Michael Bay has killed Transformers for me - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

[knowsbleed]

I was a serious Transformers fan from 1984 - 2007. When the first movie came out... I lost almost all interest in the entire franchise. The 2nd movie came out and Optimus Prime was somewhat redeemed... but the bots were still second fiddlers to the humans with no real personalities other than cliche/stereotypical cannon fodder blah blah suck suck crappiness. I can't even form a decent sentence about their characters... they are just that 'meh'.

I'm still a Negatron. I predict an equal amount of suckage for this new movie.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

For some reason I confused him with Jack Angel. Adler voiced Triggerhappy.

Ahh, ok.

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

Yeah and Sunstreaker was seen with Kup earlier in the film. Hound could've been in another part of the ship, or something. He was seen when Optimus was leaving it, however, the movie was riddled with those types of things.

And Hound may have met them when they landed.

True the film is filled with errors, but this isint evidence of one of them.

Hound was actually never seen on that shuttle.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Originally Posted by Marvin

A woman gets high unknowingly whilst visiting a college..this is somehow tasteless but tony stark glorifying alcohol isn't. Tony stark banging chicks left and right and overall objectifying women but a robot humping a girls leg is crossing the line?

As I stated before, Tonys issues with women and alcohol are part of the characters history and the source martial.

Where in the "proof" you provided does it state that bay wasn't going to audition these actors? The article simply states that there was a fan outcry for an actor, nothing more nothing less. Just seems like you are using evidence to draw the conclusions you want.

The article he posted may not have gone into detail, but Cullen him self has said several times it was the fanbase that got him the audition.I remember a very tearful thank you he made to the fanbase at a TF convention.

[CEREBRAL....]

The "Reality" as you so eloquently put it, is that there is and always have been a hyperbolic criticism surrounding Micheal Bay and the Transformers Movies. And you just pointed it out with your response. I don't see how this isn't clear by now.

i dont like bays versions of the film, plan n simple there are other films he has done and i have had no problems with them.look at my view of this film how you want...at the end of the day you have your thoughts and i have mine..

You're acting like a film has never gotten a bad rap before.

Not at alll..i never go by what a critic says to judge or go watch a film, i'm plainly pointing out to you *insert number* of people may it be cirtics, fanboys, casual fans..didnt like the film for whatever their reasons were, alot of us share some of the views..if you want to look at it as a "witch hunt" against michael bay..go right ahead.



actually you did say that, but I digress

Transformers has tasteless humor but the Hangover is the comedy hit of the year. There is no right or wrong way to do humor. Just people that get bent out of shape when their franchise isn't taken seriously.

look at it however you want, i like to think there is such a way to do comedy and when you do you get G, PG, NC-17, R ratings..the last time i check "the hangover" is rated R, TF is PG-13 with all ages going to see it. I wouldnt take my 6 year old nephew to see hangover..but i would take him to see transformers..again look at the film and it's humor how you want.

Transformers2 got "bad reviews" but it was also the highest grossing film that year...we're not here to talk about the masses or the critics.


so because it grossed alot of money, there's no room to have an issue with the film????



I know exactly what it was implying actually. I just happen to think it was done in a "tasteful way" when one stops to consider the alternatives to such a gag.

^^ you thought it was "tasteful" others didn't is that so hard to understand?

I never said it didn't have the representation of the male anatomy, but you seem to not understand the difference between representing something and showing it. The day the show balls in a transformers movie is the day I jump on the hate wagon myself.

yup your view on things is far more advance then mine (sarcasm) look at it how you will at this point.

You know the 90's batman movies had nipples in them...god forbid.

and?



you addressed my "approach" first, I simply showed you that you were doing the same thing except no one was calling you names for it.

As for relaxing, I'm not the moderator or anything and you have broken any rules, it's just for someone that seems to talk of respect as much as you do you punctuate your weariness very strongly. At a certain point you said it was like talking to child...just saying you should exercise more patience with people.


i apologize for my comment to you..now if you wanna keep harpen on it, have at it, you have your way of posting i have mine. I'm pretty sure i was plenty respectful to every poster...there's been far worst things said on these boards then me referring to someone not understanding or their understanding level as being no more different then a childs..but if you wanna cont. to be my judge and jury on it..have at it man..i did my apology to you already, so i'm good.

