Optimist Prime: Discussion thread for those looking forward to the movie

[Frank Noir]

still when it comes to budget, i am amazed how LotR cost only 90 mil per movie. i mean those movies were huge with ,any cg shots, cg characters and mega battlescenes. sure they saved money by filming back to back but all 3 movies cost 300 mil. that's only 50 mil less than sm3.

Maybe WETA is cheaper than ILM?

And what is sick is that Bay is telling us that all these shots are just "teaser" shots...the money shots are yet to be shown.

If he is telling the truth, i'm going to have to see this movie 6-7 times to catch it all..!

I'm just giddy about seeing some of those decipticons tear ***** up. Bonecrusher and Blackout just look tough as all get out. And amazingly enough, starscream is doing some of the coolest stuff i've ever seen in film...i really think he is going to win alot of people over.

I read that too (it made me even more hyped than I already am). He also said this is one of the few trailers that doesn't show the biggest scenes in the movie. I agree on Bonecrusher and Blackout. They're already my favorites.

 

[GhostPoet]

Let's look at what I typed back then.

"Spidey will underwhelm. Pirates will perform moderately. Shreck will flop."

Spidey did underwhelm. 60% drop second weekend, doesn't look like it'll match or surpass even the second film's totall. so I don't see how that was off. We'll have to wait and see if it continues to hold that openning weekend record though. Sure that was impressive, but it's not insurmountable.

Pirates has recently gotten a few lukewarm reviews in at aicn. Not too bad. Just as I said. I think it'll get moderate reception... it'll do ok, but not ridiculously great like the last movie.

Shrek's just, I don't know what to think of it. It's not that popular anymore so I kinda exaggerrated when I said it'd flop, but I don't think it'll blow us away that's for sure. IF it does, then woopty doo. Who cares about shrek anyway?

hehe nice try...
Spidey 2 had roughly the same drop the second week. But it did INCREDIBLE on it's first week. Infact, it blew away Spiderman 1 and 2.

Shrek 3 actually blew away Shrek 2's opening, by farrrrr.

I think you're getting your info from a particular one of your body parts...you should probably stop trusting it as a reliable source.

 

[The Kid]

Like I said, I could care less about shrek. He's a silly cartoon used to sell happy meals. Big deal. He'll be forgotten by the time Jack's swinging through theaters.

I'm not sure what you were trying to say about spider-man's performance.

 

[Tempest19]

Really love the goo goo dolls song and the IPod and 360 Transformers (which have been confirmed)... I'll definitely look at my 360 with a brand new light while playing the Transformers game after seeing the film.

 

[TNC9852002]

I've been interested in this movie even before all of the photos and trailers. The trailers look good, but that only heightens my excitement factor. My anticipation for the movie hasn't changed that much, though...

-TNC

 

[shigsy2003]

While I am anticipating this film, my feelings to vary dramatically. I can see a clip or a photo and get really exctited and then a few weeks later I can find something out or see another clip and it disappoint me hugely.

July 27th will have to delivers something special for me to enjoy this film the way I want to.

 

[The Kid]

Better to go in thinking it'll be crap, so you'll be pleasantly surprised, I say.

 

[matrix_ghost]

i wondered the same thing. there are quite a few cg shots, but it wasn't that spectacular. probably the filming in new york is quite expensive.
still when it comes to budget, i am amazed how LotR cost only 90 mil per movie. i mean those movies were huge with ,any cg shots, cg characters and mega battlescenes. sure they saved money by filming back to back but all 3 movies cost 300 mil. that's only 50 mil less than sm3.

Maybe WETA is cheaper than ILM?

Nope. When you compare LOTR to Spiderman 3 , there is a major difference in terms of the VFX.
Spiderman 3 featured alot of CG humans visual effects. Look at the scene where Harry and Peter duke it out. Sure it has some live action shots of TObey but the fight is mostly with Tobey and Franco without masks. They're faces are seen. CG humans are incredibly difficult to animate . You can relate easier to a non-human look VFX then a human looking VFX.
That's the difference between LOTR and Spiderman. LOTR featured many ashots of the massive characters in action , you know orcs and horses and the nazgul. It's easier to see realism. Not only that but when the camera goes in for a close up of a orc , it's no CG character there. It's all make up.
With Spiderman the camera goes full towards the CG characters ( Sandman birth , CG TObey , CG Franco , Venom) meaning you need a better detailed animation.
Those things cost money. It's much more difficult to create CG human then a CG orc.
In the end it depends on what kind of VFX you're looking at. Some things are relatively easy and therefore cheaper to make whereas other things are more difficult and therefore EXPENSIVE to make.

