Transformers The Reviews Thread

[Marvin]

when this film succeeds it will be a mad dash for 80's properties
(oh and it will succeed, considering the budget and what the yield will no doubt be)

of course studios will assume it's the 80s factor and they'll be a third right

the other factors the bay and the berg

 

[arty2]

After transformers there will be an invasion of the mech movies: Gundam and Macross?

MACROSS!!! even MACROSS PLUS!! FTW

 

[Marvin]

when is that dude who made hero/flying daggers going to make my Ninja Scroll

or Stephen Chow make My Dragon ball or Naruto

or Ang Lee my Avatar

or John woo my champloo or afro sam

 

[blind_fury]

when is that dude who made hero/flying daggers going to make my Ninja Scroll

or Stephen Chow make My Dragon ball or Naruto

or Ang Lee my Avatar

or John woo my champloo or afro sam

what's the point? You won't even care if the characters are recognizable or not.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

After transformers there will be an invasion of the mech movies: Gundam and Macross?

Macross, unfortunately, is one of those things you either do faithfully and keep the story or don't do at all.

 

[Marvin]

yes...because they all look like blocky 80's designed for animation robots and when bay adapts them for functionality

I won't care either way...

cause if i cared...if i cared if they LOOKED like the characters...then and only then would there be a point in making them

 

[Darkest Knight]

Michael Bay is THAT dude. Brought huge credibility to this franchise. His work on this thing looks FANTASTIC thus far.

 

[blind_fury]

Michael Bay is THAT dude. Brought huge credibility to this franchise. His work on this thing looks FANTASTIC thus far.

Judging by the ratings of Bay's other movies on rottentomatoes, Transformers brought credibility to Bay.

 

[blind_fury]

yes...because they all look like blocky 80's designed for animation robots and when bay adapts them for functionality

I won't care either way...

cause if i cared...if i cared if they LOOKED like the characters...then and only then would there be a point in making them

Just because a character shares the same name doesn't make them recognizable.

 

[Darkest Knight]

What does rottentomatoes know? Michael Bay has put together some of the biggest epics from the 90's till now. I mean: "The Rock", "Bad Boys", "Bad Boys 2", "Armageddon", "Pearl Harbor" etc. The guy just knows what he's doing.

 

[Marvin]

and just because a character has an updated look (for whatever reason), doesn't change who they are

(-superman blue)

 

[Darkest Knight]

and just because a character has an updated look (for whatever reason), doesn't change who they are

This is true, but fanboys will NEVER understand. They are boxed in mentality on how these characters and universes should be, or could be. These things can be made even better from the intial concept.

See Burton in B89 employing an ALL BLACK bat-suit. Originally balked @ by stubborn fanboy geeks.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Just because a character shares the same name doesn't make them recognizable.

But such is the nature of Transformers. Unlike other franchises, Transformers does recycle names, often on unrecognizable new characters. Frankly this new Scattershot easily is more popular than the last, Scorponok from Beast Wars is the more famous incarnation of that name, and to date the most noteable Jetfire has been the one from UT. So Transformers has made a business off of reinventing and retooling it's old characters, often with much success. I mean do you know how many Alt. modes characters like Ironhide, Prowl and Mirage have had by this point...tons.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

This is true, but fanboys will NEVER understand. They are boxed in mentality on how these characters and universes should be, or could be. These things can be made even better from the intial concept.

Actually whats funny is over at the Allspark (the number 1 TF message board) and BotCon (the Transformers convention), there is almost no dispute...this movie rocks and Transformers has been praised since about 6 months ago almost without any dissent.

 

[The Kid]

What does rottentomatoes know? Michael Bay has put together some of the biggest epics from the 90's till now. I mean: "The Rock", "Bad Boys", "Bad Boys 2", "Armageddon", "Pearl Harbor" etc. The guy just knows what he's doing.

He's the walt disney of Action movies.

 

[Darkest Knight]

He's the walt disney of Action movies.

EXACTLY. Show that dude some much needed respect. Bay is a action movie GOD.