[Mr. Earle]

Michael Bay has slept with my girlfriend and he made my house explode. That fiend!

[Avangarde]

[Jake Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Earle

Michael Bay has slept with my girlfriend

Who hasn't?

[Mr. Earle]

Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by CEREBRAL....

according to martin this did not happened...i'm sure the cartoon had awkward humor, and sillyness...i'm just saying the humor and tone of the cartoon was alot diff then the movie and shouldnt be compared.

I'm not comparing ball humor to ball humor, I'm simply saying both had awkward humor and silly moments. As for why Bay's films can have Frat Boys, sexuality and drugs and the cartoon doesn't, that's just the nature of things. I never had a problem with Bumblebee 'peeing' on that guy. Bumblebee is a more lighthearted characters, and quite frankly, sector 7 deserved to be pee-d on *shrugs*, but no one can make you find something funny.

you are entitle to your opinion on the niche thing, and TF was mentio...i seen it..and recall it being mention....i dont know what esle to tell you about it.

I know they mentioned it, I remember the piece. The irony of you mentioning it though is that, at the time, it highlighted how little people knew of Transformers. As I say, I seem to remember Quickswitch is the toy used in that piece that the comedians play with. Quickswitch is a fairly unpopular character (in fact he never really was a character), and a somewhat awkward toy. I'm not sure what kind of planning goes into those segments, but a simple google search would've given them enough information on Transformers to not use Quickswitch(and I seem to remember they had trouble transforming him - he did have six modes though)!?! They might as well have used Bristleback, Cindersaur or Airwave.

Ninja Turtles and G.I.Joe were, at one time, decidedly more popular. One piece of evidence: Transformers War for Cybertron is basically the first G1 game of any noteriety, the rest were total flops. I think that one for the Playstation 2 never made it to the shelves. Transformers also hadn't been producing much in the way of comics until the new movies. I remember when I completed my Transformer comic collection, sometime back around '98 or so. I never had to add to it until Bay began producing the new films.

It's not really an opinion. Maybe they aren't now, but before the LA movies it was a very niche' fanbase.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

Transformers also hadn't been producing much in the way of comics until the new movies. I remember when I completed my Transformer comic collection, sometime back around '98 or so. I never had to add to it until Bay began producing the new films.

This is not accurate.

You may not have been collecting/reading but there were plenty of books before the films.

Dreamwave had a very popular run from 2001 till early 2005.

And IDW picked up in mid 2005 with their first mini and have continued toi do minis, spotlights and a monthly since then.

[Jake Cassidy]

The comics are nowhere near as big as the cartoons are.

[powerbomb1411]

Originally Posted by Jake Cassidy

The comics are nowhere near as big as the cartoons are.

Depends what cartoons.

[Jake Cassidy]

G1 cartoons.

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by sto_vo_kor_2000

As I stated before, Tonys issues with women and alcohol are part of the characters history and the source martial.

Validation by source material wouldn't(doesn't) render the content non offensive if it was.

Theoretically if someone made a remake of the this film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Serbian_Film for American audiences and kept all the "source material"

It would still be as "offensive" as the original.

What your getting at is how willing as "Fans" you would be to forgive something that is validated by source and that's fine.

However, it doesn't take source material to understand/justify that an adult like Tony Stark drinks and then goes on to act a fool after the fact, it's not offensive to any average audience member that isn't going into the film looking to pick it apart. By that same logic a grown woman accidently consuming intoxicating brownies and acting a fool shouldn't be either..yet "it is"

This isn't me advocating more of this kind of humor in the new TF film, but rather me highlighting the obvious double standard I've seen in the reception of the previous one.

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by CEREBRAL....

i dont like bays versions of the film, plan n simple there are other films he has done and i have had no problems with them.look at my view of this film how you want...at the end of the day you have your thoughts and i have mine..

If more people were to just annunciate this outright, it would save a lot of time.

And I'm not saying people shouldn't state their faults with the film, if anything that helps, but it's really just this root issue of not liking the film that snow balls into what I consider broad stroke hyperbolic statements that make the film appear to be more than it is.

