Michael Bay and Mark Wahlberg Talk Transformers 4

Hmm. So it's sounding like he's going to do all three of the next trilogy. That'll make the fans have a conniption fit.

Autobot032 wrote:Hmm. So it's sounding like he's going to do all three of the next trilogy. That'll make the fans have a conniption fit.

I look forward to it. Besides the fact they're fun movies half the enjoyment is from the bitter tears of the fanboys.

And to that I proclaim: Long live the Bay!

i officially hate mark wahlberg now, the franchise needs a change not sit stagnant like it is. If hasbro doesnt want the franchise to die they need to do something & fast, & this isnt it.

whatever makes money.

Megatron Wolf wrote:i officially hate mark wahlberg now, the franchise needs a change not sit stagnant like it is. If hasbro doesnt want the franchise to die they need to do something & fast, & this isnt it.

You clearly have no idea how much good the films have done for the franchise. The more successful the films are, the more money Hasbro earns, the more Generations toys we get. We're getting Springer, Blitzwing, Metroplex, etc. thanks to the massive moolah the films have garnered.

BUT, that isn't to say anything about the quality of the films, no. I'm not saying they're flawless, masterpiece works of art. Far from it, even. The movies are flawed on so many levels, but that type of unsophisticated entertainment is simply what sells and gets as wide an amount of commercial and financial success as the the films have had.

Capt.Failure wrote:

Autobot032 wrote:Hmm. So it's sounding like he's going to do all three of the next trilogy. That'll make the fans have a conniption fit.

I look forward to it. Besides the fact they're fun movies half the enjoyment is from the bitter tears of the fanboys.

And to that I proclaim: Long live the Bay!

Nicely put.

Sabrblade wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:i officially hate mark wahlberg now, the franchise needs a change not sit stagnant like it is. If hasbro doesnt want the franchise to die they need to do something & fast, & this isnt it.

You clearly have no idea how much good the films have done for the franchise. The more successful the films are, the more money Hasbro earns, the more Generations toys we get. We're getting Springer, Blitzwing, Metroplex, etc. thanks to the massive moolah the films have garnered.

Exactly. It might even be fair to say that the movies helped save Transformers, honestly.

We only got Classics as a filler line because they knew the movie was coming and they needed something to keep fans/kids interested and keep sales going. Had the movies not been coming out, what would've?

Animated might've worked without the movies coming before it, but I doubt it. CN canceled it, the toys weren't the biggest sellers, and the animation style is a tough cookie to swallow. (And I say this being a fan. I loved Animated.)

Rescue Bots? As far as we know, it wasn't even remotely ready at that point.
Prime? Same. Heck, without the movies, we wouldn't have Prime. We wouldn't have had Orci & Kurtzman producing it.

I don't know what would've been next, but chances are it wouldn't have made it as far as it has. Cybertron ended in '05/06 and this is now 2013. That's 7-8 years. A lot can happen and change in that time. It could've been another G1 for all we know. (Ending on a really sour note.)

We now have the 30th. anniversary coming up, without the movies, I don't think we'd be celebrating it.

Are the movies perfect? Absolutely not. Are they fun moneymakers? Yup.

Fine here. That's just 4-5 years of movie toys I don't have to buy. As long as the Classics toys keep coming, they can keep making those train-wrecks of movies all they want. I only cringe thinking there's an entire generation of children growing up thinking that's what Transformers are "all about." Groan.

Autobot032 wrote:Prime? Same. Heck, without the movies, we wouldn't have Prime. We wouldn't have had Orci & Kurtzman producing it.

While not necessarily Prime, I think we still might have gotten the Aligned continuity in some form, as Hasbro was beginning to put together the Binder of Revelation around 2007-ish.

I could see War for Cybertron still coming out, but with some differences. If Prime did come out, it certainly wouldn't look as much like the movie style as it does now, so it might have been more G1 looking.

Though, I agree in not seeing Animated come out since it too was meant to be a filler series between films (with an unexpectedly overwhelming positive reaction).

So, maybe instead of Classics being a filler to tide us over until the films, it might have instead tided us over until the (radically different, but still similar in spirit to the) Aligned continuity, coming to life much sooner than 2010.

gothsaurus wrote:Fine here. That's just 4-5 years of movie toys I don't have to buy. As long as the Classics toys keep coming, they can keep making those train-wrecks of movies all they want. I only cringe thinking there's an entire generation of children growing up thinking that's what Transformers are "all about." Groan.

It's not your place to decide what new fans should and should not enjoy. Part of being a healthy member of a fandom is accepting that things change with the times. Transformers can't be stuck in 1986 forever. These films do the series a service by introducing so many new fans to Transformers that would have ignored it otherwise. These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

Megatron Wolf wrote:i officially hate mark wahlberg now, the franchise needs a change not sit stagnant like it is. If hasbro doesnt want the franchise to die they need to do something & fast, & this isnt it.

