Dark of the Moon Michael Bay has killed Transformers for me

[Marvin]

There is just no comparison other than ticket sales batman is a serious crime drama and transformers is a bubblegum ass scratch. Transformers did not have to be a bubble gum flick about giant robots taking leaks or having ballsacs to bring in the mass audiences. You put in someone like James Cameron at the helm and the cheese, school boy humor, and oversexed dialogue and situations would not be there and the people would have still gone to see it by the masses. If making a movie that dumb is the only way to make people see a movie, then a movie like Batman would not have done as well as it did either. Dont credit the success of transformers to its weaknessesand dont mistake lighthearted-ness for jokes about parents on marijuana on a movie about giant robots.

Of course Im not part of the mass audience this was aimed at. That doesnt mean I cant appreciate a movie for its real qualities of which transformers has some but lacks many.

I see what your saying, but I think it's part of a growing mentality that wants hollywood to cater to it's needs and discard the tastes of the others(masses) sho are equally responsible for it's strong presence and history.

For example, why should the genre of buddy cop action flick exist? Why can't all police films either be of the "quality" of Serpico and or Heat?
Beverly hills cop, Cop out and even bad boys as much as they are enjoyed could all be stripped of thier over the top plots and sensless humor and turned into "better" films that ask all the right questions of virtue ethics and provoke thought.

The problem with that is you are robbing the industry of one of it's forms of entertainment and expression all in the name of a "better" film. It's just not fair. Not everyone likes the type of film and or "direction" you do, it's just that simple. And no amount of huffing and puffing (by critics) can or should change that.

Here in lies the problems with this type of criticism for the Transformers films. They are, when they work, very effective at the type of film they are trying to be. Transformers could be this and this and that but all those things are simply your take on what you want Transformers to be. To say it's better is in my opinion to look down on the views of the masses whom enjoy this direction of the material.

You said that if we were to insert a "cameron" into the directors chair then...well we've already seen that hypothetical, Spielberg(who is arguably better at doing what cameron does in some/many regards) made a film about a family in the middle of an alien invasion with giant robots and no "Fratboy" humor and no one cared. It wasn't unique and only entertained the many who were entertained by the other 15 movies they saw that treated the material with the same "maturity"

The funny thing is as an audience we will enjoy plenty of films about jokes with parents on marijuana or minorities making fun of themselves...it's only when they appear in a genre films by a music video director that they are "dumb" and the "death of cinema." And genre blending was just starting to get it's legs.

Next we'll be saying that costumed heroes ruined the crime drama.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Transformers is made for it's audience if you don't like it you are not a part of it's audience. Whew that must be a relief, for now you don't have to judge yourself.

I think then, the problem that "Transformers" alreay had an audiance, one which was ignored by the writers and Michel Bay when they made their first film.

 

[marvelman2006]

I think then, the problem that "Transformers" alreay had an audiance, one which was ignored by the writers and Michel Bay when they made their first film.

I remember on the bluray extras of the first movie that bay admitted when he was sitting with hasbro getting his "transformers knowledge" he said he was looking at the toys and thought how cool it would be for the action scenes. sadly while he was day dreaming he missed the actually character knowledge. I know he hit the basics like what the 2 brewing factions were and there leaders but beyond that it was all filler.

 

[roach]

i am a child of the 80's...Optimus Prime and Duke pretty much raised me...i am able to separate the cartoon and the movies. I can enjoy both. I dont understand why other people cant.We are three movies into the Bay series and people are still complaining about how its not like the cartoon.

 

[Marvin]

I think then, the problem that "Transformers" alreay had an audiance, one which was ignored by the writers and Michel Bay when they made their first film.

three things about that.

1. The audience is and always has been 14 year olds and such, not fans who take to the forums to argue where all the depth has gone.

2. Just as beast wars wasn't the same audience as G1, Transformers is it's own entitity that pull from all incarnations but mailny G1, the fact that skopinok showed up renders all reqeusts for g1 continuity inert...except to the fans i mentioned earlier.

