such a HIGHLY popular character, in a movie called Transformers, about robots that transform...and then not have him transform..:confused:

It makes no sense whatsoever. The voice thing, i understand 'cause maybe Bay felt it sounded a little cheesy or whatever but having him not transform......geez, it feels as though Bay does things sometimes out of spite.

[S.A.A.D.]

Not every film team assembled can be as awesome as Nolan and Co.

Nolan isn't that good,he's very basic IMO.

[protocida]

Reused animations.
The movie is not done yet. Bay probably reused some animations from the 1° movie while the new ones aren't finished.

[ClintF]

The movie is not done yet. Bay probably reused some animations from the 1° movie while the new ones aren't finished.

Thats what Im hoping, reused the animations as a quick media to throw on the canvas to see what it will look like etc. or not who knows

[BrollySupersj]

Is is true that Rampage is red instead of yellow?

[Ace of Knaves]

We had all that in a film about a dude that dresses like a bat. Why cant we have it here?


Come on man, that's just a dumb comment.

You can't compare Batman and Transformers, end of.

[ironwez20]

wait sombody just said that bay hooked up this guy with a ticket so maybe he told the guy to post this review and say some things to mislead us maybe bay wants everything to be a surprise, ive been looking at these tvspots and nothing gives anything away its all little drops of used footage and more reused footage mostly of freakin meagan fox who they cant stop showing. anyway yea maybe bay told the guy to post a review with some true points, some hints, and some false the question is which are which. thats just my opnion tho.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The complaint about Soundwave is more so that his robot mode is not in the film. From the time TF2 went into pre-production...yell, even while TF1 was finishing up, the writers and Bay were promoting the fact that Soundwave was gonna be in TF2. Yes he's in there, but what's the point of having such a HIGHLY popular character, in a movie called Transformers, about robots that transform...and then not have him transform..:confused:

It makes no sense whatsoever. The voice thing, i understand 'cause maybe Bay felt it sounded a little cheesy or whatever but having him not transform......geez, it feels as though Bay does things sometimes out of spite.


Unfortunately, what you get is what you get with Bay, I dont think he does it out of spite, just that he thinks he knows better. But he made the first movie work to his credit, so I am hoping the same is true of TF2.

One thing we all demanded at least seems to be true in the movie, Prime being more bad-ass this time.

[Mr. Earle]

Come on man, that's just a dumb comment.

You can't compare Batman and Transformers, end of.Ok, i was exaggerating, but still.... they could try coming up with a decent plot. I think that the first movie had a pretty basic but interesting plot. Not too deep and full of excitement and fun. It just needed less humans and less fart jokes.

The bumblebee - Sam relationship (how he gets him, how Bee helps out with Mikaela and all that) was one of the best parts of the movie IMHO.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea the friendship between Sam and Bumblebee was probably the best thing about it IMO.

And yea there should be at least a half decent plot in every single movie ever made, regardless of genre. But we can't say this movie hasn't got a decent plot yet, because none of us have seen it. All we have heard is a pretty un specific "review".

[Mr. Earle]

Yea the friendship between Sam and Bumblebee was probably the best thing about it IMO.

And yea there should be at least a half decent plot in every single movie ever made, regardless of genre. But we can't say this movie hasn't got a decent plot yet, because none of us have seen it. All we have heard is a pretty un specific "review".
I heard that Spielberg proposed the idea to Bay. He said he wanted the movie to start with the story of "a boy and his first car". And it was cool that they kept the rest of the Autobots for later. When Prime first transforms its like you re standing in front of Jesus (only he is mechanical and he has swords :hehe:).

Thank god for Spielberg then. Damn it Bay has such a low IQ, yet he is wealthier than whole countries!

[GhostPoet]

This just in! ----BREAKING NEWS---
A random person says the movie sucks!

That is all.

[CrashNburn]

I am only mad that the Imax is longer than the theatrical because the closest Imax theatre is 400 miles away:cmad:


You shouldnt be that mad...the word going around is that it's only just under a minute longer.

[Lunar_Wolf]

Come on man, that's just a dumb comment.

You can't compare Batman and Transformers, end of.

Don't you know EVERY film is now compared to TDK for no reaon:csad:

[MessiahDecoy123]

The comparison makes sense. People said Batman was silly based on Superfriends and Adam West. They said it was dumb to expect anything more because it was about a guy who dresses up like a bat. Now people say the same thing about Transformers. Supposedly it doesn't deserve a quality adaptation because the concept and cartoon was silly.

Same argument.

[protocida]

I like Transformers better than The Dark Knight.

[Golgo-13]

I want to hear something about the score. Is it a rehash from TF1? Original? What.....?

[Lunar_Wolf]

The comparison makes sense. People said Batman was silly based on Superfriends and Adam West. They said it was dumb to expect anything more because it was about a guy who dresses up like a bat. Now people say the same thing about Transformers. Supposedly it doesn't deserve a quality adaptation because the concept and cartoon was silly.

Same argument.

They are both way different franchises to compare them. Sure they both were campy and silly in the 80's, but so was most cartoons, comics etc at that time.

Batman got darker in most media forms in the late 80's and stuck to that tone(minus Forever and Batman & Robin) to this day. Before the film in '07, Transformers was still pretty silly in most media forms. Even the film kept in some sillyness because it's adapted from a kids show that's used to sell toys.

Transformers are robots from space, Batman is a guy who dresses up because his parents were killed, both concepts are even different.

Everyone feels that all films should live up to TDK standards like it's a perfect film, it's not, it has it's flaws. Transformers cannot present itself like TDK has. Transformers is not dark and will never be.

[Ace of Knaves]

@messiahdecoy

No it's not.

It's not that it was a cartoon and was silly. It's that Transformers is SUPPOSED to be more action focused. It's about giant frickin robots at war on earth!

So you want a cerebral Transformers film in the same mold as the recent Batman films, is that what you are saying?

[MessiahDecoy123]

@messiahdecoy

No it's not.

It's not that it was a cartoon and was silly. It's that Transformers is SUPPOSED to be more action focused. It's about giant frickin robots at war on earth!

So you want a cerebral Transformers film in the same mold as the recent Batman films, is that what you are saying?
Well it doesn't necessarily have to cerebral as a detective movie but it could be cerebral as a mild cyber punk movie being that these are living machines fighting for human trust and energy to fuel a million year civil war. You can embellish and reinforce the source material using the best the comics had to offer like the Dark Knight did rather than simply transfer the sillier elements of the show. That would be what Joel Schumacher and Michael Bay did.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea that's fair enough, good points.

[Lunar_Wolf]

Well it doesn't necessarily have to cerebral as a detective movie but it could be cerebral as a mild cyber punk movie being that these are living machines fighting for human trust and energy to fuel a million year civil war. You can embellish and reinforce the source material using the best the comics had to offer like the Dark Knight did rather than simply transfer the sillier elements of the show. That would be what Joel Schumacher and Michael Bay did.

Batman came from a comic book, Transformers didn't. Even TDK changed major things from the comics. Joker had white skin, he didn't have cuts in his face(for most part), he fell into chemicals, Two-Face didn't get burnt from a fire, he never dated someone called Rachel(plus she was never even in the comics) and you could go in other things about characters.

Transformers HAS to be aimed towards kids because they are the demographic. Hasbro makes it's money from the toys. The cartoon is what everyone remembers the Transformers from, not the comics. Sure the first film had it's major weaknesses and I'm sure this will too, but at the end of the days it's not Batman. It does not have the same director or writers, so there shouldn't be a moment to think it will be the same as TDK. Bay is the right guy, he knows action and that's what people want from Transformers.

[Mr. Earle]

I certainly dont want Transformers or any other franchise to lose its focus and copy TDK because it was successful. TDK succeeded for a million reasons and its tone is on par with the material.
TF is all about robots transforming into human vehicles. I think its focus needs to be action, CGI, some humor, etc. Not grimdark. And i think that Bay has caught the essense of it and he deserves credit for having the guts to go with the new radical designs. I know i love them and cant go back to the cubic robots. The faces especially are amazing btw!

That said, TF could use a deeper plot (in TF1 at least. We dont know about the second yet). I am not saying make it a Shakespearean play, but it could analyse some themes, like the death and destruction that comes from war, or worse in this case, a civil war, etc.
Also, it would be wise for Bay not to think of us as idiots. I rolled my eyes into my brain when they presented us that hot Aussie chick and that black guy as top hackers working for the goverment. And while some of the humor was good, most of it was bad. And the worst part is the robot humor, because you know that each frame costs time and money and you wish they had spent it on something better. We didnt get any character development for the decepticons, but we sure did get the "oops...my bad" scene. That scene wasnt funny and it felt like it lasted for a century!

My god the Twins are gonna be so bad...

[protocida]

Your, sir, have no sense of fun.

[Mr. Earle]

Your, sir, have no sense of fun.Dont get me wrong, i liked TF1. It was a fun movie. I had more fun with it than with Ironman which i found boring.
For example, i laughed a lot during the scene where the blond chick visits the black guy at his house. Both the grandma and the dance jokes were good. But you just cant pass this guy as a top hacker. He could have been Sam's neighbor or something!

[MessiahDecoy123]

Batman came from a comic book, Transformers didn't. Even TDK changed major things from the comics. Joker had white skin, he didn't have cuts in his face(for most part), he fell into chemicals, Two-Face didn't get burnt from a fire, he never dated someone called Rachel(plus she was never even in the comics) and you could go in other things about characters.
Transformers has a long history of comics it doesn't matter if it was pre-dated by the cartoon. When making an adaptation you are not barred from using the comics because the source material didn't originate in comics.

The Heath Ledger design for the Joker works because it melds perfectly with Heath Ledger's interpretation of the character. The acid/fire change to Two-face was superficial. I didn't say everything had to be exactly the same for an adaptation. I simply stated that if your going to make changes, embellish and reinforce the best that source material had to offer (much of which could be found in Transformer comic books) rather than transfer the silliest elements the way Joel Schumacher did.

Transformers HAS to be aimed towards kids because they are the demographic. Hasbro makes it's money from the toys. The cartoon is what everyone remembers the Transformers from, not the comics. Sure the first film had it's major weaknesses and I'm sure this will too, but at the end of the days it's not Batman. It does not have the same director or writers, so there shouldn't be a moment to think it will be the same as TDK. Bay is the right guy, he knows action and that's what people want from Transformers.
Not true, there are plenty of PG-13 movies with children toys. That means a movie aimed at people at least in high school offers toys aimed at five and six year olds. At the end of the day you can use the best the comics had to offer the way TDK successfully did in a Transformers movie. There's really no reason not to other than lazy storytelling.

People don't know what to expect from a new franchise. You can give them more than empty spectacle and loud explosions and they will have a memorable movie going experience. You can't keep people's attention with 2 hours of explosions, you need to tell a story. It doesn't matter if the movie is about ninjas, pirates, zombies or robots. You can craft a great story around the action sequences like the Empire Strikes Back or Raider of the Lost Ark. There's no excuse for anything less when you have decades of beloved comic story arcs to draw from.

[CEREBRAL....]

^^well said...

i just dont understand why can't people who dont like the movie and have a legitimate grap about bay's version be able to express it w/o someone saying "o it's just a cartoon..u dont know how to have fun, or what are you looking for a shakespearean play"

i mean Bay turn'd this movie into his own version and if he wanted to do that..then don't use any of the source material..use your own creation....

hope number 2 is a big improvement...but there's things that i have read that i'm not plz with already (soundwave not tranforming or even using the voicoder....f'ing bay)

[Jake Cassidy]

The report says that Sideswipe is cool. That makes me happy.

[Occam's Phaser]

The movie is not done yet. Bay probably reused some animations from the 1° movie while the new ones aren't finished.

Thats what Im hoping, reused the animations as a quick media to throw on the canvas to see what it will look like etc. or not who knows

It's bad wording on the part of the original reviewer. It's not reused animation. It is reused character models. Basically, it costs a lot of money and takes a lot of man hours to construct a detailed CGI character such as the robots in Transfromers. Understandable considering that each has thousands of complex moving parts. It seems that, to save time and money, Bay has populated the larger battles (and in the case of the forest fight, an apparently unexplained reappearance of Blackout) with mulitiple characters that share the same design.