Here come the grumps... so who cares who does the films and whos in it has longest i get to see the thing i love other than my family i realy dont care i still get chills when i see the films who else is gonna make our thing come to life i mean who of us real fans hasent ever thought about what it would be like if they where real i love the fact that someone is putting the money and someone else is putting the effort in doing it, i for one love the films and exited to see whats next maybe three more after three more i dont care ill be watching with my son til i turn grandpa and take my grand children i say keep em comming bay!!

Megatron Wolf wrote:i officially hate mark wahlberg now, the franchise needs a change not sit stagnant like it is. If hasbro doesnt want the franchise to die they need to do something & fast, & this isnt it.

Here come the grumps... so who cares who does the films and whos in it has longest i get to see the thing i love other than my family i realy dont care i still get chills when i see the films who else is gonna make our thing come to life i mean who of us real fans hasent ever thought about what it would be like if they where real i love the fact that someone is putting the money and someone else is putting the effort in doing it, i for one love the films and exited to see whats next maybe three more after three more i dont care ill be watching with my son til i turn grandpa and take my grand children i say keep em comming bay!!

Capt.Failure wrote:These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

You had me up until this. The TFs play second fiddle to the humans in these films, being either background material or guest stars in their own movies. There's so much more to the Transformers than what these film portray. At best, these films can act as a conduit to get new fans interested in the brand and seek out more stuff beyond the films so they can experience a better idea of the heart and soul of the Transformers fiction.

Megatron Wolf wrote:i officially hate mark wahlberg now, the franchise needs a change not sit stagnant like it is. If hasbro doesnt want the franchise to die they need to do something & fast, & this isnt it.

1-1.5 billion dollars in box office revenue from a franchise immune to critical backlash. The introduction of Transformers to new generations of fans. The revitalization of the toy lines. New interest in Transformers TV shows.

Apparently money, popularity, and new fans kill franchises now.

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

You had me up until this. The TFs play second fiddle to the humans in these films, being either background material or guest stars in their own movies. There's so much more to the Transformers than what these film portray. At best, these films can act as a conduit to get new fans interested in the brand and seek out more stuff beyond the films so they can experience a better idea of the heart and soul of the Transformers fiction.

No, wrong. While the Transformers had less screen time in the first film (a practical step since it was an origin story and they had less budget) to say the latter two films suffered this problem is at best stretching the truth and at worst an outright lie. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they are somehow "not Transformers." If anything they acted as a necessary step up in quality from the garbage we'd been served post-Beast Wars.

My statement was just that kids won't know or respect the ROOTS of Transformers. This Bay "chapter" isn't what I'd prefer to see it judged by. Either way, I'm entitled to my opinion — and to buy what I want.

Capt.Failure wrote:

gothsaurus wrote:Fine here. That's just 4-5 years of movie toys I don't have to buy. As long as the Classics toys keep coming, they can keep making those train-wrecks of movies all they want. I only cringe thinking there's an entire generation of children growing up thinking that's what Transformers are "all about." Groan.

It's not your place to decide what new fans should and should not enjoy. Part of being a healthy member of a fandom is accepting that things change with the times. Transformers can't be stuck in 1986 forever. These films do the series a service by introducing so many new fans to Transformers that would have ignored it otherwise. These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

Hang on sec here.

He hasn't decided for anyone, nor has he implied such. "I only cringe thinking" is what he said. Even if I don't agree with his point of view, I see it as a statement, not a declaration of action.

While I agree we can't be stuck in 1986 forever, some people only like G1. Some only like the movies. It's all a matter of opinion. And people are allowed to have and voice their opinions.

While we don't agree with them, we do have to respect the people giving them. So please be careful where we step, folks. I know the movies are polarizing, but let's not let it get us in trouble.

Autobot032 wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

gothsaurus wrote:Fine here. That's just 4-5 years of movie toys I don't have to buy. As long as the Classics toys keep coming, they can keep making those train-wrecks of movies all they want. I only cringe thinking there's an entire generation of children growing up thinking that's what Transformers are "all about." Groan.

It's not your place to decide what new fans should and should not enjoy. Part of being a healthy member of a fandom is accepting that things change with the times. Transformers can't be stuck in 1986 forever. These films do the series a service by introducing so many new fans to Transformers that would have ignored it otherwise. These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

Hang on sec here.

He hasn't decided for anyone, nor has he implied such. "I only cringe thinking" is what he said. Even if I don't agree with his point of view, I see it as a statement, not a declaration of action.

