Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Trans4mers4ever wrote:you know, you can stop trying to prove that godzilla made a large profit at the box office, because nobody's denying it. the point absumzer0 is making is that, although it made a profit, it also significantly damaged tristar's credibility and power in the industry because it was so bad that nobody wanted the merchandise. as a result, the profit they made from the box office take on the film wasn't as much as they lost over the next few years because most big-time investors wouldn't come near them after that movie. hence, for tristar as well as everyone else concerned, the movie was a huge mistake.

to summarize, it was a financial success, but also proved to be a huge commercial flop. you guys are fighting two different arguments, and you're both right.

Milanion wrote:

Trans4mers4ever wrote:you know, you can stop trying to prove that godzilla made a large profit at the box office, because nobody's denying it. the point absumzer0 is making is that, although it made a profit, it also significantly damaged tristar's credibility and power in the industry because it was so bad that nobody wanted the merchandise. as a result, the profit they made from the box office take on the film wasn't as much as they lost over the next few years because most big-time investors wouldn't come near them after that movie. hence, for tristar as well as everyone else concerned, the movie was a huge mistake.

to summarize, it was a financial success, but also proved to be a huge commercial flop. you guys are fighting two different arguments, and you're both right.

Sigh.

My point is that "Godzilla98" was financially successful. What "Tristar" did afterwards is irrelavant.

Done.

Milanion wrote:

AbsumZer0 wrote:If you regard every fact other than what the studio made as 'irrelevant', as you have. Meanwhile every industry analyst (people who, unlike you, actually make a living in the industry) have in hindsight taken all the factors you've deemed 'irrelevant' into account, like the fact that Tristar demanded a then-unheard of 80% of ticket sales for the first few weeks in the U.S. and other nations while ticket sales dropped 60% by the 2nd weekend, and almost universally declared the film a 'flop' or 'failure'. You can believe what you like but I personally feel they're more likely to know what it is they're talking about than some guy on a fan forum.

I can only present the blatant facts so many times. If you can't accept them, that's fine, but I'm officially done wasting my time here.

Shadowman wrote:Okay, so all this means that it is wrong to like a movie?

That's where the discussion started.

AbsumZer0 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:Okay, so all this means that it is wrong to like a movie?

That's where the discussion started.

Of course not.

I watched Tom-Yung-Goong (the film that was butchered into The Protector) 3 times over the weekend. There's a scene in that movie where he goes into the 'secret VIP room' of a little Thai-town restaurant that nobody is allowed into, and it turns out to be a 7 or 8-story building with an atrium, casino, brother, restaurant and like 20 people. And it wasn't a visual gag either, it was meant to be serious. I'm not going to claim it was a great movie because in all honesty it's pretty mediocre even for a martial-arts film. I still enjoyed the bloody thing enough to re-watch it twice. The same goes for Godzilla. I didn't like it personally but I won't fault anyone for enjoying it. That doesn't mean I'm going to agree that it was a cinematic milestone, either.

Milanion wrote:

Phategod1 wrote:can I ask a question? How can someone be a fan of something for 20 years, and not be care about how its treated on celluloid. How can you invest hundreds of dollars on toys, Spend hundreds of hour on websites dedicated to it, but when it comes to the movie you don't demand quality? What if you spent $200.00 for MP prime and it fell apart the minute you took it out of the box? Why is Spiderman treated like the Holy Grail? It has nothing to do with how popular one series is over another It has to do with Director and Writer Competency. The thing is a lot of the "Fans" don't demand quality. But at least they (fans with low standards)can "enjoy the movie"

First of all, Spiderman is Spiderman. Prime has changed appearance dozens of times (and had various alt forms). The success of TF is that everything changes to keep it interesting - that is not the success of Spiderman. Also, Spiderman is primarily a literary figure, and TFs are primarily toys. That argument is weak.

Secondly, even fans with high standards, as you say, can enjoy the movie, as Ryan and a few other legacy types have already made clear. In fact, anyone can enjoy the movie - some just refuse to... the same type that seem to think they alone are the "real fans" which is laughable.

A prime example would be the 3-4 guys from Ain't It Cool News forums that joined here around midnight Aug 30 2006 specifically to start a fight with Don Murphy, and then stayed on to complain about anything and everything related to the movie.

What were there names... Phategod, Horseflesh and Riotflea I believe.

Yeah.

As for Riotflea's comments. Blockbuster movies are about money. Take home is what makes a movie franchise ultimately successful - not reviews or fanboys. There is going to be a TF movie because Dreamworks knows it will make a ton of cash, not because they think it will win Best Picture. Godzilla98 was still the most successful Godzilla movie ever - even if you and Toho didn't like it.

