Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Starscreamers wrote:I've been a TF fan since 1984 and you know what,Bay TF movies do suck. If Hollywood is going to make Transformer movies and spend millions and millions of dollars they should have made them right. Epic blockbusters with less humans, more bots, serious tone, not comedy, and the movies should be for adults and the cartons for the kids. Period!

I always aim my cartons at kids.

I don't know what's more sad:

1. The people telling the fans of the films to stop liking what they don't like.

2. The people who yes-man to others who didn't like the films rather than make up their own points.

3. The fact the fandom is mired in their childhood and can't stand seeing violence in Transformers.

4. The fact the above group are hypocrites since that was perfectly fine in the original animated movie.

5. The fact the fandom is shocked that they, a fringe group at best, were not the focal point when the films were produced.

People with common sense or maturity would be able to do better while counter-pointing in a debate than these five points. Clearly the fandom is lacking both such traits.

I feel no need to try and justify my like of the films anymore to the likes of you, so I'm afraid I won't fall into your little trap with this thread. All I can do is offer some two word advice:

Grow up.

Tidalwavex wrote:2- TF fans didn't care about the three live action movies being a reboot of G-1. As were use to this because we get reboots all the time. fans wanted a decent reboot not a crap-tacular reboot that was the movie-verse.

I'm a TF fan and I disagree with this statement

3-TF fans main complaint about the three live action TF movies. was the lack of story. awful stories & the worst dialogue spoken in a movie ever.

I'm a TF fan and I disagree with this statement

4-TF Fans didn't care for the acting talent chosen for the three live action TF movies. those who had starring roles & got the most dialogue were the most talentless & in-experienced actors/actresses of the crew.

I'm a TF fan and I disagree with this statement

5-TF Fans wanted the three live action TF movies to star the robots not the humans. having robots who barely got to speak a few words in each movie upset the fans.

I'm a TF fan and I disagree with this statement

6-each three live action TF movie was almost 3 hours each. this is too much time to invest in a movie that is awful. only movies that have great story telling & a cast of people with talent that is superp is worth investing 3 hours in a movie.

Your opinion.

7-micheal bay kept re-writting the scipts to add in his stereo type & bathroom humor.

As the director, he can do that.

8-shia la beof was a horrible choice for the lead actor. he was the most talentless & in-experienced of the crew. he ruined all the scenes he was in.

Your opinion.

9-micheal bay was a bad choice for the director. as the man never had movies with decent story telling. james cameron or ron howard would have been better choices for the director.

Your opinion.

10-micheal bay's answer to bad dialogue & very little story was to mask all this with huge gigantic explosions.

As the director, he can do that.

11-most adults didn't enjoy the "all ages" theme about the three live action TF movies.having all that potty humor,stereo type humor,tiny robot humor,bumblbee humor,the parents crude perverted humor,was their to make the toddlers laugh. this all hurt the movies. is it too much to ask to have serious mature TF movies that don't get ruined by all that toddler humor scenes.

Given how much money the movies made, they weren't "hurt"

Please do not mistake your opinions for facts. kthxbye.

Capt.Failure wrote:I don't know what's more sad:

1. The people telling the fans of the films to stop liking what they don't like.

2. The people who yes-man to others who didn't like the films rather than make up their own points.

3. The fact the fandom is mired in their childhood and can't stand seeing violence in Transformers.

4. The fact the above group are hypocrites since that was perfectly fine in the original animated movie.

5. The fact the fandom is shocked that they, a fringe group at best, were not the focal point when the films were produced.

People with common sense or maturity would be able to do better while counter-pointing in a debate than these five points. Clearly the fandom is lacking both such traits.

I feel no need to try and justify my like of the films anymore to the likes of you, so I'm afraid I won't fall into your little trap with this thread. All I can do is offer some two word advice:

Grow up.

Or 3-word advice: Get over it.

Here me now, all of you fellow Seibertronians:

I will be the next Steven Spielberg,

and I will make the next Transformers series WHICH WILL (note the which will)

ROCK THE PANTS OF YOUR LEADER CLASS PREMIUM FIRE RETARDANT BATTERY POWERED REMOTE CONTROLLED LEGENDS OPTIMUS PRIME. IF THAT EXISTED.

I loved the movies, The last one because of the story and Sentinel the badass traitor.

