Transformers Style - What will this movie be like?

[Marvin]

First off, it's Tokyo not Hong Kong. And, at its heart, Godzilla is anything but silly. It's about as silly as any stupid comic book that gets elevated to the big screen while still remaining faithful to the CORE concepts.

u have a good point...

but the thing is a mutant iguana that's nesting in the city though not as cinematic on paper, can be seen as less silly than the godzilla vs mothra and asian ppl cheering on from the sidelines


as "silly" as X-men may in fact be, it's not that silly

Goyers work with the blade concept is proof
adapting for real world yet still crazy

 

[CFlash]

u have a good point...

but the thing is a mutant iguana that's nesting in the city though not as cinematic on paper, can be seen as less silly than the godzilla vs mothra and asian ppl cheering on from the sidelines


as "silly" as X-men may in fact be, it's not that silly

Goyers work with the blade concept is proof
adapting for real world yet still crazy

Neither is Godzilla. The cheesy feel-good 70's ones notwithstanding. t: And even those were great. Just like I'm sure you feel about X-men.

 

[Marvin]

I can see your point, but they wanted a more family oriented flick when the project first started. Meaning, keeping the story simple with lots of action.

I would love to see an epic sci-fi Transformers film. I just don't see it becoming reality. Transformers is a marketing cash cow. If they wanted to make the flick you wanted, they would have replaced Bay with Stanley Kubrick. It would probably had less interest from the general public, but what a story it could've been.t:

Kubricks transfomers would have been a mess

and in elevating the material to that level (2001) would have been committing a sin far beyond bay adding flames

 

[Batmun]

I have to disagree with you. You are referring to his work based on past movies he did and saying Transformers would be just like that. His strength is delivering a thought provoking moive. With Speilburgs help and a few other that understand the Transformers Universe, could deliver an epic sci-fi flick.

 

[CFlash]

Kubricks transfomers would have been a mess

and in elevating the material to that level (2001) would have been committing a sin far beyond bay adding flames

Well, we kinda agree there. I don't see Kubrick doing Transformers. I do see everyone between Cameron and Alex Proyas to even Cuaron (together with ILM) doing a MUCH better job than Michael Bay.

 

[The Kid]

Bay is a transformer in human form, so I think he's the only person on earth who could have done this and kept it the right tone. What's left to be seen is whether he's done the characters justice.

 

[Marvin]

I have to disagree with you. You are referring to his work based on past movies he did and saying Transformers would be just like that. His strength is delivering a thought provoking moive. With Speilburgs help and a few other that understand the Transformers Universe, could deliver an epic sci-fi flick.

no i'm talking about his style

just like the old school critics that seem not to be able to "read" camera work of today...I just watched a bunch of his films and even though this reviewer seems to have missed the point in some cases

http://www.montrealfilmjournal.com/review.asp?R=R0000572

he hits the nail right on the head...
the guy strikes me as big budget indie...

i love his work mostly based on script alone
he communicates very well but that's communicating for communications sake

thought provoking is a matter of script...
all he would have done to armageddon is shoot the whole thing in one take...

unless he elevated the material to the point where everythings a metaphor(like a baby the size of a planet looking at earth)

i don't know where i'm going with this so i'll stop

 

[Marvin]

Well, we kinda agree there. I don't see Kubrick doing Transformers. I do see everyone between Cameron and Alex Proyas to even Cuaron (together with ILM) doing a MUCH better job than Michael Bay.

proyas' work on irobot was borderline pointless...
the studio wants the audience to feel engaged, not just watching some short story on the screen

Cameron can do no wrong, and he's the one person that takes all the good of bay and none of the bad

thing is bay wrote the book on cars + chases....cameron does that ok but whereas he needs a human element bays stuff looks like a reckless ballet with cars

it's bays weakness that makes this work so well (in light of all Kubrick talk)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hPRuRqZn7G8

 

[CFlash]

proyas' work on irobot was borderline pointless...
the studio wants the audience to feel engaged, not just watching some short story on the screen

Cameron can do no wrong, and he's the one person that takes all the good of bay and none of the bad

thing is bay wrote the book on cars + chases....cameron does that ok but whereas he needs a human element bays stuff looks like a reckless ballet with cars

it's bays weakness that makes this work so well (in light of all Kubrick talk)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hPRuRqZn7G8

I thought Proyas work on I, Robot was great. Once you get past the fact that the title "I Robot" is a *reference* to Asimov (like so many books and movies reference Shakespeare in their titles), I Robot taken by itself is a great (I said great) sci-fi movie. And, I even think Will Smith was extraordinarily good in it.

