CFlash
Sidekick
- Joined
- May 16, 2006
- Messages
- 3,583
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Orion Pax said:Isn't that all that matters? Yet so many put so much emphasis on how they look. The character is what is important. Batman never wore a rubber suit that was somehow bulletproof in the comics, yet I believe you said you loved Tim Burton's Batman. It was the character that came through the rubber suit that mattered. Sure, you can argue about BumbleBee's height but Michael Keaton was not Batman's height either. I'm confused and I just want to understand.
I think what will make this movie a success (if it will be a success) in the end is the characters that are within the bots. I mean, in the end, isn't that what we love about the bots in the cartoon? It's not that BumbleBee had the split hood of a VW bug for feet. It's his personality and his relationship with Spike and other humans.
I can understand logic like this to a point. And I agree to a point. I guess it's a matter of what is "iconic." Sure Batman didn't wear a bulletproof rubber suit... but Burton made sure all the "visually iconic" elements of the character were spot-on. I think they did the same with Optimus. But, big Bumblebee with big-ass cannon for an arm??? Not so much.
Also, the height example you bring up is a ******ed argument when involving cameras and human actors. Dicaprio, and Tom Cruise never look as short in film as they are in real life. And they're chosen for their acting abilities. The problem with Bumblebee in the movie is that he is PURPOSELY and on-paper SPECS tall (much taller than Jazz for instance). That's wrong.
P.S. I couldn't care less that Bumblebee is not a VW. I just don't personally think he should be a HOT-ROD or a giant. Simple as that.