Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Alright I'll walk the plank...A "Real" fan, is a fan who is soooooo enigmatically bewildered that people who watched the same $hit they did 20 whatever years ago, and think that this current incarnation of TF is actually faithful to that work...It's not right, but that's how most of us "Real" fans feel...We feel like "How can YOU be a real fan and support this $hit..." Again, not right but that's how most of us feel...

Like you said it's not right and it is a very narrowminded way to think, but from here on out to each their own.

Seibertron wrote:

Michael Bay is not quitting Transformers

Too bad. After seeing ROTF last night, I wish he would.

Wow, Seibs, that sounds pretty loaded coming from you. Looking forward to your review (which I will read AFTER me, Counterpunch, Prime Evil and Soundstang see it tomorrow night)

warahi wrote:like him or not I can safely say that he isn't perfect for the job. Big explosions and robots may be what attract the general audience but Transformers has the potential to be so much more nowadays with all the material there is and all these movies seem to really care about is explosions and things that general public will be impressed with until they leave the theatre.

I don't "Dislike" MB at all? I just like a fool thought, that with one of the Greatest Directors of alltime (Spielberg as a mentor); he'd have put more 'EC' emotional content into this franchise. He claims much like the folk behind (XMEN/same writers) that they 'CARE ABOUT THE CHARACTERS/BOTS/FRANCHISE, well we see they don't otherwise we wouldn't have 'a revenge of the nerds-SAM in place of a wrench-weildling SPIKE'; or a goofylooking MUDFLAP instead of JEEP WRANGLER HOUND?

How complicated is that? Bay and Singer are so damn set on being 'different from the orginals' that they miss what was good and simple about them? Sam didn't have a mother, take her out? To Save On Costs: Have them in VECHICLE MODE MORE STUPID?
How many times did Spike talk to BBEE while riding inside him or Prime?
Bay was the one who decided Orginally on How the TF would 'look', this Facestyle, and the really expensive rendering of the constantly moving parts well....see? If the body 'has to move' don't make the Face so darn expensive, make it smooth/frankly it would look better?

Bay just isn't a creative director, which is why there is NO CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT/NO REAL PLOT...and he relies on as Many of you have put it "crude humor/racial jokes/foul language". Oh how I wish Sam Raimi or Louis Lettier had done these films or consulted on them. Bay isn't bad, he just doesn't know how to pick good scripts? Some really really good Dir. can, and don't need any help from their Producers, well HE DOES LOL. And this time it was evident w/ having a toychest full of money at his disposal ....He wasted it in all the wrong places.
EXAMPLE James Cameron did it with TITANIC, years ago when it 1st came out everybody ran 2C it, loved it, great sp.Effects, great ship 2 look at, stupidass story; years later nobody cares or watches that film?
I Think TF is this generations special effects Titanic in a way, more so than the HULK, though thats' a much better film.

roguecds wrote:

warahi wrote:like him or not I can safely say that he isn't perfect for the job. Big explosions and robots may be what attract the general audience but Transformers has the potential to be so much more nowadays with all the material there is and all these movies seem to really care about is explosions and things that general public will be impressed with until they leave the theatre.

I don't "Dislike" MB at all? I just like a fool thought, that with one of the Greatest Directors of alltime (Spielberg as a mentor); he'd have put more 'EC' emotional content into this franchise. He claims much like the folk behind (XMEN/same writers) that they 'CARE ABOUT THE CHARACTERS/BOTS/FRANCHISE, well we see they don't otherwise we wouldn't have 'a revenge of the nerds-SAM in place of a wrench-weildling SPIKE'; or a goofylooking MUDFLAP instead of JEEP WRANGLER HOUND?

How complicated is that? Bay and Singer are so damn set on being 'different from the orginals' that they miss what was good and simple about them? Sam didn't have a mother, take her out? To Save On Costs: Have them in VECHICLE MODE MORE STUPID?
How many times did Spike talk to BBEE while riding inside him or Prime?
Bay was the one who decided Orginally on How the TF would 'look', this Facestyle, and the really expensive rendering of the constantly moving parts well....see? If the body 'has to move' don't make the Face so darn expensive, make it smooth/frankly it would look better?

Bay just isn't a creative director, which is why there is NO CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT/NO REAL PLOT...and he relies on as Many of you have put it "crude humor/racial jokes/foul language". Oh how I wish Sam Raimi or Louis Lettier had done these films or consulted on them. Bay isn't bad, he just doesn't know how to pick good scripts? Some really really good Dir. can, and don't need any help from their Producers, well HE DOES LOL. And this time it was evident w/ having a toychest full of money at his disposal ....He wasted it in all the wrong places.
EXAMPLE James Cameron did it with TITANIC, years ago when it 1st came out everybody ran 2C it, loved it, great sp.Effects, great ship 2 look at, stupidass story; years later nobody cares or watches that film?
I Think TF is this generations special effects Titanic in a way, more so than the HULK, though thats' a much better film.

