JOP wrote:Now, I would like to respond to Autobot032's comment, as I feel this rather gets at the crux of the matter:
What I wonder is this: why should we assume that the desires of a given section of fans, and the desires of the intended audience, are at all times mutually exclusive?
No one's saying they can't both happen, just that that's usually how it works. Hasbro's main concern is making money. Always has been, always will be. Both sides can't win always and whatever side will make them guaranteed money and a lot of it, will always win.
JOP wrote:For instance: let us assume that a given Transformers film is 70% 'good'. Now, let's imagine that a talented writer was hired to polish the script, reconcile a few plot holes, and smooth out some of the more clunky dialogue. At this point, the film moves up to 80% 'good'. At what point during this process were the needs of the Bumblebee-obsessed children's toy market, or the summer blockbuster crowd, harmed and hindered?
Wait... um... I'm a tad confused here. The movie and the toys have nothing to do with each other, other than promotion and tie ins. What toys Hasbro designs and produces, have nothing to do with the script or the process of constructing the film. Uh...what point were you trying to make here? I'm not being funny, I'm genuinely confused.
As for the summer blockbuster crowd... What about the TF franchise doesn't work for that mold? Action? Check. Overblown? Check. Special effects, bad dialogue, excessive running time? Check.
The toys were brought up as a different way to approach the comparison. Not stating that the toys and movies directly affected each other. Though, it should be said that toys have no effect on the movie's conception. Quite the opposite, in fact.
JOP wrote:If there is indeed a Transformers 4 on the horizon, I would very much like for it to feature a script of significantly higher quality than Transformers 1, 2 and 3. Such a script would greatly enhance my enjoyment of the movie, and other viewers like myself; and yet would not in any way detract from the enjoyment of a more traditionally-(explosively)-minded audience. So why oppose the desire for a higher quality of writing?
I think you're being a tad unfair and unkind, honestly. Orci, Kurtzman and Rogers laid the groundwork for the first film. Orci and Kurtzman are well known hacks with not an original idea between the two of them, they more or less admitted they've built an empire on the works of others. Rogers had a hand in the Halle Berry Catwoman film. (No more needs to be said, on that one. lol)
Then, during ROTF, all the writers decided to go on strike and Bay had BIG people and BIG money to answer to. He was just as much of a victim as we were. The writers strike still pisses me off to this day. What did work about ROTF, was Kruger's handiwork. What didn't, can be chalked up to Orci & Kurtzman.
Orci & Kurtzman stepped down, Kruger took over full time and he delivered the most down to Earth and realistic of the the three movies. If a spaceship had crashed on the Moon, we most certainly would've raced to be the first to find it. If the aliens in that ship destroyed Chicago and tried to take over the world, the disaster we saw on screen would've been quite close to reality.
I'm not sure why people are so hard on DOTM, when it's considered, by many including critics, to be the best story of the trilogy. Some call it outlandish and silly, but most agree that it's closer to reality than the first two.
Kruger is definitely on the right track and it shows. The movie did well, not just for it's visual effects, but for it's story. I liked the first film when I first watched it, but I started to notice how boring it could be. ROTF, while clearly not perfect, was a lot more fun and action packed. DOTM came along and changed how I saw the entire film franchise. It had none of the boredom of the first film, but all of it's wow factor. It had all the action and wall to wall excitement of the second film, but not many of it's flaws. They really did save the best for last.
I'm not opposed to better writing, but I'm also not expecting it to be overwhelmingly Oscar material either. I guess it's because I'm a realist.
I see the entire TransFormers franchise as it is: A toy that spawned a cartoon, comics and some movies. Sure, it can grow, evolve and spread it's wings, I have no problem with that, but let's face it, this all started with some toys. I'm going to treat it as such.
And let's face it, a lot of us still love G1. G1 had some of the most silly, hokey, over the top storylines EVER. On rare occasions did G1 rise above itself and wow. Same with Beast Wars, though I have to give Beast Wars some credit. I mean, Code Of Hero is a jaw dropper. However, I do think 2.5 hours of Code Of Hero would wear thin on people's patience as well.
Either way, no one's going to be fully pleased 100% of the time. It's impossible. So Paramount, Hasbro, Bay and company are going to go for the path of least resistance, work with a formula proven to work and rake in the dough. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
If I wanted Optimus to spout Shakespeare, I'd probably go read a fanfic. I have varying tastes when it comes to my entertainment, but when it comes to TransFormers...I just want Rock 'Em, Sock 'Em Robots on steroids, part elevntyseven.