Transformers Peter Cullen spills the beans on Prime in Empire interview...

[DOG LIPS]

Didn't Gobots come out first?

 

[Spidey Lover 10]

Didn't Gobots come out first?

were u knot listening?! why does EVERYONE HERE BUT ME have a PROBLEM with this movie?!?!?! I wanna know flat out strait what it is!:heart:

 

[Nathan]

were u knot listening?! why does EVERYONE HERE BUT ME have a PROBLEM with this movie?!?!?! I wanna know flat out strait what it is!:heart:

Problem #1

 

[GhostPoet]

were u knot listening?! why does EVERYONE HERE BUT ME have a PROBLEM with this movie?!?!?! I wanna know flat out strait what it is!:heart:

I don't have any problems with the movie. I like the direction it went.

 

[CFlash]

dude, gobots was a RIP-OFF on transformers! What does THAT have 2 do with A MOVIE THAT'S ENTIRELY DIFFERENT? I don't understand! I'll ask again: WHY DOES EVERYONE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS MOVIE EXCEPT ME?!:heart:

1) Gobot Renegades were often "monsterous" looking... this set them apart from the good guys. But, TF Decepticons looked exactly like the Autobot good guys did- mean stares notwithstanding. In this movie, the Decepticons are "monsters." Just like the Gobot bad guys.

2) The core of the Gobots plot was the quest to find "The Creator" (The Last Engineer) who can create new robots. The core of the TF plot was to find food. Plain and simple-- TF was about finding food to feed themselves (it so happens that they enjoyed the fossil fuels and other resources found on Earth). In this movie, the plot is to find "The Creator"... just like Gobots.

There's a lot more. But, those two are the biggies.

 

[Aeus]

What...What have I created? What have I done?

Please don't argue guys.

 

[Aeus]

But yeah, as Nathan pointed out...Starscream looks pretty ****.

 

[HHHDan]

You really need to watch G1 seasons 1 and 2 again. You are remembering it wrong...

No offense but: I own both seasons on DVD; I don't need to remember them.

 

[AyeCapn]

No offense but: I own both seasons on DVD; I don't need to remember them.

No offense but: when did you last watch them?

 

[gkokujin]

Didn't Gobots come out first?

they did.

Transformers just caught on better...and WERE better.

ask the average fan, I remember EVERY TRANSFORMER i had, but i can't name but maybe 1 or 2 Go-bots i had.

and i have quite a few of them.

However, if he says "Oh snap!" I will see the movie 10 times.

i am ashamed to say i agree...

 

[HHHDan]

... why does EVERYONE HERE BUT ME have a PROBLEM with this movie?!?!?! I wanna know flat out strait what it is!

Top ten reasons why I dread the upcoming TF CGI Movie:

# 10- Frank Welker not cast in movie.

# 9- Nearly half of the robot characters did not exist in the G1 series.

# 8- None of the robot characters look even remotely close to the G1 robots (They didn't need to be carbon copies, but at least similar enough to be recognizable).

# 7- None of the car models are remotely close to the G1 car models; most don't even have the same colors.

# 6- Megatron's fang filed mouth... And his face... And body... And alternate mode... Well: Megatron, period!

# 5- "Battle mode" face protectors (WTF?)

# 4- Robot designs look awkwardly fragile (A simple grenade looks sufficient to destroy their joints); with the exception of Starscream... who looks ridiculously bulky!!

# 3- Flames on Optimus Prime (Even hicks don't paint flames on their vehicles anymore; WAY too tacky!)

# 2- Soundwave not in the movie! That is a HUGE one!! (... And the explanation of them wanting to wait until they can do the character justice is not a good one! They have not done justice to any of the other characters so far: Why then would it be an issue with Soundwave?)

