Transformers How much can you they change??

[cryptic name]

men in suits.........HA!...

yeah im the dumbass

not you. tad fatherton. i guess i should've quoted him.

the men in suits idea would only be for a very wide angle and two or three shots. i can see it working, not in power rangers type way.
it's not something i personally would choose, but it's a valid option. just because something's been done poorly in the past, doesn't mean it can't be done well. look at C-3PO (lame example, but still)

 

[CFlash]

Seems to be written ok, so yes, it's ok in the movie. It's cliche for movies to use teen romance? So what? What's your point? That a movie is using something that has been used before? EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN HAS BEEN DONE. Would you rather have a bad-ass loner teen? Oh...that's been done to death too. How about a scientist for the Autobots to ally with? Oh...it's been done to death, too. What's that...you say that everything under the sun has been done already?

Just because "it's been done before" doesn't mean it's cliche. It becomes a cliche in a movie when the element is overused in a way that makes it out-of-place and DEVOID OF MEANING.

A good writer will recognize "no my movie doesn't need that... i'll do this instead." Instead of working BACKWARDS and saying "OK... whatever happens we need to have <XXXX Element> in there."

Star Hot-rod? OK, we'll make it work somehow. It's a must! Love interest? OK, we'll definately WEDGE that in there even though it means nothing in the larger picture! Hey, and find a place to put Yahoo, Mountain Dew, and Nike in there. Oh wait and Furbies too!

 

[Avangarde]

Maybe if Pixar made it.

Look at it this way, I'd much rather watch a CGI only of TF's (done in the same style of Final Fantasy VII Advent Children) and keep the mythos of TF's in tact then watch something that looks like a 4 year old scripted.

 

[bunk]

Look at it this way, I'd much rather watch a CGI only of TF's (done in the same style of Final Fantasy VII Advent Children) and keep the mythos of TF's in tact then watch something that looks like a 4 year old scripted.

I think that'd be pretty sweet.

 

[Hotwire]

look at C-3PO (lame example, but still)

C-3PO doesn't have fight scenes.

 

[Hotwire]

Just because "it's been done before" doesn't mean it's cliche. It becomes a cliche in a movie when the element is overused in a way that makes it out-of-place and DEVOID OF MEANING.

A good writer will recognize "no my movie doesn't need that... i'll do this instead." Instead of working BACKWARDS and saying "OK... whatever happens we need to have <XXXX Element> in there."

Star Hot-rod? OK, we'll make it work somehow. It's a must! Love interest? OK, we'll definately WEDGE that in there even though it means nothing in the larger picture! Hey, and find a place to put Yahoo, Mountain Dew, and Nike in there. Oh wait and Furbies too!

Let's not forget that at some point in the Transformers timeline, Spike has a son, Daniel. He ain't adopted, so, Spike's gotta get some at some point. As for the product placements, I find it stranger when they make up crap products because they don't gat a licence or just never use any logos. In our daily lives, these products and logos are everywhere. To take them out, well, would make it seem a bot more alien, especially if the story is set in a non-fictional location.

 

[CFlash]

Let's not forget that at some point in the Transformers timeline, Spike has a son, Daniel. He ain't adopted, so, Spike's gotta get some at some point. As for the product placements, I find it stranger when they make up crap products because they don't gat a licence or just never use any logos. In our daily lives, these products and logos are everywhere. To take them out, well, would make it seem a bot more alien, especially if the story is set in a non-fictional location.

I totally agree with the product thing. It can seem natural as rain. For instance, in The Island I thought it was PART of the story... in a "sci-fi" sense. I thought Bay was "making a point." But at some point it just became eye-roll inducing and so obviously CONTRIVED. And, that I do have a problem with.

If movies are going to contain commercials in the EXCESSIVE amounts that Bay seems to want to do, then I think the movie ticket price should be free or at least half-price.

 

[cryptic name]

C-3PO doesn't have fight scenes.

*crosses fingers for episodes 7,8,9* t:

 

[The Guard]

Just because "it's been done before" doesn't mean it's cliche. It becomes a cliche in a movie when the element is overused in a way that makes it out-of-place and DEVOID OF MEANING.

I know what cliche is. Obviously I don't buy this "done to death" thing, as again, everytuing has been done, and been done to death. How is the use of the teen frienship/romance subplot devoid of meaning? The entire metaphor of this movie is "transforming". The entire point behind Sam/Spike is that he "transforms", and that the girl he likes "transforms". That they are both, like the robots, "more than meets the eye". And Bumblebee is included in their arc.