But it still costs money and takes time to animate those reused character models and render them for the final scene. So he's not going to do that just to have robot place markers in the film that will be swapped out for original cgi creations at a later date.

[J.Howlett]

Messiah,

95% of the people who know anything about Transformers know that from the cartoon series not the comics...and let's all be honest about it, the cartoon isn't great. It got quite repetitive in the end. Not saying I still don't like it, but facts are facts.

Bay's reinvention of Transformers was a good thing...its his narrative skills that you can call into question.

Listen, I love the first film a lot, knowing all its flaws. But, it's flaws are not really in the storytelling department. It has a theme; it's just heavy handed. It's flaws come from the fact that Bay had 150 million dollars to make a live action Transformers film and that's just doesn't work. So what does he do? He overcrowds the film with humans, because he really has no choice. If you cut out Rachel Taylor and Anthony Anderson, it's a better film. That subplot really should've just been Jon Voight's character trying to figure things out. We really don't need the hackers, especially since Sector Seven tells us everything we need to know once they arrive.

Yet, I still give Bay a pass because of the nature of the material and the fact that 150 million isn't enough to make a real Transformers film. I mean, he basically shot around the robots until we got the major action sequence in the end...which still delivers, two years later.

Now, contrast that to this new film. We can already tell, with a bigger budget, that Bay cut down the humans significantly and upped the robots...and decided to tell his own version of existing Transformers lore. I really don't see what else anyone wants. We don't know what the character development is going to be like yet....but with a film like this, you shouldn't expect too much. This type of film is more plot oriented than character oriented.

You can have some character development in Transformers but from whom, Prime or Sam? If you character development between the robots, that's even more money they have to spend and then you get into the territory of not making any money off this film theatrically because it cost too much to make.

A really, real Transformers film has to be an animated feature.

[lukedoggwalker]

soo.. any other reactions from the film?

[Alex The Great]

aaahhh.....Everyone arguing about the movie based one a couple reviews....:facepalm

[Grommers]

A couple of things, there are somethings I wish Bay didn't change, however some make a whole **** ton more sense. He's given a lot of the transformers a lot more character and personality, which is an addition to it to me. Beast Wars was one of my favourite transformers shows because of the character development.

It really makes these dudes feel alot more alive.

So, the fact that they "reused" designs or transformations or whatever..hey, if i had to choose between those reused and more time for character development, or not reused and no time for character development i would choose the first option, sure it sucks, but sadly, very few people in the world have a limitless budget.

I hope they do a half decent job introducing the characters, I thought thats something transformers 1 lacked.




Anyways whoever created that thread about his "review" never talked about the positive things, he's clearly not a good writer because you usually back-up your first sentence, so I wouldn't really take much as to what he says to heart.

[Avengers-Report]

Is there another review besides the one of the front page?

[chaseter]

Who cares if they reuse animations? It is either spend money and time redoing those or spend that money and time else where:o I could care less if Bumblebee transforms the exact same way in one shot:o

[Shivsguy616]

Who cares if they reuse animations? It is either spend money and time redoing those or spend that money and time else where:o I could care less if Bumblebee transforms the exact same way in one shot:o

You COULD care less?

[Mr. Para-Normal]

I am only mad that the Imax is longer than the theatrical because the closest Imax theatre is 400 miles away:cmad:

Uh you do know that the Imax cut is less than a 1 min longer than the regular cut right. It was stated on the home page of the website Shh. I was going to go drive for a hour to the imax theater but now I will just see in the regular theaters.

[Hotwire]

I hope some of the nay-sayers on this forum are in film school so that they can become directors and give us "the true version of Transformers we deserve." If so many people think they can make a better movie, let se you do it. Put your money where your mouth is, become a director, and reboot the franchise.

[Hotwire]

Uh you do know that the Imax cut is less than a 1 min longer than the regular cut right. It was stated on the home page of the website Shh. I was going to go drive for a hour to the imax theater but now I will just see in the regular theaters.
I'd like to see some of the Transformers on that giant screen in life-size.

[Marvin]

Well it doesn't necessarily have to cerebral as a detective movie but it could be cerebral as a mild cyber punk movie being that these are living machines fighting for human trust and energy to fuel a million year civil war. You can embellish and reinforce the source material using the best the comics had to offer like the Dark Knight did rather than simply transfer the sillier elements of the show. That would be what Joel Schumacher and Michael Bay did.


nah

look at the original superman movies
look at the (Sam Raimi) spiderman movies

the material has gotten time times darker and substance driven in the comics
even with the characters dealing with their own deaths

however the films were "light hearted" to say the least
at least the first ones

movies need to know what the audience is there for, those are the "best" movies

look at it this way

if bad boys was deemed a week movie on paper and they instead made it a character drama piece with malkovitch and robbie redford
where would it be now?

it has its charms and it knows what they are and that's why it's a "good" movie

Transformers has it's charms and it knows them

and when it pulls the numbers it will pull, the point will be proven.

[luca_frontino]

Messiah,

95% of the people who know anything about Transformers know that from the cartoon series not the comics...and let's all be honest about it, the cartoon isn't great. It got quite repetitive in the end. Not saying I still don't like it, but facts are facts.

Bay's reinvention of Transformers was a good thing...its his narrative skills that you can call into question.

Listen, I love the first film a lot, knowing all its flaws. But, it's flaws are not really in the storytelling department. It has a theme; it's just heavy handed. It's flaws come from the fact that Bay had 150 million dollars to make a live action Transformers film and that's just doesn't work. So what does he do? He overcrowds the film with humans, because he really has no choice. If you cut out Rachel Taylor and Anthony Anderson, it's a better film. That subplot really should've just been Jon Voight's character trying to figure things out. We really don't need the hackers, especially since Sector Seven tells us everything we need to know once they arrive.

Yet, I still give Bay a pass because of the nature of the material and the fact that 150 million isn't enough to make a real Transformers film. I mean, he basically shot around the robots until we got the major action sequence in the end...which still delivers, two years later.

Now, contrast that to this new film. We can already tell, with a bigger budget, that Bay cut down the humans significantly and upped the robots...and decided to tell his own version of existing Transformers lore. I really don't see what else anyone wants. We don't know what the character development is going to be like yet....but with a film like this, you shouldn't expect too much. This type of film is more plot oriented than character oriented.

You can have some character development in Transformers but from whom, Prime or Sam? If you character development between the robots, that's even more money they have to spend and then you get into the territory of not making any money off this film theatrically because it cost too much to make.

A really, real Transformers film has to be an animated feature.

I understand that 150-200 millions are not enough for a full-time TFs movie.
But, instead of putting uninteresting characters and lame subplots, Bay could have just shortened the film length.
2.5 hours are really too much, if the TFs occupy just a 3rd of that.

[Johnny Drama]

What I don't get is people who expect huge character development or much of a plot in a movie about fighting robots.

Right on...

[lars573]

Well it doesn't necessarily have to cerebral as a detective movie but it could be cerebral as a mild cyber punk movie being that these are living machines fighting for human trust and energy to fuel a million year civil war. You can embellish and reinforce the source material using the best the comics had to offer like the Dark Knight did rather than simply transfer the sillier elements of the show. That would be what Joel Schumacher and Michael Bay did.
One problem though. Transformers is a toyline, not a comic or a TV show. The source material for the comic and TV show was the toyline.

[DemonicFoil]

^ Well said.

[J.Howlett]

luca,

Shortening the film wouldn't have help. I agree that SOME of the human characters should've been cut but 150 million is still not enough. He had to have the human characters take us to the third act so we could get the robot action...which he delivered in spades.

I foresee no such problem with this film, just based on the trailers.

[J.Howlett]

luca,

Shortening the film wouldn't have help. I agree that SOME of the human characters should've been cut but 150 million is still not enough. He had to have the human characters take us to the third act so we could get the robot action...which he delivered in spades.

I foresee no such problem with this film, just based on the trailers.

[Golgo-13]

The only good news i've heard about this film is "More robots;less humans".

[DorkyFresh]

In fact in the last battle scene there were tons of, well, "repaints," basically reused animation.

there are few people that would be able to pick up that kind of imagery on their first viewing, even if they had watched the first movie prior to watching the 2nd. not to mention, this is ILM working on the film and i've never known them to reuse animations in any of their movies.....so i seriously doubt this dude was seeing what he THOUGHT he was seeing.

[Chris B]

Here's a second review from a guy over at TFW. Beware, its spoiler heavy.

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-movie-discussion/239873-just-saw-rotf-some-answers-my-thoughts-spoilers.html

[ClintF]

I was wondering about Welker voicing Soundwave and not having his voice ran through a vocoder, I always said if it isnt vocoded wouldnt it just sound like his Megatron voice, and appears I was right, cool though that you get to hear G1 Megatron voice on the big screen.

[Avengers-Report]

Reading that second review kinda made me sad. It says the movie isn't any better or worse than the first, about the same.

And I guess Devastator is a complete disaster? That is a huge let down for me, along with the poor Soundwave character.

Unfortunately, Bay can never make an amazing movie. They are always going to be decent.

[S.A.A.D.]

Well to be fair,he did say he loved it and that he plans on seeing it again. And he also said it was great.

[Timstuff]

I loved the first movie, so if TF2 is of the same quality as the first movie then I'll be happy.

Honestly, I don't understand what the Bay hate is all about-- he makes big fun action movies, and makes them very well. They're not very intellectually challenging, sure, but then again cheeseburgers aren't very healthy. That doesn't mean they aren't enjoyable, though.

[lukedoggwalker]

that second review sounds like a load of bullocks. he says he has a good photographic memory but he cant remember bumblebee saying a single sentence.. how many times does he actually talk? he cant remember 2 lines of dialogue coming from a mute robot?sounds like a no life pissy fanboy holding grudges against michael bay imo..

[Sam Fisher]

When Sam dies and goes to Autobot heaven - WTF???

:huh::dry::facepalm

[Chris B]

Here's a third review, also from TFW.

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-movie-discussion/239882-just-seen-big-spoilers.html

[CEREBRAL....]

It's so funny...eventhough u give legitimate reasons to why you don't like the first film and things about the sec. film...u still get the same reply.."it's from a toyline, it's a fun film..u can't do any better..you're just hating bay....i got understand the hate..blah blah" are u guys like retard'd or there just can't be people who like the film vs people who don't like??smh

[Lunar_Wolf]

It's so funny...eventhough u give legitimate reasons to why you don't like the first film and things about the sec. film...u still get the same reply.."it's from a toyline, it's a fun film..u can't do any better..you're just hating bay....i got understand the hate..blah blah" are u guys like retard'd or there just can't be people who like the film vs people who don't like??smh

:facepalm

clfAq1xSevc

[CEREBRAL....]

and just read all 3 reviews..still going 2 see it..but all 3 basicallly say the samething..so u can't sit here and think the reviews are b.s., bay might of dropped the ball again....good job bay!!

[CEREBRAL....]

:facepalm

clfAq1xSevc


must of hurt your feelings...oh well!!!

[Lunar_Wolf]

must of hurt your feelings...oh well!!!

Not in the slightest. Just flabbergasted that you think people are retarded for liking a film:huh: But I could be wrong in what you were saying due to your spelling and grammar, don't take that as an insult.

[CEREBRAL....]

Not in the slightest. Just flabbergasted that you think people are retarded for liking a film:huh: But I could be wrong in what you were saying due to your spelling and grammar, don't take that as an insult.