3. If what worked in the 80's worked today, transformers would be just as popular and without the presence of the bay films. Even Star Trek had to piss of purists of the more muted and philosophical story telling in order to make money in todays world.

The idea of the fans needs to be defined.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

three things about that.

1. The audience is and always has been 14 year olds and such, not fans who take to the forums to argue where all the depth has gone.

This is not accurate.Your confusing Hasbro's target audience with the group they actually reached.

I am a fan from the G1 era, I was 13 when they were first were released but I was a fan till G1 dropped from popularity at the age of 17/18.

And most of the guys I grew up with that were also fans are in the same age group.

Further more, we were all greater fans of the comic, which was the first fiction BTW, and full of depth.

And we are the group that became the fans that take forums to argue where all the depth has gone.

2. Just as beast wars wasn't the same audience as G1, Transformers is it's own entitity that pull from all incarnations but mailny G1, the fact that skopinok showed up renders all reqeusts for g1 continuity inert...except to the fans i mentioned earlier.

A] I'm not referring to G1 continuity.
B] G1 had a Scopinox as well so your point is lost

3. If what worked in the 80's worked today, transformers would be just as popular and without the presence of the bay films. Even Star Trek had to piss of purists of the more muted and philosophical story telling in order to make money in todays world.

No one is suggesting a mirror of the 80's.

Trek did not "need" to piss off its fan base to make money, it was just far easier to do so.

 

[marvelman2006]

i am a child of the 80's...Optimus Prime and Duke pretty much raised me...i am able to separate the cartoon and the movies. I can enjoy both. I dont understand why other people cant.We are three movies into the Bay series and people are still complaining about how its not like the cartoon.

I can seperate them both too but my main problem with the films and with bays movies in general is the excessive use of gay/pot jokes. It just feels out of place when you spend 15 minutes on a mom getting high at a college and another scene where a guy has his pants down in the bathroom with a man under him. I know these are kids movies that arent to be taking seriously but I want to see robots fighting each other with something at stake the whole movie, not dogs humping/ dick jokes/ gay jokes/ racial over tones/ government bashing/ overkill of human scenes.

Also on a side note is it me or does bay cut too quick in his movies, like sometimes the scenes dont add up and the timing is off? case in point mikaela getting on a plane and landing and getting to sams dorm 5 minutes after he was just on the phone with her.

 

[Marvin]

This is not accurate.Your confusing Hasbro's target audience with the group they actually reached.

call it what you will but yes, the audience that gave that merchandiser the profit, means, and resources to to make a movie a movie that would allow them to replicate their success...the kids.

I am a fan from the G1 era, I was 13 when they were first were released but I was a fan till G1 dropped from popularity at the age of 17/18.

And most of the guys I grew up with that were also fans are in the same age group.

it's nice that you stuck with it, but sticking with something is hardly evidence of an immidiate target audience. I'm sure some 18 year old keep their barbies around but barbies aren't made for college girls.

Further more, we were all greater fans of the comic, which was the first fiction BTW, and full of depth.
And we are the group that became the fans that take forums to argue where all the depth has gone.

More prove that you are all a few decades too late. The depth that is constantly alluded to and mis "missing from the new films" was long gone before any cartoon was concieved. (same as tmnt)

A] I'm not referring to G1 continuity.

good

B] G1 had a Scopinox as well so your point is lost

well considering beast wars is in g1 continuity I should have seen that coming, however the lack of any sort of ark (so far) among other things serves that point that this is a continuity all it's own.

just as the new batman films just as organic web shooters, time traveling romulans...etc

No one is suggesting a mirror of the 80's.

you'd be surprised.

Trek did not "need" to piss off its fan base to make money, it was just far easier to do so.

