Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

[Smokescreen]

False. That movie was directed by Jonathan Liebesman. Bay was merely one of that film's SIX producers, and he wasn't even the executive producer.

Gotcha, thanks for trying to prove everything I said was wrong. I get that out of these types of websites all the time. For the longest time, even on MichaelBay.com it was talked about how he would be directing the movie. So apparently at some point and time he switched over to being a producer and Jonathan became director. After I initially heard he was directing the movie, I stopped paying attention.

False. That was not Grimlock. Nor was that dinosaur even of the same model design as Grimlock's. For one, it had a "mane" of sorts, which Grimlock did not have. And its teeth were laid out differently from Grimlock's, and its snout was a different shape from Grimlock's. If anything, it looked more like Scorn than it did Grimlock, but he too has differences that clash with the frozen dino's design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfJluhYbxCM 46 seconds. This isn't Grimlock? Hmm.. interesting. Sure made everyone believe it was him.

[Sabrblade]

False. That movie was directed by Jonathan Liebesman. Bay was merely one of that film's SIX producers, and he wasn't even the executive producer.

Gotcha, thanks for trying to prove everything I said was wrong. I get that out of these types of websites all the time. For the longest time, even on MichaelBay.com it was talked about how he would be directing the movie. So apparently at some point and time he switched over to being a producer and Jonathan became director. After I initially heard he was directing the movie, I stopped paying attention.

Here's one of the original announcements of his being involved at all with that movie, which pegs him as the producer, not the director - http://deadline.com/2010/05/platinum-dunes-steers-turtles-relaunch-44238/

Bay directing that movie was the stuff of fan rumor.

False. That was not Grimlock. Nor was that dinosaur even of the same model design as Grimlock's. For one, it had a "mane" of sorts, which Grimlock did not have. And its teeth were laid out differently from Grimlock's, and its snout was a different shape from Grimlock's. If anything, it looked more like Scorn than it did Grimlock, but he too has differences that clash with the frozen dino's design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfJluhYbxCM 46 seconds. This isn't Grimlock? Hmm.. interesting. Sure made everyone believe it was him.

Nope. That ain't Grimlock or anybody.

What's more is that there was a time where the Dinobots weren't even going to be in this movie (they were gonna be in the next one, with this one foreshadowing them instead), yet it was still always going to open the way it did.

[Smokescreen]

What's more is that there was a time where the Dinobots weren't even going to be in this movie (they were gonna be in the next one, with this one foreshadowing them instead), yet it was still always going to open the way it did.

As I recall, after the 2nd movie, there were talks about how Dinobots would be added in the 3rd movie. But then I didn't hear much more about it. I went to see the movie, and they had Deeno (which sounded like it should have been Mirage), and it was as if someone said.. here's your dinosaur, now be gone. Now I know that may not be the case, but I personally felt misled by the whole ordeal, and that Bay was.. .. a DECEPTICON!

[Burn]

Gotcha, thanks for trying to prove everything I said was wrong. I get that out of these types of websites all the time.

You have to forgive our resident know-it-all Sabrblade, he is quick to point out the inaccuracies of a persons post and has an awfully habit of not being tactful about it.

In this particular case though he is correct, Bay wasn't the Director, merely a Producer, however to give the movie more push they used his name as, and a lot of Bay-Haters on this sight will hate to read this, people enjoy going to see Michael Bay movies, or movies he is heavily involved in.

[Sabrblade]

Gotcha, thanks for trying to prove everything I said was wrong. I get that out of these types of websites all the time.

You have to forgive our resident know-it-all Sabrblade, he is quick to point out the inaccuracies of a persons post and has an awfully habit of not being tactful about it.

Ain't that the truth.

[Smokescreen]

You have to forgive our resident know-it-all Sabrblade, he is quick to point out the inaccuracies of a persons post and has an awfully habit of not being tactful about it.

Hello Burn, its ok, I'm used to coming across the "know-it-alls". Guess though I've been a member of the site for some time now, I just haven't used the forums.