Amen, brother, he’s just not up to the challenge in any respects when it comes to material like this, and Steven Speilberg, pardon me if I don’t flush most of the respect I had for him down the toilet when he’s the guy who handpicked Bay and thought this guy would do anything more than what he had done his whole career…When I watch stuff like Munich, Schindler’s list, Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade, I’m mesmerized by how creative and chilling Speilberg can be, but it seems as if the day he learned how to make a Volasel Raptor open a kitchen door, he has lost so much of his storytelling ability (Much like his friend George Lucas)…I almost blame him more than Bay….

Feel your pain, even more than you, but the box office numbers are gonna blow our opinions outta the water, and we can look forward to more $hit of this level getting green-lighted to Bay's ego maniacal delight...

Bay should resign. Even after the first one I thought he should of quitted. Unless some of you want to be tortured more by Bay making other bad Tf sequels like ROTF. With Bay, the Tf film franchise is going downhill.

Robinson wrote:Again, I ask you what constitutes a "Real" transformers fan?

Getting five Botcon awards.

Seibertron wrote:

Michael Bay is not quitting Transformers

Too bad. After seeing ROTF last night, I wish he would.

And if Seibertron says it, damn, it MUST be true.




I'm in no way saying that what Seibertron says is always true. For example his sig mentions plotholes and fun in the same sentence.

SpacerAM2 wrote:Bay should resign. Even after the first one I thought he should of quitted. Unless some of you want to be tortured more by Bay making other bad Tf sequels like ROTF. With Bay, the Tf film franchise is going downhill.

If you're talking money, I'm fairly sure that the film earnings would disagree. If you're talking quality, I think Bay does a wonderful job on the action scenes, but the plot isn't really his area. That's more on the heads of the writers.

Mkall wrote:

SpacerAM2 wrote:Bay should resign. Even after the first one I thought he should of quitted. Unless some of you want to be tortured more by Bay making other bad Tf sequels like ROTF. With Bay, the Tf film franchise is going downhill.

If you're talking money, I'm fairly sure that the film earnings would disagree. If you're talking quality, I think Bay does a wonderful job on the action scenes, but the plot isn't really his area. That's more on the heads of the writers.

If you want to keep being duped by Bay like so many others, go right ahead

SpacerAM2 wrote:If you want to keep being duped by Bay like so many others, go right ahead

If you want to simply blame Bay because he's "the big guy" go right ahead

Mkall wrote:

SpacerAM2 wrote:If you want to keep being duped by Bay like so many others, go right ahead

If you want to simply blame Bay because he's "the big guy" go right ahead

+1

Thats why I made my other thread, for peoples thoughts on why the moie may have not been the best, besides just blaming bay because its what all the cool kids do these days.

You know...what I find interesting in the TF community, is that there are such varying tastes. TF fans (who have such a love and passion for these little pieces of plastic and the characters that we have associated with them) have all come into the source material at different points in time. I think most of us came onboard at the beginning, and are therefore in love with the designs, ideas, and characterization that happened at that point. Then again, there are so many fans (who are younger) who have joined in more recent years and started with the more recent shows and toys. Also, the age difference in the fans means that there is a large difference in values and morals that the different fans have and have been exposed to.

I think that the combination of these facts, and the addition of non-TF fans going to see the movie, is what really stirs this debate on. I have seen many posts on this site from people who seem to think that a movie based on G1 would be for the hardcore Tf fans only, and would automatically fail because only they would go to see it. There are many G1 fans who hate the Bay designs, the way the plots and characters have progressed, and the inclusion of (what seems to be) racial stereotypes and bathroom humor.

I am part of the older, G1-loving group. I truly cannot understand why people would think that a TF movie, loosely based in G1 designs and ideas, would be such a non-moneymaker. As we have seen from the 1st movie, "Joe Blow moviegoers" (who have never been a part of the TF community) have absolutely loved watching vehicles changing into robots in a live-action movie. What evidence is there to suggest that if the designs had been a lot closer to G1 (or at least, something where you can clearly tell what body part is what), if there were no stereotypes, and if there were more plot and characterization, that there would be fewer movie-goers spending money?

I just do not see why they felt they had to create a vision of TFs that is just SO MUCH different than what the fans are used to. I mean, I have never seen any of the cartoons besides G1, Energon, and a few Anime episodes (to be honest). However, did any of the other series have so much sexual innuendo, lewd behavior, and childishness in them? I seriously doubt it. These are shows and toys that were/are created for CHILDREN. (We older collectors and fans don't want to let go of our childhood and fail to grasp that concept sometime, but that is no excuse for the people who created these movies.) But why did they feel the absolute need to change the designs sooo much that it is hard to tell what their faces and bodies look like? Why can't Bay freaking STOP JERKING THE CAMERA SO DAMNED MUCH?! At least in G1 (and the rest of the cartoons), you can clearly make out who is fighting and what is happening during the fights. After the fan reaction to the 1st movie, why would they not concentrate on that a little more?