Sorry but another startrek film in the vain of the many that have been made in recent memory or even distant just wouldn't have interested the mainstream audience. My opinion.
I'm a big next gen fan and i've given up on trying to get my more casual friends to watch any of that stuff...low and behold they're the ones dragging me to see the new one.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

call it what you will but yes, the audience that gave that merchandiser the profit, means, and resources to to make a movie a movie that would allow them to replicate their success...the kids.

I call it how I see it.

You were wrong in saying the audience was and always will be 14 year old kids.

14 year olds may be what Hasbro targeted but they got much more.

More prove that you are all a few decades too late. The depth that is constantly alluded to and mis "missing from the new films" was long gone before any cartoon was concieved. (same as tmnt)

I dont agree.

Beast Wars, Beast Machines, Dreamwave's G1, the many IDW books being released today are chuck full of in depth stories and character profiles.

The "depth" alluded to is still part of the current books.

well considering beast wars is in g1 continuity I should have seen that coming,

Thats not what I'm refering too.

There was a Scorponok [spelling?] in the G1 series of the 80's.
http://www.tfu.info/1987/Decepticon/Scorponok/scorponok.htm

however the lack of any sort of ark (so far) among other things serves that point that this is a continuity all it's own.

That was never in question.

Why bring it up?

Sorry but another startrek film in the vain of the many that have been made in recent memory or even distant just wouldn't have interested the mainstream audience. My opinion.

First Contact proves that wrong.

A Trek film could have been made, that stuck to whats been done, and still appeal to a mainstream audience.

Easy, no but it could have been done.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

i am a child of the 80's...Optimus Prime and Duke pretty much raised me...i am able to separate the cartoon and the movies. I can enjoy both. I dont understand why other people cant.We are three movies into the Bay series and people are still complaining about how its not like the cartoon.

I still don't see how people don't understand why G1 fans want to see G1 represented. G1 is what made us fans in the first place. We've been waiting our whole live to see a live action TF movie only to see most of the mythos distorted for arbitrary reasons. If you're going to alter the G1 universe at least do it to serve the story and characters, not just to put your ugly stamp on it.

Why even call the movie Transformers, why not "Generic Giant Robot Fights" with brand new characters and story? That way you don't even have to worry about closeness to something established. But no they want it both ways. They want to exploit the popularity of the G1 universe while totally destroying the enduring characters and mythos.

 

[Marvin]

I call it how I see it.

You were wrong in saying the audience was and always will be 14 year old kids.
14 year olds may be what Hasbro targeted but they got much more.
I dont agree.

Just like the new films have an audience that is expansive beyond the target, I suppose you're right.

Beast Wars, Beast Machines, Dreamwave's G1, the many IDW books being released today are chuck full of in depth stories and character profiles.

The "depth" alluded to is still part of the current books.

I'm sure you can find "depth" in the subsequent incarnations here and there, but the G1 animated series that gave this line it's initial popularity is what I'm referring to when i say the "depth" was "bay'd" long before bay showed up.

and before anyone says that the cartoon had "depth," I'd just like to point out that the films have "depth" as well.

Why bring it up?

cause people claim that the films needs to follow some sort of established continuity in order to be "good".

First Contact proves that wrong.

A Trek film could have been made, that stuck to whats been done, and still appeal to a mainstream audience.

Easy, no but it could have been done.

I've thought about that, but I honestly don't think First Contact had the pop culture relevance that this new one does. It could be argued that if Abrams and CO were to have produced the First contact script then it would have been a big hit but I have my doubts.

It just seems like that crew and those uniforms and that whole culture was what was holding the property back. I honestly feel like the only reason my friends and other like this new one is because they feel it's almost their own.
As far as the philosophy and pacing, that's a toss up, it really depends on the story. If inception could do it than why not.

 

[Marvin]

I still don't see how people don't understand why G1 fans want to see G1 represented. G1 is what made us fans in the first place. We've been waiting our whole live to see a live action TF movie only to see most of the mythos distorted for arbitrary reasons. If you're going to alter the G1 universe at least do it to serve the story and characters, not just to put your ugly stamp on it.