1. u must of been if you took the time to reply to me in the first place
2. If u actually read my post u would know i wasnt' calling anyone retard'd for liking the movie i was actually accusing anyone for not understand why there are those who don't like the movie...there's a difference

and 3... i really care less about spelling and grammar on a message board..i'm sure u and i can go up and down these boards and find all kind of literary do's and don't 's.....point i don't care, if want'd to i could.......thankx

[Marvin]

and just read all 3 reviews..still going 2 see it..but all 3 basicallly say the samething..so u can't sit here and think the reviews are b.s., bay might of dropped the ball again....good job bay!!

as if michael bays Transformers getting "bad" reviews is anything new:whatever:

this one will no doubt get an even lower score on RT (if that's even possible)

...yet somehow it's going to absolutely stomp on box office numbers? I wonder why that is?

maybe it's because of you, or rather ppl like you, still going 2 see it..
of course you are, I dare you to sit at home and miss this spectacle.
no one can.


it's simple ppl who hated the first film will hate this one(you and your crew of flunkies included)

ppl who loved the first film...so on and so forth


bay might of dropped the ball again....good job bay!!

this film is tracking huge, and is quite possibly going to give DK a run


if the success of this film and what it means for paramount in a summer of dudes is what you call dropping the ball...

[StreetWarrior]

1. u must of been if you took the time to reply to me in the first place
2. If u actually read my post u would know i wasnt' calling anyone retard'd for liking the movie i was actually accusing anyone for not understand why there are those who don't like the movie...there's a difference

and 3... i really care less about spelling and grammar on a message board..i'm sure u and i can go up and down these boards and find all kind of literary do's and don't 's.....point i don't care, if want'd to i could.......thankx

Ugh, my brain hurts just trying to read this mess. I know you don't believe in grammer or spelling, chief, but at least try and sound coherent. Wow...

[Marvin]

message boards are the last place to talk about grammer ppl

(that and a strip club)

[CEREBRAL....]

as if michael bays Transformers getting "bad" reviews is anything new:whatever:

this one will no doubt get an even lower score on RT (if that's even possible)

...yet somehow it's going to absolutely stomp on box office numbers? I wonder why that is?

maybe it's because of you, or rather ppl like you,
of course you are, I dare you to sit at home and miss this spectacle.
no one can.


it's simple ppl who hated the first film will hate this one(you and your crew of flunkies included)

ppl who loved the first film...so on and so forth




this film is tracking huge, and is quite possibly going to give DK a run


if the success of this film and what it means for paramount in a summer of dudes is what you call dropping the ball...

ahh if u think i need to see this movie for my entertainment..u are sadly mistaken..i dont need to see the movie..i choose to see it...there's a difference

I'm going to see the movie before i past complete judgement and if u paid attention u would know i was mainly talking about the first movie. Regradless of the reviews..i wanna see with my own eyes first..i do have that right...as well as the right to not like the first movie..again....

it seems that your only normal for liking the movie, but for those who dont like it..u have to be a hater....yeah that somehow makes sense!! ahh not!


also..who doesn't expect it to do numbers..it's gonna do numbers cuz it's a movie with explosions...it's target'd to be a "summer blockbuster" i'm sure your not trying to say..cuz a movie does numbers means it's ultimately a good movie..i hope u dont judge everything on numbers do you??

[CEREBRAL....]

Ugh, my brain hurts just trying to read this mess. I know you don't believe in grammer or spelling, chief, but at least try and sound coherent. Wow...


oh no...u hurt my feelings how would i ever come back here cuz someone on a message board doesn't agree with my opinion..oh no:wow: plz...:whatever:

[S.A.A.D.]

as if michael bays Transformers getting "bad" reviews is anything new:whatever:

this one will no doubt get an even lower score on RT (if that's even possible)

...yet somehow it's going to absolutely stomp on box office numbers? I wonder why that is?

maybe it's because of you, or rather ppl like you,
of course you are, I dare you to sit at home and miss this spectacle.
no one can.


it's simple ppl who hated the first film will hate this one(you and your crew of flunkies included)

ppl who loved the first film...so on and so forth




this film is tracking huge, and is quite possibly going to give DK a run


if the success of this film and what it means for paramount in a summer of dudes is what you call dropping the ball...

I'd say the chances of that are extremely slim. And it's too soon for you to say that I'd say.

[Golgo-13]

Here's a third review, also from TFW.

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-movie-discussion/239882-just-seen-big-spoilers.html

All the reviews are saying the same thing pretty much.

I wanna hear about the score though....

[Marvin]

ahh if u think i need to see this movie for my entertainment..u are sadly mistaken..i dont need to see the movie..i choose to see it...there's a difference

right,
you should practice that in a mirror, I'm sure your top lip shutters just a bit as a bead of sweat creeps down your brow:o

I'm going to see the movie before i past complete judgement and if u paid attention u would know i was mainly talking about the first movie. Regradless of the reviews..i wanna see with my own eyes first..i do have that right...as well as the right to not like the first movie..again....

well at least bay makes a movie that's "worth seeing with your own eyes"
I can think of plenty movies that probably don't deserve that honor...

still the way TF is talked about you would think otherwise

it seems that you're only normal for liking the movie, but for those who dont like it..u have to be a hater....yeah that somehow makes sense!! ahh not!

It intrigues me how the haters always seem to play the out numbered few

i mean look at what you just said, it would seem like you're one of three ppl that bash the **** out of this movie and everyone else comes down on you for doing so.

try browsing other forums, when it comes to the type of ppl that come on forums, bashing TF and Bay is the (cool) smart thing to do, trust me you get it backwards if you think you're considered normal for liking the movie

(try the talkbacks for example)

hate the movie all you want, just don't be a hypocrite and tell others they can't disagree with you

it's a forum, get over it

also..who doesn't expect it to do numbers..it's gonna do numbers cuz it's a movie with explosions...it's target'd to be a "summer blockbuster" i'm sure your not trying to say..cuz a movie does numbers means it's ultimately a good movie..i hope u dont judge everything on numbers do you??

we've had 3 movies this summer with plenty of explosions and genre following

they're mostly failures with one doing so so

TF will do very very well, there's a difference

(GI joe will do very very crappy and it's another hasbro property...maybe gi joe has even shakier camera work:whatever:)

when it comes to what I just a movie on it's simple

you said it yourself, it's targeted to be a summer blockbuster and it's going to be the most successful one of the bunch. It succeeded in what it's supposed to be unlike say wolverine

The hangover by all rights has a poor story, no character development, plenty of missed opportunities when it comes to drama, but it's a comedy and it's succeeding at being just that
Land of the lost however is a failure

Gosford Park succeeds at being what it's supposed to be
other similar films don't

I don't simply judge movies by numbers, that's secondary for bad movies rarely break records:cwink:

I judge them for delivering what their supposed to deliver

Bad boys would be a "stronger" film if it was character study with Robert Redford, Robert Duval and Malkovich as the cheif in a serious setting directed by say Ron Howard...it would actually get good reviews

but bad boys is a buddy cop action comedy, and it does that well, better then any other actually

That's what I judge TF on

[Marvin]

I'd say the chances of that are extremely slim. And it's too soon for you to say that I'd say.

it's very possible, even if the film is good

there are too many agendas at work

[Lunar_Wolf]

1. u must of been if you took the time to reply to me in the first place
2. If u actually read my post u would know i wasnt' calling anyone retard'd for liking the movie i was actually accusing anyone for not understand why there are those who don't like the movie...there's a difference

and 3... i really care less about spelling and grammar on a message board..i'm sure u and i can go up and down these boards and find all kind of literary do's and don't 's.....point i don't care, if want'd to i could.......thankx

message boards are the last place to talk about grammer ppl

(that and a strip club)
Everyone here has bad grammar at some point, but man, I don't understand half of his post.

[Marvin]

Everyone here has bad grammar at some point, but man, I don't understand half of his post.

that says just as much about you as it does him

for I comprehend him just fine


it's like a bay action scene, the point isn't that it's as clear as possible, it's that you understand it
(ie sideswipe coming through that boarded up window in the trailer for example)

comprehension :trans:
it makes the world go round

[The Lizard]

Here's a second review from a guy over at TFW. Beware, its spoiler heavy.

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-movie-discussion/239873-just-saw-rotf-some-answers-my-thoughts-spoilers.html

If all that's true, it looks like I'll be rolling my eyes and facepalming just as much as I did during the first movie...if not more.

[Lunar_Wolf]

that says just as much about you as it does him

for I comprehend him just fine


it's like a bay action scene, the point isn't that it's as clear as possible, it's that you understand it
(ie sideswipe coming through that boarded up window in the trailer for example)

comprehension :trans:
it makes the world go round

That's Sideways:o

[Marvin]

If all that's true, it looks like I'll be rolling my eyes and facepalming just as much as I did during the first movie...if not more.

oho sorry for a second there...

um when you said first one...

I um figured you were talking about that original 80's G1 cartoon movie



if that was the case, I wouldn't blame you

but I guess it's not, now is it

[Marvin]

That's Sideways:o


eh...chalk it up to bays funky camera work

:woot:

[The Lizard]

oho sorry for a second there...

um when you said first one...

I um figured you were talking about that original 80's G1 cartoon movie



if that was the case, I wouldn't blame you

but I guess it's not, now is it

When I saw the '86 cartoon movie

I was a kid watching a PG cartoon.


Now I'm not a little kid

And I'm seeing a PG-13 movie with adult humor and increased violence


So I guess that is the case now, isn't it?

[CEREBRAL....]

right,
you should practice that in a mirror, I'm sure your top lip shutters just a bit as a bead of sweat creeps down your brow:o

Oh..how it would be so entertaining for me to prove this but i don't have to, nor care...i didn't see "batman" in the movie threaters, rent it..and that movie with all it's awards and recognition has been dub'd (by many )as "the greatest comic book movie ever"





It intrigues me how the haters always seem to play the out numbered few

i mean look at what you just said, it would seem like you're one of three ppl that bash the **** out of this movie and everyone else comes down on you for doing so.

try browsing other forums, when it comes to the type of ppl that come on forums, bashing TF and Bay is the (cool) smart thing to do, trust me you get it backwards if you think you're considered normal for liking the movie

(try the talkbacks for example)

u already fail by assuming i'm a hater...again...i dont have to like his movies...if there are people who like his movies and the way he does them, then they are ones who don't like his movies and the way they are done. It's a two sided coin...."hater" is a term use to loosely...i dont hate the man..he's done nothing to me or my family....i didnt like TF 1, i'm gonna go see this one and hope it has improved but i will have my doubts because of the first one, and some of the comments that have been made about this one....and i'm sure there are more people negative about bay version of transformers..so i dont have to play the "minority" role in my opinon of the movie..

hate the movie all you want, just don't be a hypocrite and tell others they can't disagree with you

it's a forum, get over it)

plz find any quote where i'm getting on anyone for liking TF1? plz find me that, and take your own advice...cuz u seem to have a problem with me expressing my dislikes in Bay's effort in doing a relive action film (it's a forum, (with many diff. opinions) get over it)

[CEREBRAL....]

that says just as much about you as it does him

for I comprehend him just fine



It says nothing about me.......like u said..it's a message board...

[Marvin]

When I saw the '86 cartoon movie

I was a kid watching a PG cartoon.


Now I'm not a little kid

And I'm seeing a PG-13 movie with adult humor and increased violence


So I guess that is the case now, isn't it?

if Sesame was all of a sudden rated pg 13, with inserts of college humor that wouldn't make the show any less laughable from an adult perspective, no matter how much he loved it as a kid

moreover I expect the kids to start talking about the econmic crisis or abortion issues in a serious manner


let me be serious for a minute here(cause I really am all jokes today)

simply put, if you were still a kid you'd no doubt like the new TF

and if you were an "adult"(back in the 80's) you probably never would have liked that cartoon

real talk

[The Lizard]

if Sesame was all of a sudden rated pg 13, with inserts of college humor that wouldn't make the show any less laughable from an adult perspective, no matter how much he loved it as a kid

moreover I expect the kids to start talking about the econmic crisis or abortion issues in a serious manner


let me be serious for a minute here(cause I really am all jokes today)

simply put, if you were still a kid you'd no doubt like the new TF

and if you were an "adult"(back in the 80's) you probably never would have liked that cartoon

real talk

By "sesame", I assume you mean Sesame Street

An invalid comparison since even though that show contains some jokes to entertain parents its aimed squarely at only small children

While the new TF movies try to entertain a larger audience


But fails when it attempts to portray adult humor or non-robot interactions


But of course those who don't expect much from their sci-fi movies


and gravitate towards broad comedy and simplistic dialog in any film genre



probably won't mind

[Marvin]

Oh..how it would be so entertaining for me to prove this but i don't have to, nor care...i didn't see "batman" in the movie threaters, rent it..and that movie with all it's awards and recognation has been dub'd (by many )as "the greatest comic book movie ever"


that's nice

(if you know your not going to enjoy it, why give it your money?:huh:)


u already fail by assuming i'm a hater...again...i dont have to like his movies...if there are people who like his movies and the way he does them, then they are ones who don't like his movies and the way they are done. It's a two sided coin...."hater" is a term use to losely...i dont hate the man..he's done nothing to me or my family....i didnt like TF 1, i'm gonna go see this one and hope it has improved but i will have my doubts because of the first one, and some of the comments that have been made about this one....and i'm sure there are more people negative about bay version of transformers..so i dont have to play the "minority" role in my opinon of the movie..

hater simply means you hate or don't like TF...
what else should you be called? a "not liker?"