In this particular case though he is correct, Bay wasn't the Director, merely a Producer, however to give the movie more push they used his name as, and a lot of Bay-Haters on this sight will hate to read this, people enjoy going to see Michael Bay movies, or movies he is heavily involved in.

Yeah I did a little more research on the issue and saw that Bay was merely a producer. I'm not a Bay-hater per se, because I loved "The Island", as well as "Pearl Harbor". I thought hmm.. someone is actually willing to try to make a Transformers movie? cool.. lets see what he can do. The first movie turned out great and had a lot of cameos to the 1986 Transformers movie cartoon. I thought.. wow.. this is great. With the involvement of Transfans I saw why. With the last few movies, I think its best for him to walk away and do something else. (In my opinion)

[Burn]

But see you're blaming the Director. You're completely over-looking the writers.

First movie was Orci/Kurtzman, notorious for not being very original.
Second movie was interrupted by the writers strike, so was rushed, Orci/Kurtzman returned along with Ehran Kruger
Third movie was solely Kruger
Fourth movie was solely Kruger.

From my personal perspective, as the movies have progressed they've gotten worse. With each movie my viewing times in the cinemas has reduced from the initial movie (four times) to AoE (once).

One thing has remained consistent. The director.

What's changed, the writers.

I don't blame Bay, I blame the writers.

[SlyTF1]

False. That was not Grimlock. Nor was that dinosaur even of the same model design as Grimlock's. For one, it had a "mane" of sorts, which Grimlock did not have. And its teeth were laid out differently from Grimlock's, and its snout was a different shape from Grimlock's. If anything, it looked more like Scorn than it did Grimlock, but he too has differences that clash with the frozen dino's design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfJluhYbxCM 46 seconds. This isn't Grimlock? Hmm.. interesting. Sure made everyone believe it was him.

Yeah, and by "everyone," you mean just you.

[Smokescreen]

Well then lets get some new writers!

Yeah, and by "everyone," you mean just you.

no. everyone as in everyone who I went to see the movie with. (and yes I went with a group of 10 of us) everyone who I've talked with about the movie. everyone EXCEPT for people on this website.

[Burn]

Well then lets get some new writers!

I would not have one problem with that at all.

[TurboMMaster]

But see you're blaming the Director. You're completely over-looking the writers.

First movie was Orci/Kurtzman, notorious for not being very original.
Second movie was interrupted by the writers strike, so was rushed, Orci/Kurtzman returned along with Ehran Kruger
Third movie was solely Kruger
Fourth movie was solely Kruger.

From my personal perspective, as the movies have progressed they've gotten worse. With each movie my viewing times in the cinemas has reduced from the initial movie (four times) to AoE (once).

One thing has remained consistent. The director.

What's changed, the writers.

I don't blame Bay, I blame the writers.

It was already proved that Bay changed original scripts a lot, and that Movies with simple and naive plot (Godzilla and Hercules from this summer only) are consider good, or at least decent. Yet some people still belive that this isn't Bay's fault that his movies were disaster. I don't know how this conspiracy can be so long-living...

[Burn]

There's a big difference between taking something and changing it and creating something from scratch.

Of course he would have made changes, I would imagine all directors do that, but he did NOT re-write them. Thus blaming him solely is pointless.

[Cthulhunicron]

Finally got around to seeing Age of Extinction. I have to say, though I'm not a huge fan of the overall style of the live-action films, this is definitely an improvement over the last two. The humor was definitely toned down, and I liked that there was a more compact set of characters. Every person in the movie felt like they had a reason for being there, and I liked that the whole family works together at the end to help defeat Lockdown. I also enjoyed Kelsey Grammar as Attinger.

I still wish they would get a better writer than Ehren Kruger. The guy doesn't seem to know how to make these movies connect and flow together. First it was the Allspark that created the Transformers and now it's these mysterious aliens? The Autobots seem to be pretty aware of the fact that they were made by aliens and that they had cyberformed Earth millions of years ago. So if they knew this the whole time, why were they saying that they were created by the Allspark in the first movie? And again, the incredible coincidences surrounding Earth are just annoying. Aliens cyberform Earth, then millions of years ago, the Fallen just happens to build the star harvester on Earth, then thousands of years later, the Allspark just happens to land on Earth, and then thousands of years later, Sentinel just happens to crash into Earth's moon. Sure is convenient.