And... The #1 reason why I dread the upcoming TF CGI Movie is:

# 1- Micheal bay has arrogantly shown great disdain for the original material, and fans of it, on multiple occasions (Could you expect someone who hates golf and the Tiger Woods phenomenon to make a good and interesting biographical movie of Tiger's life, for example?) and he is a Heavy on the "action bling-bling"/light on the story line director (I WANT A STORY! Not just a "bang-bang" big freakin' robot battles, zoom-zoom car chases, no substance, cliché summer blockbuster )


Those are MY top reasons (Of the top of my head). Now, I'm sure you won't agree with those, Spidey (Since you seem to have complete blind faith that anything with Transformers writen on it is the best thing since the creation of fire), but you asked "why"; and now you know.
... Remember: If you have the right to believe it's going to be good, others have the right to believe it's going to be bad! We'll see the final verdicts once it is out. Until then: It is all speculation (On both sides)! So: Chill!

 

[gkokujin]

as much as I despise this movie and michael bays rants about us fans,

only two of your arguments have a SOLID leg to stand on.

#1 and #8

 

[HHHDan]

as much as I despise this movie and michael bays rants about us fans,

only two of your arguments have a SOLID leg to stand on.

#1 and #8

t: To each his own! t:

 

[GhostPoet]

But yeah, as Nathan pointed out...Starscream looks pretty ****.

After seeing Starscream transform in mid-flight and land on that bridge....he deffinetly looks like something you don't wanna mess with. He looks awesome.

 

[CFlash]

After seeing Starscream transform in mid-flight and land on that bridge....he deffinetly looks like something you don't wanna mess with. He looks awesome.

He does. That shot and animation looked way cool. Unfortunately, he also looks like a Gobot Orangutan when he finishes Transforming. The CGI looks awesome... but, that there is not Starscream. Not even remotely.

Starscream's not a monkey.

 

[k0uger]

Top ten reasons why I dread the upcoming TF CGI Movie:
<snip>

Basically you are saying you hate the new movie because of Hasbro. Hasbro wanted new characters so they can *gasp* make money selling NEW molds. Beast Wars figures had battle face shields, while the show didn't. I see no difference.

Big deal, it isn't G1.

 

[shigsy2003]

Top ten reasons why I dread the upcoming TF CGI Movie:

# 10- Frank Welker not cast in movie.

Okay as I die hard G1 fan I want to answer these

I agree with this, Welker should have been cast BUT Weaving is a very good non-Welker choice.

# 9- Nearly half of the robot characters did not exist in the G1 series.

True but this isn't a direct G1 film so this doesn't really matter.

# 8- None of the robot characters look even remotely close to the G1 robots (They didn't need to be carbon copies, but at least similar enough to be recognizable).

Again true and the same answer above applies.

# 7- None of the car models are remotely close to the G1 car models; most don't even have the same colors.

See above.

# 6- Megatron's fang filed mouth... And his face... And body... And alternate mode... Well: Megatron, period!

Agreed, Megatron looks terrible.

# 5- "Battle mode" face protectors (WTF?)

This isn't really a problem however Prime's non-battle face looks atrocious.

# 4- Robot designs look awkwardly fragile (A simple grenade looks sufficient to destroy their joints); with the exception of Starscream... who looks ridiculously bulky!!

Agreed. They are not covered enough which also makes them lack personailty and look samey.

# 3- Flames on Optimus Prime (Even hicks don't paint flames on their vehicles anymore; WAY too tacky!)

Okay I guess this is a matter of taste. The flames don't really bother me, but there is no justification for them being there, so what is the point in having them?

# 2- Soundwave not in the movie! That is a HUGE one!! (... And the explanation of them wanting to wait until they can do the character justice is not a good one! They have not done justice to any of the other characters so far: Why then would it be an issue with Soundwave?)

Yeah this does suck. I would much prefer Soundwave than Frenzy.

And... The #1 reason why I dread the upcoming TF CGI Movie is:

# 1- Micheal bay has arrogantly shown great disdain for the original material, and fans of it, on multiple occasions (Could you expect someone who hates golf and the Tiger Woods phenomenon to make a good and interesting biographical movie of Tiger's life, for example?) and he is a Heavy on the "action bling-bling"/light on the story line director (I WANT A STORY! Not just a "bang-bang" big freakin' robot battles, zoom-zoom car chases, no substance, cliché summer blockbuster )

Again I agree. Although my main problem is Micheal Bay directing...full stop. After Pearl Harbor and Armaggedon..can we really expect a good, non-patriotic story?