But I will always remain true to Transformers.

Rise, my fellow bots, and protect!

OmegaPrime-4 wrote:Here me now, all of you fellow Seibertronians:

I will be the next Steven Spielberg,

And I will be the next Michael Bay. Your point is?

True Facts: Spielburg insisted on the increased human presence in the Transformers films. Are you sure you want him directing?

Good lord, are we still beating this long dead horse? The Movies are done for now. Can't we just enjoy Transformers Prime and stop bitching about the movies...please?
...right, stupid question.

Capt.Failure wrote:True Facts: Spielburg insisted on the increased human presence in the Transformers films. Are you sure you want him directing?

Very true.

That's something a lot of people don't realize. Spielberg set the foundation of the whole story in TF1, that being a boy and his first car. Micheal Bay ran with the idea and made it sort of an homage to E.T., kind of like a tipping of the hat to his boss.

Honestly, there are some things you can fault Bay with [juvenile and crass humor, military worship, poor casting], but there are some things you simply can't [the human aspect, some of the plot points, the choice of TF's featured]. If one takes the time to listen to the commentary in both TF1 and ROTF, the TF movies he envisioned actually had a grander, more epic feel to it. It was Spielberg's fault for limiting the budget to the movies, supposedly to "inspire creativity."

One of the things that bugged me about ROTF was it's lack of an epic feel, and after hearing the ROTF DVD commentary, I knew who to blame--Orzman, Kruger, and indirectly Spielberg. They decided that scenes of massive invasions bore too much resemblance to War of the Worlds, and they thought it would somehow be disrespectful or something to Spielberg's work.

Go figure.

In short, Bay isn't to blame for the overflowing cast of humans in the movies, although he did pick the cast.

Tidalwavex wrote:please lets get the facts correct.

I would love too, but it seems you can not differentiate between an actual FACT and your OPINION.

1-The movie review critics gave all three live action TF movies two thumbs down & they hated all 3 movies. most old school top movie reviewers hate action movies & they hardly praise them nor like them.

not exactly accurate.While some critics trashed the films, I saw a very small few that praised them.

2- TF fans didn't care about the three live action movies being a reboot of G-1. As were use to this because we get reboots all the time. fans wanted a decent reboot not a crap-tacular reboot that was the movie-verse.

again, not exactly accurate.there were some numbers from within the fanbase that wanted a faithful retelling of the G1 toon and not a reboot.

3-TF fans main complaint about the three live action TF movies. was the lack of story. awful stories & the worst dialogue spoken in a movie ever.

"main complaint".............maybe in your opinion

4-TF Fans didn't care for the acting talent chosen for the three live action TF movies. those who had starring roles & got the most dialogue were the most talentless & in-experienced actors/actresses of the crew.

again, thats your opinion, I know some people that very muck like these actors.

6-each three live action TF movie was almost 3 hours each. this is too much time to invest in a movie that is awful. only movies that have great story telling & a cast of people with talent that is superp is worth investing 3 hours in a movie.

again, your opinion that they are too loong

TF1 144 minutes
TF2 149 minutes
TF3 154 minutes

seems rather normal for a sci/fi action flick

8-shia la beof was a horrible choice for the lead actor. he was the most talentless & in-experienced of the crew. he ruined all the scenes he was in.

9-micheal bay was a bad choice for the director. as the man never had movies with decent story telling. james cameron or ron howard would have been better choices for the director.

your opinion not a fact

11-most adults didn't enjoy the "all ages" theme about the three live action TF movies.

can you back that up?the claim that "MOST" adults didnt like it.

If not then its just your opinion, not a fact.

Capt.Failure wrote:True Facts: Spielburg insisted on the increased human presence in the Transformers films. Are you sure you want him directing?

Exactly. And Bay wanted giant air hangars to transform, battle ships, and more stuff, and Speilberg was the one who said "no". He's the one who reduced the movies to what they where, not Bay.

Tidalwavex wrote: please lets get the facts correct.

The only "facts" that you need to get correct, is that nothing that you wrote is even a fact. Their just your opinions. That said, ther's no point in addressing 90% of what you said. BUt i will address a couple points..

Tidalwavex wrote: 5-TF Fans wanted the three live action TF movies to star the robots not the humans. having robots who barely got to speak a few words in each movie upset the fans.