While I agree we can't be stuck in 1986 forever, some people only like G1. Some only like the movies. It's all a matter of opinion. And people are allowed to have and voice their opinions.

While we don't agree with them, we do have to respect the people giving them. So please be careful where we step, folks. I know the movies are polarizing, but let's not let it get us in trouble.

Apologies. I just find the idea that newcomers should distance themselves from the films as soon as possible to be a ridiculous notion, especially since it's fueled by individual dislike for the films.

Capt.Failure wrote:

Autobot032 wrote:Hmm. So it's sounding like he's going to do all three of the next trilogy. That'll make the fans have a conniption fit.

I look forward to it. Besides the fact they're fun movies half the enjoyment is from the bitter tears of the fanboys.

And to that I proclaim: Long live the Bay!

Here, here!

Seriously, the movies are just good fun, all blockbuster explosions and high quality CGI everywhere! Now, yes, I would like to see fewer human things, and perhaps less of "The United States is the world," but they're FUN. The movies are FUN, period. Just go and enjoy them! You know you want to!

Capt.Failure wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

You had me up until this. The TFs play second fiddle to the humans in these films, being either background material or guest stars in their own movies. There's so much more to the Transformers than what these film portray. At best, these films can act as a conduit to get new fans interested in the brand and seek out more stuff beyond the films so they can experience a better idea of the heart and soul of the Transformers fiction.

No, wrong. While the Transformers had less screen time in the first film (a practical step since it was an origin story and they had less budget) to say the latter two films suffered this problem is at best stretching the truth and at worst an outright lie. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they are somehow "not Transformers." If anything they acted as a necessary step up in quality from the garbage we'd been served post-Beast Wars.

In all three films, the TFs are not the main stars. No matter how you look at it, they are not in the lead roles. I never once said that they are "not Transformers films", I said that they do not adequately represent what Transformers is all about. There's more, much more, to it that simple "Autobots vs. Decepticons". The films just sorta-kinda scratch the surface of what Transformers is all about, but not quite. They are still very much Transformers films (in the most basic, bare minimum ways), but they are far from perfect examples of TF fiction.

Bay's desire to return to the franchise, one he seemingly concluded with 2011's "Transformers: Dark of the Moon," came while the director waited in line for the Transformers ride at Universal Studios. "I was like, 'Wow, a lot of people like this.' I wanted to do it one more time... but then I brought Mark in and he's actually harassing me to do more."

I officialy love mark now something i never said about shia

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:These films are absolutely what Transformers is all about.

You had me up until this. The TFs play second fiddle to the humans in these films, being either background material or guest stars in their own movies. There's so much more to the Transformers than what these film portray. At best, these films can act as a conduit to get new fans interested in the brand and seek out more stuff beyond the films so they can experience a better idea of the heart and soul of the Transformers fiction.

No, wrong. While the Transformers had less screen time in the first film (a practical step since it was an origin story and they had less budget) to say the latter two films suffered this problem is at best stretching the truth and at worst an outright lie. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they are somehow "not Transformers." If anything they acted as a necessary step up in quality from the garbage we'd been served post-Beast Wars.

In all three films, the TFs are not the main stars. No matter how you look at it, they are not in the lead roles. I never once said that they are "not Transformers films", I said that they do not adequately represent what Transformers is all about. There's more, much more, to it that simple "Autobots vs. Decepticons". The films just sorta-kinda scratch the surface of what Transformers is all about, but not quite. They are still very much Transformers films (in the most basic, bare minimum ways), but they are far from perfect examples of TF fiction.

Their representation of what Transformers is all about is pretty spot on. There's not much to Transformers really. I'm a fan but I don't let my enjoyment of the franchise convince me there's some deeper meaning that isn't there. The convoluted mess of continuity that is the Transformers lore and setting does not qualify it as "deep" by any objective definition. It's more like a poorly maintained toybox, full of bits and pieces of stuff that can be picked and chosen to have fun with.

Ultimately Bay gets it right by trimming the accumulated fat, even if you don't agree. Whether he reaches deeper into the proverbial toybox with the next three films we have yet to see. Ultimately though the quantity of the Transformers lore does not equal quality. And the quality is rather poor.

DEMEXICONZ wrote:Bay's desire to return to the franchise, one he seemingly concluded with 2011's "Transformers: Dark of the Moon," came while the director waited in line for the Transformers ride at Universal Studios. "I was like, 'Wow, a lot of people like this.' I wanted to do it one more time... but then I brought Mark in and he's actually harassing me to do more."

I officialy love mark now something i never said about shia

That's because LeBouf is a worker after a paycheck regardless of the film he's in. Walberg is an actor. Major difference there.