 

[Spidey Lover 10]

Here's MY reasons on why it WON'T suck!:

1. IT'S TRANSFORMERS, DARNIT!!!: We all liked the stuff years ago, and the fact that a LIVE ACTION MOVIE was being made for THIS SUMMER got us all hyped up. Why everyone else thinks it gonna suck is just stupid!

2. HUGE ALL-STAR CAST! Think about it. Having SHIA LEBOUF, JOHN VOIGHT, FREAKING TYRESE GIBSON, JOSH DUHAMEL, ANTHONY "FUNNY AS HELL" ANDERSON, FREAKING PETER CULLEN, AND HUGO "AGENT SMITH"
WEAVING IN THE SAME MOVIE WILL BE JUST AS COOL AS IT SOUNDS (Samantha Smith, who plays the deceased mother on "Supernatural", and is also the daughter of my high-school librarian, Mrs. Smith, will also be in it as Sarah Lennox, the wife of the Josh Duhamel character)!!!! Doesn't anyone consider that at least?

3. SAME OLD ROBOTS, BUT DIFFFERENT, YET KICK-ASS LOOK!: NEED I SAY MORE ON THIS!

4. GREAT DIRECTOR, EVEN BETTER EXEC. PRODUCER: Think about it: Having Michael Bay, the 2ND BEST ACTION FILM DIRECTOR EVER (FORGET THE FREAKING ISLAND!!! THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT!!!!!!!), teamed-up with STEVEN SPIELBERG, THE BEST MOVIE DIRECTOR EVER, PERIOD, is just as good as it sounds, too! MAKES FOR A GREAT TEAM, AND A KICK-ASS MOVIE, TOO!!!!

And finally,

5. INTENSE ACTION, GOOD STORY, GOOD ACTING, AND, ON TOP OF ALL THAT, GOOD, LIFE-LIKE, PORTRAYAL OF THE ROBOTS SO FAR, ESPECIALLY OPTIMUS PRIME!: I understand ur concerns for his "trying 2 b hip" thing, but THIS MEANS HE HAS A MORE HUMAN SIDE, TOO! Have u ever considered that? With THAT, i think Transformers WILL BE THE BIGGEST, MOST SUCCESSFUL, KICK-ASS ACTION/ADVENTURE MOVIE SINCE "LORD OF THE RINGS"!!!!

So.....what do u guys think?t::heart::heart::heart:

 

[HHHDan]

Basically you are saying you hate the new movie because of Hasbro. Hasbro wanted new characters so they can *gasp* make money selling NEW molds. Beast Wars figures had battle face shields, while the show didn't. I see no difference.

Big deal, it isn't G1.

True: The toy company does deserve part of the responsibility. It's especially puzzling after seeing the documentary on the 20th anniversary edition of the cartoon movie, in which they discuss the fact that the reason why they killed off most characters was because they wanted to create new toys but that, in the end, the backlash was very negative (You'd think they'd learned from their mistakes!... The biggest of which being that the new characters weren't has good looking as the original - Scourge, cyclonus & Kup being good exemples, though it might be a matter of opinions).

Optimus primal, in Beast Wars, had a sort of battle mask and I didn't mind it. However, Optimus Primal is precisely a character from Beast Wars and not from G1; and his face underneath the mask didn't look as bad as Prime's in the upcomming movie. This, of course, hits to the point of the movie not being a G1 movie... Then, here is my question: Why isn't it?
Yes, yes: New toys! New toys!... Ugly new toys! There is a limit that is dangerous to cross once you have the technology to do what ever you want (I think George Lucas crossed it in Star Wars Ep. I with the "Mister potato head" alien in the Pod Race): Simply because you CAN CGI it, doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Now, again, those are just my own opinions and don't implicate anybody else. Call me an inflexible hard-core fan if you wish: I make no excuses of it! I can accept differences: When Spider-man hit the big screen and suddenly no longer had web-shooters but instead was biologically producing the webs from his wrists... I flintched, but got over it because it was an acceptable change. The difference here seems to me that the level of change with Transformers is equivalent to making a Superman movie in which the costume has been change from blue and red to Pink and Yellow, with a "peace sing" instead of the "S"; a Batman movie in which Batman isn't a human in costume but instead has become a half-man/half-bat mutant; ... or a Daredevil movie in which the Kingpin is a non-obese looking black man... ?... Hmmmm... D'oh! t:

