Revenge of the Fallen Is it pointless to hope for a better script than the first movie?

[CEREBRAL....]

I don't really understand the criticism that some people make about critics of TF1 about them wanting some Shakespearian plot. I think those people realize that Transformers has never been that deep of a franchise. I think all they wanted was some thing like Iron Man, Spider-Man 1, the first three Indiana Jones films, etc. A combination of a lighthearted tone and a solid storyline.

thankx my man..either they dont get it..or tried hard to ignore it...

Wow, you totally failed to grasp what I was saying.




But, I also don't remember the cartoon having dorky dog piss gags or wacky racial stereotypes


If you think everything about the first TF movie was "nailed", and there's no room for corrections, well that's fine for you. Despite the fact that I love giant robots beating the crap out of each other, and I realize it's "not Shakespeare" I'm apparently a bit more demanding with regard to how a sci-fi film speaks to my intelligence level.

^^^

 

[CFlash]

I don't really understand the criticism that some people make about critics of TF1 about them wanting some Shakespearian plot. I think those people realize that Transformers has never been that deep of a franchise. I think all they wanted was some thing like Iron Man, Spider-Man 1, the first three Indiana Jones films, etc. A combination of a lighthearted tone and a solid storyline.

For the record, I enjoyed TF1 and will probably enjoy ROTF when all is said and done. But as TF fan, I can't deny that TF film franchise leaves a lot to be desired in its current state.

IMO, the problem with Bay's Transformers is that it had very little heart... no gravity... no moral... nothing to say. You watch it simply to watch it. You walk away having not a single thought provoked. Even light-hearted movies can provoke thought and make you think. All good sci-fi does this. Whether it's Terminator or Men In Black. Even the original cartoon/comic/backstory premised itself on things *deeper* than Bay's movie. Like...

1) Yeah, the energy angle... the dying (drained) Cybertron serving as a metaphor for our planet (climate change, draining of natural resources like forests, etc). Whoever thinks this is an "80's" thing does not watch the news. It is more relevant today than even then.
2) The Autobots being an oppressed and technologically inferior class (Decepticons are more advanced, they can fly, etc). Classic Third World or minority class struggle.

There were some good things I loved about Bay's Transformers. Optimus Prime. Sam and BB's relationship. BB. But, you can't defend this movie by saying the cartoon/comic source was this or it was that. Because even on that level, the movie failed... having not captured a single central premise of the cartoon and sometimes even turning the premises upside-down.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

It had nothing to say? No message? So ****in' what? It's a ****in' movie, for God's sake. Personally, all those 'thought-provoking' movies some people love so much bore the **** out of me.

I prefer movies that are pure entertainment. I don't go to the movies to think. That's what books are for. t:

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Wow, you totally failed to grasp what I was saying.

I didn't mention "Godzilla 1998", I was talking about Godzilla movies in general. But you did bring up an interesting point. The 1998 American Godzilla movie had better special effects than any of the original Japanese Godzilla movies. But today, the US Godzilla movie is dismissed as a dorky attempt at an overhyped blockbuster that ultimately failed to generate enough interest to even justify a sequel, while the low-tech Japanese Godzilla is still a beloved pop icon.

Anyway, back to Transformers....
The TF cartoon was indeed limited in its scope and depth considering that it was a toy-based cartoon. I freely admit that (since I am not a "completist", whatever that means in regard to Transformers). But, I also don't remember the cartoon having dorky dog piss gags or wacky racial stereotypes aimed at the same crowd that thought Eddie Murphy's Meet Dave movie was hilarious.

If you think everything about the first TF movie was "nailed", and there's no room for corrections, well that's fine for you. Despite the fact that I love giant robots beating the crap out of each other, and I realize it's "not Shakespeare" I'm apparently a bit more demanding with regard to how a sci-fi film speaks to my intelligence level.

1) Again,get off your high horse.

2) Wrong,I enjoyed the movie alot,but I do believe there is more room for improvement which I am confident will be dished out alot in Transformers:Revenge Of The Fallen.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

^ You forgot:

3) Nobody thinks Meet Dave is funny. t:

 

[S.A.A.D.]

^ You forgot:

3) Nobody thinks Meet Dave is funny. t:

^Oooh,good one. Hehehe. t:
Thanks for pointing that out dude.

