Dark of the Moon Michael Bay has killed Transformers for me

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ratchet and some one said it was pure energy that can be transformed

Regardless of what may have been said, the evidence of what was seen proves otherwise.

Ok, maybe not "full" of holes. But it was an 80's toon designed to sell toys. I'm a child/fan of the 80's as much as anybody, but I have to be realistic about it.

So do I, which is why I always make a point to address this issue when others bring it up.

Some of the big contradictions that most fans speak about are really "presentational" and do not really cause any contradiction.

Hint Constructicons.
 
One can argue that some of the personalities of the Transformers are changed... like Optimus at the backyard, Bumblebee peeing and stuff. Really degrading
 
I agree with Soundwave's voice, shouldnt have been closer to G1. But I was more frustrated with the fact that he barely did anything in the movie

what a strange way of putting things.
 
One can argue that some of the personalities of the Transformers are changed... like Optimus at the backyard, Bumblebee peeing and stuff. Really degrading

Bumble bee really had no personality other then being Sam's friend and the "little guy"

nothign Optimus did in the back yard was that out of character for me

Regardless of what may have been said, the evidence of what was seen proves otherwise.



.
It was shown to be energy thogh, with all the runoff it gave when ever it was jostled to hard, and when sam shoved it in Megatrons chest
 
One can argue that some of the personalities of the Transformers are changed... like Optimus at the backyard, Bumblebee peeing and stuff. Really degrading

This isint G1, you really cant expect the characters personalities to match up.
It was shown to be energy thogh, with all the runoff it gave when ever it was jostled to hard, and when sam shoved it in Megatrons chest

It was shown to "contain" energy.But it was not "Pure energy".

So your argument doesnt really make much sence.If mass shifting was ok for the cube theres no logical reason it wasnt ok for the cubes creations.
 
It was shown to "contain" energy.But it was not "Pure energy".

So your argument doesnt really make much sence.If mass shifting was ok for the cube theres no logical reason it wasnt ok for the cubes creations.

It was said to be pure energy and then it was transformed into it

these are facts
 
It was said to be pure energy and then it was transformed into it

these are facts

Sorry but your wrong.

It was said to be pure energy, but like I said, the evidence of what was seen proves that wrong.

"Pure energy" means energy with out form or mass or body of any sort.

And thats not what it was.It was the Cube, a physical construct/body or a type.It had form, it had mass.And it contained energy.

It was not pure energy.And it never Trasnsformered into pure energy either.
 
Sorry but your wrong.

It was said to be pure energy, but like I said, the evidence of what was seen proves that wrong.

"Pure energy" means energy with out form or mass or body of any sort.

And thats not what it was.It was the Cube, a physical construct/body or a type.It had form, it had mass.And it contained energy.

It was not pure energy.And it never Trasnsformered into pure energy either.

it did when it was shoved into Megatron's chest, also it was also stated that the cube could transform or be transformed

it was pure energy that Transformed into a physical construct
 
it did when it was shoved into Megatron's chest, also it was also stated that the cube could transform or be transformed

it was pure energy that Transformed into a physical construct

Sorry your wrong again.

It did not "transform"
when it was shoved in Meg's chest.

It ruptured from its container.

And it was never "pure energy".

By definition, "pure energy" has no physical construct, no body, no defined mass.

The Cube was a physical object that contained great energies.Energies that could transform inanimate object to living robots.

But it was never seen to be pure energy.
 
My expectations has dropped with every movie, almost to the point where I may wait for the Bluray/DVD release to see it (probably wont as I love going to a cinema). I don't post much here, nor do I visit other sites like I used to. So many old school posters have vanished much for the same reason, it just doesn't excite them any more. There are those whom enjoy these movies, good for them, it's not really up to others to decide for them to like a movie or not, it's a matter of personal taste. It just bugs me when they try to defend a movie with comments like "but it's based on a cartoon to sell toys", or "it's just a fun popcorn movie, you shouldn't take it so serious". These points are true but is it really an excuse for slack writing? Take Star Trek for example, it didn't make as much money as RotF, and while it may not be based on a cartoon to sell toys but rather an old cheesy scifi series where it cops ridicule from people as being nerdy/geeky or whatever. Abrams managed to reinvent it with style, making it a fun popcorn movie where people that used to go "meh" to Star Trek actually enjoy it. There is no reason why Transformers couldn't have been like this. In the hands of someone else it could have been so much better. Michael Bay is a good director in the way of action scenes, but he sucks with character narratives, and his sense of humour is pretty stupid, if his movies are anything to go by he is a very shallow man. Anyway enough Bay bashing, point is it could have been great, should have been great, but it wasn't, and what we have is what we will remember Transformers in live action. Oh and for those that stand up for Bay and his work, you are what you eat.
 