I've read your comments in the past, your really don't like the film, and it's direction...

I'd go so far as to say you hate it.

and you're right, you don't have to play the minority, just another person on a forum that has ppl disagree with him.

plz find any quote where i'm getting on anyone for liking TF1? plz find me that, and take your own advice...cuz u seem to have a problem with me expressing my dislikes in Bay's effort in doing a relive action film (it's a forum, (with many diff. opinions) get over it)

your use of the word "Retards" not withstanding

the point being made wasn't you getting on anyone it was one of a hypocrisy I see happening alot on the TF forums

ppl seem awfully talkative about what other ppl think of their views

claims that ppl that like the film are attacking you for hating it and vice versa

forums used to be about ppl liking or hating a movie not so much about what ppl thought of ppl liking or hating a movie

I only point you out because most of your posts have this theme

[Avengers-Report]

as if michael bays Transformers getting "bad" reviews is anything new:whatever:

this one will no doubt get an even lower score on RT (if that's even possible)

...yet somehow it's going to absolutely stomp on box office numbers? I wonder why that is?

maybe it's because of you, or rather ppl like you,
of course you are, I dare you to sit at home and miss this spectacle.
no one can.


it's simple ppl who hated the first film will hate this one(you and your crew of flunkies included)

ppl who loved the first film...so on and so forth




this film is tracking huge, and is quite possibly going to give DK a run


if the success of this film and what it means for paramount in a summer of dudes is what you call dropping the ball...

lol dude your an idiot. giving dark knight a run? get real

[Shivsguy616]

lol dude your an idiot. giving dark knight a run? get real

Learn to use capitals, and pick the right "you're" before calling anyone else an idiot.

[Marvin]

By "sesame", I assume you mean Sesame Street

An invalid comparison since even though that show contains some jokes to entertain parents its aimed squarely at only small children

While the new TF movies try to entertain a larger audience


But fails when it attempts to portray adult humor or non-robot interactions


But of course those who don't expect much from their sci-fi movies


and gravitate towards broad comedy and simplistic dialog in any film genre



probably won't mind

Yes sesame street, and no it a wonderfully valid comparison...

you seem to miss the parameters

simple PG rated G1 cartoon ---- G Rated Sesame Street show

Pg13 TF movie ------ Pg 13 S Street movie


the g rated SS show has kid themes and kids doing kid things all day

in the Pg13 movie they would be doing the same **** thematically but with raunchy college humor jokes(for arguments sake)

just because it's PG13 that doesn't warrant the issues all of a sudden being about world politics and virture ethics

it's still for the kids, there are just raunchy jokes added


TF doesn't need to become a study of the complexities man and machine and their place in the universe, just because it's PG 13...it's still about the same tangible childish toy selling themes it always was

pg 13 means quite literally that the jokes can be at college level


not sure which theater you were in but TF garners big laughs in the comedy department
(the human jokes anyway)
read all the reviews you want but I challenge anyone to find a theater that dead pans when a comedic beat drops

and maybe i'm just drawing a blank here but how many live action sci fi films can you recall that don't have any non robot interactions?

(how many sci-fi films don't have a huge human element?)
honest question

[Marvin]

lol dude your an idiot. giving dark knight a run? get real

sure

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/06/01/box-office-tracking-transformers-2-could-take-175-million-in-first-five-days/

with numbers that close anything could happen

now all that needs to happen is one of the Transformers, probably starscream in the supporting antagonist role, die of a drug over dose or rather a mixed up persciption and watch the money roll in

-these are opening numbers I'm talking about
-heath is a great man, rest his soul
-don't call ppl idiots on forums, that's something cowards do

[Lunar_Wolf]

Learn to use capitals, and pick the right "you're" before calling anyone else an idiot.

Don't worry man, posters like that don't stick around for long.

[CEREBRAL....]

that's nice

(if you know your not going to enjoy it, why give it your money?:huh:)

emm...."i'm going to see the movie to get my complete review"...i don't know about you..but by me saying that, it basically means....before i pass judgement..i would like to see TF 2 first...i think that is fare..again..i mostly made comments about TF1..which i did see and was able to give my opinion on it, and not just go by what others had to say....is that not what u would ask of someone??



hater simply means you hate or don't like TF...
what else should you be called? a "not liker?" )

sorry but that definition by you seem very narrow mind'd or misguid'd... a hater is somone who does not like you for no good reason, just jealous of your success....again..it's a two side coin when we talk about peoples views and opinons...u have people who like it, and u have people who don't like...if u calling anyone a "hater" cuz they don't like it..i think that's pretty pompus of you given that there will always be a difference of opinions and views.....


I've read your comments in the past, your really don't like the film, and it's direction...

I'd go so far as to say you hate it.

and you're right, you don't have to play the minority, just another person on a forum that has ppl disagree with him.

I dont know where u get your numbers from..or how much you pay attention on these boards..or are you only using these boards for your judgement..but there are plenty of people who didn't like TF1 and have voiced theirs opinons about it..on these boards and elsewhere...so no by no means am i a minority in that fact.....try again....




the point being made wasn't you getting on anyone it was one of a hypocrisy I see happening alot on the TF forums

ppl seem awfully talkative about what other ppl think of their views

claims that ppl that like the film are attacking you for hating it and vice versa

forums used to be about ppl liking or hating a movie not so much about what ppl thought of ppl liking or hating a movie

I only point you out because most of your posts have this theme

sorry bud..i'm not self concious to where i gotta wonder or feel i'm being attack'd. I ask'd a pretty legit question not about me but for anyone who voice their opinion that is diff. from those who like TF!.

plz do not try to labe me like anyone or any theme from these forums..i dont post here that often....so whatever the norm. is, i'm not the one to be judged by that norm...and if u read'd other post.....before mine..u would see..other people making comments that differs from those who like the movie..and what u got back in return was, yes OTHER PEOPLE MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT PEOPLE HATING THE FILM....

so your grap seems 2 be with the overall approach to posting on these boards and not anyone's opinion that differs from yours (and ppl like you)...and plz stop talking like i dont like TF2, i haven't seen it yet to like or dislike the movie....i have read'd some reviews that i don't lke, but it's not gonna stop me from seeing the movie and given my own opinion...

[Marvin]

emm...."i'm going to see the movie to get my complete review"...i don't know about you..but by me saying that, it basically means....before i pass judgement..i would like to see TF 2 first...i think that is fare..again..i mostly made comments about TF1..which i did see and was able to give my opinion on it, and not just go by what others had to say....is that not what u would ask of someone??

in other words (it seems) that you want to be able to back up your opinion (whatever it may be) which seems fair enough

I guess that's forum culture

i'm pretty sure bay is bay and his direction of transformers will be the it always was, I assume you wouldn't kid yourself into believe for one second that that's going to change

-busy designs
-kinetic (point break inspired) camera work
-non robot interaction
-teen choice devised jokes
etc

if you truly "didin't like" the first film I can anyone and their mother can tell you that you won't like this one, unless of course, it was simple the all spark plot device that irk'd you.

me personally I don't buy chocolate mint ice cream cause i think it tastes like toothpaste
when they make chocolate mint part 2, I think i'll pass

there is something honorable about someone not "passing judgment" on a film they haven't seen yet, I just don't believe judgment hasn't been passed yet that's all.



sorry but that definition by you seem very narrow mind'd or misguid'd... a hater is somone who does not like you for no good reason, just jealous of your success....again..it's a two side coin when we talk about peoples views and opinons...u have people who like it, and u have people who don't like...if u calling anyone a "hater" cuz they don't like it..i think that's pretty pompus of you given that there will always be a difference of opinions and views.....

I'm sorry, from now on i'll call you something more appropriate

for the record tho I did mean in it it's more traditional literal terms
I call vegans meat haters...simply because they hate (eating) meat.


I dont know where u get your numbers from..or how much you pay attention on these boards..or are you only using these boards for your judgement..but there are plenty of people who didn't like TF1 and have voiced theirs opinons about it..on these boards and elsewhere...so no by no means am i a minority in that fact.....try again....


I agree, the "not likers" are not in the minority

when it comes to forums, they're the majority imo

but they tend to play the victims from time to time


sorry bud..i'm not self concious to where i gotta wonder or feel i'm being attack'd. I ask'd a pretty legit question not about me but for anyone who voice their opinion that is diff. from those who like TF!.

plz do not try to labe me like anyone or any theme from these forums..i dont post here that often....so whatever the norm. is, i'm not the one to be judged by that norm...and if u read'd other post.....before mine..u would see..other people making comments that differs from those who like the movie..and what u got back in return was, yes OTHER PEOPLE MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT PEOPLE HATING THE FILM....

so your grap seems 2 be with the overall approach to posting on these boards and not anyone's opinion that differs from yours (and ppl like you)...and plz stop talking like i dont like TF2, i haven't seen it yet to like or dislike the movie....i have read'd some reviews that i don't lke, but it's not gonna stop me from seeing the movie and given my own opinion...


don't mean to single you out but, your posts stand out to me as having that theme...


hey maybe you'll love the film:yay:

but until your a professional critic and you get paid to watch films for free, don't come back here and act like you were robbed of your money.

[CEREBRAL....]

in other words (it seems) that you want to be able to back up your opinion (whatever it may be) which seems fair enough

I guess that's forum culture.

Wow....u dont know me, so plz dont not assume anything of me, no matter what my view is......i dnt make a living on hating or loving anything...i post cuz i have an opinon...

if you truly "didin't like" the first film I can anyone and their mother can tell you that you won't like this one, unless of course, it was simple the all spark plot device that irk'd you.

me personally I don't buy chocolate mint ice cream cause i think it tastes like toothpaste
when they make chocolate mint part 2, I think i'll pass

again u dont know me, and i'm not the norm here...i didnt like "armageddon", but i like "bad boyz", i didn't like TF1...but i like "the rock" plz dont prejudge what my views are gonna be...cuz u are very much at fault at assuming.....

there is something honorable about someone not "passing judgment" on a film they haven't seen yet, I just don't believe judgment hasn't been passed yet that's all.

again..u dont know me, and it seems that is exactly what u are doing to me..passing judgement...





I'm sorry, from now on i'll call you something more appropriate

for the record tho I did mean in it it's more traditional literal terms
I call vegans meat haters...simply because they hate (eating) meat.

one thing your terminology fails at...is with you not liking mint ice cream..and vegans not liking meat....they and you won't eat those things again...i for one, never said i wouldn't watch another m.bay movie again...or tf 2.....call me whatever u wanna call me...but plz get the terminology correctly..thankx






but until your a professional critic and you get paid to watch films for free, don't come back here and act like you were robbed of your money.

u must be like that other kat who didn't know bad spelling and grammar comes with message boards..cuz u seem to think....i can't come in here and say what i feel when i feel so...and i didn't know i had to be a profeesional critic to do so..so that means u are one, or you're in film school too..cuz by this notion...i have no right to speak on this movie..so i wonder what is your profession?