 

[Fanticon]

i just finished the commentary on transformers blu ray...and after listening to bay talk, i really feel like the success of the movie has made him feel enabled to do anything he wants with part 2. the way he was talking was as if he knew it was going to be good all along...even all his changes and the goofiness...and now, we the audience have enabled him to expand upon this...and that is why i feel like tf2 will be great eye-candy but even more hokey than the first one.

 

[Marvin]

If he bores you, STOP arguing!!!!!

But noooo, you just have to keep telling your side of the story.

Damn

he's obviously itching for a confrontation(especially with the bore comment, and with respect to lizards thread and not letting turn into anything less then productive discussion I've tried to move beyond retorting to his beckons and calls

besides he doesn't even read my posts, so what's the point(if u did you'd realize you were schooled after the first one)

as somewhat of a vet here i figured i'd set an moral high ground example and only respond to the more objective thoughts on the matter.

it's what optimus would do(insert TF smiley)

I didn't mention "Godzilla 1998", I was talking about Godzilla movies in general. But you did bring up an interesting point. The 1998 American Godzilla movie had better special effects than any of the original Japanese Godzilla movies. But today, the US Godzilla movie is dismissed as a dorky attempt at an overhyped blockbuster that ultimately failed to generate enough interest to even justify a sequel, while the low-tech Japanese Godzilla is still a beloved pop icon.

funny enough the fans of godzilla didn't go around telling everyone the movie sucked due to it's lack of elevation of the material
sure the original was charming and beloved but it was just that, nothing more..if anything the Emmerich version tried in vain to make sense out of something that only works when it's camp.

TF fans need to just admit they don't like what bay did and end it there...they instead hide behind the false validation that the original was something more that it was and the new one is only bad because it's about nothing

sorry to break it to "them" but TF has always been this shallow when it comes to legitimate depth.

note;
general audience rarely seem to mention anything about the designs not making sense...just the fans...
Regular people simply accept that this is what cars would look like if they were to unfold and stand to two legs

the same way the bat fans seemed to shut up about the "real world" approach to the suit once film pleased their fanboyiness

fans will be fans

Anyway, back to Transformers....
The TF cartoon was indeed limited in its scope and depth considering that it was a toy-based cartoon. I freely admit that (since I am not a "completist", whatever that means in regard to Transformers). But, I also don't remember the cartoon having dorky dog piss gags or wacky racial stereotypes aimed at the same crowd that thought Eddie Murphy's Meet Dave movie was hilarious.

alot of things are different
material changes with the times...childish gags evolve over 30years

the minute James cameron has the terminator peeing on a gov't agent, then you can cry hail mary.

I don't remember the cartoon making 7 hundred million dollars in it's original "run" either

IMO, the problem with Bay's Transformers is that it had very little heart... no gravity... no moral... nothing to say. You watch it simply to watch it. You walk away having not a single thought provoked. Even light-hearted movies can provoke thought and make you think. All good sci-fi does this. Whether it's Terminator or Men In Black. Even the original cartoon/comic/backstory premised itself on things *deeper* than Bay's movie. Like...

Technically if you watch the scene with Optimus and the crew at Griffith Telescope, they pretty much hits the moral legacy of the material on the head
[YT]0ngQsxqXIeM[/YT]

and he goes on when he fights megatron...

like i said before, it seems to be so obvious in the 80's cartoon but when it shows itself in the new one people seem to cover their ears...

1) Yeah, the energy angle... the dying (drained) Cybertron serving as a metaphor for our planet (climate change, draining of natural resources like forests, etc). Whoever thinks this is an "80's" thing does not watch the news. It is more relevant today than even then.
2) The Autobots being an oppressed and technologically inferior class (Decepticons are more advanced, they can fly, etc). Classic Third World or minority class struggle.

Yea the autobots would represent Humas in that particular angle..


There were some good things I loved about Bay's Transformers. Optimus Prime. Sam and BB's relationship. BB. But, you can't defend this movie by saying the cartoon/comic source was this or it was that. Because even on that level, the movie failed... having not captured a single central premise of the cartoon and sometimes even turning the premises upside-down.[/QUOTE]


a transformer peeing on a gov't agent could be a childish gag, by a childish director yes
but
it could be seen as some form of political statement
we see what we want to see.

