Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

[Deadput]

Okay... so, in your minds, what details/plot points could the movies have included that would satisfy your criteria for not being a string of coincidences?

Not ALL of those you listed are mere coincidences, but most of them are.[/q

But still no explanation of *how* people are deciding what is and isn't a coincincidence versus an homage, so basically what I'm hearing people say is that the movies have few to no homages to other Transformers series, just a LOT of coincidental similarities, which we know *must* be coincidental because the movies have few to no homages.

But their probably right though just because it seems like a homage doesn't actually mean it is.

Unless it's something very specific it's more then likely a coincidence but a happy one.

[Dr. Caelus]

Okay... so, in your minds, what details/plot points could the movies have included that would satisfy your criteria for not being a string of coincidences?

Not ALL of those you listed are mere coincidences, but most of them are.[/q

But still no explanation of *how* people are deciding what is and isn't a coincincidence versus an homage, so basically what I'm hearing people say is that the movies have few to no homages to other Transformers series, just a LOT of coincidental similarities, which we know *must* be coincidental because the movies have few to no homages.

It's more like they're very general and non-specific tropes that happen a lot in many action and sci-fi properties, not just Transformers. It's true we don't know why any particular decision was made, but we can also make educated guesses and not immediately jump to the conclusion that something is a homage just because it's a common fictional trope both the movies and a previous Transformers series has utilised.

So how many coincidental similarities would there have to be be before the similarities were no longer considered coincidental?

[Deadput]

So how many coincidental similarities would there have to be be before the similarities were no longer considered coincidental?

When their actually homages and not just coincidences for example the only ones I could see being intentional in your movie 4 lists are

Bad guys want to use MacGuffin to cyberform Earth (Key to Vector Sigma) and only loosely

Grimlock challenges Optimus's authority (G1) I mean that's always been a part of Grimlock so whatever and it's not like Grimlock talked either making his defiance not that big a deal.

But stuff like this:
Optimus gives up his guns in favor of a sweet@$$ melee weapon and the ability to fly (Transformers: Animated)

Are absolutely not homages at all that is a definite coincidence and a loose one too since Animated Optimus uses a hammer and an actual jetpack instead of a knight sword and rocket boots.

[Seibertron]

Where is Bayverse Dr Archeville? He would have been an awesome character, done Bayverse style, to have had in DOTM.

[Deadput]

Where is Bayverse Dr Archeville? He would have been an awesome character, done Bayverse style, to have had in DOTM.

Maybe he was considered to cartoonish to the dreamy Patrick Dempsey... oh wait.

[Rodimus Prime]

Where is Bayverse Dr Archeville? He would have been an awesome character, done Bayverse style, to have had in DOTM.

Maybe he was considered to cartoonish to the dreamy Patrick Dempsey... oh wait.

John Malkovich was in DoTM, I always thought he would have been perfect to play Dr. Arkeville. He kinda looks like him, and is kinda crazy like he was. Too bad they turned his character into a buffoon instead of a serious menace. Much like most of the Transformers themselves.

[william-james88]

So much wasted talent.

[Seibertron]

Where is Bayverse Dr Archeville? He would have been an awesome character, done Bayverse style, to have had in DOTM.

Maybe he was considered to cartoonish to the dreamy Patrick Dempsey... oh wait.

John Malkovich was in DoTM, I always thought he would have been perfect to play Dr. Arkeville. He kinda looks like him, and is kinda crazy like he was. Too bad they turned his character into a buffoon instead of a serious menace. Much like most of the Transformers themselves.

Wow, I completely forgot about him being in the movie, which doesn't say much or it says a lot, depending on how you want to look at that. Yah, he would've have been perfect for Dr Archeville had they played up that idea instead.

[Deadput]

Wow, I completely forgot about him being in the movie, which doesn't say much or it says a lot, depending on how you want to look at that. Yah, he would've have been perfect for Dr Archeville had they played up that idea instead.

But would you want the character that John played to be in the film for most of it?

[Va'al]

Over from CinemaCon, where some new footage is being shown by Paramount for the upcoming Transformers: The Last Knight movie - if you're interested, you can find out more here, though be warned for spoilers - the film's cast and Michael Bay are pressing and schmoozing, and social media is there to document it! You can check out Laura Haddock, Isabela Moner, Mark Wahlberg, Anthony Hopkins, Jerrod Carmichael in the images below, and take a look at the official clip from Twitter, too.

video

[Dr. Caelus]

So how many coincidental similarities would there have to be be before the similarities were no longer considered coincidental?