Why even call the movie Transformers, why not "Generic Giant Robot Fights" with brand new characters and story? That way you don't even have to worry about closeness to something established. But no they want it both ways. They want to exploit the popularity of the G1 universe while totally destroying the enduring characters and mythos.

Probably because there are some fans that can appreciate a loose interpretation and adaptation of a property they have ties to.

but then again we live in an age in which Heimdall the "white" is being played by a black actor...
at least he's a Brit.

-define totally destroying.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Probably because there are some fans that can appreciate a loose interpretation and adaptation of a property they have ties to.

but then again we live in an age in which Heimdall the "white" is being played by a black actor...
at least he's a Brit.

-define totally destroying.

Heimdall being black is like Ironhide being black, oh wait, no one complained about Ironhide's color.

I doubt Asgardians in the Thor movie are going to fart/piss/hump while others look like giant chickens or have giant testicles.

Totally destroying = FUBARing the iconic design and personality of every character not named Optimus while replacing the more interesting aspects of the mythos with potty humor and other weak elements.

 

[roach]

I still don't see how people don't understand why G1 fans want to see G1 represented. G1 is what made us fans in the first place. We've been waiting our whole live to see a live action TF movie only to see most of the mythos distorted for arbitrary reasons. If you're going to alter the G1 universe at least do it to serve the story and characters, not just to put your ugly stamp on it.

Why even call the movie Transformers, why not "Generic Giant Robot Fights" with brand new characters and story? That way you don't even have to worry about closeness to something established. But no they want it both ways. They want to exploit the popularity of the G1 universe while totally destroying the enduring characters and mythos.

when did they say this was gonna be G1???
The movies are just another interpretation...just like GI Joe Renegades and GI Joe Resolute are interpretations of the 80's cartoon.
This is Michael Bay's interpretation...signed off by Hasbro.
Seriously like I said before...we are three movies into the series and you are still complaining that it's not a carbon copy of the cartoon.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

when did they say this was gonna be G1???
The movies are just another interpretation...just like GI Joe Renegades and GI Joe Resolute are interpretations of the 80's cartoon.
This is Michael Bay's interpretation...signed off by Hasbro.
Seriously like I said before...we are three movies into the series and you are still complaining that it's not a carbon copy of the cartoon.

It's an interpretation based on G1 just like every interpretation is based on G1. But cartoons need new interpretations because there's already a G1 cartoon series but there's never been a live action movie that is purely that is G1.

It's like doing a new interpretation of LOTR or Harry Potter as films when the original books were never properly adapted.

Fans are always going to want to see a genuine G1 movie not just a cheap knock off. I don't blame them. There's alot of cool elements to the G1 universe that have not been explored.

 

[Ipodman]

But then again... you can't TOTALLY 100% adapt everything from the G1 cartoon into live action... well, I don't think any book / cartoon has had that treatment. Even LOTR had some major characters cut out.

 

[roach]

LOTR and Harry Potter are different. The movies are based on books...and even these added and subtracted to the stories based on what the director saw fit (Tom Bombadil for instance).
There will never be a "genuine" G1 movie. No director in hollywood is just gonna copy a cartoon and call it their own. Every director changes something to a property. Raimi did it on Spider-man, Singer did it on X-men, Nolan did it on Batman.

 

[roach]

But then again... you can't TOTALLY 100% adapt everything from the G1 cartoon into live action... well, I don't think any book / cartoon has had that treatment. Even LOTR had some major characters cut out.

...like Tom Bombadil

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

But then again... you can't TOTALLY 100% adapt everything from the G1 cartoon into live action... well, I don't think any book / cartoon has had that treatment. Even LOTR had some major characters cut out.

But 90 percent of the LOTR vision is intact same goes for Harry Potter for the most part.