Lockdown tells Prime that he wasn't born, he was built. I'm not really sure what he's getting at here... He could mean that all Transformers on their own, when in reality they are all manufactured by the Creators. This would contradict what Hound and Optimus say later when they speak candidly about their knowledge of aliens creating their race. It would also contradict the fact that the Decepticons were able to create hatchlings in Revenge of the Fallen. Or maybe he means the aliens created the first Transformers who then reproduced on their own for generations, but then the aliens built Optimus Prime to be some special Transformer. Or maybe he was just trying to tell Prime that aliens created the Cybertronian race and nothing more. But Optimus seems to already know this. Plus, if aliens created the Cybertronians and then later generations reproduced on their own, then Optimus would still have been born..not built.

So maybe that's what the Knights were? Special Transformers that were custom built by the creators and then reinserted into Cybertronian society with false memories so they wouldn't know of their true origins? Maybe that's what the Primes were? We don't know, because the movie is frustratingly vague about all this.

Speaking of vague, we don't know hardly anything about the Dinobots. From what I could gather, the Creators made them from dinosaurs when they cyberformed Earth...even though most of the other dinosaurs were just rendered down for their metal and made into normal Transformers. So maybe the Dinobots were some kind of experiment? Then somehow, they were told of in legends...it's not clear if they lived alongside the other Cybertronians, or what exactly happened to them between being created and being captured by Lockdown.

The idea of humans wanting to make their own Transformers is a neat idea, definitely one that's been around for a while in Transformers lore. Not a huge fan of the new, micro-cube style of transforming. Half the fun is watching all the pieces of the vehicle slide around, fold, and bend to reveal the robot form. I hope the old style of transformation returns in the next movie. I also wish they had done more classic Decepticons for this movie, or maybe had Double Dealer as one of Lockdown's henchmen.

The Autobot designs were definitely an improvement over abominations like Q and the twins. I kinda wish these Autobots would act a little more like heroes, though. Crosshairs openly talks about wishing he could kill all the others so he could be in charge. Hound kills a small animal on Lockdown's ship simply for spitting on him. It's hard for me to really sympathize with these characters when they're always screaming about killing everything in sight, hitting each other, calling everything a "bitch," etc. "I'm a fat ballerina who takes scalps and slits throats" has to be one of the worst lines of dialogue I've ever heard in a movie.

In closing, I think the movie was okay. Still not a huge fan of Michael Bay's style of directing, or Kruger's writing, but it's definitely better than the last two. Hopefully they keep improving.

[SlyTF1]

Finally got around to seeing Age of Extinction. I have to say, though I'm not a huge fan of the overall style of the live-action films, this is definitely an improvement over the last two. The humor was definitely toned down, and I liked that there was a more compact set of characters. Every person in the movie felt like they had a reason for being there, and I liked that the whole family works together at the end to help defeat Lockdown. I also enjoyed Kelsey Grammar as Attinger.

I still wish they would get a better writer than Ehren Kruger. The guy doesn't seem to know how to make these movies connect and flow together. First it was the Allspark that created the Transformers and now it's these mysterious aliens? The Autobots seem to be pretty aware of the fact that they were made by aliens and that they had cyberformed Earth millions of years ago. So if they knew this the whole time, why were they saying that they were created by the Allspark in the first movie? And again, the incredible coincidences surrounding Earth are just annoying. Aliens cyberform Earth, then millions of years ago, the Fallen just happens to build the star harvester on Earth, then thousands of years later, the Allspark just happens to land on Earth, and then thousands of years later, Sentinel just happens to crash into Earth's moon. Sure is convenient.