 

[Spidey Lover 10]

True: The toy company does deserve part of the responsibility. It's especially puzzling after seeing the documentary on the 20th anniversary edition of the cartoon movie, in which they discuss the fact that the reason why they killed off most characters was because they wanted to create new toys but that, in the end, the backlash was very negative (You'd think they'd learned from their mistakes!... The biggest of which being that the new characters weren't has good looking as the original - Scourge, cyclonus & Kup being good exemples, though it might be a matter of opinions).

Optimus primal, in Beast Wars, had a sort of battle mask and I didn't mind it. However, Optimus Primal is precisely a character from Beast Wars and not from G1; and his face underneath the mask didn't look as bad as Prime's in the upcomming movie. This, of course, hits to the point of the movie not being a G1 movie... Then, here is my question: Why isn't it?
Yes, yes: New toys! New toys!... Ugly new toys! There is a limit that is dangerous to cross once you have the technology to do what ever you want (I think George Lucas crossed it in Star Wars Ep. I with the "Mister potato head" alien in the Pod Race): Simply because you CAN CGI it, doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Now, again, those are just my own opinions and don't implicate anybody else. Call me an inflexible hard-core fan if you wish: I make no excuses of it! I can accept differences: When Spider-man hit the big screen and suddenly no longer had web-shooters but instead was biologically producing the webs from his wrists... I flintched, but got over it because it was an acceptable change. The difference here seems to me that the level of change with Transformers is equivalent to making a Superman movie in which the costume has been change from blue and red to Pink and Yellow, with a "peace sing" instead of the "S"; a Batman movie in which Batman isn't a human in costume but instead has become a half-man/half-bat mutant; ... or a Daredevil movie in which the Kingpin is a non-obese looking black man... ?... Hmmmm... D'oh!

THAT'S the reason why people think this will suck (which it won't, damnit!!!)?!??! BEAUSE IT'S NOT A STRICT G1-BASED MOVIE?!?!!? CMON, PEOPLE, SO SHOW SOME RESPECT!!! AND TRY AND BORADEN UR HORIZONS, TOO!!! NOT EVERYTHING HAS 2 BE THE SAME AS THE ORIGINAL!!! JUST ASK LORD OF THE RINGS, DAMNIT!!!!!!!!!:heart::heart:

 

[CFlash]

LOL. Spidey_lover is hilarious. What a guy.

 

[Spidey Lover 10]

LOL. Spidey_lover is hilarious. What a guy.

tks. HAS ANYONE READ MY LAST POST?! IF NOT, HERE IT IS:

Here's MY reasons on why it WON'T suck!:

1. IT'S TRANSFORMERS, DARNIT!!!: We all liked the stuff years ago, and the fact that a LIVE ACTION MOVIE was being made for THIS SUMMER got us all hyped up. Why everyone else thinks it gonna suck is just stupid!

2. HUGE ALL-STAR CAST! Think about it. Having SHIA LEBOUF, JOHN VOIGHT, FREAKING TYRESE GIBSON, JOSH DUHAMEL, ANTHONY "FUNNY AS HELL" ANDERSON, FREAKING PETER CULLEN, AND HUGO "AGENT SMITH"
WEAVING IN THE SAME MOVIE WILL BE JUST AS COOL AS IT SOUNDS (Samantha Smith, who plays the deceased mother on "Supernatural", and is also the daughter of my high-school librarian, Mrs. Smith, will also be in it as Sarah Lennox, the wife of the Josh Duhamel character)!!!! Doesn't anyone consider that at least?

3. SAME OLD ROBOTS, BUT DIFFFERENT, YET KICK-ASS LOOK!: NEED I SAY MORE ON THIS!

4. GREAT DIRECTOR, EVEN BETTER EXEC. PRODUCER: Think about it: Having Michael Bay, the 2ND BEST ACTION FILM DIRECTOR EVER (FORGET THE FREAKING ISLAND!!! THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT!!!!!!!), teamed-up with STEVEN SPIELBERG, THE BEST MOVIE DIRECTOR EVER, PERIOD, is just as good as it sounds, too! MAKES FOR A GREAT TEAM, AND A KICK-ASS MOVIE, TOO!!!!