Capt.Failure wrote:Their representation of what Transformers is all about is pretty spot on. There's not much to Transformers really. I'm a fan but I don't let my enjoyment of the franchise convince me there's some deeper meaning that isn't there. The convoluted mess of continuity that is the Transformers lore and setting does not qualify it as "deep" by any objective definition. It's more like a poorly maintained toybox, full of bits and pieces of stuff that can be picked and chosen to have fun with.

Ultimately Bay gets it right by trimming the accumulated fat, even if you don't agree. Whether he reaches deeper into the proverbial toybox with the next three films we have yet to see. Ultimately though the quantity of the Transformers lore does not equal quality. And the quality is rather poor.

I wan't referring to either the lore or continuity. What the TFs in these films lack compared to other TF fiction is personality. Most the bots in the films are stock characters who lack development or character exploration, with most of those qualities being given to the human cast. Sam was the one growing and developing (for better or for worse) in the films, with the people he interacted with affecting him and vice versa. The bots, however, were given next to no reasons for us, the audience, to really care for them as characters (Ironhide's death only bugged me in that they killed off a guy I barely anything about and wanted to know more about, but wasn't going to get to know him because of the films not letting us get to know him before he got axed). They're meant to be flashy special effects and nothing more, which is not the case in just about every other piece of Transformers fiction ever created.

I'm pretty neutral about the films right now, I don't tend to get too bent out of shape when it comes to them but...

I just find it kind of interesting that Hasbro won't consider revamping G1 because they want to continue moving forward with the franchise (which I think in a lot of ways makes sense no matter how sad it makes me). It doesn't really make sense to me, at least in regards to their feelings about moving ahead with Transformers instead of dwelling on older continuities, that they would make another trilogy. Especially since it won't be a real departure from what has already been done.
Shall I say it's a little hypocritical, or is that too harsh?

Anyway, I suppose it is simply the nature of the beast.

inspider wrote:I'm pretty neutral about the films right now, I don't tend to get too bent out of shape when it comes to them but...

I just find it kind of interesting that Hasbro won't consider revamping G1 because they want to continue moving forward with the franchise (which I think in a lot of ways makes sense no matter how sad it makes me). It doesn't really make sense to me, at least in regards to their feelings about moving ahead with Transformers instead of dwelling on older continuities, that they would make another trilogy. Especially since it won't be a real departure from what has already been done.
Shall I say it's a little hypocritical, or is that too harsh?

Anyway, I suppose it is simply the nature of the beast.

The difference between continuing the movie continuity and continuing the G1 continuity is that the former is still fairly recent and the most mainstream thing with Transformers of today, while the latter is over two decades old and more niche with today's audiences. "Currently mainstream" is more appealing for good business than "currently niche" is.

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:Their representation of what Transformers is all about is pretty spot on. There's not much to Transformers really. I'm a fan but I don't let my enjoyment of the franchise convince me there's some deeper meaning that isn't there. The convoluted mess of continuity that is the Transformers lore and setting does not qualify it as "deep" by any objective definition. It's more like a poorly maintained toybox, full of bits and pieces of stuff that can be picked and chosen to have fun with.

Ultimately Bay gets it right by trimming the accumulated fat, even if you don't agree. Whether he reaches deeper into the proverbial toybox with the next three films we have yet to see. Ultimately though the quantity of the Transformers lore does not equal quality. And the quality is rather poor.

I wan't referring to either the lore or continuity. What the TFs in these films lack compared to other TF fiction is personality. Most the bots in the films are stock characters who lack development or character exploration, with most of those qualities being given to the human cast. Sam was the one growing and developing (for better or for worse) in the films, with the people he interacted with affecting him and vice versa. The bots, however, were given next to no reasons for us, the audience, to really care for them as characters (Ironhide's death only bugged me in that they killed off a guy I barely anything about and wanted to know more about, but wasn't going to get to know him because of the films not letting us get to know him before he got axed). They're meant to be flashy special effects and nothing more, which is not the case in just about every other piece of Transformers fiction ever created.

I fail to see how this is a complaint considering once in my entire memory did Transformers feature character development that was worthwhile (Beast Wars). I'm not saying they shouldn't be developed as characters, but character development is one of the weakest parts of Transformers as a franchise, if not the weakest. The term you should use for the bot's character development is "par the course."

I also found it refreshing to have human companions who were not completely, utterly useless, or that the series ditched the "alien invader = immune to human weapons by default" trope.

Capt.Failure wrote:I fail to see how this is a complaint considering once in my entire memory did Transformers feature character development that was worthwhile (Beast Wars). I'm not saying they shouldn't be developed as characters, but character development is one of the weakest parts of Transformers as a franchise, if not the weakest. The term you should use for the bot's character development is "par the course."