Secondly , time plays an important role. What was a big advantage with LOTR is the fact that they worked for a long time in creating these VFX compared to SPiderman's relative short period. In comparison , Return Of The King essentially had 3 years of work done on it ( if you count all the early VFX work done with FOTR and TTT with the culumination in ROTK).
Massive was developed long before FOTR.
With Spiderman 3 they had to start fresh in developing software to create Sandman . They had a shorter schedule to deliver these VFX.

FInally as for whether WETA is cheaper then ILM :
Remember that WETA belongs to Peter Jackson and ILM belongs to Lucas. Of course WETA animators will bust their ass off for Peter Jackson. Do you honestly think that they would show the same love and dedication to another director ?
Same with ILM. The guys at ILM know that Lucas and Spielberg are best of buds and they will give everything for that too.

 

[Naite22]

I'll just ask in this thread, cause I surdently dont wanna get flamed for making a thread about a single question!

WHEN do we hear something about the original movie-soundtrack....!!!! I've tried looking for it, but I can't find anything! This is one of those movie's where I'm EXSTREMELY eager to hear the soundtrack!

 

[Golgo-13]

Artist soundtrack or score? I'm only interested in the score myself.....

 

[Naite22]

^The SCORE!...... when do we hear something about it??? anyone?????

 

[kzupin]

FInally as for whether WETA is cheaper then ILM :
Remember that WETA belongs to Peter Jackson and ILM belongs to Lucas. Of course WETA animators will bust their ass off for Peter Jackson. Do you honestly think that they would show the same love and dedication to another director ?
Same with ILM. The guys at ILM know that Lucas and Spielberg are best of buds and they will give everything for that too.

Are you really serious? You think that just because its Peter Jackson or Lucas or Spielberg that there not going to do there best work they can? That is just stupied, there going to do the best work they can so they can use what they've learned later.

 

[XXTBWCXX]

With everything I've seen and even reading the script, I'm excited for the movie...those fanboys didn't like the movie just because of the leaked script, but to me, it was a great script...it has a build-up for the TF's, and that's a good thing.

 

[AyeCapn]

With everything I've seen and even reading the script, I'm excited for the movie...those fanboys didn't like the movie just because of the leaked script, but to me, it was a great script...it has a build-up for the TF's, and that's a good thing.

XXthe reason some people make millions of their movies is they see things in the script we can;t visualize. If we could we'd be making millions instead. I trust Bay to imagine some pretty impressive stuff, and the ILM folks to bring it to lifeXX

 

[gimmen64]

Artist soundtrack or score? I'm only interested in the score myself.....

Yeah, hopefully its dramatic and epic. I have to say that a soundtrack similar to 300 would be great!

 

[XXTBWCXX]

XXthe reason some people make millions of their movies is they see things in the script we can;t visualize. If we could we'd be making millions instead. I trust Bay to imagine some pretty impressive stuff, and the ILM folks to bring it to lifeXX

Ahh, thank you for using my XX's for your pleasure.

 

[Tempest19]

XXthe reason some people make millions of their movies is they see things in the script we can;t visualize. If we could we'd be making millions instead. I trust Bay to imagine some pretty impressive stuff, and the ILM folks to bring it to lifeXX

Speak for yourself dude. I can visualize and I knew it would be great. That's one of the reasons I pick up official film novelizations or read the screenplays before I see the film- so that I can see my vision of the film in my head, how I would bring the script to life and then compare that with what the actual film maker does. Sometimes there's similar visions, othertimes there's a difference in visualization. But, I visualize.

 

[cryptic name]

XXthe reason some people make millions of their movies is they see things in the script we can;t visualize. If we could we'd be making millions instead. I trust Bay to imagine some pretty impressive stuff, and the ILM folks to bring it to lifeXX

i really disagree with this. the parts of the script that are criticized most are not parts that need a directors eye to interprit. it's problems with story, dialogue, and lame departures from the source material. and i know that i for one can get a vision of almost every script i read about how i would do things, so not being able to visualize has nothing to do with disliking the script.