 

[Hotwire]

I totally agree with the product thing. It can seem natural as rain. For instance, in The Island I thought it was PART of the story... in a "sci-fi" sense. I thought Bay was "making a point." But at some point it just became eye-roll inducing and so obviously CONTRIVED. And, that I do have a problem with.

If movies are going to contain commercials in the EXCESSIVE amounts that Bay seems to want to do, then I think the movie ticket price should be free or at least half-price.

What would be better, a non-descript game console coming to life, of an X-Box coming to life?? An iPod or somethig you don't recognize? I would also bet that by allowing companies to place their products in their movies then perhaps the companies give some money to help make the movie. If you're a producer, every dime added to the budget helps.

 

[xwolverine2]

not you. tad fatherton. i guess i should've quoted him.

the men in suits idea would only be for a very wide angle and two or three shots. i can see it working, not in power rangers type way.
it's not something i personally would choose, but it's a valid option. just because something's been done poorly in the past, doesn't mean it can't be done well. look at C-3PO (lame example, but still)

yeah so there gonna build millions of dollars worth of robots.... just for a couple of wideshots.....

the producers are SO gonna bich slap you

 

[HighVoltage]

I didnt have a problem with the Godzilla98 design. To me it was a little more believeable than the "thunderthighs" man in suit that they use. What made the movie suck for me was the story.

Same here, for me Godzilla 98 was a good movie, the character was good for me, even like an original Godzilla fan, I have no problems with enjoy that movie, and yes the only problem of that movie was the story, because that Godzilla was just a creature trying to survive, and I feel bad at the end of this movie, because this Godzilla was killed without a reason, that was the only mistake about that character, because that character was so cool and so real, that you feel sympathy for him (or her?).

In the other hand, The Transformers are totally different, because the Robots in disguise are part of an era,are part of one generation, of people who enjoyed the cartoons and the toys in the 80s, and that people wants to feel the same sensation from their childhood, when everyone was watching the cartoons and playing with the toys, and now with this movie, they can´t feel that sensation, because the producers and the directors Michael Bay and Steven Spielberg are destroying the concept of the Transformers, because they are doing their own version of these characters with a great lack of knowledge about these characters, the only connection with The Transformers are the logos and the name of the characters, this movie is going to suck.

 

[cryptic name]

yeah so there gonna build millions of dollars worth of robots.... just for a couple of wideshots.....

the producers are SO gonna bich slap you

dude, im not trying to argue with you. i was just suggesting that there are alternatives to cgi, whether the alternatives are good or not is a different story

 

[Headless Knight]

C-3PO doesn't have fight scenes.

Lol, imagine if he had. The poor guy can hardly walk, he wouldn't be able to kick a puppy without falling on his back.

 

[big D Evil]

What would be better, a non-descript game console coming to life, of an X-Box coming to life?? An iPod or somethig you don't recognize? I would also bet that by allowing companies to place their products in their movies then perhaps the companies give some money to help make the movie. If you're a producer, every dime added to the budget helps.

It's dumb to have a game system OR MP3 player come to life.
The whole concept of an "Energon cube" that makes things come to life is lame and it makes the characters less important.
Like the transformers arent special in any way they are just piles of metal that happened to be in the vicnity of the magic life giving energon cube so they came to life.
An xbox coming to life and running away is a concept that makes me cringe with embarrasment for anyone who is under 5 years old that finds it amusing....

 

[nogster]

same...
so is bumblebee peeing on someone.
and the furbies........
why??

 

[roach]

In the other hand, The Transformers are totally different, because the Robots in disguise are part of an era,are part of one generation, of people who enjoyed the cartoons and the toys in the 80s, and that people wants to feel the same sensation from their childhood, when everyone was watching the cartoons and playing with the toys, and now with this movie, they can´t feel that sensation, because the producers and the directors Michael Bay and Steven Spielberg are destroying the concept of the Transformers, because they are doing their own version of these characters with a great lack of knowledge about these characters, the only connection with The Transformers are the logos and the name of the characters, this movie is going to suck.

No Transformers are not part of an era. They became popular in the 80's but are still going strong with cartoons and toys. That's like saying the Simpsons are part of the 80's too. The concept of Transformers is still in this movie. Things had to be tweaked because of the movie making process....and you cant complain that they are doing their vision of Transformers because every director who has ever done a movie is doing their vision of the script..Spielburg did his vision of Jaws and Jurassic Park, Peter Jackson did his vision of LOTR, Raimi is doing his vision of Spider-man. Each of them tweeked and changed things...so why isnt Bay allowed to do the same???????