(insert TF smiley)

 

[Marvin]

[YT]Oaai7k-NJWU[/YT]

with the way fan's work, they would no doubt encourage things like this in the final cut

(insert TF smiley)

 

[The Lizard]

1) Again,get off your high horse.

x 1000

Right, I'll stop offering my opinion in the face of some barely-coherent pseudo-criticism from Michael Bay fans. That'll be the day.

 

[The Lizard]

funny enough the fans of godzilla didn't go around telling everyone the movie sucked due to it's lack of elevation of the material
sure the original was charming and beloved but it was just that, nothing more..if anything the Emmerich version tried in vain to make sense out of something that only works when it's camp.

TF fans need to just admit they don't like what bay did and end it there...they instead hide behind the false validation that the original was something more that it was and the new one is only bad because it's about nothing

sorry to break it to "them" but TF has always been this shallow when it comes to legitimate depth.

But the relative "shallowness" of the original cartoon concept should have no bearing on whether or not a new script is creative and engaging, or piss-poor, lazy and derivative. That's all the doing of the writers.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

i can't stand posters who think they are too smart...

 

[Marvin]

But the relative "shallowness" of the original cartoon concept should have no bearing on whether or not a new script is creative and engaging, or piss-poor, lazy and derivative. That's all the doing of the writers.

Here is where i partially agree

1. the pseudo fans claim that the original material is in the deeper end of the pool whereas this new version barely has it's toe in the shallow end

if the truth was spoken they would just say they want their version but instead, like i said they take the "high road" and act like it was something that it's not

and all their criticism are valid beyond belief because their on the side of substance.

We all are, deep down
but to blame the producers for keeping something the same is hardly fair

like i said

why make a barbie movie sex and the city...
so the kids can't watch it?

it could be more though
but it's no big shame if it isn't

lest we forget Godzilla 1998

 

[Marvin]

i can't stand posters who think they are too smart...

how do you feel about posters who are smart

(insert TF smiley here)

 

[LightningFlash]

Wait a min. i dont remember calling your name or seeing how u fit into this..i was having a convo with another poster and he decided to drop in his two cents..(just like how u are doing..) sooo... onless i was speaking to you....plz stay out of it..thanks i'm sure he doesn't need a father on these boards....thnkx

If you wanna argue with me, first learn how to spell correctly. You can spell cerebral right but not unless?

Secondly, there's been nothing but arguments for the last three pages and it's getting annoying. VERY annoying.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I think Bay is a great action director, but that's all he is. Some of the lines in TF were actually cringe worthy, I actually felt embarrassed for them at some points. And the whole thing about that cute blonde Aussie being more intelligent than every single other person in the whole film was just typical Bay. Style over substance. And please don't get me started on the blatent stereotypical marines. A heroic white guy, a crazy bad ass black guy and a religious hispanic guy. I bet that took a while for him to think up.

But, I did enjoy TF. It was a fun ride, but completely forgettable. I hope the second one isn't.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

double

 

[CEREBRAL....]

If you wanna argue with me, first learn how to spell correctly. You can spell cerebral right but not unless?

Secondly, there's been nothing but arguments for the last three pages and it's getting annoying. VERY annoying.

and yet u wanna continue by adding... That makes sense right??..u asking for it to stop but you continue....and typos and spelling errors are all over these boards..i dont have anything to prove to you about my intelligences so why do i care if i accidentially misspelled anything. End of the day it matters not..like i said..the debate/difference was between him and i..you were not talked about..so you should of stay'd out of it..point blanket...dont complain about it, then add to it..

if u aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem....deal with it...

 

[Marvin]

I think Bay is a great action director, but that's all he is.

because he's failed at anything and everything else

yes that's the point...
you people can't look at a director whose decidedly done nothing but comedy and say they not only can they not do anything else...
but that that's all they can do

the guy has made about 6 films that have all been released around the mega tentpole date of mid july

...I don't get it, he's never pretended to do anything else but that, so why is he called the failure at drama and substance?
is it because he does action so well?