 

[AyeCapn]

Ahh, thank you for using my XX's for your pleasure.

XXI'm here for you, buddayXX

 

[AyeCapn]

i really disagree with this. the parts of the script that are criticized most are not parts that need a directors eye to interprit. it's problems with story, dialogue, and lame departures from the source material. and i know that i for one can get a vision of almost every script i read about how i would do things, so not being able to visualize has nothing to do with disliking the script.

If that were the case, They would have stuck with comics or novels. Film is a VISUAL medium. Yes story, plot, and characterization override gloss, but it is the challenge to make those things palatable to our eyesight. It connects our eyes to our emotions and that triggers the response.

If we didn;t want to SEE the movie, and SEE the bots we wouldn't be here. If you can visualize these things yourself to your own satisfaction, what need ahve you for film?

 

[AyeCapn]

Speak for yourself dude. I can visualize and I knew it would be great. That's one of the reasons I pick up official film novelizations or read the screenplays before I see the film- so that I can see my vision of the film in my head, how I would bring the script to life and then compare that with what the actual film maker does. Sometimes there's similar visions, othertimes there's a difference in visualization. But, I visualize.

I do those things for the same reason. What I meant was that our internal mental visualizations cannot be translated out as well as film directors do. Especially those who are successful financially. There is a small number of peopel who do this genre well. If it were that easy, we'd all be doing it.

The difference between me and some of the haters is that I accept Bay's vision of the script. I will not compare it to my own vision, and say his sucks or mine sucks because of X. I might contrast them, but I will accept his direction as his direction, and enjoy it.

 

[Tempest19]

I'm a writer for a virtual series, write screenplays and direct. Meaning I storyboard, draw up visual sketches to get a look of a character down, etc. So, yeah- I have a "director's eye." I am one and I'm learning to become a better one. The only thing to do now is harness it through experience and learning filming techniques.

So far Bay is going in a different route than I would have and I love the style of it. I would have gone for the more basic and down to earth approach, which I think is hard to describe- you might have a sense of what that means by the whole first introduction to Sam Witwicky scene which I have nailed down to a T in my vision. And everything else VERY elaborate as well. That includes the WHOLE MIS-EN-SCENE and several other aspects as well such as camera angles with diegetic and nondiegetic sound, etc. Just not with the "Bay stamp" on it, his choices of colors and lighting.

 

[AyeCapn]

now you need to find someone who is more technically adept at filmmaking and SFX but has trouble finding the vision themselves. I look forward to seeing the finished product.

Now get on it

 

[Tempest19]

Problem is, don't have the money mate and need to finish film school for technicality and experience handling a crew.

Having a CLEAR VISION- mise-en-scene, with sounds and camera angles is one thing...

Bringing it to life is another.

As said, I have a "director's eye" a living breathing movie with camera angles, sound and composition- I had to develop that skill through writing for the majority of my life (only 19). If you don't have an "eye", in my opinion, you can't really be that good a writer (television and film wise).

But, right now I can get a talented artist under my control to draw a VERY detailed storyboard. Lol.

And the projects I have worked on have always stayed remarkably true to those storyboards.

And by the way, don't know if you saw- but, I actually really like the script and though Bay approached it differently- it's still brilliant. And I firmly believe they picked the right guy- go watch any of his films with chase sequences, imagine those transforming mid-chase and you've got your first official peek at the Transformers. He's got the eye for something not many directors have- CARS. His car shots in his films are BRILLIANT! I just watched 'The Island' again yesterday and seriously thought in my mind of watching a Transforms film and got a quick Transformgasm. Trust me, if he stays true to his style- we're in for a wild ride with those sequences.

 

[cryptic name]

If that were the case, They would have stuck with comics or novels. Film is a VISUAL medium. Yes story, plot, and characterization override gloss, but it is the challenge to make those things palatable to our eyesight. It connects our eyes to our emotions and that triggers the response.

If we didn;t want to SEE the movie, and SEE the bots we wouldn't be here. If you can visualize these things yourself to your own satisfaction, what need ahve you for film?

you said the reason the script is disliked is that many people can't visualize what it could be when translated to screen. i disagreed with you, believe it or not a movie can be amazing looking and not be a good film. And my point of vissualization meant that i could see how great the visuals were when i read the script, but that alone was not enough to make me like the script.