 

[CherryRedSpider]

you cant complain that they are doing their vision of Transformers because every director who has ever done a movie is doing their vision of the script..Spielburg did his vision of Jaws and Jurassic Park, Peter Jackson did his vision of LOTR, Raimi is doing his vision of Spider-man. Each of them tweeked and changed things...so why isnt Bay allowed to do the same???????

and besides Raimi, Bay is trying put this 80's toy icon into modern day.

 

[roach]

...and I dont see how this movie is raping childhoods. This could be the worst movie since Glitter and I will still have my memories of my first Transformer and playing with my toys....doing that epic battle of Transformers vs G.I. Joe way before they decided to do the comic....nothing changes that

 

[big D Evil]

No Transformers are not part of an era. They became popular in the 80's but are still going strong with cartoons and toys. That's like saying the Simpsons are part of the 80's too. The concept of Transformers is still in this movie. Things had to be tweaked because of the movie making process....and you cant complain that they are doing their vision of Transformers because every director who has ever done a movie is doing their vision of the script..Spielburg did his vision of Jaws and Jurassic Park, Peter Jackson did his vision of LOTR, Raimi is doing his vision of Spider-man. Each of them tweeked and changed things...so why isnt Bay allowed to do the same???????

For the 999,999th time it's very simple. LOTR and Spider-man had characters that looked AND acted like thier namesakes.

Also Spielberg,Jackson and Raimi have godlike directing skills in comparison to Bay.

 

[Boiiinng]

...and I dont see how this movie is raping childhoods. This could be the worst movie since Glitter and I will still have my memories of my first Transformer and playing with my toys....doing that epic battle of Transformers vs G.I. Joe way before they decided to do the comic....nothing changes that

But you won't have them......in live-action.

 

[IKnowSomeJudo]

Also Spielberg,Jackson and Raimi have godlike directing skills in comparison to Bay.

To be fair, both Jackson and Raimi started out as B-movie horror directors before they really hit it big in Hollywood. Honestly I never would have thought in a million years that a guy who directed Bad Taste and Meet the Feebles could make LOTR movies the way they are, but there you go, he did it. Who's to say that Bay can't grow as a director in similar way?

 

[big D Evil]

To be fair, both Jackson and Raimi started out as B-movie horror directors before they really hit it big in Hollywood. Honestly I never would have thought in a million years that a guy who directed Bad Taste and Meet the Feebles could make LOTR.

I am a huge horror fan and I followed both raimi and Jacksons careers. I loved braindead and I would have always thought peter Jackson could jump into pretty much any suspense/horror movie and do it justice. Once I saw heavenly creatures I knew PJ could jump to the next level. I never would have though he would make something as huge as LOTR as his first fantasy type film but he put alot of love into the trilogy and it showed.
Raimi paid his dues as well. After watching Darkman it was obvious he could do a comic book movie no problem.
I loved watching LOTR and spider-man and catching little glimpses of the directing styles in them.
But you see both of these guys paid thier dues and worked thier way up. They both started with zero money and still made good films.
Bay has hundreds of millions at his disposal and still can't generate the kind of emotional response that Raimi or jackson can. Take out his FX and he's nothing.
I challenge anyone to compare the artistic merits of PJ's "heavenly creatures" or Raimi's "a simple plan" with any or all of Bay's movies.

 

[ragdus]

Also Spielberg,Jackson and Raimi have godlike directing skills in comparison to Bay.

So if Spielberg is godlike, what does it say to you that he recommended Bay to do this film?

 

[CFlash]

I am a huge horror fan and I followed both raimi and Jacksons careers. I loved braindead and I would have always thought peter Jackson could jump into pretty much any suspense/horror movie and do it justice. Once I saw heavenly creatures I knew PJ could jump to the next level. I never would have though he would make something as huge as LOTR as his first fantasy type film but he put alot of love into the trilogy and it showed.
Raimi paid his dues as well. After watching Darkman it was obvious he could do a comic book movie no problem.
I loved watching LOTR and spider-man and catching little glimpses of the directing styles in them.
But you see both of these guys paid thier dues and worked thier way up. They both started with zero money and still made good films.
Bay has hundreds of millions at his disposal and still can't generate the kind of emotional response that Raimi or jackson can. Take out his FX and he's nothing.
I challenge anyone to compare the artistic merits of PJ's "heavenly creatures" or Raimi's "a simple plan" with any or all of Bay's movies.

Very well said.