Some of the lines in TF were actually cringe worthy, I actually felt embarrassed for them at some points.

that's like being embarrassed for a spoof for lacking substance

And the whole thing about that cute blonde Aussie being more intelligent than every single other person in the whole film was just typical Bay.

actually it was typical cartoon material, u know saturday morning where in the name of equal rights there will be a super smart scientist lady who is pretty...see power rangers spd..

Style over substance. And please don't get me started on the blatent stereotypical marines. A heroic white guy, a crazy bad ass black guy and a religious hispanic guy. I bet that took a while for him to think up.

GI Joe is coming out this year...I wonder if anyone will have the balls to say something like this to that...

But, I did enjoy TF. It was a fun ride, but completely forgettable. I hope the second one isn't.

storywise it is pretty forgettable...just like G1

visual wise, it's the new Jurassic Park

 

[terry78]

I think Bay is a great action director, but that's all he is. Some of the lines in TF were actually cringe worthy, I actually felt embarrassed for them at some points. And the whole thing about that cute blonde Aussie being more intelligent than every single other person in the whole film was just typical Bay. Style over substance. And please don't get me started on the blatent stereotypical marines. A heroic white guy, a crazy bad ass black guy and a religious hispanic guy. I bet that took a while for him to think up.

But, I did enjoy TF. It was a fun ride, but completely forgettable. I hope the second one isn't.

Well, it is required by law for every hispanic character in movies to utter the phrase dios mio while crossing their heart at least once.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

so why is he called the failure at drama and substance?
is it because he does action so well?

No its because he's tried to add "drama and substance" to some of those action films and hasnt always done a great job at it.

Armageddon,The Island,Perl Haber are all lacking in those departments.

GI Joe is coming out this year...I wonder if anyone will have the balls to say something like this to that...

I would....then again I'm not a GI Joe fan.

visual wise, it's the new Jurassic Park

I wouldnt go that far.

 

[LightningFlash]

if u aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem....deal with it...

And knowing is half the battle.


G.I. JOE!!!!!!!!!



...


I'm just making fun of you now..by the way.

 

[Marvin]

No its because he's tried to add "drama and substance" to some of those action films and hasnt always done a great job at it.

Armageddon,The Island,Perl Haber are all lacking in those departments.

Armageddon was never intended to be anything but fun, to do anything else with that script would have been a big mistake
(and astroid is coming and they send drillers...bay is such an idiot for not giving that the full apollo thirteen treatment...(not)

it's summer camp drama, intended to read but not actually move

pearl harbor was a bad idea on a scriptual level, it worked for Titanic but that love story didn't take place during a war...
in fact I'm drawing a blank as to the last time someone successfully mixed a love and war film
(the love story sucked either way)

the island actually raises alot of deep questions and is full of substance, for it's as easy as filming a script that asks questions about the human condition and the value of life, to get credit for substance as a director

I would....then again I'm not a GI Joe fan.

you'd be wrong for doing so

...but i won't stop you

I wouldnt go that far.

I would
JP came out and people had never seen CGI applied like that, with that realism...it was half the reason to go

same thing with TF
the reviews at least give the film credit on that end

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Armageddon was never intended to be anything but fun,

Which is irrelevant to my point.

Bay tried to add a "tear jerker" and a "teen love story" to that film, not to mention the love for a father and his child and tried to make them a center peace of the film....

And he failed.

to do anything else with that script would have been a big mistake

Which proves my point.

Thanks

(and astroid is coming and they send drillers...bay is such an idiot for not giving that the full apollo thirteen treatment...(not)

He would have failed if he tried that too.

it's summer camp drama, intended to read but not actually move

Agreed....and he and the movie failed because he tried to "move" people with the plight of the characters.

The father that cared to much for his daughter, the NASA administrator who always wanted to be the pilot, The true love that may never be, the other father who never knew his son,

All of these concept and characterizations were an attempt to "move" the viewer, to make the viewer identify with the characters and they all failed.

About the only part that rang true was how the Government almost messed everything up.

pearl harbor was a bad idea on a scriptual level, it worked for Titanic but that love story didn't take place during a war...

True enough and I dont know if many other directors could have made a better film useing that script but the concept of love and war may be out dated but its not a failed concept.