Lockdown tells Prime that he wasn't born, he was built. I'm not really sure what he's getting at here... He could mean that all Transformers on their own, when in reality they are all manufactured by the Creators. This would contradict what Hound and Optimus say later when they speak candidly about their knowledge of aliens creating their race. It would also contradict the fact that the Decepticons were able to create hatchlings in Revenge of the Fallen. Or maybe he means the aliens created the first Transformers who then reproduced on their own for generations, but then the aliens built Optimus Prime to be some special Transformer. Or maybe he was just trying to tell Prime that aliens created the Cybertronian race and nothing more. But Optimus seems to already know this. Plus, if aliens created the Cybertronians and then later generations reproduced on their own, then Optimus would still have been born..not built.

So maybe that's what the Knights were? Special Transformers that were custom built by the creators and then reinserted into Cybertronian society with false memories so they wouldn't know of their true origins? Maybe that's what the Primes were? We don't know, because the movie is frustratingly vague about all this.

Speaking of vague, we don't know hardly anything about the Dinobots. From what I could gather, the Creators made them from dinosaurs when they cyberformed Earth...even though most of the other dinosaurs were just rendered down for their metal and made into normal Transformers. So maybe the Dinobots were some kind of experiment? Then somehow, they were told of in legends...it's not clear if they lived alongside the other Cybertronians, or what exactly happened to them between being created and being captured by Lockdown.

The idea of humans wanting to make their own Transformers is a neat idea, definitely one that's been around for a while in Transformers lore. Not a huge fan of the new, micro-cube style of transforming. Half the fun is watching all the pieces of the vehicle slide around, fold, and bend to reveal the robot form. I hope the old style of transformation returns in the next movie. I also wish they had done more classic Decepticons for this movie, or maybe had Double Dealer as one of Lockdown's henchmen.

The Autobot designs were definitely an improvement over abominations like Q and the twins. I kinda wish these Autobots would act a little more like heroes, though. Crosshairs openly talks about wishing he could kill all the others so he could be in charge. Hound kills a small animal on Lockdown's ship simply for spitting on him. It's hard for me to really sympathize with these characters when they're always screaming about killing everything in sight, hitting each other, calling everything a "****," etc. "I'm a fat ballerina who takes scalps and slits throats" has to be one of the worst lines of dialogue I've ever heard in a movie.

In closing, I think the movie was okay. Still not a huge fan of Michael Bay's style of directing, or Kruger's writing, but it's definitely better than the last two. Hopefully they keep improving.

The things about the Knights and the Creators are supposed to be vague. They still have 2 movies left to explain it all.

[ZeroWolf]

But see you're blaming the Director. You're completely over-looking the writers.

First movie was Orci/Kurtzman, notorious for not being very original.
Second movie was interrupted by the writers strike, so was rushed, Orci/Kurtzman returned along with Ehran Kruger
Third movie was solely Kruger
Fourth movie was solely Kruger.

From my personal perspective, as the movies have progressed they've gotten worse. With each movie my viewing times in the cinemas has reduced from the initial movie (four times) to AoE (once).

One thing has remained consistent. The director.

What's changed, the writers.

I don't blame Bay, I blame the writers.

It was already proved that Bay changed original scripts a lot, and that Movies with simple and naive plot (Godzilla and Hercules from this summer only) are consider good, or at least decent. Yet some people still belive that this isn't Bay's fault that his movies were disaster. I don't know how this conspiracy can be so long-living...

But there is no conspiracy. People out there love these movies. Simple as. Everyone has their tastes. Also not everyone wants the live action movies to just be repeats of the not-very-good-at-all-when-looked-at-without-nostagia-goggles animated movie.

[Cthulhunicron]

The things about the Knights and the Creators are supposed to be vague. They still have 2 movies left to explain it all.

I'll be very impressed if they do. I was hoping Transformers 3 would explain what the Fallen did between leaving Earth and his appearance in Transformers 2 but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again. I was hoping Transformers 4 would shed some light on whether Sentinel was leaving Cybertron to look for the Allspark or if the Allspark was launched after he left, but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again.

[SlyTF1]

The things about the Knights and the Creators are supposed to be vague. They still have 2 movies left to explain it all.