Beast Machines, Animated, even RiD, Armada, and Cybertron had characters who got development. And there's also the comics, going back to Marvel all the way to today with IDW.

And, it's not just the development that matters, but the characterization. The actual, regular use of a character's personality, which happened in just about all forms of TF fiction, one of the least of which being these films.

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:I fail to see how this is a complaint considering once in my entire memory did Transformers feature character development that was worthwhile (Beast Wars). I'm not saying they shouldn't be developed as characters, but character development is one of the weakest parts of Transformers as a franchise, if not the weakest. The term you should use for the bot's character development is "par the course."

Beast Machines, Animated, even RiD, Armada, and Cybertron had characters who got development. And there's also the comics, going back to Marvel all the way to today with IDW.

And, it's not just the development that matters, but the characterization. The actual, regular use of a character's personality, which happened in just about all forms of TF fiction, one of the least of which being these films.

Notice I said "meaningful" character development.

Concerning characterization, well there's nothing to argue. Shy of development the personalities were spot on. By the way, don't even start with Optimus being "too violent." No one complained when he mowed down 11 Decepticons indiscriminately in the '86 movie.

all i have to say is that these movies better be good, and same with the toys. i wont have a problem with them as along as there is more robot and less humans

That sounds great, I really don't mind keeping the Franchise movies all in continuity with each other, I love the Dark look of Bay's films, His Cinematographer is one of the best in Hollywood.

Re: Characterization.

Would it be too much to ask for meaningful interaction and growth of character between one main Autobot who can speak and one mane human counterpart???

In most series of Transformers, and every season of US G1, we have this key relationship.

Some key examples:

In G1 Bumblebee and Spike. Later his son Daniel and Hot Rod/Rodimus/Grimlock/Arcee.

In Energon the ever annoying Kicker and Ironhide (Roadblock in Japan).

But in the movies a Bumblebee who cannot speak and Sam, who speaks all the time.

And why can't the Autobots speak to the humans in alt mode?

I don't get it.

Bradimus wrote:Re: Characterization.

Would it be too much to ask for meaningful interaction and growth of character between one main Autobot who can speak and one mane human counterpart???

In most series of Transformers, and every season of US G1, we have this key relationship.

Some key examples:

In G1 Bumblebee and Spike. Later his son Daniel and Hot Rod/Rodimus/Grimlock/Arcee.

In Energon the ever annoying Kicker and Ironhide (Roadblock in Japan).

But in the movies a Bumblebee who cannot speak and Sam, who speaks all the time.

And why can't the Autobots speak to the humans in alt mode?

I don't get it.

At least Movie Bumblebee has his radio gimmick, which is okay. Prime Bee is just a waste of space/ R2-D2 wannabe.

RAcast wrote:

Bradimus wrote:Re: Characterization.

Would it be too much to ask for meaningful interaction and growth of character between one main Autobot who can speak and one mane human counterpart???

In most series of Transformers, and every season of US G1, we have this key relationship.

Some key examples:

In G1 Bumblebee and Spike. Later his son Daniel and Hot Rod/Rodimus/Grimlock/Arcee.

In Energon the ever annoying Kicker and Ironhide (Roadblock in Japan).

But in the movies a Bumblebee who cannot speak and Sam, who speaks all the time.

And why can't the Autobots speak to the humans in alt mode?

I don't get it.

At least Movie Bumblebee has his radio gimmick, which is okay. Prime Bee is just a waste of space/ R2-D2 wannabe.

While agree in part, at least Raff translates for him and has conversations with him, so it works on some level. I guess we know who really didn't want Bumble to talk (Orci and Kurtzman).

Also, we have Jack and Arcee, and Meeko and Bulkhead. While Meeko can be seen as a cheerleader character, Jack and Arcee are the heart and soul relationship of TF Prime.

I want a Jack and Arcee relationship (no innuendo intended) as the heart and soul of the TF movies.

Why is that too much to ask?

Bradimus wrote:

RAcast wrote:

Bradimus wrote:Re: Characterization.

Would it be too much to ask for meaningful interaction and growth of character between one main Autobot who can speak and one mane human counterpart???

In most series of Transformers, and every season of US G1, we have this key relationship.

Some key examples:

In G1 Bumblebee and Spike. Later his son Daniel and Hot Rod/Rodimus/Grimlock/Arcee.

In Energon the ever annoying Kicker and Ironhide (Roadblock in Japan).

But in the movies a Bumblebee who cannot speak and Sam, who speaks all the time.

And why can't the Autobots speak to the humans in alt mode?

I don't get it.

At least Movie Bumblebee has his radio gimmick, which is okay. Prime Bee is just a waste of space/ R2-D2 wannabe.