When their actually homages and not just coincidences

So, again, you're saying that we know something is a coincidence because it's not an homage, and we know that because we know it's a coincidence.

I don't even actually like the movies, but you guys are driving me nuts. You're using "coincidence" as a preclusion rather than a conclusion.

If you have a concurrence, naturally you should wonder if the concurrent events are correlated with one another. If you can find no evidence that the incidents are correlated, you can reasonably conclude that they're only concurrent - they are coincidental (or, you might say, you "fail to reject the null hypothesis"). Fair enough. It doesn't make sense, though, to eliminate a large portion of your 'data' from your 'analysis' on the premise that the concurrent events are coincidences. You're eliminating evidence based on a presumption about the conclusion you're trying to arrive at in the end.

Let's say I was looking at two research papers (or maybe two short stories or comic books - the medium doesn't really matter, what matters is we have an old one and a new one). The new one has a dozen different things that are very similar to the old one, so I suggest that the new one is based on the old one. The author pulls out a dozen other research papers, and says that clearly paper #2 is not ripping off paper #1, because each of the dozen things that is similar between paper #2 and paper #1, is also similar between paper #2 and one of the other dozen or so papers - the fact that it has so many similarities to this previous research paper is coincidence. Should I be convinced that paper #2 isn't plagiarized from paper #1? And by extension, if the author had said upfront that paper #2 was based on paper #1, and gave full credit, would I have cause to dismiss that claim?

Basically, (to return to Ryan's example) in order to prove that the face on mars is a matter of imagination we should have to send a $154 million probe to take better pictures demonstrate that people are just as likely to see faces in a series of randomly selected ambiguous shapes (e.g., ink blots) as in a series of photos of Mars.

So, in the context of the movies, to conclude that the similarity between the movies and the precedent Transformers properties is coincidental, we'd have to be saying that the points of similarity are not only shared with other science fiction properties, but that the movie takes no more cues from the Transformers series than it does from any other single series. In other words, to conclude that the similarities between the movies and the preceding series are a matter of chance, rather than design, we should be able to choose any science fiction series at random and see roughly the same number of similarities.

[Dagon]

Eh, it's an action movie. It's not heavy on plot and it really shouldn't be; movies of this sort work best with a relatively simple plot that's easy to follow with a few twists and turns inserted in there somewhere. It shares that much in common with the original cartoon:-

“...we feel action should be emphasised over plot—especially avoiding any complicated story lines—to ensure the success of this series with its intended viewers.”
—Bryce Malek and Dick Robbins

While all of what you say is true, it is still a valid criticism all these years after the start of the live action franchise. Some people may be ok with a lack of plot or a lack of quality plot; others may not be. I don't feel that action and plot are mutually exclusive, and for ten years now, have never been convinced otherwise by the powerhouse argument of "it's an action movie". I'd honestly find it much more convincing, and subsequently find the movies far more enjoyable, if the argument was "they show you a bunch of decent images and you just make up your own story." Choose Your Own Adventure.

[Dr. Caelus]

I'd honestly find it much more convincing, and subsequently find the movies far more enjoyable, if the argument was "they show you a bunch of decent images and you just make up your own story." Choose Your Own Adventure.

That would be interesting; that sounds like it could be Shia Lebouef's next project.

[Va'al]

The official website for Paramount's Transformers: The Last Knight live-action movie has appeared online fully updated, including videos, clips, teasers, trailers, the official synopsis and robot cast bios and links to the social media accounts (plus a new background track from the movie score). Check it out here, and let us know what you think of our coverage of the early footage and information we were able to gain access to via Paramount direct!

The Last Knight shatters the core myths of the Transformers franchise, and redefines what it means to be a hero. Humans and Transformers are at war, Optimus Prime is gone. The key to saving our future lies buried in the secrets of the past, in the hidden history of Transformers on Earth. Saving our world falls upon the shoulders of an unlikely alliance: Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg); Bumblebee; an English Lord (Sir Anthony Hopkins); and an Oxford Professor (Laura Haddock).

There comes a moment in everyone’s life when we are called upon to make a difference. In Transformers: The Last Knight, the hunted will become heroes. Heroes will become villains. Only one world will survive: theirs, or ours.

[SlyTF1]

Thanks anyways I was wondering if anyone else from Seibertron went to the event or if it was just you?