And finally,

5. INTENSE ACTION, GOOD STORY, GOOD ACTING, AND, ON TOP OF ALL THAT, GOOD, LIFE-LIKE, PORTRAYAL OF THE ROBOTS SO FAR, ESPECIALLY OPTIMUS PRIME!: I understand ur concerns for his "trying 2 b hip" thing, but THIS MEANS HE HAS A MORE HUMAN SIDE, TOO! Have u ever considered that? With THAT, i think Transformers WILL BE THE BIGGEST, MOST SUCCESSFUL, KICK-ASS ACTION/ADVENTURE MOVIE SINCE "LORD OF THE RINGS"!!!!

So.....what do u guys think?t::heart::heart:

 

[Dr Lee]

Spidey people would listen to you if you just stop using the freaking CAPS LOCK.

I think this will come third behind Spidey three and POTC 3 (though it could be close between POTC3 and TF if the CGI is as good as we've seen so far)

 

[CFlash]

Here's MY reasons on why it WON'T suck!:

1. IT'S TRANSFORMERS, DARNIT!!!: We all liked the stuff years ago, and the fact that a LIVE ACTION MOVIE was being made for THIS SUMMER got us all hyped up. Why everyone else thinks it gonna suck is just stupid!

Because we all liked Transformers. Not Gobots. There's a difference. You can't just slap on the name "Autobots" and Bumblebee on any ol' robot and call it Transformers.

2. HUGE ALL-STAR CAST! Think about it. Having SHIA LEBOUF, JOHN VOIGHT, FREAKING TYRESE GIBSON, JOSH DUHAMEL, ANTHONY "FUNNY AS HELL" ANDERSON, FREAKING PETER CULLEN, AND HUGO "AGENT SMITH"
WEAVING IN THE SAME MOVIE WILL BE JUST AS COOL AS IT SOUNDS (Samantha Smith, who plays the deceased mother on "Supernatural", and is also the daughter of my high-school librarian, Mrs. Smith, will also be in it as Sarah Lennox, the wife of the Josh Duhamel character)!!!! Doesn't anyone consider that at least?

This is a joke right?

3. SAME OLD ROBOTS, BUT DIFFFERENT, YET KICK-ASS LOOK!: NEED I SAY MORE ON THIS!

No, they're not the same old robots. Just because they have the same names doesn't mean they're the same. Even worse, the story is COMPLETELY different and doesn't have any of the same moral undertones as the original. In both look-of-the-robots and plot, this movie looks more like Gob--- ahhh you know.

4. GREAT DIRECTOR, EVEN BETTER EXEC. PRODUCER: Think about it: Having Michael Bay, the 2ND BEST ACTION FILM DIRECTOR EVER (FORGET THE FREAKING ISLAND!!! THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT!!!!!!!), teamed-up with STEVEN SPIELBERG, THE BEST MOVIE DIRECTOR EVER, PERIOD, is just as good as it sounds, too! MAKES FOR A GREAT TEAM, AND A KICK-ASS MOVIE, TOO!!!!

Michael Bay is one of the worst directors of all time... that's not just my opinion. He's universally regarded as such. He's not 2nd best anything. Where do you get this from? What does "action" mean to you?

If he's 2nd best, it means his better than at least 4 of the following people: James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, Paul Verhoeven, Wachoski Bros. Heck, even John McTieman kicks Bay's ass even tho he hasn't really done anything good lately.

Bay is not 2nd best anything.

However, I do agree that Steven Spielberg is the best director ever. He's also a good Exec Producer IMHO.

And finally,

5. INTENSE ACTION, GOOD STORY, GOOD ACTING, AND, ON TOP OF ALL THAT, GOOD, LIFE-LIKE, PORTRAYAL OF THE ROBOTS SO FAR, ESPECIALLY OPTIMUS PRIME!: I understand ur concerns for his "trying 2 b hip" thing, but THIS MEANS HE HAS A MORE HUMAN SIDE, TOO! Have u ever considered that? With THAT, i think Transformers WILL BE THE BIGGEST, MOST SUCCESSFUL, KICK-ASS ACTION/ADVENTURE MOVIE SINCE "LORD OF THE RINGS"!!!!