At the very least an other director may have called for a re-wrire and we may have gotten a better film.

in fact I'm drawing a blank as to the last time someone successfully mixed a love and war film
(the love story sucked either way)

Gone with the Wind (1939) It was nominated for thirteen Academy Awards and won eight including Best Picture, Best Actress (Vivian Leigh), and Best Screenplay (Sidney Howard).Not to mention it featured two of the most memorable characters in movie history. Casablanca (1942) The film won three Academy Awards including Best Picture.

The Best Years of our lives (1946) won seven Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Director (William Wyler), and Best Screenplay (Robert Sherwood)
From Here to Eternity (1953)Won eight Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Director (Fred Zinnemann) and Supporting Oscars for Frank Sinatra and Donna Reed
Dr. Zhivago (1965) Won five Oscars including Best Screenplay and Best Music.

And More recently The English Patient (1996)Winner of nine Academy Awards including Best Picture

None are exactly my kind of films thou

the island actually raises alot of deep questions and is full of substance, for it's as easy as filming a script that asks questions about the human condition and the value of life, to get credit for substance as a director

The script may have raised questions about the human condition and had substance but the directors job is to make that ring true on film....to make it seem real to the view threw the preformance of the actors.

And Bay failed in that sence.He was more concerned with the action and product placement then he was in creating an atmosphere of realizem and the effect of that world on the characters, and in retrospect, our possible futures.

and "The Island" failed in that department where other films like "Logan's Run" and "Fahrenheit 451" [ which shared the concept theme] did not fail.

Even the film that "The Island" stole its premise from did a far better job at being thought provoking....""Parts: The Clonus Horror".

Children of Men also did a great job of showing the plight of the human condition if things dont change.

Even the 5 Planet of the Apes did a far better job of conveying the general idea that "look at what our society has created".

There were even a few Twilight Zone and Outer limit's episodes that did a far better job with the general concept in question then Bay did.

The Island just doesn't measure up.....at least not in my opinion.

you'd be wrong for doing so

...but i won't stop you

We'll see....after the movie is released.

I would
JP came out and people had never seen CGI applied like that, with that realism...it was half the reason to go

Correct there.

same thing with TF

And thats where I wouldnt go as far in saying.

To begin with the robot designs were lacking in the same areas that the Dino designs fulfilled.[BTW this was also Bays fault]

You looked at the Dino's in J.Park and felt that you may have just seen what they really looked like.On the other hand, Bay took a lot of creative chances with the designs he chose and truth be told it hurt the way some of the characters were viewed [no pun intended]

You really didnt walk out of the TF film an say.... "boy the TF's looked like I always imagined they would look".

Besides that there were a lot of visual flaws in TF that just werent as apparent in JP.

Even the "Bumblebee "leaking" on the agent scene had an apparent flaw.

When Bumble bee let his cap hit the agent in the head the agent rubbed the wrong part of his head afterward.

I can name a few more visual flaws but I dont want to make this a CGI debate.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

because he's failed at anything and everything else

yes that's the point...
you people can't look at a director whose decidedly done nothing but comedy and say they not only can they not do anything else...
but that that's all they can do

the guy has made about 6 films that have all been released around the mega tentpole date of mid july

...I don't get it, he's never pretended to do anything else but that, so why is he called the failure at drama and substance?
is it because he does action so well?

I didn't call him a failure of drama, i simply said he is a good action director, nothing more. So he shouldn't pretend to be more than that. All his films are the same "Woohoo go America!!! We are so awesome!! We are the ones who will save the world!! bad ass!!! woohoo!!"

After a while, that does get quite annoying you know?

that's like being embarrassed for a spoof for lacking substance

But this isn't supposed to be a spoof is it? It's supposed to be a fun action flick yea, but the lines shouldn't be soooo bad that it makes me cringe and feel embarrassed for the actor.

actually it was typical cartoon material, u know saturday morning where in the name of equal rights there will be a super smart scientist lady who is pretty...see power rangers spd..

I fail to see how bringing frickin Power Rangers into this can be used as a defense

GI Joe is coming out this year...I wonder if anyone will have the balls to say something like this to that...

I'm not too familier with G.I Joe but I know the characters in that have interesting and non stereotypical traits. I've seen too many bad ass black soldiers and stereotypically religious hispanic soldiers or people to last me a life time thanks.

storywise it is pretty forgettable...just like G1

Errr what's G1?

visual wise, it's the new Jurassic Park

Errrr... no mate, it is not.