It was just me from Seibertron.com along with one representative each from bwtf.com, unicron.com, tfwiki.net, tfw2005.com, tformers.com, allspark.com, and Marcelo Matere! The rest of the group was filled out with Michael Bay superfans and Transformers fans from around the world.

Bay superfans eh? Wonder if I missed my invite in the mail



Oh and perhaps Sly too if anyone in the world is a superfan it's that guy.

Well, considering the fact that I often publicly REBUKE and CONDEMN people, in defense of these movies, the least they could do is send me a notification.

[Autobot N]

http://screenrant.com/transformers-5-la ... bumblebee/

Article says that Canopy manages to escape.

[D-Maximal_Primal]

http://screenrant.com/transformers-5-last-knight-trailer-cinemacon-bumblebee/

Article says that Canopy manages to escape.

That's actually pretty awesome, concerning Bee and Hopkins

[Deadput]

http://screenrant.com/transformers-5-last-knight-trailer-cinemacon-bumblebee/

Article says that Canopy manages to escape.

Most people say that Canopy dies though so it's inconsistent.

[Arsnof]

I think when people want more "character" their talking about screen-time and lines which we definitely got in the last movie with Optimus (as always), Crosshairs, Hound, Lockdown.

Bumblebee was a bit less of a screen hog in Aoe with Hound pretty much taking his place in the movie and Drift was good too although he got the less screen time out of all the main Autobots in that movie doesn't help that it's difficult to make a stoic personality stick out compared to loud or snarky ones such as Hound and Crosshairs.

The only characters I felt needing more screen time were The Dinobots (Although I understand since they show up at the end of the movie not much time to develop character there although a line or two from Grimlock would help at least Grimlock is coming back) and some more screemtime or at least some action scenes to make Stinger stand out more then he actually did in the final film since it's obvious compared to what we saw during filming that several scenes with Stinger were cut out of the movie.

Oh true, characters are certainly important and AoE making its Autobot cast stand out a lot more compared to the previous movies was certainly an improvement - while action should be prioritised, one should also make an effort to have the characters stand out a little and be enjoyable and likeable. Nothing groundbreaking or full of depth; but just someone that you might be able to relate to on some small level and someone who you're rooting for when they're taking the fight to the bad guys. So you can certainly criticise these movies for not having likeable, enjoyable characters if that's how you feel (it's personally how I feel; I find Optimus in these movies to be an extremely unlikable character for instance - but that's not the point I'm making here and I won't bore you all by going into why).

What I was getting at is that a lot of people seem to criticise the movie for having plots and characters that lack depth. But, as I keep saying, that's generally how action movies work best. It's not where you look for your deeply impactful stories or something that will re-define cinema for generations or have characters the like of which you've never seen before. I mean hey, maybe these movies do do that for you; I dunno. If they do, all the power to you! But for those complaining that they don't... this is a summer action blockbuster. You go in, you have fun, you get out. That's generally the point, so I don't see much worth in complaining that the first movie's story was simple or that Hound doesn't have a deeply developed backstory. One of the few points I'll agree with Bay on is that ROTF having an overly-complex mythos was a detriment because it's distracting from what should be the focus; the action.

A lot of the criticisms about the movies (ESPECIALLY the first couple) were that the Transformers themselves didn't get a lot of screen time compared to the human characters and that when they did, they were hard to tell apart. This lack of screen time led to the lack of character depth and was caused mainly by design.

There was a lot of complaining early on about how the design of the Transformers was far too complicated; basically a skeleton with wires and pistons and various gizmos and doodads barely covered up by bits and pieces of the vehicle mode. This did two things; the first being small - they were so similar in build and color that it was hard to tell them apart during fight scenes or just walking around together. The second being that, especially for the technology at the time, it was incredibly difficult to animate them. So many moving parts, so many exposed surfaces, so many exposed bits and pieces all over the place takes a LOT of time and money to render.

To put any Transformer up on the screen for longer than they did, even if it was to give more depth or more backstory that would have made the movie that much better would have cost hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars more and hundred of man and computer hours that they didn't have in the budget. So they sacrificed story for substance.

I honestly think that's why a lot of the story has been becoming more robo-centric and the designs since have been getting more and more individual and recognizable. Look at the most recent rounds of design releases. Much more solid coverage, much more color, much more variance in shape and height. And, if these previews and trailers are to be believed, much, much more presence in the movie. Which is why I'm going to give it one more try.