Optimus Prime does look great.... as a robot. As a vehicle he makes me want to roll my eyes, throw up, join the Confederate Army, yell Yee-haw, and marry my sister.

If Transformers comes anywhere near the $1 Billion set by the likes of Lord of the Rings, Spider-man, and Pirates movies I will send you an I Heart NY T-shirt.

So.....what do u guys think?t::heart::heart::heart:

[/quote]

You're insane. t: (j/k).

 

[HHHDan]

Here's MY reasons on why it WON'T suck!:

1. IT'S TRANSFORMERS, DARNIT!!!: We all liked the stuff years ago, and the fact that a LIVE ACTION MOVIE was being made for THIS SUMMER got us all hyped up. Why everyone else thinks it gonna suck is just stupid!

Well... No: It's not automatically stupid. G1 was great but it all went south after the cartoon movie. Besides, even in the first two seasons: There were characters, plot lines and other things that weren't so great. And then, armada, energon and Cybertron sucked a** (My opinion only: No offense to the fans of those versions), while Beast Wars and Beast Machines were great.

I guess I just do not take a: If it is good, it is automatically GREAT kind of attitude! Plus, while I did get hyped up when I learned they were gonna make the movie, I got a cold shower when I saw the teaser trailer and wondered "how does that fit into the TF story?" and an even colder shower when I learned that it would have nothing to do with the movie. I guess that to me, it becomes akin to false advertising! It's as though someone was trying to get me to go to a movie by showing me the trailer to another movie (!!??!!)

2. HUGE ALL-STAR CAST! Think about it. Having SHIA LEBOUF, JOHN VOIGHT, FREAKING TYRESE GIBSON, JOSH DUHAMEL, ANTHONY "FUNNY AS HELL" ANDERSON, FREAKING PETER CULLEN, AND HUGO "AGENT SMITH"
WEAVING IN THE SAME MOVIE WILL BE JUST AS COOL AS IT SOUNDS (Samantha Smith, who plays the deceased mother on "Supernatural", and is also the daughter of my high-school librarian, Mrs. Smith, will also be in it as Sarah Lennox, the wife of the Josh Duhamel character)!!!! Doesn't anyone consider that at least?

See now... That is another point that rubbed me the wrong way as the movie was developed: Too many humans! For once we had the chance to have a movie that would have been nearly all "alien culture" sort of thing, but now it looks like it's going to be more about the humans, again! There's been 20 billion movies about humans in the history of cinema... Couldn't we change, just for once?

Plus when I read synopsis on the net that hints that it might be Shia Leboeuf's character that may have, in the end, "the fate of the world in his hands"... It screams "Cliché" story to me.

A note on Hugo Weaving: I don't mind his casting. I haven't heard the voice he'll make for Megatron yet, so I'll hold back on the verdict until I do hear it; but my instincts still feel like the leader of the Decepticons, just like the leader of the Autobots, should have had the same voice as in the cartoon (Heck! If Chris Latta was still alive: He'd be the only choice for Starscream in my book!!... And for a future Cobra commander!!!... Such a shame!)

3. SAME OLD ROBOTS, BUT DIFFFERENT, YET KICK-ASS LOOK!: NEED I SAY MORE ON THIS!

Same old?... Bonecrusher? Demolisher? Blackout? Scorpinok? Brawl? Barricade?... I guess whoever was asking me how long ago I had watched G1 was right 'cause I don't remember these guys in there?

Sarcasm aside, just saying same old but different is a contradiction ("Yes but..." does not mean "Yes": It means "No"). This all goes back to the argument of the looks and the alternate modes being different: Some like it, some don't... I hate it! I don't care if the WV Beetle doesn't look like a good race car: Bumbblebee is a WV Beetle! Not a camero. Besides: he would have been a Beetle only in appearance, not in mechanics; it would have been absolutely acceptable that it would have raced at 300 MPH.