I'll be very impressed if they do. I was hoping Transformers 3 would explain what the Fallen did between leaving Earth and his appearance in Transformers 2 but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again. I was hoping Transformers 4 would shed some light on whether Sentinel was leaving Cybertron to look for the Allspark or if the Allspark was launched after he left, but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again.

The prequel comics mentioned that. I don't see why the movies would have to cover something that was already explained in the same continuity, twice. I thought that the reason they eliminated comics for AOE was specifically because people who didn't read the ones that came out with the first three were confused about it all. Thus, giving them the opportunity to explain everything in this new trilogy in the actual movies themselves.

Plus, I remember before the movie even came out, Bay said something about certain aspects in Lockdown's ship hinting at things that would be more fleshed out in sequels. And the entire ship was a Knight ship, so I assumed that's the concept he was talking about. I also remember the producer saying that if the fans wanted the Knights to be expanded upon, they would try do just that.

[Burn]

The prequel comics mentioned that. I don't see why the movies would have to cover something that was already explained in the same continuity, twice.

You know the majority of those people who went to see the movies that helped each of them generate millions, and some times billions of dollars?

Yeah ... most of them don't read comics.

I really wish you'd step back and realise that nearly everyone else in the world isn't as narrow mindedly obsessed like you are, perhaps then you'd actually be more objective in these discussions.

[Cthulhunicron]

The prequel comics mentioned that. I don't see why the movies would have to cover something that was already explained in the same continuity, twice. I thought that the reason they eliminated comics for AOE was specifically because people who didn't read the ones that came out with the first three were confused about it all. Thus, giving them the opportunity to explain everything in this new trilogy in the actual movies themselves.

I shouldn't have to read peripheral material such as prequel comics to understand a movie's plot. It's cool if they add something to the backstory, something that's not necessary to follow the actual films, but they shouldn't be essential reading. If I watch a film series, and things don't add up because I'm not reading the comics that are released at the same time as the film, then that's the fault of the film writers, not me.

besides, even if you do read the comics, it still doesn't quite make sense. According to the comics, the Primes trap the Fallen in another dimension, and then randomly he shows up in Revenge of the Fallen film, with no explanation of how he escaped.

[SKYWARPED_128]

The things about the Knights and the Creators are supposed to be vague. They still have 2 movies left to explain it all.

I'll be very impressed if they do. I was hoping Transformers 3 would explain what the Fallen did between leaving Earth and his appearance in Transformers 2 but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again. I was hoping Transformers 4 would shed some light on whether Sentinel was leaving Cybertron to look for the Allspark or if the Allspark was launched after he left, but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again.

To be perfectly honest, Bay goes by the rule of cool, and doesn't really worry about minor details. That can be a good thing when applied to movies with less mythology and history to worry about, like Bad Boys and The Rock. But when you're talking about Transformers, a universe that has massive amounts of fictional history built into it...well, let's just say details aren't his forte.

To be fair, though, I'd rather not be reminded of ROTF ever again.

As for whether the questions posed in AoE will be answered in TF5 or not, I'm actually rather optimistic that they will. Of all 4 movies, AoE is the only movie that wrapped things up with a sort of "to be continued" ending, where you see Galvatron alive and promising revenge, and Optimus jetting off to search for the so-called Creators. In the last 3, it's just OP striking a heroic pose and giving an affected speech about humans and TF's, while Sam does whatever Sam does, nearby.

I shouldn't have to read peripheral material such as prequel comics to understand a movie's plot. It's cool if they add something to the backstory, something that's not necessary to follow the actual films, but they shouldn't be essential reading. If I watch a film series, and things don't add up because I'm not reading the comics that are released at the same time as the film, then that's the fault of the film writers, not me.

Agreed. A movie, novel or whatever medium in which a story is told should never rely on tie-ins to plug plot holes.

[Smokescreen]

The prequel comics mentioned that. I don't see why the movies would have to cover something that was already explained in the same continuity, twice.

You know the majority of those people who went to see the movies that helped each of them generate millions, and some times billions of dollars?

Yeah ... most of them don't read comics.

I really wish you'd step back and realise that nearly everyone else in the world isn't as narrow mindedly obsessed like you are, perhaps then you'd actually be more objective in these discussions.