... in my opinion, one of the best movie designs was Jazz. He had enough visual cues from the original character to tell you that, yes, this is Jazz (the visor, the hood chest, I'm pretty sure he turned into a porche?) while also having enough new traits to give him his own visual identity separate from the original while still clearly being an update. I personally would have given him a colour scheme more reminiscent of his G1 self, but that's just my own personal aesthetic preference; I like a bit of colour compared to the grays and silvers.

And then his only line in the entire movie was basically " 'Sup, bitches?"...

[Sabrblade]

... in my opinion, one of the best movie designs was Jazz. He had enough visual cues from the original character to tell you that, yes, this is Jazz (the visor, the hood chest, I'm pretty sure he turned into a porche?) while also having enough new traits to give him his own visual identity separate from the original while still clearly being an update. I personally would have given him a colour scheme more reminiscent of his G1 self, but that's just my own personal aesthetic preference; I like a bit of colour compared to the grays and silvers.

And then his only line in the entire movie was basically " 'Sup, bitches?"...

He had more lines than that. Just, not as memorable.

[Kurona]

There was that thing he said right before he died!

[Sabrblade]

There was that thing he said right before he died!

In all honesty, I could go skim through Jazz's scenes of the movie and transcribe every line he said (and some of them were good lines), but I just don't want to right now.

[Arsnof]

From IMDB:

Transformers (2007)
Jazz: Is that all you got, Megatron?
Megatron: Come here, you little cretin!
[Megatron grabs Jazz, but Jazz opens fire with his blaster]
Jazz: You want a piece of me? You want a piece?
Megatron: No, I want TWO!
[rips Jazz in half]

Jazz: It's Megatron! Retreat! Move! Fall back!

Jazz: [jumping on Devastator] Come on, Decepticon punk!

Jazz: What's crackin' little bitches?
[does a somersault]
Optimus Prime: My first lieutenant. Designation: Jazz.
Jazz: This looks like a cool place to kick it!

Jazz: What about Bumblebee? We can't just leave him to die and become some human experiment!
Optimus Prime: He'll die in vain if we don't accomplish our mission. Bumblebee is a brave soldier. This is what he would want.

Jazz: Fire it up, Optimus!

Optimus Prime: Autobots, roll out!
Jazz: We rollin'!

[Kurona]

Jazz: What's crackin' little bitches?
[does a somersault]
Optimus Prime: My first lieutenant. Designation: Jazz.
Jazz: This looks like a cool place to kick it!

This brings to mind a way funnier scene than the movie's script has any right to...

[Deadput]

From IMDB:

Transformers (2007)
Jazz: Is that all you got, Megatron?
Megatron: Come here, you little cretin!
[Megatron grabs Jazz, but Jazz opens fire with his blaster]
Jazz: You want a piece of me? You want a piece?
Megatron: No, I want TWO!
[rips Jazz in half]

Jazz: It's Megatron! Retreat! Move! Fall back!

Jazz: [jumping on Devastator] Come on, Decepticon punk!

Jazz: What's crackin' little bitches?
[does a somersault]
Optimus Prime: My first lieutenant. Designation: Jazz.
Jazz: This looks like a cool place to kick it!

Jazz: What about Bumblebee? We can't just leave him to die and become some human experiment!
Optimus Prime: He'll die in vain if we don't accomplish our mission. Bumblebee is a brave soldier. This is what he would want.

Jazz: Fire it up, Optimus!

Optimus Prime: Autobots, roll out!
Jazz: We rollin'!

He also said a few more other lines but most of them were harder to hear I can think of three of them.

1: When their trying to hide in Sam's backyard this one is a bit hard to hear due to the music in the scene and Jazz is pretty much whispering.
Jazz: Hide? Hide where? Oh no Oh no.

2: When Jazz uses his magnet hands to take away S7 Guns
Jazz: Give me those!

3: When Bee is captured and Jazz, Ironhide and Ratchet pull up to Optimus right before he talks to Optimus about Bumblebee he tells them to stay there.
Jazz: Hang back, let me check it out.

So all in all Jazz did have plenty of lines but most of them were easy to miss in fact some of them I only heard due to a combination of headphones and subtitles since when I rewatch the the movies I use subtitles to find hidden or misheard dialogue such as Mixmaster's "listen up" and Shockwave's "Driller bot is thirsty".