4. GREAT DIRECTOR, EVEN BETTER EXEC. PRODUCER: Think about it: Having Michael Bay, the 2ND BEST ACTION FILM DIRECTOR EVER (FORGET THE FREAKING ISLAND!!! THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT!!!!!!!), teamed-up with STEVEN SPIELBERG, THE BEST MOVIE DIRECTOR EVER, PERIOD, is just as good as it sounds, too! MAKES FOR A GREAT TEAM, AND A KICK-ASS MOVIE, TOO!!!!

For Bay:

I'm sorry but the guy seems hell bent on ruining classics! He's not only raping my childhood with TF, but now I learn that he is going to ruin one of my favorite Horror franchise: Friday the 13th! He already made a mockery of Amityville and Texas chainsaw Massacre.

Plus: What is it with Bay and remakes????? Add the Hitcher and the Birds to the list and it is as though he can't work on anything that is genuine and brand new!?? Or is it just another sign that he is so arrogant that he thinks he can do better then anyone, that old movies were badly made and the is going to "correct" them?

For Spielberg:

Yes: He is a great director/producer... So? Does that mean his ***** doesn't smell like everybody else's? War of the Worlds was very crappy! Didn't care for Minority Report and A.I. either! I'm not saying he is bad: I'm saying he is not perfect to the point of being "Bad movie proof". And I can't help but get the feeling that, in the same way that he and others like Lucas and Coppola were all a breath of fresh air that pushed away some "old croutons" when they came onto the movie scene, maybe it is time for Spielberg to leave the place to a new generation of movie makers; just not Micheal Bay!

(... I know, I know: The Spielberg lovers are going to crucify me for saying that he should retire... Oh well!)

5. INTENSE ACTION, GOOD STORY, GOOD ACTING, AND, ON TOP OF ALL THAT, GOOD, LIFE-LIKE, PORTRAYAL OF THE ROBOTS SO FAR, ESPECIALLY OPTIMUS PRIME!: I understand your concerns for his "trying 2 b hip" thing, but THIS MEANS HE HAS A MORE HUMAN SIDE, TOO! Have u ever considered that? With THAT, i think Transformers WILL BE THE BIGGEST, MOST SUCCESSFUL, KICK-ASS ACTION/ADVENTURE MOVIE SINCE "LORD OF THE RINGS"!!!!

Intense action? Sure! I have no doubt. But that is the credo of ALL summer movies. As I mentioned before: I want a story first (Action is the cherry on top of the Sunday; the story is the ice cream that holds everything else on top of it!)
Good story?... On what do you base that? I haven't read the story anywhere? I've read people mentioning a "script" running around but, even if I would get a copy of it, I know that allot of movies have multiple scripts made before the movie is made and that the final product often doesn't match most of those scripts (... But if that "optimus is sick and hiding on earth" crap pans out: I'm gonna cry!!). So: I'm holding out judgment on that one; but I am not optimistic from what I've seen so far.
Good portrayal? Well, there we'll have to agree to disagree, as they say. I don't recognize my favorites (Sure, Prime's head looks similar... From the back! After that, I don't recognize anything)
A more human side? I'm all for that! But why then go to such lengths to make the robots look LESS human? The thing that I dislike most of the "hip" debate is that even if there were some few comic relief moments in which Prime was made to look hip in the cartoons, it's not what was so great about the character: His focus, leadership, compassion and ability to balance it all together is what made the character iconic.

In the end, if you think that TF is going to be the biggest thing since LOTR (...?...): Good for you! If you go see it and you still think it: Even better for you! And I am not being sarcastic. I would love to share your enthusiasm and maybe once I see the movie, maybe I'll even like it (Neither of us will know until it is out). But... A word of caution:

The way you feel about TF sounds allot like the way I felt about 300 a few months ago. And while it was still a very good, 9/10 movie... I was expecting it to be an 11/10 movie... and couldn't help but leave the movie theatre somewhat disappointed. So, the ironic thing is that, since you seem to give TF a 15/10 already, without having seeing it: It means that I'm actually more likely to enjoy the movie, in the end, and you are more in a position to come out of it disappointed...!

Faith is a good thing: Until it blinds you!