I agree with you here Burn. After all, the comics that involved the Fallen were only available in the UK. Us Americans who have different variations of comics available to us, do not always get the same back story as other parts of the world. Places like Japan had Beast Wars NEO and Beast Wars II. The UK had comics with a character called The Fallen. All of which I still don't know the whole story to. (I've watched all of the American cartoons as well as read most of the comics available) I personally didn't know anything about The Fallen until the movie came out, and I did some digging to find out that it was a "UK" thing.

The things about the Knights and the Creators are supposed to be vague. They still have 2 movies left to explain it all.

I'll be very impressed if they do. I was hoping Transformers 3 would explain what the Fallen did between leaving Earth and his appearance in Transformers 2 but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again. I was hoping Transformers 4 would shed some light on whether Sentinel was leaving Cybertron to look for the Allspark or if the Allspark was launched after he left, but the whole thing got dropped and was never mentioned again.

Thank you for expanding on what I was trying to explain Cthulh. Like you explained, the story, and the dialogue were confusing to me. I was hoping for more of an expansion on the story so I could say, "OHhhhh so THATS whats going on.. " Instead I was constantly left hanging. And yes like you put in another post, I thought it was a bad idea to have Autobots like Hound make comments about killing other living beings.. which is EXACTLY what the Autobots (such as Optimus Prime) do NOT want to happen.

[Rodimus Prime]

The prequel comics mentioned that. I don't see why the movies would have to cover something that was already explained in the same continuity, twice.

You know the majority of those people who went to see the movies that helped each of them generate millions, and some times billions of dollars?

Yeah ... most of them don't read comics.

I really wish you'd step back and realise that nearly everyone else in the world isn't as narrow mindedly obsessed like you are, perhaps then you'd actually be more objective in these discussions.

QFT.

[TurboMMaster]

There's a big difference between taking something and changing it and creating something from scratch.

Of course he would have made changes, I would imagine all directors do that, but he did NOT re-write them. Thus blaming him solely is pointless.

The main reason why ROTF was considered so bad are

1) Igorning the facts estabilished in first movie
2) Idiotic Jokes
3) Overpowored Optimus Prime
4) Characters introduced only to beign killed after few seconds.

The second and the third one Bay's changes, without them, we will don't got Transformers with balls, Simmon's Ass, less ridicilous Forest & Final Battles. A less pitafull Megatron. Also Grindor survived in Comic Book, I don't see reason why he should die in the movie.

I he decide to leave writing to the writers, we could propably had enjoyable ROTF, not great, but no so bad either.

However, AOE is great improvement in this term: Galvatron not only survivied and didin't die or beign humiliated in any way, but he didn't lost a single fight in the entire movie and and get away, possibly taking Lockdown's ship. Optimus is far from beign overpowered, since Lockdown knocked him down easily + he had lost to human soldiers few years later(If they only didn't let him to beat Grimlock....) . Most of stupid jokes are out, and characters (Drones aside) at least seems unique. So Yeah, AOE is what ROTF should have beign. If Bayformers stays on this track, Transformers 5 can be quite good.

[Burn]

-edit-

It just occurred to me this is a thread about Age of Extinction, talking about Bay's involvement in the first three movies is off topic.

And of course, discussed to death, horse has been beaten to a pulp. Time for that soap box to be ...

[Cthulhunicron]

I agree with you here Burn. After all, the comics that involved the Fallen were only available in the UK. Us Americans who have different variations of comics available to us, do not always get the same back story as other parts of the world. Places like Japan had Beast Wars NEO and Beast Wars II. The UK had comics with a character called The Fallen. All of which I still don't know the whole story to. (I've watched all of the American cartoons as well as read most of the comics available) I personally didn't know anything about The Fallen until the movie came out, and I did some digging to find out that it was a "UK" thing.

The Fallen was not a UK thing. The Fallen is first mentioned in the Dreamwave comic miniseries, The War Within: The Dark Ages, and the movie version of his character appears in the Revenge of the Fallen prequel comics. All of these comics were available in the US.