[omgwtfbbq]

the reactions of gooks:
http://www.treehugger.com/stinky%20fish.jpg

[rashad]

IGN UK Review - 3 out of 5 Stars | 6/10
Sequel proves that sometimes you can have too much of a good thing.


UK, June 13, 2009 - The biggest movie of the summer is finally here, but that's the problem with Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - it's just too bloody big. Epic, spectacular but unfortunately far, far too long; the film proves that when it comes to Michael Bay blockbuster movies, you can have too much of a good thing.

Indeed the film reaches its pinnacle with one such action set-piece that takes place in a forest - a brilliantly crafted sequence that is kinetic, emotional and genuinely thrilling. Unfortunately however, it is a climax that comes only an hour or so into the movie - the remaining 80 or so minutes just never quite scale the same heights.

That's the one BIG problem with ROTF; the movie stops dead halfway through, and then spends the rest of its overlong run-time building up a head of steam again, painstakingly setting up the eventual climax.

Bay takes an age meticulously manoeuvring all the film's protagonists into place for a vast, epic confrontation in the middle of the Egyptian desert. But by the time this all-in royal rumble between the Autobots, Decepticons and US Army finally arrives, you are too numbed, exhausted and inured to actually give a damn about the outcome.

Don't get us wrong, we love Michael Bay and the particular grab-bag of delights only he can bring to blockbuster movies; huge explosions; quick, intense dialogue; lingering , pornographic shots of both girls' asses and military hardware. 90 minutes of Bay-ness makes for a thrilling flick, but if the clock starts ticking past the two hour mark and beyond, it all becomes just too much; your mind and senses need a rest.

Bay could have cut 40 minutes from the bowels of Transformers 2, and it would have been a far more effective movie. Unfortunately, the director fell into the same trap with Pearl Harbour and Bad Boys II - each filled with spectacular moments, but both becoming bloated, arduous cinematic experiences that ultimately outstay their welcome.

Is this issue going to place the franchise in any kind of trouble? Of course not; ROTF will make gazillions, and it still deserves to. The team behind the Transformers movies have hit upon a formula that mixes E-number-fuelled Saturday morning cartoons with '90s-style military action movies, and it works in a spectacularly un-ironic, gloriously juvenile way.

It is just kind of inexcusable that with such a ridiculously enjoyable formula, viewers of ROTF still spend the movie's final half hour nursing a numb head and arse, and willing the noise to stop. Transformers 2 proves that sometimes less is more.


http://movies.ign.com/articles/994/994427p2.html

[Marvin]

[QUOTE=CEREBRAL....;17054528]Wow....u dont know me, so plz dont not assume anything of me, no matter what my view is......i dnt make a living on hating or loving anything...i post cuz i have an opinon...

again u dont know me, and i'm not the norm here...i didnt like "armageddon", but i like "bad boyz", i didn't like TF1...but i like "the rock" plz dont prejudge what my views are gonna be...cuz u are very much at fault at assuming.....

yea man i liked those too
the thing is
TF2 being the 2 year apart sequel to TF, it will be less like Bay's the Rock and more like um you know...TF one.

just saying


again..u dont know me, and it seems that is exactly what u are doing to me..passing judgement...


oh plz by this notion...now let me call u a hater for not liking ice cream.....i think by the amount of ice cream sales that min ice cream does..u are in the minority...how many times have u ate mint ice cream..You're just passing judgment on mint ice cream......:whatever:

I've had a summer job selling ice cream once, it was fun
(lol mint ice cream does taste like toothpaste, yet it was the highest seller)

I'm not sure where you're going with that one but ok, when I made my Ice cream analogy it was reinforcing the idea that

if they made chocolate mint ice cream part two, I'm sure the the things that made it a success and different from the other ice creams...the things I personally don't like about it will be present

call it what you will, I call it reasonable patronage



u must be like that other kat who didn't know bad spelling and grammar comes with message boards..cuz u seem to think....i can't come in here and say what i feel when i feel so...and i didn't know i had to be a profeesional critic to do so..so that means u are one, or you're in film school too..cuz by this notion...i have no right to speak on this movie..so i wonder what is your profession?

oh no you can, anyone who says you can't is missing the point of forums

what I said you shouldn't don is come back here and say like so many ppl before you say

and I paraphrase

"bay did me an injustice, i gave him my money and he gave me a bad(or rather film i didn't like) back in return"

if you were a professional critic and you got to watch movies for free, then it would make sense to watch movies all day and then critique them and back up your critique by the fact that you watched it(for free)

but if the film isn't free, and you know your probably not going to like it, then just watch it at home,

at least that way you can have less contempt in your review.

you missed my point, i wasn't saying you have to be a professional critic to have an opinion(that would be silly)

I was saying they get paid to watch movies and thus they can do what I was assuming your gonna do
(which is watch a movie not so much because you've been waiting for it for 2 years and what not, but to be able to provide a review about it)

like you said I don't know you

something you must know is that there are a whole lot of ppl going to see the movie who spent the last two years criticizing the DIRECTION, for no other reason than to sit in the theater planting their face in their hands and murmuring jokes to their dates(guy or girl) only to be able to come on the forums and have an opinion that is legit

[The Guard]

I look forward to the various numbnesses. That's the sign of an intense movie.

You all need to meet more computer hackers/experts. The really good ones tend to be pretty insane. And the whole point of the hot one and the black one...isn't it obvious? It's the same with Sam and Mikaela, and to some extent, the soldiers.

"More than meets the eye"

Assuming Soundwave doesn't transform in this movie...what the hell did people want Soundwave to transform into in the first place so badly that him not doing so is a crime? A giant 80's tape recorder?

We had all that in a film about a dude that dresses like a bat. Why cant we have it here?

There wasn't great character development in THE DARK KNIGHT on any real level. Harvey Dent went nuts and became Two-Face, and it's titular character had almost no development beyond a sudden decision to be the enemy of Gotham by the end of the movie. And while THE DARK KNIGHT certainly had a plot, and a good one, it was no less rambling and point to point as anything TRANSFORMERS featured. It's not like the key story stuff that happened in TRANSFORMERS was not relevant to the story.

And am I really seeing people whine about why a Transformers movie isn't as deep as a Batman movie?

I like Transformers. I like the saga, and the mythology, and the ins and outs of it. But I have never, ever, EVER seen a Transformers comic book that was as deep as the best Batman comic books. I've seen some where they present character development, where the robots take on generic hero personalities, etc, and it's usually an excuse for a slugfest between Prime and Megatron, or Starscream and whoever else. But nothing in it that I've seen compares to the best Batman material.

When did transformers ever have personality? The the movie characters have about the same amount of personality as TF's have ever had.

The Transformers have always had relatively generic warrior/hero personalities. Which, near as I can tell, they still have in the movies.

This is an unpopular opinion...but the best story and character material Transformers ever had to offer...is cool and all, and a hell of a lot of fun, but STILL really derivative and cheesy. If they ever make TRANSFORMERS BEGIN, you might get to see this amazing character development you all keep clamoring for, where Bumblebee, Prime, and the others "change" somehow instead of just, you, being themselves.

In these movies, however, which are clearly more about the interaction between humans and Transformers than pure Transformers soap opera stuff, look for character interaction developments, IE, a development of the robots role on Earth, their relationships with humans, etc.

You cannot act like these robots don't have personalities thus far. They just haven't been incredibly fleshed out. And that's a product of one, there just flat out being so damn many of them, and a second, obvious limitation of having to have much of the movie devoted to humans because Transformers are so freaking expensive to render.

The Heath Ledger design for the Joker works because it melds perfectly with Heath Ledger's interpretation of the character. The acid/fire change to Two-face was superficial. I didn't say everything had to be exactly the same for an adaptation. I simply stated that if your going to make changes, embellish and reinforce the best that source material had to offer (much of which could be found in Transformer comic books) rather than transfer the silliest elements the way Joel Schumacher did.

Not all Batman fans believe that to be the case.

What great stuff should they use that the source material offered?

If it's that easy...please...someone. Thrill me with your version of Transformers.

[Bunker]

So I guess this isn't any darker or better than the first one. I think Star Trek will be the only blockbuster this summer that doesn't disappoint.

[Johnny Drama]

the reactions of gooks:
http://www.treehugger.com/stinky%20fish.jpg

With comments like that, it's no wonder you are a banned user at only 13 posts in. Good job, retard...

[CEREBRAL....]

I look forward to the various numbnesses. That's the sign of an intense movie.


Assuming Soundwave doesn't transform in this movie...what the hell did people want Soundwave to transform into in the first place so badly that him not doing so is a crime? A giant 80's tape recorder?

emm...the fact of the movie being named "transformers" and the uniqueness of alien robots with ability to transformer into diff. things to disguise themseleves..and u not have some of them tranformer...yeah that's kind dumb...


You cannot act like these robots don't have personalities thus far. They just haven't been incredibly fleshed out. And that's a product of one, there just flat out being so damn many of them, and a second, obvious limitation of having to have much of the movie devoted to humans because Transformers are so freaking expensive to render.


What great stuff should they use that the source material offered?

If it's that easy...please...someone. Thrill me with your version of Transformers.

You're making excuses...if they can't do the job then don't do the movie, if you can't control a how bunch of robots on screen..then don't have so many robots on screen...i mean the creators of the movie have already agreed with other viewers who point'd out the flaws in the first movie..so obviously the flaws of the first film are legit and not just people graping about the movie..

[J.Howlett]

Not having some of them transformers=not enough money to do it.

Seriously, 200 million for this film sounds like a lot but it really isn't, considering how much it cost to do the visual effects.

In order to have a real, live action transformers film that meets the perfect standards of the fanbase, you'd essentially have maybe two humans and a total of 15 to 25 robots. That film would cost 500 million to make, easy...and for any studio, that's not fiscally responsible to do so.

Not saying there aren't any flaws in the first film but truly, a real live-action Transformers film isn't possible.

[Ace of Knaves]

the reactions of gooks:
http://www.treehugger.com/stinky%20fish.jpg

With comments like that, it's no wonder you are a banned user at only 13 posts in. Good job, retard...

Right? WTF is wrong with some people? What did he hope to achieve by doing that? Getting some e-cred or something? Pathetic.

And what is everyone arguing about? Are people saying you must be stupid to like films like this? If so I'll give you a e-slap *slap*

But no, this film won't beat TDK box office wise. I don't think any film will for quite a while.

[CEREBRAL....]

Not having some of them transformers=not enough money to do it.

Seriously, 200 million for this film sounds like a lot but it really isn't, considering how much it cost to do the visual effects.

In order to have a real, live action transformers film that meets the perfect standards of the fanbase, you'd essentially have maybe two humans and a total of 15 to 25 robots. That film would cost 500 million to make, easy...and for any studio, that's not fiscally responsible to do so.

Not saying there aren't any flaws in the first film but truly, a real live-action Transformers film isn't possible.

then u dont have 15 to 20 robots...budget and know your abilities..quality over quantity....it has nothing to do with prefect standards..nobody wants dry comedy, what's wrong with better robot designs, what's wrong with a little less humans...since the movie is about TRANSFORMERS, what's with asking for better dialogue between the robots, miss using names of robots, etc... better camera work.....these things aren't perfect standards..these things are what we should expect from a big budget director given what he has to work with..plan n simple...

[Ace of Knaves]

You haven't seen this film yet have you? So you have no right to pass judgement on it yet.

And before anyone starts saying I'm a Bay defender and I accept mediocrity...I'm not a big fan of the first film. I'm saying this as a complete neutral.

[CEREBRAL....]

Right? WTF is wrong with some people? What did he hope to achieve by doing that? Getting some e-cred or something? Pathetic.

And what is everyone arguing about? Are people saying you must be stupid to like films like this? If so I'll give you a e-slap *slap*

But no, this film won't beat TDK box office wise. I don't think any film will for quite a while.


no!!

[Ace of Knaves]

Well good. Because that sorta BS belongs over at IMDB.

[CEREBRAL....]

You haven't seen this film yet have you? So you have no right to pass judgement on it yet.