Not at alll..i never go by what a critic says to judge or go watch a film, i'm plainly pointing out to you *insert number* of people may it be cirtics, fanboys, casual fans..didnt like the film for whatever their reasons were, alot of us share some of the views..if you want to look at it as a "witch hunt" against michael bay..go right ahead.

I never go by what critics say either, which is why I never bring them up to validate my views.

I acknowledge that people feel the way they do, I just want to establish that they are nothing more than feelings and shouldn't be proclaimed as statements. I posted a clip of Cars earlier, It had the same quasi racial stereo typing present in TF2 except even more apparent. Now if people starting crying that that film was racist I'd be on here arguing against that too. Opinion vs Fact.
This montage shows what disney has been doing for almost a century, with their kids films...

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

call it what you will

look at it however you want, i like to think there is such a way to do comedy and when you do you get G, PG, NC-17, R ratings..the last time i check "the hangover" is rated R, TF is PG-13 with all ages going to see it. I wouldnt take my 6 year old nephew to see hangover..but i would take him to see transformers..again look at the film and it's humor how you want.

It doesn't matter if a film is rated R or G for a grown man to be offended. I've heard grown men tell me they were personally offended by pot brownies! But then later told my about how funny the hangover was. I've been told by my white friends that racist robots personally offended them, but than a naked chinese man jumping out of a trunk was hilarious. Ken Jeong's naked butt made them laugh but John Turturro's made them gag. I'm talking about on a base level these grown men have a personal response that varies whist the content remains the same.

TRANSFORMERS(2) IS OFFENSIVE is the statement heard round the internet as opposed to TRANSFORMERS(2) IS OFFENSIVE for a pg 13 movie.

Moreover a PG-13 rating isn't G rating, it actually enforces parental guidance. When a disney audience is subjected to "offensive" material(beastiality not withstanding), I'd be more inclined agree but that still wouldn't apply to Transformers.

so because it grossed alot of money, there's no room to have an issue with the film????

Not at all, I'm just showing you how little numbers should mean in a discussion such as this. Something to keep in mind next time one mentions how many people felt such and such a way.

yup your view on things is far more advance then mine (sarcasm) look at it how you will at this point.

I'm just being objective.

and?

Well, in some countries those parts of the anatomy are considered offensive. Which by your logic means there were human genitalia in the batman films when clearly their wasn't. But hey they were pg13 so no defenseless eyes were harmed cheers.

cover your eyes boys and girls, you are about to get a double dose of male asses on screen and you should be offended when you see this because well ...you are seeing male asses on screen.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

by your flawed logic when applied to the batgirl suit up scene, you actually get to see a "NAKED WOMAN" a pg 13 movie.

Like I said, objectively speaking, I like to have a mind of my own when it comes to such things.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by Jake Cassidy

The comics are nowhere near as big as the cartoons are.

No, they never have been.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Anyone else notice how Hasbro has been quietly turning Warpath from a complete goofball to a badass.

THEN

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Bang, I'm gonna POW! Right in your ZOOM!

The very easily dispatched Warpath
NOW

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Originally Posted by Marvin

Validation by source material wouldn't(doesn't) render the content non offensive if it was.

Theoretically if someone made a remake of the this film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Serbian_Film for American audiences and kept all the "source material"

It would still be as "offensive" as the original.

What your getting at is how willing as "Fans" you would be to forgive something that is validated by source and that's fine.

However, it doesn't take source material to understand/justify that an adult like Tony Stark drinks and then goes on to act a fool after the fact, it's not offensive to any average audience member that isn't going into the film looking to pick it apart. By that same logic a grown woman accidently consuming intoxicating brownies and acting a fool shouldn't be either..yet "it is"

This isn't me advocating more of this kind of humor in the new TF film, but rather me highlighting the obvious double standard I've seen in the reception of the previous one.

I wasnt offended by it in the TF films at all, I just feel that it was out of place.

[Hotwire]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

Anyone else notice how Hasbro has been quietly turning Warpath from a complete goofball to a badass.

THEN

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Bang, I'm gonna POW! Right in your ZOOM!

The very easily dispatched Warpath
NOW

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

You should see in the Dark of the Moon game trailer!