While agree in part, at least Raff translates for him and has conversations with him, so it works on some level. I guess we know who really didn't want Bumble to talk (Orci and Kurtzman).

Also, we have Jack and Arcee, and Meeko and Bulkhead. While Meeko can be seen as a cheerleader character, Jack and Arcee are the heart and soul relationship of TF Prime.

I want a Jack and Arcee relationship (no innuendo intended) as the heart and soul of the TF movies.

Why is that too much to ask?

So Sam and Bumblebee don't count all of a sudden? Oh wait, let me guess: "It's not the same!"

Capt.Failure wrote:

Bradimus wrote:

RAcast wrote:

Bradimus wrote:Re: Characterization.

Would it be too much to ask for meaningful interaction and growth of character between one main Autobot who can speak and one mane human counterpart???

In most series of Transformers, and every season of US G1, we have this key relationship.

Some key examples:

In G1 Bumblebee and Spike. Later his son Daniel and Hot Rod/Rodimus/Grimlock/Arcee.

In Energon the ever annoying Kicker and Ironhide (Roadblock in Japan).

But in the movies a Bumblebee who cannot speak and Sam, who speaks all the time.

And why can't the Autobots speak to the humans in alt mode?

I don't get it.

At least Movie Bumblebee has his radio gimmick, which is okay. Prime Bee is just a waste of space/ R2-D2 wannabe.

While agree in part, at least Raff translates for him and has conversations with him, so it works on some level. I guess we know who really didn't want Bumble to talk (Orci and Kurtzman).

Also, we have Jack and Arcee, and Meeko and Bulkhead. While Meeko can be seen as a cheerleader character, Jack and Arcee are the heart and soul relationship of TF Prime.

I want a Jack and Arcee relationship (no innuendo intended) as the heart and soul of the TF movies.

Why is that too much to ask?

So Sam and Bumblebee don't count all of a sudden? Oh wait, let me guess: "It's not the same!"

It's not about being the same or different. It's about Bumblebee being there to be there. He's more a gag than a character. If he beeped like he does on Prime, and if Sam could understand him and carry our actual conversations that we could barely follow, I could live with that. But that's not what we have been given. So my question stands.

Bradimus wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

Bradimus wrote:

RAcast wrote:

Bradimus wrote:Re: Characterization.

Would it be too much to ask for meaningful interaction and growth of character between one main Autobot who can speak and one mane human counterpart???

In most series of Transformers, and every season of US G1, we have this key relationship.

Some key examples:

In G1 Bumblebee and Spike. Later his son Daniel and Hot Rod/Rodimus/Grimlock/Arcee.

In Energon the ever annoying Kicker and Ironhide (Roadblock in Japan).

But in the movies a Bumblebee who cannot speak and Sam, who speaks all the time.

And why can't the Autobots speak to the humans in alt mode?

I don't get it.

At least Movie Bumblebee has his radio gimmick, which is okay. Prime Bee is just a waste of space/ R2-D2 wannabe.

While agree in part, at least Raff translates for him and has conversations with him, so it works on some level. I guess we know who really didn't want Bumble to talk (Orci and Kurtzman).

Also, we have Jack and Arcee, and Meeko and Bulkhead. While Meeko can be seen as a cheerleader character, Jack and Arcee are the heart and soul relationship of TF Prime.

I want a Jack and Arcee relationship (no innuendo intended) as the heart and soul of the TF movies.

Why is that too much to ask?

So Sam and Bumblebee don't count all of a sudden? Oh wait, let me guess: "It's not the same!"

It's not about being the same or different. It's about Bumblebee being there to be there. He's more a gag than a character. If he beeped like he does on Prime, and if Sam could understand him and carry our actual conversations that we could barely follow, I could live with that. But that's not what we have been given. So my question stands.

Right, so going by your comments you didn't even see the movie. So my answer still stands.

Come on. Bumblebee was just "there?" Sam talked with him more than his fellow humans. He was the #2 most developed Autobot behind Optimus. In fact your entire response to my post is basically the comparison of Movie Bee to Prime Bee, but in reverse. Prime Bee is a gag character. Movie Bee was an actual character. Don't try to warp facts here.

Bradimus wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:So Sam and Bumblebee don't count all of a sudden? Oh wait, let me guess: "It's not the same!"

It's not about being the same or different. It's about Bumblebee being there to be there. He's more a gag than a character. If he beeped like he does on Prime, and if Sam could understand him and carry our actual conversations that we could barely follow, I could live with that. But that's not what we have been given. So my question stands.

While he may "talk," and I use that term very loosely about Prime Bee, I still feel like Movie Bee is a more emotive character. Not by a ton, mind you, but it's there.