 

[nogster]

just read the review in our sunday mail paper...
4 stars!!
this is the summary of it..
" forget spiders, ogres, pirates, silversurfers and all other hollywood blockbusters this year.
transformers the eyepopping, ear splitting, bone jarring, metal crunching spectacle to beat them all.
sure, adapting a 1980s kids cartoon based on popular toys stretches credibility. but in a year full of big budget sequels, it comes off as fresh and original. i doubt even the boy wizards fifth movie will cast a spell on this behemoth."
the closing line to the review was.....
" if anything challenges it as the years biggest flick, it could only be that yellow wildcard, the simpsons movie."

and i agree...
i went in not expecting much, and came out blown away, i was a kid again..

 

[Marvin]

his vision applies to some movies better than others
ie
heman
halo

just sign the papers bay
just sign

 

[blind_fury]

This is true, but fanboys will NEVER understand. They are boxed in mentality on how these characters and universes should be, or could be. These things can be made even better from the intial concept.

See Burton in B89 employing an ALL BLACK bat-suit. Originally balked @ by stubborn fanboy geeks.

What you don't seem to understand in your boxed in mentality is that if an adaptation does not attempt to capture what resonated enough to inspire lifelong fandom the audience and fans are being cheated.

It's not that easy to make characters that hit a cord and resonate with millions. To revamp these characters is to suggest our attachment to these characters is based on something disposable. That is false and offensive.

Harry Potter is not thing. But I would never tell the fans there attachment to the characters is based on something disposable. You might as well make a Venom that looks like what ever pops in your head (how about a striped penguin with fangs?) instead of what most fans have an attachment to and hope for.

 

[blind_fury]

EXACTLY. Show that dude some much needed respect. Bay is a action movie GOD.

lolz.

easy there guy. He made one or two quality movies.

take a breath.

 

[blind_fury]

What does rottentomatoes know? Michael Bay has put together some of the biggest epics from the 90's till now. I mean: "The Rock", "Bad Boys", "Bad Boys 2", "Armageddon", "Pearl Harbor" etc. The guy just knows what he's doing.

Are you being sarcastic?

All of those are either crappy or guilty pleasures except the Rock.

 

[Jager X]

although i still dispise the designs of some of the characters, i am going to give this movie a chance. i have two conflicting sides when it comes to this thing. i love the visual aspect of the movie, but from what i see so far i am not going to like the plot. still, i will give this movie a chance.

 

[Darkest Knight]

Yet all made TONS of CASH, and are extrememly fun to watch. No one is talking about making oscar award winning movies. We're talking about the best of blockbusters which are fun to watch. Bay dominates at providing movies as such. No difference with T-formers.

Oh, and the characters haven't been altered to the extent of not being recognizable. Well, maybe some of them have ... but that's because the CONCEPT of Transformers is what is remembered ... not the exact look of every character in the mythos. The only character in Transformers who is recognized by everyone is Optimus Prime. And that's the 100% truth. You have to be a die hard in order to remember everyone's original look. And please, the characters themselves beyond their look haven't been changed or altered. They all in some way shape or form represent the essence of what they were intially. Which is what is most important. Their looks are simply updated to fit context, times, etc. Don't go to extremes. Alterations to minor characters can be a great thing. Or even to major ones (see Megatron). The only character you REALLY need to keep a general guidline as far as looks are concerned is Optimus Prime ... since he is easily the most recognizable by fanboys and mild enthusiasts. New commers would be more turned onto the new looks than the old look of the originals. I mean, let's roll out some blocky shoe box looking characters into a bad ass major motion picture, and EVERYONE will buy that. But yeah, if they alter the looks, yet keep the character's essence the same ... they are DESTROYING the material. [/end sarcasm]

 

[Jager X]

all the disney movies i love weren't made by walt. as a matter of fact, if said movies weren't owned by disney i doubt i would have much LIKE for the company besides the classic characters.

and i have to agree with blind_fury, all of bay's movies during the 90s were guilty pleasures. i can't begin to describe the misery of sitting through pearl harbor in every history class since 2001. with that said, i'd rather not look at the track record of the directors unless they directly affect me somehow (ie uwe boll). if a movie is good then it is good despite who directed it.

 

[StylishHokie21]

So is the movie any good? I was never a huge fan of Transformers growing up, but this one interests me. I watched a couple of episodes of the TV show and that was it. I never saw the original Transformers movie either.