Look, I saw TF2 last night and (for the most part) really enjoyed it. I was one of the many people in the theater that laughed at almost every single joke, hard mostly! However (just like the 1st movie)the stereotypes and the sexual innuendo were there and the were obvious. And, once again, you could not see what the hell was happening throughout much of the fighting because of the designs and the camera work. It sucks, because with today's special effects, better character designs, less camera movement, and better stories, we could ALL love these movies. But with Michael Bay directing these it just won't happen. I wish we had started these movies with Spielberg or Lucas directing them.

inturnmike wrote:I have seen many posts on this site from people who seem to think that a movie based on G1 would be for the hardcore Tf fans only, and would automatically fail because only they would go to see it.

Transformers (1986) 5 mil opening weekend.
Transformers (2007) 70.5 mil opening weekend, 155 mil opening week
Transformers 2 (2009) 60 mil opening DAY

That right there shows why a "G1"ish movie probably wouldnt work. People in general dont want to see something that was designed 25 years ago. It had to be fresh to stand a chance and having the least bit of creditability. Now I know ppl can say well if the 86 came out now it would make a lot more money than it did then, but thats just for nostalgia in my opinion.


At least with the new movies when the guy gies he isnt just put back together like a lego. *ahem* Ultra Magnus. The time has gome and gone for "PURE G1" now a mix of styles may appease more fans but straight up wont cut it.

No, what that shows is that back in 1986, almost all ofthe fans were just kids, and the "non-TF" fans didn't go to see it because it was an ANIMATED movie. Believe me, just like people flocked to see Jurassic Park because it had live-action dinosaurs, people go to these TF movies because they want to see how real they can look and how cool the action can be. There is NO REASON at all that they could not have used designs where you could distinguish body parts and still make it look realistic. It is hard to tell what bot is what when they are tangled and fighting each other! A little better designs and camera work would fix that,and we'd all be happy. I think it would make even MORE money. Oh, and just making a ton of money doesn't make a movie a great one. It just lines the studios' pockets a little more.

That was way back in 1986. Plus it was a cartoon which mostly equates to an kids flick. Animated films then weren't the huge success as the Pixar films are today. Plus TF had only been out for less than to years at that point so it didn't have time to build up a super huge follow the current TF movies possess.

I still believe that a live action movie close based of G1 would still be very successful. It wouldn't have to follow it to a t, still enough to resemble G1 timeline/storyline. I think realistic G1 alt modes, with a few exceptions, would work and could still be made to be realistic.

Point is the TF movies are being successful because of the 20+ year build up to them because of the huge fanbase that the franchise has created. I'm not knocking what they have produce as I am happy with most of the stuff that has come out.

That why I said "probably" and "in my opinion" It may work, it may not.

SpacerAM2 wrote:If you want to keep being duped by Bay like so many others, go right ahead

What does this mean exactly?

I've seen this sort of comment a few times over the last few days and I just don't understand it. It seems like people are implying that if you liked the movie you must be stupid or something.

Heaven forbid people have their own tastes like inturnmike said.

Evolution Prime wrote:That was way back in 1986. Plus it was a cartoon which mostly equates to an kids flick. Animated films then weren't the huge success as the Pixar films are today. Plus TF had only been out for less than to years at that point so it didn't have time to build up a super huge follow the current TF movies possess.

I still believe that a live action movie close based of G1 would still be very successful. It wouldn't have to follow it to a t, still enough to resemble G1 timeline/storyline. I think realistic G1 alt modes, with a few exceptions, would work and could still be made to be realistic.

Point is the TF movies are being successful because of the 20+ year build up to them because of the huge fanbase that the franchise has created. I'm not knocking what they have produce as I am happy with most of the stuff that has come out.

Yeah, that is what I am getting at. If Bay and Co. wanted to "update" the franchise to make it more non-TF fan friendly, that's fine with me, as it just gives TFs more exposure and expands teh fan base. The thing is...he could have made us all happy by just making updates to teh existing character designs, not making them some weird hybrids that are barely recognizeable to the existing fanbase. I know it is an old argument, but I think that would appease the most people and still make them fresh and new enough to attract a whole new fanbase. I am not saying G1 or nothing (or vice versa). I'm just saying a lot of people in their late 20's/early 30's wish that they could've stuck with the basis of TFs a little closer. It could have been done, and we know that just based on some ofthe CGI that fans have made themselves, using far weaker equipment and with less funds. These two movies very easily could have been called "Xylomorphs" or something, and if they changed the colors and parts a little, and it would be a completely different movie having nothing to do with TFs. I'm just saying that they are that far removed from the "usual" TFs. And you could see what is happening when Prime is hacking away with his sword vs. just blurs of motion and loud noises, then some bot gets (what we assume to be) his face ripped off. I mean, we waited for 20+ years for the CGI to be good enough to look real, why can't we make it a little better?