Prime Bee is no less of a "gag" than Movie Bee is, but Prime Bee should at least have the chance for character development, being a main character in a running series. It ain't gonna happen. Movie Bee has an excuse for being flat.

Further, Movie Bee can at least directly communicate without the need of translation, and the clips that they've used for him have gone over pretty well. Heck, I'd go so far as to say his face is a great deal more expressive than Prime Bee's is, they had to make it that way since he can only communicate through sampling things otherwise. Because Prime Bee CAN "speak," they didn't have to go through the trouble. Anybody see where I'm coming from?

Capt.Failure wrote:

Bradimus wrote:
It's not about being the same or different. It's about Bumblebee being there to be there. He's more a gag than a character. If he beeped like he does on Prime, and if Sam could understand him and carry our actual conversations that we could barely follow, I could live with that. But that's not what we have been given. So my question stands.

Right, so going by your comments you didn't even see the movie. So my answer still stands.

Come on. Bumblebee was just "there?" Sam talked with him more than his fellow humans. He was the #2 most developed Autobot behind Optimus. In fact your entire response to my post is basically the comparison of Movie Bee to Prime Bee, but in reverse. Prime Bee is a gag character. Movie Bee was an actual character. Don't try to warp facts here.

Sam talked to him the most, not with him. That's my problem. But yes, he was the second most developed Autobot. That's not saying much.

RAcast wrote:

Bradimus wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:So Sam and Bumblebee don't count all of a sudden? Oh wait, let me guess: "It's not the same!"

It's not about being the same or different. It's about Bumblebee being there to be there. He's more a gag than a character. If he beeped like he does on Prime, and if Sam could understand him and carry our actual conversations that we could barely follow, I could live with that. But that's not what we have been given. So my question stands.

While he may "talk," and I use that term very loosely about Prime Bee, I still feel like Movie Bee is a more emotive character. Not by a ton, mind you, but it's there.

Prime Bee is no less of a "gag" than Movie Bee is, but Prime Bee should at least have the chance for character development, being a main character in a running series. It ain't gonna happen. Movie Bee has an excuse for being flat.

Further, Movie Bee can at least directly communicate without the need of translation, and the clips that they've used for him have gone over pretty well. Heck, I'd go so far as to say his face is a great deal more expressive than Prime Bee's is, they had to make it that way since he can only communicate through sampling things otherwise. Because Prime Bee CAN "speak," they didn't have to go through the trouble. Anybody see where I'm coming from?

Point taken, RAcast, movie Bee is emotive. But Prime Bee is just as much a bada$$.

In answer to both of you, I suppose the Star Wars fan in me prefers the R2D2/C3P0 relationship to the way the movie did things. In Prime, Bee speaks, we cannot understand him, but everyone else can. In the movie, he cannot speak even in basic binary. I suppose it fits Bay's hard look at the price of war better that he's mute without a radio prosthesis, but it just does not work for me.

This is coming from someone who enjoys the first two films and owns both, Capt.Failure.

Eh,personally,I'm more interested in a Transformers Prime and MLP crossover,even if it is non-canon.

Cue the fan raging over this one in 3,2,and now!!!!

Listen to Sabrblade. Only one making any solid points here regarding the movies compared to all other TF lore. Enjoy your flashy garbage, but thats all it is. If you want to know what Transformers are in their evolved from, read the comics, as suggested, from Marvel to IDW.

For the new fans of Transformers due to the movies, hopefully the concept allows them to dig deeper into the good stuff. If not, who cares. There will still be more Beiber fans to irritate me.

Give me more Generations toys and **** off

MINDVVIPE wrote:Listen to Sabrblade. Only one making any solid points here regarding the movies compared to all other TF lore. Enjoy your flashy garbage, but thats all it is. If you want to know what Transformers are in their evolved from, read the comics, as suggested, from Marvel to IDW.

For the new fans of Transformers due to the movies, hopefully the concept allows them to dig deeper into the good stuff. If not, who cares. There will still be more Beiber fans to irritate me.

Give me more Generations toys and **** off

Sorry, Rated X, is that you?

RAcast wrote:Sorry, Rated X, is that you?

Nah, Rated X and I are never of the same mindset.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Listen to Sabrblade. Only one making any solid points here regarding the movies compared to all other TF lore. Enjoy your flashy garbage, but thats all it is. If you want to know what Transformers are in their evolved from, read the comics, as suggested, from Marvel to IDW.

For the new fans of Transformers due to the movies, hopefully the concept allows them to dig deeper into the good stuff. If not, who cares. There will still be more Beiber fans to irritate me.

Give me more Generations toys and **** off

It's nice to see the rabid, drooling fanboys get mad because other people enjoy something they hate. Your tears fuel me.