And before anyone starts saying I'm a Bay defender and I accept mediocrity...I'm not a big fan of the first film. I'm saying this as a complete neutral.

Is anyone passing judgement on the 2nd film???? This is a first reaction to what others have seen about the 2nd film...3 reviews have been the same..so we are commenting on them....

[Ace of Knaves]

OK I understand that. But things like camera work are all down to opinion. One person might not like the "shakey cam" (the reviewers you are talking about for instance) but some other people really like that style.

[CEREBRAL....]

OK I understand that. But things like camera work are all down to opinion. One person might not like the "shakey cam" (the reviewers you are talking about for instance) but some other people really like that style.


If it effects our view and actually seeing what they are doing..i say that's a problem....cuz after all we are trying to watch the film..but i have no clue what the camera work is gonna be cuz i haven't seen the film yet..but i am concern that these 50-60 robots do nothing, there's no point to having devastator there, or ratchet an ironhide have no purpose as well as acree..that to me is an issue...but i will find out for myself in 2 weeks

[Ace of Knaves]

That camera style is SUPPOSED to leave you disorientated. It makes it seem like you are right there in the thick of the action, like you are in the movie. I think when used right it is a brilliant style.

[J.Howlett]

Cerebral,

Do you have a better idea of the robot designs? From Bay's perspective, the designs make sense. Realistically (which is what Bay is going for with the designs), you can't have that many parts on a vehicle not accounted for when it comes to the transformations. Actually, I give the designers and artists at ILM much respect for going the extra mile when they really didn't have to. You could've simply done some serious cutting corners for those transformations and designs. And, people would've caught notice how the corners were crossed to achieve a specific look. Personally, I thought the designs were leaps and bounds the best designs for the Transformers in a realistic environment. You can make a case for the camera work have the most to do with the inability to decipher between the robots but I've never had an issue with the camera work in the first film. Just based on the trailer, it looks like this sequel has pulled the camera back a bit....which is a good thing.

In terms of missing using names, that's something only true fans of the franchise would really bicker about. It's not that big a deal.

Dialogue? It is what it is. Could it be better? Sure...but we are dealing with a strike movie after all. Not to mention, Bay specifically prefers ad libing with this actors. But, better dialogue could be achieved if you had better writers.(The same issues arise in the new Star Trek film as well, yet both that and Transformers do what they were meant to do.)

In terms of humans vs. robots...again, this has more to do with budget than anything else. Say you just had Sam, Mikalea, Epps, Lennox, and Simmons as the main human characters and 5 Autobots and 7 Decepitcons as your cast for the film....you'd still have to budget of 300 million plus to have a real transformers film. No matter what get rid of, it still costs alot to do a real transformers film. The robots screen time is just too costly. The creators of this franchise have to basically pick and choose their spots. I'm sure they would like to have it the other way around but to make a viable film, this is the only option they really have. If the cost of visual effects, especially ones so complicated, wasn't as expensive, I'm willing to bet that they would do the film in a manner that I think everyone believes it should be done in...which is all robots and basically one or two humans.

But again, no matter the plan, a real transformers film is too expensive in the live action realm.

Better plot (which I think is more opinion than anything else...can't ***** at Bay for not using the lore this time around, no matter how different), better dialogue can be achieved with just better writers. But, the other aspects for a live action transformers film, Bay has those in spades...with the money has to work with in order to turn a profit.

[CEREBRAL....]

Cerebral,

Do you have a better idea of the robot designs? From Bay's perspective, the designs make sense. Realistically (which is what Bay is going for with the designs), you can't have that many parts on a vehicle not accounted for when it comes to the transformations. Actually, I give the designers and artists at ILM much respect for going the extra mile when they really didn't have to. You could've simply done some serious cutting corners for those transformations and designs. And, people would've caught notice how the corners were crossed to achieve a specific look. Personally, I thought the designs were leaps and bounds the best designs for the Transformers in a realistic environment. You can make a case for the camera work have the most to do with the inability to decipher between the robots but I've never had an issue with the camera work in the first film. Just based on the trailer, it looks like this sequel has pulled the camera back a bit....which is a good thing.


If a fan can design "long haul" w/o a problem , then the talent that was hired should of done a better job with the look of "starscream" , "megs", and "devastator"; along with "ravage". It has nothing to do with being realistic...a lot of those tranformers look like trash cans put together, and the lack of color also adds to the visual issues with the first film. It was hard to see two almost same color robots fight......

if james cameron (for instance) way back in '83 (i think) with his crew could construct a very likeable robot with the terminator, then michael bay and his crew could of done a better job with today's graphics...this excuse about them being "realistic" to me is just an excuse..come on..we are in 09..We have been able to remake history with such movies like jurassic park, parol harbor, and titantic along with capturing the imagination of other comic books such as x-men and spiderman...There's more then enough talent'd people in hollywood that could of done a better job with the budget. "Realism" should not be the issue in this day and age of computer graphics...we have see fans make robot designs look better then what we have seen for some of these robots..


Dialogue? It is what it is. Could it be better? Sure...but we are dealing with a strike movie after all. Not to mention, Bay specifically prefers ad libing with this actors. But, better dialogue could be achieved if you had better writers.(The same issues arise in the new Star Trek film as well, yet both that and Transformers do what they were meant to do.)

If u are acknowledging the lack of dialogue then u see my point..what bay prefers or doesn't has nothing to do with the overall point...the writing wasn't good...



In terms of humans vs. robots...again, this has more to do with budget than anything else. Say you just had Sam, Mikalea, Epps, Lennox, and Simmons as the main human characters and 5 Autobots and 7 Decepitcons as your cast for the film....you'd still have to budget of 300 million plus to have a real transformers film. No matter what get rid of, it still costs alot to do a real transformers film. The robots screen time is just too costly.

again if you can't manage what you have for money (which was alot) then you are incapable of doing the film. To me you are making an excuse again....their budget was just fine..they miss used it if that's the case...again.."quality over quantity"..i dont care if you only use 3 robots (and as u look at TF1...only 3 robots anyways got enough quality screen time) like one of the critic wrote...cut the movie shorter and u will have a better effect....money should never be an issue especially since u have a big budget to work with already..nobody is gonna grap if u do it right...

[Marvin]

If a fan can design "long haul" w/o a problem , then the talent that was hired should of done a better job with the look of "starscream" , "megs", and "devastator"; along with "ravage". It has nothing to do with being realistic...a lot of those tranformers look like trash cans put together, and the lack of color also adds to the visual issues with the first film. It was hard to see two almost same color robots fight......

by better design I assume you mean looks more like the drawn for animation designs of the 80's?

I truly am curious if any talk like this would exist if there was no original 80's cartoon for ppl to compare too

the way I see it, when I watched BEAST WARS I seen an optimus prime(l) and a megatron act like their decendants of the same name yet they looked very different(yet kinda similar)
its just a different take on the characters, even the modern cartoon has a very different look to the characters.

the retractable faceplate idea was born in beastwars why? well think of this, if heath ledger wore a faceplate during his "performance" weather it was true to comics or not, it was hinder him...

bay the action director decides he wants his character to have a face...fans hate characters with lips?
i'm confused

if they made a really good hulk movie and he wore blue shorts, it would ruin the movie for some ppl(which is sad)

Iron man for instance, his look has evolved from what it was in the 80's for no greater reason then that of functionality

batman used to wear spandex in the 80's now he looks like he's wearing hockey pads

Transformers has not only been changed like other properties to fit into the times, whilst being original in cinema(bays robots are pretty fresh looking), there is a factor of functionality present that wasn't there in the 80's designed for animation characters.

also they look like aliens now, not just a bunch characters with reused versions of starscreams face.

if james cameron (for instance) way back in '83 (i think) with his crew could construct a very likeable robot with the terminator, then michael bay and his crew could of done a better job with today's graphics...this excuse about them being "realistic" to me is just an excuse..come on..we are in 09..We have been able to remake history with such movies like jurassic park, parol harbor, and titantic along with capturing the imagination of other comic book such as x-men and spiderman...There's more then enough talent'd people in hollywood that could of done a better job with the budget. "Realism" should be the issue in this day and age of computer graphics...we have see fans make robot designs look better then what we have seen for some of these robots..


Likable? you mean arnold with metal face makeup? wow what a fair comparison

if you are bringing up the likability of a characters I know many a child that loves the new bumblebee and a big part of that is due to how he acted on sams date

what cameron did was have a movie about one cyborg and a likable talkative kid in need of a father figure (similar to the iron giant)

no matter what TF cannot be about one kid and one robot or two or three.

secondly what do you mean designed a likable robot? if I recall they didn't design arnold's face?
unless you mean the ugly generic skeletal face of the t800
wow

there is an interesting point worth mentioning
when it comes to TF robots there is a certain dimension of TRANSFORMING FUNCTIONALLY that almost no other movie designs have to deal with

look at terminator salvation, the harvester looked more solid but at the same time

-he wasn't running around the way optimus does
-doing martial arts poses the way BB does
-WASN'T TRANSFORMING (unless you consider that crouching part lol)

believe it or not the best ppl in the world are working at ILM, they've had these discussions...it's not just that bay is an a$$ h0le and likes when you complain, it's his energon and it makes him stronger
:cwink:

(I personally think the BB design if freaking awesome especially what his doors do on his back and his finger tips, and that battle mask that sits on top of his head like a soldiers helmet)

If u are acknowledging the lack of dialogue then u see my point..what bay prefers or doesn't has nothing to do with the overall point...the writing wasn't good...


dialogue could be better, but it's true that's more of a writing error

then again, lets watch that 80's cartoon once more

I think the dialogue suits the type of movie it is


again if you can't manage what you have for money (which was alot) then you are incapable of doing the film. To me you are making an excuse again....their budget was just fine..they miss used it if that's the case...again.."quality over quantity"..i dont care if you only use 3 robots (and as u look at TF1...only 3 robots anyways got enough quality screen time) like one of the critic wrote...cut the movie shorter and u will have a better effect....money should never be an issue especially since u have a big budget to work with already..nobody is gonna grap if u do it right...

I think you're missing the point

you're doing this thing you do, of forcing your niave qualms on the production

look at Jurassic Park, notice the dinosaurs are on screen for a little more then half of the movie, sure there is a factor of story to that, but also think of this

if they made that movie with a T-rex and 2 of his raptor friends in every shot the budgets would crumble

and this is where you say, EXATLY, speilberg made a movie where the dinos were on screen just enough and it meshed with the story and budget

PROBLEM IS, there is no way for anyone to write a story that has the robots disappear from the screen for more then 5 mins without fan boy *****ing

you want more robot time, that's fine but don't sit there and pretend that even if there was twice the amount of robot time that you would be pleased for there would have to be some sort of down time and you'd still find fault with it

that's what was meant when he said it's impossible to make a pure transition from what you saw in the cartoon to a live action film (unless you disregard the high standard of cgi rendering bay demands)

[Marvin]

in the short and long of it all

it seems like you are asking for TF to be more like Xmen in terms of protagonists screen time

I assure you that if the Xmen had to be fully cgi, you'd see alot less of them

sucks for us eh

[J.Howlett]

Cerebal,

But the budget is an issue when it comes to this specific franchise. You basically alluded to the idea that you would be satisfied with just three robots in a transformers film. Really?! How does that work with the story about of a war between two factions of robots. Some one was always going to get the shaft in terms of screen time. It's inevitable with this franchise. It's just too costly to do it the way it SHOULD be done.

You do a transformers film with just robots, live action, based on the cost of visual effects, I guarantee you that the film would be no longer than 90 minutes and an epic mythological story like this can't be done in 90 minutes...at least not well anyway.

I'm not saying Michael Bay shouldn't have cut in the first film. You take out two human characters (Anthony Anderson and Rachel Taylor), cut out the scene at Sam's house looking for the glasses with the Autobots, I'll admit wholeheartedly that the film would've been better by a factor of five...but the screen time with the robots still would've been the same because of the cost of the visual effects....period.

The humans are our guide to get to what we really want to get to...it's inevitable. It's not because Bay doesn't want to. It's because it's almost impossible because of the money it cost to produce the mega films.