Its not as easy as just trading human screen time for robot screen time. This isn't 1984 were both humans and robots are animated.
The robots cost millions every time there on screen, unlike the human scene's. I'm sure if you donated a few extra million for CGI, you could get your added robot time.
also, i find it rather insulting when people bitch about the human time in these movies. Like it or not, you need human aspect for these movies to work. Remeber their live action. The actors work very hard but i guess its just selfish for them to want to have their time on screen huh?

Tidalwavex wrote:9-micheal bay was a bad choice for the director. as the man never had movies with decent story telling. james cameron or ron howard would have been better choices for the director.

Intill recently, TF has never had strong story telling. And while i don't know about Howard, james Cameron was approached to direct the first movie, and he was one of a few that turned it down.
But that said, the stories were good. Granted ROTF was proabably the worst of the 3, but you know what? It was the one that probabaly was based the most on TF mytho's. What??? The one TF movie that was proabaly disliked the most by "fans" was the one that took the most from TF stories?? How about that...

Tidalwavex wrote:11-most adults didn't enjoy the "all ages" theme about the three live action TF movies.having all that potty humor,stereo type humor,tiny robot humor,bumblbee humor,the parents crude perverted humor,was their to make the toddlers laugh. this all hurt the movies. is it too much to ask to have serious mature TF movies that don't get ruined by all that toddler humor scenes.

This is where your just flat out wrong. There is nothing, absoultly nothing to support your aurgument. In fact, the billions that the movie made proves the complete opisite of what you said.

5105 Cruiser wrote:This is where your just flat out wrong. There is nothing, absoultly nothing to support your aurgument. In fact, the billions that the movie made proves the complete opisite of what you said.

I figured by now you'd realize unsupported "facts" and claiming opinions as facts are the hallmarks of Transformers fans who didn't like the films? Mainly due to the fact it's all they have to stand on.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:True Facts: Spielburg insisted on the increased human presence in the Transformers films. Are you sure you want him directing?

Very true.

That's something a lot of people don't realize. Spielberg set the foundation of the whole story in TF1, that being a boy and his first car. Micheal Bay ran with the idea and made it sort of an homage to E.T., kind of like a tipping of the hat to his boss.

Honestly, there are some things you can fault Bay with [juvenile and crass humor, military worship, poor casting], but there are some things you simply can't [the human aspect, some of the plot points, the choice of TF's featured]. If one takes the time to listen to the commentary in both TF1 and ROTF, the TF movies he envisioned actually had a grander, more epic feel to it. It was Spielberg's fault for limiting the budget to the movies, supposedly to "inspire creativity."

One of the things that bugged me about ROTF was it's lack of an epic feel, and after hearing the ROTF DVD commentary, I knew who to blame--Orzman, Kruger, and indirectly Spielberg. They decided that scenes of massive invasions bore too much resemblance to War of the Worlds, and they thought it would somehow be disrespectful or something to Spielberg's work.

Go figure.

In short, Bay isn't to blame for the overflowing cast of humans in the movies, although he did pick the cast.

ROTF sure as hell felt epic to me. I think it was probably even more epic than DOTM.

Capt.Failure wrote:

5105 Cruiser wrote:This is where your just flat out wrong. There is nothing, absoultly nothing to support your aurgument. In fact, the billions that the movie made proves the complete opisite of what you said.

I figured by now you'd realize unsupported "facts" and claiming opinions as facts are the hallmarks of Transformers fans who didn't like the films? Mainly due to the fact it's all they have to stand on.

unfortunately that is true, and its a major point of friction among the fandom.

I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

Because the voices of many can make a louder noise than voices of few. It's strictly a security thing, they feel more comfortable by believing they're part of the majority.

But that's life. The minority is always the loudest because they're the ones that feel the need to speak to sway more to their cause.

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

Because the voices of many can make a louder noise than voices of few. It's strictly a security thing, they feel more comfortable by believing they're part of the majority.

But that's life. The minority is always the loudest because they're the ones that feel the need to speak to sway more to their cause.

so, even in this its all about penis size.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

Because the voices of many can make a louder noise than voices of few. It's strictly a security thing, they feel more comfortable by believing they're part of the majority.

But that's life. The minority is always the loudest because they're the ones that feel the need to speak to sway more to their cause.

so, even in this its all about penis size.