 

[roach]

But 90 percent of the LOTR vision is intact same goes for Harry Potter for the most part.

yes but they are adapting a book...its different.
its the difference in adapting the 80's (the decade) than say the events leading up to the Ronald Regan assassination attempt.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

LOTR and Harry Potter are different. The movies are based on books...and even these added and subtracted to the stories based on what the director saw fit (Tom Bombadil for instance).
There will never be a "genuine" G1 movie. No director in hollywood is just gonna copy a cartoon and call it their own. Every director changes something to a property. Raimi did it on Spider-man, Singer did it on X-men, Nolan did it on Batman.

Raimi and Singer didn't change much. What they did change weren't improvements. Nolan's changes work because because he takes the source seriously and is doing a version that makes Batman as real as possible. He isn't just changing things just to put his own useless stamp on it..

 

[Ipodman]

I actually thought Optimus Prime, Bumblebee, Megatron, Starscream were more in-character in the second movie than the first movie.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

LOTR and Harry Potter are different. The movies are based on books...and even these added and subtracted to the stories based on what the director saw fit (Tom Bombadil for instance).
There will never be a "genuine" G1 movie. No director in hollywood is just gonna copy a cartoon and call it their own. Every director changes something to a property.

Sin City and Sin City are pretty much carbon copies.

But of course making a G1 movie is rather simple. All you need is recognizable designs, personalities, conflicts , history and references. Everyone loves Optimus and outside of some design shifts he is pure G1. Why not do that with the rest of the characters?

 

[Marvin]

Heimdall being black is like Ironhide being black, oh wait, no one complained about Ironhide's color.

problem with that logic is that iron hide is a changeling colourless alien with nothing but interpretation to fuel his design. Oh and he's a car.

Heimdall is, for one, known as the "white god" and for seconds based on Norwegian mythology. An area that to this day may not have even seen a black person t:
the fact of the matter is this, you can't make an african movie based on african mythology and folklore and cast white people in it. I mean sure you can we are a progressive society but rest assured that it is a liberty that is in conflict with source material. Being black myself I find it all kinda silly but making Heimdall black is nothing like making Ironhide black.

I doubt Asgardians in the Thor movie are going to fart/piss/hump while others look like giant chickens or have giant testicles.

I also doubt asgauadians will fart piss and hump but you know what, they aren't based on a hasbro toyline that will make the majority of its money from an audience that might appreciate that.

Transformers on the other hand is...and the proof is in the pudding.
see most of the beast wars series.

and just like the "funny" beast wars series the movies are littered with serious moments to tie it all down.

Totally destroying = FUBARing the iconic design and personality of every character not named Optimus while replacing the more interesting aspects of the mythos with potty humor and other weak elements.

iconic design? haven't there been a dozen interpretations these characters? Ironhide is hardly superman or thor even..

the the important stuff is still present, hardly replaced.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Just like the new films have an audience that is expansive beyond the target, I suppose you're right.

They also had a "built in" audience that was ignored.

I'm sure you can find "depth" in the subsequent incarnations here and there, but the G1 animated series that gave this line it's initial popularity is what I'm referring to when i say the "depth" was "bay'd" long before bay showed up.

and before anyone says that the cartoon had "depth," I'd just like to point out that the films have "depth" as well.

True enough, but your statements seem to indicate that those who complain about the lack of depth" only wanted a straight G1 remake.

Which I dont think is the case.

cause people claim that the films needs to follow some sort of established continuity in order to be "good"

I dont thats the case either.

It seems they just would have rather gotton a connected continuity over what we ended up getting..

I've thought about that, but I honestly don't think First Contact had the pop culture relevance that this new one does. It could be argued that if Abrams and CO were to have produced the First contact script then it would have been a big hit but I have my doubts.

I think thats a tought argument to make.

When released, First Contact, was extremely popular with general audiances.

It just seems like that crew and those uniforms and that whole culture was what was holding the property back. I honestly feel like the only reason my friends and other like this new one is because they feel it's almost their own.

Well, I wasnt necessarily suggesting that they should have stuck with the TNG crew.

They could have gone with members from the crews of DS9,Voyager , a mix mash or even started a new.