Phategod1 wrote:

Milanion wrote:

Phategod1 wrote:can I ask a question? How can someone be a fan of something for 20 years, and not be care about how its treated on celluloid. How can you invest hundreds of dollars on toys, Spend hundreds of hour on websites dedicated to it, but when it comes to the movie you don't demand quality? What if you spent $200.00 for MP prime and it fell apart the minute you took it out of the box? Why is Spiderman treated like the Holy Grail? It has nothing to do with how popular one series is over another It has to do with Director and Writer Competency. The thing is a lot of the "Fans" don't demand quality. But at least they (fans with low standards)can "enjoy the movie"

First of all, Spiderman is Spiderman. Prime has changed appearance dozens of times (and had various alt forms). The success of TF is that everything changes to keep it interesting - that is not the success of Spiderman. Also, Spiderman is primarily a literary figure, and TFs are primarily toys. That argument is weak.

Secondly, even fans with high standards, as you say, can enjoy the movie, as Ryan and a few other legacy types have already made clear. In fact, anyone can enjoy the movie - some just refuse to... the same type that seem to think they alone are the "real fans" which is laughable.

A prime example would be the 3-4 guys from Ain't It Cool News forums that joined here around midnight Aug 30 2006 specifically to start a fight with Don Murphy, and then stayed on to complain about anything and everything related to the movie.

What were there names... Phategod, Horseflesh and Riotflea I believe.

Yeah.

As for Riotflea's comments. Blockbuster movies are about money. Take home is what makes a movie franchise ultimately successful - not reviews or fanboys. There is going to be a TF movie because Dreamworks knows it will make a ton of cash, not because they think it will win Best Picture. Godzilla98 was still the most successful Godzilla movie ever - even if you and Toho didn't like it.

1st of all before that date I didn't Know this Website existed, Thanks to KNEONT for the heads Up if you saved the Webpage You'll see that Murph Attacked me for comments I made Off-site. I asked him intelligent questions. Second This portion of the Forum is one I've come to visit and post in the least, and In My Opinion there has been very little that I find to be Positive about. And I didn't know RiotFlea joined around that time are you sure. I thought he was one of your OG's. as for as Godzilla circa 1998 if it was so successful why was there no sequel?

Phategod1 wrote: I still can't understand how anyone can say Spiderman deserves better treatment then TF because its older and a literary figure.

Phategod1 wrote:I never said anyone was a Low level Fan Just that certain Fans Movie-going standards are Higher then Others. There has been Fans That have blatantly said All they look for in movies to paraphrase are, explosions, Bullets and B00B!3S. and that they have Never seen a action movie they haven't liked. Some of us have a ability to call a spade a spade. That Script, these designs all point to signs that this movie is one Bat nipple short of Batman & Robin. And I'm sick of hearing "just be glad there making movie" Or "You haven't seen Anything yet" but like I said my main question was How do you invest 20 Years of your life into something and when they decide to make a movie about it you'll take anything Hollywood dishes out. and I still can't understand how anyone can say Spiderman deserves better treatment then TF because its older and a literary figure. As for prime in the rest yes he has had many forms but we all know which one is the most recognized. That all I have to say for Now I need a Sammich.

Ironhidensh wrote:

Phategod1 wrote: I still can't understand how anyone can say Spiderman deserves better treatment then TF because its older and a literary figure.

Simple. For every Transformers fan, there are 3 or 4 hunderd Spider-man fans.

Grimshock wrote:Really guys, what you have to do is just not go see the movie if it bothers you. And, you've got to let the casual fans know that it's not a TF movie, just some sci-fi flick. If you decide to go, you will add to its success and the downfall of TF's as we know and love them.

collector maximus wrote:I do have a question that I haven't asked before. If the robots are not supposed to be humanoid influenced, what are their designs based on?

Shadowman wrote:

collector maximus wrote:I do have a question that I haven't asked before. If the robots are not supposed to be humanoid influenced, what are their designs based on?

Ther are very slight influences from the older designs. Megs still has his bucket head, Bumblebee has his horns, Prime has basically the same head, and Jazz has an updated version of his head.

Now, to adress a few things:

1. It is a Transformers movie. It is endorsed by Hasbro and, oh! It's called Transformers. And it has robots that turn into vehicles and stuff.

2. Pirating I'm normally all for. Pirating purely to stick it to someone is just dumb.

3. There's the biggest possibility that this movie failing will kill the line. Hasbro will look, and, since the fans didn't see it, then Transformers must not be worth continuing. Then won't you feel stupid?

Shadowman wrote:3. There's the biggest possibility that this movie failing will kill the line. Hasbro will look, and, since the fans didn't see it, then Transformers must not be worth continuing. Then won't you feel stupid?