...

you are a strange strange man.

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

Because the voices of many can make a louder noise than voices of few. It's strictly a security thing, they feel more comfortable by believing they're part of the majority.

But that's life. The minority is always the loudest because they're the ones that feel the need to speak to sway more to their cause.

so, even in this its all about penis size.

...

you are a strange strange man.

and I aims to stay that way

Capt.Failure wrote:

5105 Cruiser wrote:This is where your just flat out wrong. There is nothing, absoultly nothing to support your aurgument. In fact, the billions that the movie made proves the complete opisite of what you said.

I figured by now you'd realize unsupported "facts" and claiming opinions as facts are the hallmarks of Transformers fans who didn't like the films? Mainly due to the fact it's all they have to stand on.

ya, you'd think i would have learn'd my lesson by now.. But while its almost as pointless as those that claim their opinions as facts,....
It is fun once in a while to call them out. Well... Sometimes.

5150 Cruiser wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

5105 Cruiser wrote:This is where your just flat out wrong. There is nothing, absoultly nothing to support your aurgument. In fact, the billions that the movie made proves the complete opisite of what you said.

I figured by now you'd realize unsupported "facts" and claiming opinions as facts are the hallmarks of Transformers fans who didn't like the films? Mainly due to the fact it's all they have to stand on.

ya, you'd think i would have learn'd my lesson by now.. But while its almost as pointless as those that claim their opinions as facts,....
It is fun once in a while to call them out. Well... Sometimes.

Maybe you're just a glutton for punishment?

Still when it comes to this debate I've learned that essentially it's a matter of TF fans who disliked the films feeling highly defensive. The arguements they bring are usually done in such a way as to make film fans try to justify why they liked them. Considering they've earned close to three billion dollars across three films, spawned numerous successful toy lines, a new and successful animated series that follows the film's style, brought in an entire generation of new fans and now bring talks of a 4th movie I only have this to ask:

Based on the above, what exactly is it that needs justification?

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

Because the voices of many can make a louder noise than voices of few. It's strictly a security thing, they feel more comfortable by believing they're part of the majority.

But that's life. The minority is always the loudest because they're the ones that feel the need to speak to sway more to their cause.

so, even in this its all about penis size.

...

you are a strange strange man.

and I aims to stay that way

Would you like to see my opinion?

RhA wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I dont understand why some, must voice their displeasure with the Bay films with claims like "most fans dont like this or that" instead of just admitting they personally didnt like it.

Because the voices of many can make a louder noise than voices of few. It's strictly a security thing, they feel more comfortable by believing they're part of the majority.

But that's life. The minority is always the loudest because they're the ones that feel the need to speak to sway more to their cause.

so, even in this its all about penis size.

...

you are a strange strange man.

and I aims to stay that way

Would you like to see my opinion?

nah

SlyTF1 wrote:ROTF sure as hell felt epic to me. I think it was probably even more epic than DOTM.

Maybe epic wasn't the right word. How should I put this? I really meant that the scenes lacked "scale," which might be an even worse word to use.

I've watched quite a few Asian war movies set in ancient times, and the scenes used there exude what I call epic: tens of thousands of soldiers and horses sweeping across the landscape like a human tide, the sound of metal on metal ringing in the air.

My definition of an epic TF scene would kind of like DOTM, when the Cons teleport to Chicago using the space bridge, except on a grander scale. Thousands of TF's swarming the city like ants, blood soaking the streets and walls as a discreet hint of the amount of killin that went on off-screen.

In ROTF, the invasion was just a dozen or so TF's in "comet" mode streaking across the sky, one crashing into a clock tower etc, a few crashing into an aircraft carrier, and some scenes with a couple of Cons standing on a bridge and on top of a skyscraper.

Speaking of the aircraft carrier scene, IMO it would have looked so cool if the Fallen had single-handedly destroyed it with his anti-gravity thing. Just my personal opinion, but a few comet mode TF's crashing into it just doesn;t do it for me.

You know after watching District 9 for like the 10th time ill say this, for all the money spent making the movies D9 blows them away on special effects, weapons, and the mech suit looked a hell of a lot more realistic than any of the bots or cons did. Plus it didnt cost nowhere near what they spent to film one tf film. And having a weapon that can launch a pig as a projectile is pure win.