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Link to the story

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by sto_vo_kor_2000

I wasnt offended by it in the TF films at all, I just feel that it was out of place.

this is basically my take on the humor, or certain humor of the TF films....

Originally Posted by Marvin

but it's really just this root issue of not liking the film that snow balls into what I consider broad stroke hyperbolic statements that make the film appear to be more than it is.
.

^^maybe that is with some ppl who oppose the film, but it's not with everyone who opposes the film.

Originally Posted by Marvin

I just want to establish that they are nothing more than feelings and shouldn't be proclaimed as statements. .

i'm not sure who proclaimed anything to be a statement, but isnt this what we all are doing; are making statements and are our feelings??? Onless someone in here is claiming that the producer or reliable source made a statment that is not true? I dont now, I just dont understand what you mean by this statement...?

Originally Posted by Marvin

Not at all, I'm just showing you how little numbers should mean in a discussion such as this. Something to keep in mind next time one memtions how many people felt such and such a way..

well bring up that example to me was pointless because i'm sure we all know numbers never tell a whole story, if you are referring to me describing that many oppose the film, then that is something that you can not try to debunk because it's an actual fact that there are many who didnt like the film..you can apply whatever plural term you want to that , but within that statement or that topic i think numbers(unoffical head counts) do bring meaning...if that is what your trying to say..

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by Hotwire

You should see in the Dark of the Moon game trailer!

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Link to the story

At one time I kind of scoffed at some of liberties taken with the designs of the Bay-verse Transformers, now I really must admit they are all lightyears ahead of any and all previous designs.

Even the Starscream has officially grown on me.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by sto_vo_kor_2000

The article he posted may not have gone into detail, but Cullen him self has said several times it was the fanbase that got him the audition.I remember a very tearful thank you he made to the fanbase at a TF convention.

Not to sound crass, but of course he's going to pay the fans lip-service, they've only been buying toys of "him" for twenty some odd years now. I'd be pretty grateful too, considering, without Prime, he'd have been far less successful. As Marvin, Hotwire and I have all said, these articles hardly prove Bay was opposed to using the original voice actors, or that he was "forced" to give them an audition, or that 'the fanbase' was the reason he got cast (because that same fanbase was clearly unable to get Welker recast as Megatron). Don Murphy, the producer, was lobbying for Cullen as far back as 2004 when they were going through script drafts and no director was attached. Bay admittedly wasn't a Transformers fan, and considering his age I doubt he knew Cullen from my left foot when he signed on. Even in their first meeting Bay didn't know Cullen was just a voice actor.

[powerbomb1411]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

Not to sound crass, but of course he's going to pay the fans lip-service, they've only been buying toys of "him" for twenty some odd years now. I'd be pretty grateful too, considering, without Prime, he'd have been far less successful. As Marvin, Hotwire and I have all said, these articles hardly prove Bay was opposed to using the original voice actors, or that he was "forced" to give them an audition, or that 'the fanbase' was the reason he got cast (because that same fanbase was clearly unable to get Welker recast as Megatron). Don Murphy, the producer, was lobbying for Cullen as far back as 2004 when they were going through script drafts and no director was attached. Bay admittedly wasn't a Transformers fan, and considering his age I doubt he knew Cullen from my left foot when he signed on. Even in their first meeting Bay didn't know Cullen was just a voice actor.

Bay himself said a few times it was the fans that convinced him to give Cullen a shot. He also gave Welker a shot but didn't feel his voiced matched what Megatron should sound like on the big screen.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by powerbomb1411

Bay himself said a few times it was the fans that convinced him to give Cullen a shot. He also gave Welker a shot but didn't feel his voiced matched what Megatron should sound like on the big screen.

I've seen no article that states anything remotely close to this, other than the latter part of what you just said. The only reason this is even brought up is because of unsubstantiated rumors that Bay and Speilberg were going to get George Clooney or Tom Hanks to play Prime. Actually, as far as I know, the only one who ever read for Prime was Cullen. All the quotes are simply this person or that person thanking the "fans" (that vague, undefined concept). As I said Don Murphy wanted to bring him back in 2004, so it's doubtful internet message boards or some fan movement really scored him an audition.