Capt.Failure wrote:It's nice to see the rabid, drooling fanboys get mad because other people enjoy something they hate. Your tears fuel me.

Yet, my first post in this thread spoke in defense of the movies for their success.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Listen to Sabrblade. Only one making any solid points here regarding the movies compared to all other TF lore.

Incorrect. And knock that off. I've already said once, show respect. You absolutely choose to ignore it.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Give me more Generations toys and **** off

You've crossed a line, here.

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:It's nice to see the rabid, drooling fanboys get mad because other people enjoy something they hate. Your tears fuel me.

Yet, my first posti n this thread spoke in defense of the movies for their success.

I'm aware. However, further remarks about the films including the belief that new fans should immediately disregard or be forced to change their opinions are ill informed and uncalled for. If new fans love the films, then so be it. Harboring the belief they need to be "steered the right way" is wrong.

Capt.Failure wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:It's nice to see the rabid, drooling fanboys get mad because other people enjoy something they hate. Your tears fuel me.

Yet, my first posti n this thread spoke in defense of the movies for their success.

I'm aware. However, further remarks about the films including the belief that new fans should immediately disregard or be forced to change their opinions are ill informed and uncalled for. If new fans love the films, then so be it. Harboring the belief they need to be "steered the right way" is wrong.

But fans can't get a real Transformers experience with the films as they are now. It is sad when I know more about the movie's Transformers through their package bios than the movie itself.

Capt.Failure wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:It's nice to see the rabid, drooling fanboys get mad because other people enjoy something they hate. Your tears fuel me.

Yet, my first post in this thread spoke in defense of the movies for their success.

I'm aware. However, further remarks about the films including the belief that new fans should immediately disregard or be forced to change their opinions are ill informed and uncalled for. If new fans love the films, then so be it. Harboring the belief they need to be "steered the right way" is wrong.

I didn't say that (if it was implied, though, that was never my intention). I meant that new fans could use the films as a jumping on point for them to get into the brand and potentially seek out more beyond the films, not that they must immediately jump ship to drown out the films with other TF works.

I don't hate the films, and I appreciate the positives that they have done for the brand. I just don't find them to be the best representations of the Transformers. If others like them, very well.

But, answer me this honestly. The fight/chase/action scenes, the explosions, the eye candy, the etc. can all be considered the icing on the cake, right? Well, take away the icing, leaving only just the cake, and what all is left of the films to consist of the cake?

I've one other question after this, but it depends on what this answer to this is.

Xephon0930 wrote:But fans can't get a real Transformers experience with the films as they are now.

That's kind of a bold statement to make since, well, what exactly is the definition of "a real Transformers experience" (if there even is one)?

Autobot032 wrote:

MINDVVIPE wrote:Listen to Sabrblade. Only one making any solid points here regarding the movies compared to all other TF lore.

Incorrect. And knock that off. I've already said once, show respect. You absolutely choose to ignore it.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Give me more Generations toys and **** off

You've crossed a line, here.

How am I incorrect? It is my opinion (obviously) and should be taken as such, even if you disagree. I am not showing any disrespect, but saying that (to me, obviously again) Sabrblade is the only one nailing it. And what line did I cross? the no swearing line? The insult line? The "be nice to hasbro/Bay/Movies" line? PM me if you have a problem with me further.

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:It's nice to see the rabid, drooling fanboys get mad because other people enjoy something they hate. Your tears fuel me.

Yet, my first post in this thread spoke in defense of the movies for their success.

I'm aware. However, further remarks about the films including the belief that new fans should immediately disregard or be forced to change their opinions are ill informed and uncalled for. If new fans love the films, then so be it. Harboring the belief they need to be "steered the right way" is wrong.

I didn't say that (if it was implied, though, that was never my intention). I meant that new fans could use the films as a jumping on point for them to get into the brand and potentially seek out more beyond the films, not that they must immediately jump ship to drown out the films with other TF works.

I don't hate the films, and I appreciate the positives that they have done for the brand. I just don't find them to be the best representations of the Transformers. If others like them, very well.

But, answer me this honestly. The fight/chase/action scenes, the explosions, the eye candy, the etc. can all be considered the icing on the cake, right? Well, take away the icing, leaving only just the cake, and what all is left of the films to consist of the cake?

I've one other question after this, but it depends on what this answer to this is.

I see, well thanks for better explaining your viewpoint. I disagree that the films are shallow compared to the rest of Transformers but I can respect your opinion.

Sabrblade wrote:

Xephon0930 wrote:But fans can't get a real Transformers experience with the films as they are now.

That's kind of a bold statement to make since, well, what exactly is the definition of "a real Transformers experience" (if there even is one)?

A true Transformers experience is one you enjoy. That's as simple as you can put it.