As for Cameron, I think it's the other way around. Michael Bay took all the bad of Cameron and stripped it of all cohesiveness and sense. In effect, he's a horrible filmmaker. Great at commercials tho!

 

[Bishop49]

Bay was the right choice just think of the car chase scenes thats going too be in this movie.. its going too be insane..

 

[Marvin]

I thought Proyas work on I, Robot was great. Once you get past the fact that the title "I Robot" is a *reference* to Asimov (like so many books and movies reference Shakespeare in their titles), I Robot taken by itself is a great (I said great) sci-fi movie. And, I even think Will Smith was extraordinarily good in it.

naw
that movie was somewhere in the middle of a question life (kubrick movie), a action movie with man vs machine, and a will smith movie and because it never chose on which side of the three sided fence it wanted to be on it just fell short

note: it did "ok" because it was "ok"

i miss the proyas of the Crow/Dark city days...if he shot the film like those two it would have been something else...

As for Cameron, I think it's the other way around. Michael Bay took all the bad of Cameron and stripped it of all cohesiveness and sense. In effect, he's a horrible filmmaker. Great at commercials tho!

you could see it that way
then again, apart from pearl harbour, bays movies do really really well
so theres something he does well about them...

i guess taking the bad from cameron has its benefits

i'm sure bays titanic would have been weak

but the honest to god truth is that cameron doing bad boys one (with said script in tacked) would have been weak for other reasons

who knows maybe if Cameron shot pearl harbour it would have been as good as titanic
(or maybe it's time the world realizes that directors do one thing and writers do another)

oh and theres nothing incomprehensible about bay

 

[CFlash]

naw
that movie was somewhere in the middle of a question life (kubrick movie), a action movie with man vs machine, and a will smith movie and because it never chose on which side of the three sided fence it wanted to be on it just fell short

note: it did "ok" because it was "ok"

i miss the proyas of the Crow/Dark city days...if he shot the film like those two it would have been something else...

It would have done even worse. As much as I like those movies (and I love Dark City) none of them did much box office... in fact, they were disasters. Those very things you say is what made I Robot great. Would you have preferred he dumbed it down like The Island?

I see Alex Proyas (so far) on a track similar to Cameron's. His career so far is creeping towards popcorn while still being a great intelligent filmmaker. Michael Bay is a straight-line. Just MTV video after MTV video. That is not what makes a great filmmaker.

 

[Marvin]

i robot may have done worse, but it would have been a better film for it...atmosphere is one thing that Proyas films kick ass in more than most
the crow had and undeniable one start to finish

i robot was like, vancouver on a somewhat sunny/rainy day

i don't think dumbing it down is in his parameters, he either either needed to linger on the slow and meaningful metaphors, linger on the man robot war(ie terminator), or linger on will smith an his jokes

but he was just inbetween all of those that they all came off weak imo

for example will smith on the motorcycle shooting in slo-mo and then shia making a "funny" comment, and then will responding...
it was nothing new and nothing interesting

and i love will smith jokes
(it's similar to why BB failed)

If that's were u see proyas(i'm not sure i do) than because he's trying to do both but can't as well as cameron, I robot was pretty lame as compared to T2...

Bay does what he does well

doing one thing well is better then doing 2 things poorly

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

Too much is being expect of this film in the first place. It's being made to sell toys and rejuvenate the franchise. That's what Hasbro wanted and so that's what we're going to get. Simple as that.


Now I may not as versed in Transformers as you all here but as far as I'm concerned I just don't see this introductory film as being the best place to make 'an epic', a term which is being thrown around far too much here. This film is simply telling us 'this is who they are' further films tell us 'this is a specific point in their lives we are telling'. Save the big epic stuff for another film, all I want is to get to know these characters first, then tell something big.

And this kids is why Superman Returns failed, because we weren't there from day one like with Spider-Man or Batman.