[Marvin]

the scene with the robots acting charming and off balance around the house is a huge favorite with the younger audience

a lot more then just the shooting and punching

even T2 had it's charming scenes that really didn't need to be there, and T2 doesn't even have childlike source material

[J.Howlett]

Marvin,

I agree. The scene, taken independently from the rest of the film, works perfectly. But, with the rest of the film, it doesn't. All Sam had to do was ask his mother where his bag was, which he does, after all the mayhem happened. By cutting all that out, you save about 5 minutes.

Again, love the scene by itself, hate it with the rest of the film....

[The Guard]

emm...the fact of the movie being named "transformers" and the uniqueness of alien robots with ability to transformer into diff. things to disguise themseleves..and u not have some of them tranformer...yeah that's kind dumb...

I'm sorry...really?

Really?

That's your answer to why it's a big deal that Soundwave might not concievably be seen transforming?

You're making excuses...if they can't do the job then don't do the movie, if you can't control a how bunch of robots on screen..then don't have so many robots on screen...i mean the creators of the movie have already agreed with other viewers who point'd out the flaws in the first movie..so obviously the flaws of the first film are legit and not just people graping about the movie..

If "logical explantion" is an excuse, then yes, I'm making an excuse for why they haven't shown you EVERYTHING IMPORTANT about EVERY TRANSFORMER in four hours of film.

The same thing happens in any comic book movie, hell, the same thing happens in most Transformer comics. I could read two TPBs full of Transformer lore and not learn anything important any of the Transformers except Optimus Prime, Bumblee, Starscream and Megatron.

There simply isn't the time to adequately develop every single character fans want to see in every story.

And I don't see anywhere in my statement where I said "there are no flaws in the first film". Please don't drag that argument up. I wasn't referring to the film lacking flaws. I was referring to people making silly statements like "The robots don't have personalities".

And when I hear "better robot designs"...what does that even mean? A ridiculous amount of work has gone into these designs and the nature of and mechanics of their transformations and so forth.

As far as seeing more Transformers/less humans, it isn't just a budget issue...more robot time means more time to render those robots as well. Do you want to wait seven years for each Transformers sequel?

I still, in the span of years since TRANSFORMERS began production, have yet to see a single fanboy who has come up with an actual plot for a movie that would be better than what we got. Oh, sure, people have gone "Use the Ark, use the conservation themes, etc", but literally no one has bothered to explain how they would make a better franchise or laid out story ideas other than "make it more like the source material".

[CEREBRAL....]

by better design I assume you mean looks more like the drawn for animation designs of the 80's?

If i gave u examples like the fan design of "long haul" and other fans created designs..Then u tell me where did i once ask for the 80s cartoon animation??..u are once again doing what we discuss'd about before..."assuming"....

I truly am curious if any talk like this would exist if there was no original 80's cartoon for ppl to compare too

why deal with hypotheticals...that's not a good way to debate.....the reality is..it wasn't his orignial idea....or creation....


bay the action director decides he wants his character to have a face...fans hate characters with lips?
i'm confused

^^I have no idea what you mean here...i never once said anything about optimus...yeah the lips do look stupid but i really didn't care...the face plate looks cooler But that was never once my issue....


if they made a really good hulk movie and he wore blue shorts, it would ruin the movie for some ppl(which is sad)

Iron man for instance, his look has evolved from what it was in the 80's for no greater reason then that of functionality

batman used to wear spandex in the 80's now he looks like he's wearing hockey pads

Transformers has not only been changed like other properties to fit into the times, whilst being original in cinema(bays robots are pretty fresh looking), there is a factor of functionality present that wasn't there in the 80's designed for animation characters.

minor changes do not bother me, to which i have not said anything about any minor changes...shoot bumblebee doesn't talk at all..i like that idea for instance, BUT again like i said before..."long haul" which the design was used in the film.(and does not bare any appearance to any of the cartoon imagery)...was alot better design compare to devastator....u keep referring to the cartoon..and i have not reference the cartoon, and u keep ignoring that they are using the comic books as well..not just the cartoon. And toy line..



Likable? you mean arnold with metal face makeup? wow what a fair comparison

if you are bringing up the likability of a characters I know many a child that loves the new bumblebee and a big part of that is due to how he acted on sams date

the terminator robot, i'm not talking about the make-up put on arnold..i'm talking about the robot it's self...and i have never once mention bumblebee's design being an issue..i named what robot designs i had issues with....



what cameron did was have a movie about one cyborg and a likable talkative kid in need of a father figure (similar to the iron giant)

no matter what TF cannot be about one kid and one robot or two or three.

I never once compared the story of terminator to TF..i was soley talking about the robot design....as an example...


secondly what do you mean designed a likable robot? if I recall they didn't design arnold's face?
unless you mean the ugly generic skeletal face of the t800
wow

i shouldn't of said likeable..i should of said the look of that robot looks good, but i really shouldn't bring it up now..cuz you are already showing your bias by calling it the terminator 's robot "ugly"..so it's obvious u like what bay did with these design...to each is own...


there is an interesting point worth mentioning
when it comes to TF robots there is a certain dimension of TRANSFORMING FUNCTIONALLY that almost no other movie designs have to deal with

look at terminator salvation, the harvester looked more solid but at the same time

-he wasn't running around the way optimus does
-doing martial arts poses the way BB does
-WASN'T TRANSFORMING (unless you consider that crouching part lol)

believe it or not the best ppl in the world are working at ILM, they've had these discussions...it's not just that bay is an a$$ h0le and likes when you complain, it's his energon and it makes him stronger
:cwink:

(I personally think the BB design if freaking awesome especially what his doors do on his back and his finger tips, and that battle mask that sits on top of his head like a soldiers helmet)

I haven't seen terminator salvation so i really can't comment..and again..i never mention bumblebee..u are bring up the one design i never mention and do like (along with some others)..and it's interesting..you call what i'm doing "complaint" rather then it being my oppose objective to the first film (again..there's are two sides of viewing a movie)..so if i dont like it..according to you then i'm just complaining and being a hater..rather then a person with a respectable opinion that differs from those who like the film....(1st film)





dialogue could be better, but it's true that's more of a writing error

then again, lets watch that 80's cartoon once more

I think the dialogue suits the type of movie it is

again...u keeping using the 80s cartoon to go back to in which i'm not, since the movie is referencing ALL SOURCE material 2 tranformers, cartoons, comic books and toyline....and i'm not just talking about the 80s cartoon...






I think you're missing the point

you're doing this thing you do, of forcing your niave qualms on the production



"naive qualms", you don't make films, i dont make films but some how....i have naive qualms about the film?? what sets you apart from having a opinon like myself? Why is my opinon naive???

[Ace of Knaves]

I think the bot designs are cool. If they ripped them straight from the cartoon, bright, garish colours and all, I would of pissed myself laughing.

They look organic and mechanical. They look pretty menacing. They look like they are really made from machine parts. What's the problem?

[Lunar_Wolf]

I think the bot designs are cool. If they ripped them straight from the cartoon, bright, garish colours and all, I would of pissed myself laughing.

They look organic and mechanical. They look pretty menacing. They look like they are really made from machine parts. What's the problem?

Don't forget boxy:hehe:

[Marvin]

Marvin,

I agree. The scene, taken independently from the rest of the film, works perfectly. But, with the rest of the film, it doesn't. All Sam had to do was ask his mother where his bag was, which he does, after all the mayhem happened. By cutting all that out, you save about 5 minutes.

Again, love the scene by itself, hate it with the rest of the film....

I have to disagree

this not all films should be efficient plot machines that play out like reality

I mean with that approach to story telling Chaplin wouldn't have a career
Ace Ventura would be have a movie
Mr. Bean for goodnessake

The 40year old virgin could have just asked for a chest wax and 30 seconds later walked out of the salon

The Terminator could have just asked for the the guys bike clothes and shades and that would have been the end of it(T2)

I come from an animation background and what is brought up often is that an audience needs a performance, a character could fall of off a cliff or while E coyote could perform his way off

in comedy talk, why miss a comedic beat?
because the audience that paid money to be entertained just wants to get through the plot as quickly and effortlessly as possible?

secondly there is reason TF will out perform just about everymovie this year(without a major star dying in real life)

beause it's audience appeal is wider then anything

there is a 7 year old girl who loves the movie for no other reason than the huge personality filled creatures of war are trouncing the lawn sams dad showed us he loved to much he chewed out his son for stepping on the grass in a scene early in the movie.

[CEREBRAL....]

Cerebal,

But the budget is an issue when it comes to this specific franchise. You basically alluded to the idea that you would be satisfied with just three robots in a transformers film. Really?! How does that work with the story about of a war between two factions of robots. Some one was always going to get the shaft in terms of screen time. It's inevitable with this franchise. It's just too costly to do it the way it SHOULD be done..

i said....if using only 3 robots would had improved the quality of the film then i would of been all for it...i'm not saying i want them to use just 3 robots..i said already "quality over quantity" it's not hard to explain why there are less robots in part one of a robot vs robot film....if need be...again.."quality over quantity"


You do a transformers film with just robots, live action, based on the cost of visual effects, I guarantee you that the film would be no longer than 90 minutes and an epic mythological story like this can't be done in 90 minutes...at least not well anyway.

u seem not to understand..i couldn't say it any better....given the cost of the first film a better job can have been done..u keep going back "to well to have so many robots you need the budget to be more etc"...lke i said..work with what you got...Other films having work'd with what they had for a budget and done a great job in that...and again...TF1 had a pretty sizeable budget so to even complain about the budget doesn't make sense to me!??


I'm not saying Michael Bay shouldn't have cut in the first film. You take out two human characters (Anthony Anderson and Rachel Taylor), cut out the scene at Sam's house looking for the glasses with the Autobots, I'll admit wholeheartedly that the film would've been better by a factor of five...but the screen time with the robots still would've been the same because of the cost of the visual effects....period..

So u do recognize cutting parts of the film couldof help'd..so u do see the point the critic was making and u do see the point i'm making with "quality over quantity....and u dont know for sure how the film would be had it been done another way...either do i...


The humans are our guide to get to what we really want to get to...it's inevitable. It's not because Bay doesn't want to. It's because it's almost impossible because of the money it cost to produce the mega films.

if the flim makers complied with fans with the fact that there was too many humans in the first film then obviously some fans had a point (since the flim makers complied)..how many humans did jurassic park had?? That film went over fine...but i'm sure someone's gonns say..well in the transformer world you need so many humans..etc..etc....i'm not saying to talk out all humans..but (as u agreed) there were some human elements that were not needed.....

[J.Howlett]

Cerebal,

Actually, compared to Pirates 2 and 3 and Spider-Man 3, Transformers budget wasn't nearly close. And yet, Bay's film looks like a three hundred million dollar film....when the others don't....

Theoretically, yes, Bay could've managed the film better had he really gone through the script and simplified it. But, with that, you probably would've gotten only 3 to 5 minutes extra robot time, devoted to the Decepticons, had he taken out Anthony Anderson and Rachel Taylor's scenes.

That still doesn't really changed the film one bit. It just makes it shorter.

[Marvin]

If i gave u examples like the fan design of "long haul" and other fans created designs..Then u tell me where did i once ask for the 80s cartoon animation??..u are once again doing what we discuss'd about before..."assuming"....



why deal with hypotheticals...that's not a good way to debate.....the reality is..it wasn't his orignial idea....or creation....



^^I have no idea what you mean here...i never once said anything about optimus...yeah the lips do look stupid but i really didn't care...the face plate looks cooler But that was never once my issue....



minor changes do not bother me, to which i have not said anything about any minor changes...shoot bumblebee doesn't talk at all..i like that idea for instance, BUT again like i said before..."long haul" which the design was used in the film.(and does not bare any appearance to any of the cartoon imagery)...was alot better design compare to devastator....u keep referring to the cartoon..and i have not reference the cartoon, and u keep ignoring that they are using the comic books as well..not just the cartoon. And toy line..


yes I am curious about this "long haul" design

ok, you're not talking about 80's cartoons(most ppl do, sorry) what are you talking about cause there is not much else g1 designs out there
the comics?

the hypothetical was to question what ppl mean by better design

"more like the source material"

or

"more functional, readable, robotlike"
to be honest I'm at a loss where your coming from

the terminator robot, i'm not talking about the make-up put on arnold..i'm talking about the robot it's self...and i have never once mention bumblebee's design being an issue..i named what robot designs i had issues with....

which ones?
last I checked they all looked similar

is BB somehow a good design whereas the others are bad?