My biggest problem actually has to do with the selection of characters. Someone said it earlier; where was Hound? Instead of Hound or another great character, we get....Skids and Mudflap? That just seems counterintuitive to me. BTW, I don't just mean Hound-he was just a good example that someone used.

Prime Riblet wrote:My biggest problem actually has to do with the selection of characters. Someone said it earlier; where was Hound? Instead of Hound or another great character, we get....Skids and Mudflap? That just seems counterintuitive to me. BTW, I don't just mean Hound-he was just a good example that someone used.

While using more well known characters would have been great, i think it was wise to bring in a few that weren't quite as popular as others. If we used up all the good ones in the first couple movies, you'd be left with nothing but crap non known characters for the remaining movies. It also seems that in the first movie, the autobots got the more recognizable characters. This time around, the focus was more about the Decepticons characters than autobots. Maybe for the third well get an equal amount popular character selection from both sides.

@inturnmike – Great posts, it really motivates me to hear some people on the same wavelength as me…Just to add to your already potent analysis, I’ll also say another thing that’s overlooked (In regards to how they could have made a movie actually faithful to the source material) is that the period in which TF was iconic and at it’s height in the public realm was during the 1985-1989 or whatever time period…So it would make sense that if you derived a plan to make a movie that you would take the most relevant period of the material to atleast examine for cinematic appeal…Why wouldn’t the 5-10 year olds who are now 30-35 not be engaged by a story that had an integrity with the original work? TF sells itself and if ILM was gonna be involved there were still going to be plenty of awesomeness in-terms of CGI? Big a$$ transforming Robots would have still attracted a huge audience no matter who directed it…

Unlike a Batman or Superman that had a plethora of different time periods where it was popular in the public sphere (Giving way to multiple genres within that set to take stories from) Transformers most incredible period here in the western world was in the mid-80’s…Now that’s not to say or suggest that everything that came after that was crap or wak or whatver…The comicbook sphere, the toy sphere, etc., was still relevant in it’s own way, but nothing in TF history preceding the film was bigger than the mid-80’s cartoon run, not Beast Wars, not Energon, not Hasbro’s new toy incarnations (Although TF popularity lasted far into the 90’s in Japan after they made the sequel Headmasters series)…It almost defies logic that you would totally alienate the fanbase that made TF relevant and created the pop-culture phenomenon in the first place….

If teenagers were gonna see a movie directed by Bay who made movies when they were still toddlers, then why wouldn’t they see one by a James Cameron, or Robert Zemekis, or Stephen Speilberg (pre-2000 version^^) or Peter Jackson, or JJ Abrams, etc.,? This isn’t the Hulk, it’s transforming cars that talk, it was gonna be successful with 2007 plus technology…To go so far away from the roots of this series and basically create a cherry-picked TF world where it could virtually be called anything is more the will of one man’s ego than it is of any relevant pondering…

Orci and Kurtz the same guys who wrote something as decent if not totally satisfying in Star Trek, were the ones who wrote this franchise too?? I’ll never believe it, Mike Bay bullies every writer he has ever worked on a film with (Google it) and throws out scripts on the fly with no regard for anything but his massive ego…To think I waited 20 whatever years for this, and for people to die defending this it’s indeed disappointing, but only these words can hold some sort of comfort, just like the iconic time-period in which TF was at it’s greatest height….To $hit on the integrity of that, to go OUT OF YOUR WAY (Flames on Prime, Totally jacked up designs, Calling Spike Sam) to do this, and wonder why so many of us are so upset…What’s to wonder?

5150 Cruiser wrote:

Prime Riblet wrote:My biggest problem actually has to do with the selection of characters. Someone said it earlier; where was Hound? Instead of Hound or another great character, we get....Skids and Mudflap? That just seems counterintuitive to me. BTW, I don't just mean Hound-he was just a good example that someone used.

While using more well known characters would have been great, i think it was wise to bring in a few that weren't quite as popular as others. If we used up all the good ones in the first couple movies, you'd be left with nothing but crap non known characters for the remaining movies. It also seems that in the first movie, the autobots got the more recognizable characters. This time around, the focus was more about the Decepticons characters than autobots. Maybe for the third well get an equal amount popular character selection from both sides.

Good point 5150. Hope the character selection is awesome for the 3rd (which we know will occur).

Whitch were all looking forward to! (as much as many here will never admit! )