I watched Star Trek again the other day. I can't get enough of it.
 
This stupid bawwwwwwwing thread should be closed. All I can say to knowsbleed is learn to let go,if you really want to conquer this disappointment,the painful truth is that the key people who made this movie don't owe you a damn thing,it's an oldie statement but you left me no choice but to use it.
 

I too remember you, and knowsbleed, and others. I'm still as psyched about the next movie, as I was for the first one . . . just ask my wife :)

I check SSH, TFW2005, and Seibertron daily, for updates. Don't tell me you won't likely be more hyped, once we start seeing more official stuff . . . trailer, etc?

I guess I'm an optimist, and perhaps em replying in the wrong thread.
 
It's funny, i hear next to nothing in the form of complaints about the vulgarity is these movies from parents, or the media; these movies are still highly considered and marketed towards children.
 
My expectations has dropped with every movie, almost to the point where I may wait for the Bluray/DVD release to see it (probably wont as I love going to a cinema). I don't post much here, nor do I visit other sites like I used to. So many old school posters have vanished much for the same reason, it just doesn't excite them any more. There are those whom enjoy these movies, good for them, it's not really up to others to decide for them to like a movie or not, it's a matter of personal taste. It just bugs me when they try to defend a movie with comments like "but it's based on a cartoon to sell toys", or "it's just a fun popcorn movie, you shouldn't take it so serious". These points are true but is it really an excuse for slack writing? Take Star Trek for example, it didn't make as much money as RotF, and while it may not be based on a cartoon to sell toys but rather an old cheesy scifi series where it cops ridicule from people as being nerdy/geeky or whatever. Abrams managed to reinvent it with style, making it a fun popcorn movie where people that used to go "meh" to Star Trek actually enjoy it. There is no reason why Transformers couldn't have been like this. In the hands of someone else it could have been so much better. Michael Bay is a good director in the way of action scenes, but he sucks with character narratives, and his sense of humour is pretty stupid, if his movies are anything to go by he is a very shallow man. Anyway enough Bay bashing, point is it could have been great, should have been great, but it wasn't, and what we have is what we will remember Transformers in live action. Oh and for those that stand up for Bay and his work, you are what you eat.

Your words... they are music to my ears. You are probably the voice of reason I once used to be. I'm glad you're still here Avan.

This stupid bawwwwwwwing thread should be closed. All I can say to knowsbleed is learn to let go,if you really want to conquer this disappointment,the painful truth is that the key people who made this movie don't owe you a damn thing,it's an oldie statement but you left me no choice but to use it.

I never said anybody owed me anything. My point was, as a result of these movies... my interest in a once lifelong passion has waned. So no, this thread doesn't need to be closed... it just needs good discussion.

I too remember you, and knowsbleed, and others. I'm still as psyched about the next movie, as I was for the first one . . . just ask my wife :)

I check SSH, TFW2005, and Seibertron daily, for updates. Don't tell me you won't likely be more hyped, once we start seeing more official stuff . . . trailer, etc?

I guess I'm an optimist, and perhaps em replying in the wrong thread.

Good to see you too *D*E*... I still remember that awesome avatar you made me back in the day. While I admire your devotion for Transformers... I still can't rally for anything Bay related.
 
^ Just the Bay TF movies or all of his movies? Because 'The Rock' is awesome.
 
Last edited:
Just his Tranformers movies. I think as long as Bay isn't touching adaptations, he's fine with his style of moviemaking... but Pearl Harbor was absolute garbage.
 
Fair enough. The attack sequence was good, but I only really watched it for Kate Beckinsale. :woot:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"