 

[Marvin]

not that this is the place but

Superman failed because

what should have been a ground breaking cinematic achievement of a movie with an ever so charming hero and a cast of westernized charicatures of a supporting cast one of which is a SASSY self indulgent mature beautiful reporter laday

was

a flat uninspired beat for beat retelling of a film that was heavily loved back when no one believed "a man could fly"

batman failed for other reasons

 

[AyeCapn]

Not too sure about the TV commercials tho... I think they've given away too much. "The Island" syndrome might hit this movie hard... and Bay will blame Dreamworks marketing again. We'll see.

I am REALLY worried about this

 

[Tempest19]

If they keep the TV commercials to what it is now- reading the script and the novel... we haven't seen anything yet. If they keep on making dozens upon dozens of TV spots with lots of new footage in each, then yeah- that would be a bad move- but personally I don't think we'll get there.

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

not that this is the place but

Superman failed because

what should have been a ground breaking cinematic achievement of a movie with an ever so charming hero and a cast of westernized charicatures of a supporting cast one of which is a SASSY self indulgent mature beautiful reporter laday

was

a flat uninspired beat for beat retelling of a film that was heavily loved back when no one believed "a man could fly"

batman failed for other reasons

This film would've, in my opinion, been better received if it had been released later on. An audience likes to be there when it all starts. Sure, Singer really needed have taken a step back and ask himself 'Is this too much Donner honoring?' but he didn't and now we have what we have and I'm sick and tired of complaining.

 

[thegameq]

I have to disagree with you. You are referring to his work based on past movies he did and saying Transformers would be just like that. His strength is delivering a thought provoking moive. With Speilburgs help and a few other that understand the Transformers Universe, could deliver an epic sci-fi flick.

I thought you mentioned Kubrick as sarcasm...might be interesting, but definitely not Transformers.

 

[thegameq]

Too much is being expect of this film in the first place. It's being made to sell toys and rejuvenate the franchise. That's what Hasbro wanted and so that's what we're going to get. Simple as that.


Now I may not as versed in Transformers as you all here but as far as I'm concerned I just don't see this introductory film as being the best place to make 'an epic', a term which is being thrown around far too much here. This film is simply telling us 'this is who they are' further films tell us 'this is a specific point in their lives we are telling'. Save the big epic stuff for another film, all I want is to get to know these characters first, then tell something big.

And this kids is why Superman Returns failed, because we weren't there from day one like with Spider-Man or Batman.

If selling toys was Hasbro's main concern they may be in for a shock, because outside of two or three designs for this film, none of them look as cool as the anime-esque original designs. In fact the contraptions that ILM has created scream overkill. Yeah, ok realism, but zero cool factor. The Valkyrie for Robotech look better than ILM's over exaggerated, overkill versions of Transformers.

 

[CFlash]

If selling toys was Hasbro's main concern they may be in for a shock, because outside of two or three designs for this film, none of them look as cool as the anime-esque original designs. In fact the contraptions that ILM has created scream overkill. Yeah, ok realism, but zero cool factor. The Valkyrie for Robotech look better than ILM's over exaggerated, overkill versions of Transformers.

None of the movie bots are out yet right?

I'm still curious as to how those monsterous, complicated, designs transform into vehicles. I still can't figure Optimus Prime out... and he's the best looking one. I have a feeling the final toys will involve A LOT of "cheating".... remove several pieces, simply fold robot in half, *boom* that's it! A truck.

 

[Tempest19]

I'm still curious as to how those monsterous, complicated, designs transform into vehicles.

Movie- yes. I am pretty sure they can. They brought in plenty of car specialists that worked on the designs, forgot where I heard that exactly though...

But, toy and plastic structure - difficult.

These could very well become the new rubik cubes.

"Transform this vehicle- if you can."

 

[Mr. Roboto]

None of the movie bots are out yet right?

I'm still curious as to how those monsterous, complicated, designs transform into vehicles. I still can't figure Optimus Prime out... and he's the best looking one. I have a feeling the final toys will involve A LOT of "cheating".... remove several pieces, simply fold robot in half, *boom* that's it! A truck.

The basis of the new designs is that they use all the parts to make a robot rather than hide a robot inside the car like the cartoon ones. As for "cheating" well all the cartoon designs do that allready although it's more animation quirks in my opinion than cheating.