I never once compared the story of terminator to TF..i was soley talking about the robot design....as an example...



i shouldn't of said likeable..i should of said the look of that robot looks good, but i really shouldn't bring it up now..cuz you are already showing your bias by calling it the terminator 's robot "ugly"..so it's obvious u like what bay did with these design...to each is own...

hey, you said likable, how was I to know you weren't talking about story

now, bias?
T2 is my favorite movie after Blade

the terminator robot is ugly and that's a good thing considering it's orignal purpose was as a killer meant to scare the audience then sure plus the human skull is ugly especially with red eyes, it looks like something out of hell
ergo motorcycle emblems for the hells angels

design? they pretty much made a human skeleton with a chest chasie
not much in terms of design when compared to blackout(the transforming helicopter)

then again you mean pretty right?

I haven't seen terminator salvation so i really can't comment..and again..i never mention bumblebee..u are bring up the one design i never mention and do like (along with some others)..and it's interesting..you call what i'm doing "complaint" rather then it being my oppose objective to the first film (again..there's are two sides of viewing a movie)..so if i dont like it..according to you then i'm just complaining and being a hater..rather then a person with a respectable opinion that differs from those who like the film....(1st film)

sorry I wasn't around when you did mention who you were talking about, you just keep saying the movie has badly designed robots

ok, from now on I'll call what you do "oppose objective to the first film"

you keep taking these words and making them sound petty

complaint is a perfectly respectable word. "I went to red lobster yesterday, I have a list of complaints about the food"

am i a hater now?

to be fair I "hate" alot of things about DK
and I have many "complaints" to boot

syntax


again...u keeping using the 80s cartoon to go back to in which i'm not, since the movie is referencing ALL SOURCE material 2 tranformers, cartoons, comic books and toyline....and i'm not just talking about the 80s cartoon...

I see
I'm curious how visually different all this other source material is

that being said the 80's cartoon that you are not talking about get's half as much sh#t as 2007 TF




"naive qualms", you don't make films, i dont make films but some how....i have naive qualms about the film?? what sets you apart from having a opinon like myself? Why is my opinon naive???

Naive, this is the one time I do intend to diminish your argument
here and there you've made statements assuming there are no costs/consequences to take into account

that would be niave imo

this talk of more robot time for example,I see what your getting at, and to a point your right, but even if things were changed it could only be so much and it would never appease your appetite.

and yes, i make films baby

[CEREBRAL....]

I'm sorry...really?

Really?

That's your answer to why it's a big deal that Soundwave might not concievably be seen transforming?

ok....to see them transform..was one of the alluring expects of this film, right...to see them transform....one of the more popular robots does not transform...from a fan aspect..that sucks to not be able to see soundwave transform....



If "logical explantion" is an excuse, then yes, I'm making an excuse for why they haven't shown you EVERYTHING IMPORTANT about EVERY TRANSFORMER in four hours of film.

better designs, less dry humor..are some examples..i have voiced along with others...how is that in anyway us "asking for EVERYTHING IMPORTANT" thing about tranformers..????


There simply isn't the time to adequately develop every single character fans want to see in every story.

i see that, and didnt ask for every transformer in the universe to be developed all in one film..but for the ones u did have on screen..was it hard to ask them to be given more of a personality....was it hard to ask to see the deceps be shown earlier rather then later n the film..none of this is going to the extreme here..these are just examples....


I still, in the span of years since TRANSFORMERS began production, have yet to see a single fanboy who has come up with an actual plot for a movie that would be better than what we got. Oh, sure, people have gone "Use the Ark, use the conservation themes, etc", but literally no one has bothered to explain how they would make a better franchise or laid out story ideas other than "make it more like the source material".


Why as u put it "fanboy" or whoever voice their opinons opposite of those who like it, need " to be a movie critic" "or a filmmaker or director" why does anyone need to rewrite a plot for you to see what we our points...if u see that there were flaws..then that's where it stops..u noticed it..so u shouldn' t have an issue with anyone voicing their opinions....point blank..we all can't like and agree on everything.....

[CEREBRAL....]

yes I am curious about this "long haul" design

the long haul design/robot that's in the film now. The person if memory services me correctly..was not sign on to design any of robots for this film..he made a porotype (fan art..i think) and cuz of the popualrity he was getting frm it, they keep his idea and use his protype for the film..and i'm sure i said i like "long haul design compared to devastators design...i know there's alot of type going on here by me..but i'm trying to make it pretty clear..









sorry I wasn't around when you did mention who you were talking about, you just keep saying the movie has badly designed robots

ok, from now on I'll call what you do "oppose objective to the first film"

you keep taking these words and making them sound petty

complaint is a perfectly respectable word. "I went to red lobster yesterday, I have a list of complaints about the food"

am i a hater now?

to be fair I "hate" alot of things about DK
and I have many "complaints" to boot

syntax

U can all me whatever...i just find it funny that my opinion differs from yours..so for that i'm a hater, and a complain'er in your eyes...






]

[Marvin]

the long haul design/robot that's in the film now. The person if memory services me correctly..was not sign on to design any of robots for this film..he made a porotype (fan art..i think) and cuz of the popualrity he was getting frm it, they keep his idea and use his protype for the film..and i'm sure i said i like "long haul design compared to devastators design...i know there's alot of type going on here by me..but i'm trying to make it pretty clear..



I see

personally I don't see any bots that look any different then any others to be honest

except for Megatron(who I believe is in his pure form)
and star scream who is "designed" to have bird legs

in the production illustrations they all look as "fan friendly" as "long haul"

when it comes to production art, even batman looks like he's from the comics

when it comes to film, this constructicon will look as bay as anyone else but that's just my opinion





U can all me whatever...i just find it funny that my opinion differs from yours..so for that i'm a hater, and a complain'er in your eyes...


Your a hater of the film and I'm a liker

you complain I accept

if you look at the english, it's pretty straight forward

if you apply your interpretations of these words, then yes it seems unfair
like I said I don't intend to be

you'll know when I am
the use of the word Fan Boys for one

[CEREBRAL....]

I see

personally I don't see any bots that look any different then any others to be honest

except for Megatron(who I believe is in his pure form)
and star scream who is "designed" to have bird legs

in the production illustrations they all look as "fan friendly" as "long haul"

when it comes to production art, even batman looks like he's from the comics

when it comes to film, this constructicon will look as bay as anyone else but that's just my opinion

well we can disagree..along with the fact that i can see a lot of difference in devastator and starscream (for ex.) compared to "long haul". Also batman has nothing to do with this.........i personally didn't like "tdk's" look in the film...but it wasnt' a big deal....like i said..a lot of the tf 's look like smash'd together trash cans...not taken away the realism of them..but that's just not appealing to me...

[Marvin]

by devastator I assume you mean the character that is made up of many other characters?
yea i bet he looks different

i wasn't talking about batman I was talking about production design compared to final look on film

(whatever you thought of the way batman looked on film, I assure you in the production art he looked alot more like the comic book)

I am personally curious which bots you are talking about in relation to trash cans

[CEREBRAL....]

by devastator I assume you mean the character that is made up of many other characters?
yea i bet he looks different


no...i meant all the intecticons....(one smart ass comment deserves another)


i wasn't talking about batman I was talking about production design compared to final look on film

(whatever you thought of the way batman looked on film, I assure you in the production art he looked alot more like the comic book)

I am personally curious which bots you are talking about in relation to trash cans

honestly..u like the TF1 and no matter what, u will like TF2...is there really a point of us going back n forth..i can't be any clearer in my points..u dont have to or need to agree with anything i'm saying...i dont like devastators design..unlike what ur saying..it's more then "just bring together a bunch of robots t" u can be as cynical as u want with that comment...it comes a point when ur just repeating yourself (meaning me) like i said...i've made my points...i dont need to change your views..i didnt like the first film..i'm going to see the sec..but if the reviews hold true....then i'll say it again..."bay dropped the ball" take it how u wanna...anyone on this board take it how they wanna....

i'll be back to post on this board again..regradless

[The Guard]

ok....to see them transform..was one of the alluring expects of this film, right...to see them transform....one of the more popular robots does not transform...from a fan aspect..that sucks to not be able to see soundwave transform....

Right, but you are still going to see ****ton of robots transform. What about not seeing Soundwave in particular transform is a horrible thing?

Disappointment I can understand? But the kind of extreme reactions people have given to the idea that he may or may not transform...border on anger.

better designs, less dry humor..are some examples..i have voiced along with others...how is that in anyway us "asking for EVERYTHING IMPORTANT" thing about tranformers..????

Better designs in what sense?

Wait...there's dry humor in TRANSFORMERS?

Do you know what dry humor is?

i see that, and didnt ask for every transformer in the universe to be developed all in one film..but for the ones u did have on screen..was it hard to ask them to be given more of a personality....

More of a personality how? Specifics.

was it hard to ask to see the deceps be shown earlier rather then later n the film..none of this is going to the extreme here..these are just examples....

You can ask for whatever you want. Did waiting for decepticons till somewhat later in the movie hurt TRANSFORMERS? I don't think so. Not much, at least. There was decepticon action right from the start of it.

Why as u put it "fanboy" or whoever voice their opinons opposite of those who like it, need " to be a movie critic" "or a filmmaker or director" why does anyone need to rewrite a plot for you to see what we our points...if u see that there were flaws..then that's where it stops..u noticed it..so u shouldn' t have an issue with anyone voicing their opinions....point blank..we all can't like and agree on everything.....

Here's the problem.

I get that TRANSFORMERS isn't perfect, that it has flaws, etc.

What I also get is that people say things like

"It should have had a better story", and then don't bother to say what that is, or how the current story is a subpar one. It's been five, six years now, and I have yet to see a single fan lay out something that's any more compelling than what the creators of this franchise have come up with.

[CEREBRAL....]

Right, but you are still going to see ****ton of robots transform. What about not seeing Soundwave in particular transform is a horrible thing?.

I gave a reason to why fans of Soundwave or any other character maybe diappointed in not seeing them tranform...i don't know what esle u need for an explanation...u dont have to like it...but it's pretty plan n simple..but again...if u understand the "disappointment" then there's no further i need to go with this...




Better designs in what sense?

Wait...there's dry humor in TRANSFORMERS?

Do you know what dry humor is?

like i said to "marvin" i have explain'd my issues already, i can't explain them any clearer in running the risk of repeating myself way too much..i'm so sorry for you if you need some type albert einstein quemt physics explanation to satisfty your needs..which even if that was insanely possible..i don't think it would be enough to satify you...and again....i have explain'd myself already...and furthermore i'm not gonna entertain the dumb question u ask 'd me about dry humor ....



More of a personality how? Specifics.

again...no need for me to explain any clearer...



Here's the problem.

I get that TRANSFORMERS isn't perfect, that it has flaws, etc.

What I also get is that people say things like

"It should have had a better story", and then don't bother to say what that is, or how the current story is a subpar one. It's been five, six years now, and I have yet to see a single fan lay out something that's any more compelling than what the creators of this franchise have come up with.

no it's not a problem, it's your problem...too bad if you are not satified with others complaining and given reasons why they didnt like the first film..why does there have to be a 38 page plot written out for you to understand...there are people who didn't like the first film, and being that the filmmakers have address'd the issues (in a fan forum and in the film) as i said before..i guess they understood some of the fans gripe..

i'm not asking for a perfect film..i will never ask anyone or anything to be prefect..that's ridiculous...just see the holes in the first film...and as it stands now..didnt like some of the things that has been said about the 2nd film....

[The Overlord]

I wonder how movie is doing in Japan, did they like the first one?