Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

SlyTF1 wrote:Well I don't care about a script, or actors, and the designs in the movies are perfect IMO, I just want something that distracts me from my miserable life; and for that all I want is stuff blowing up.

There is nothing about this sentence that doesn't make me facepalm. Which part makes me facepalm more? Is it that you care about nothing that actually makes a movie? Or is it that you continue to think your life is miserable despite the face that I have, personally and repeatedly, told you it's your own damn fault as well as giving you advice on how to fix it?

Surprise! It's both.

RhA wrote:no, the problem lies in what you personally wanted, not in what we should have gotten.

Not at all.

Despite the franchises menial beginnings as a toyline, the brand as grown up with its audience, sure we have pleanty of kid friendly silly stories, but we have also gotten some wonderful, in depth , stories over the years with wonderful amounts or character development.

The brand deserved to have its best qualities reflected in a motion picture.A film should have taken all that has been the best over the years and take a step up.

That is what we should have gotten, that is what the brand deserved.

Now, I'll admit, the films were enjoyable in a "roller coaster" kind of way.But they could have made a better appeal to what the brand has become.

SlyTF1 wrote:I just want something that distracts me from my miserable life; and for that all I want is stuff blowing up.

believe me, that I can understand, but I find a greater amount of distraction when I get a good stor and good acting with my explosions.

how tasty is a a peace of raw chicken with out cooling it in seasoning ???

RhA wrote:no, the problem lies in what you personally wanted, not in what we should have gotten.

Firstly, how precisely does one determine "...what we should have gotten"?

Secondly, the qualities that sto_vo_kor_2000 appears to be seeking in a finished Transformers film - consistent narrative, emotional depth, character development, polished dialogue and so on - are generally considered to be measures of cinematic excellence. Why would we not, as Transformers fans, desire for a Transformers-branded film to feature such measures?

JOP wrote:

RhA wrote:no, the problem lies in what you personally wanted, not in what we should have gotten.

Firstly, how precisely does one determine "...what we should have gotten"?

Secondly, the qualities that sto_vo_kor_2000 appears to be seeking in a finished Transformers film - consistent narrative, emotional depth, character development, polished dialogue and so on - are generally considered to be measures of cinematic excellence. Why would we not, as Transformers fans, desire for a Transformers-branded film to feature such measures?

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

RhA wrote:no, the problem lies in what you personally wanted, not in what we should have gotten.

Not at all.

Despite the franchises menial beginnings as a toyline, the brand as grown up with its audience, sure we have pleanty of kid friendly silly stories, but we have also gotten some wonderful, in depth , stories over the years with wonderful amounts or character development.

The brand deserved to have its best qualities reflected in a motion picture.A film should have taken all that has been the best over the years and take a step up.

That is what we should have gotten, that is what the brand deserved.

Now, I'll admit, the films were enjoyable in a "roller coaster" kind of way.But they could have made a better appeal to what the brand has become.

SlyTF1 wrote:I just want something that distracts me from my miserable life; and for that all I want is stuff blowing up.

believe me, that I can understand, but I find a greater amount of distraction when I get a good stor and good acting with my explosions.

how tasty is a a peace of raw chicken with out cooling it in seasoning ???

Excuse the gargantuan quote.

I do not claim that either of you can't want something. That's your call. My point is that you should not speak about what 'we should have gotten', because when I read something like that I feel like you're telling me that I should want somethin else in a movie. Can I please pick for myself what I like? Thank you.

All your arguments revolve around you personal tastes. You want more character delevopment, less explosions, less potty humor and that's fine. You need to be able to speak about preferences, that's what we're here for. But you cannot state with a straight face that everyone should want what you want and that's why I say;

no, the problem lies in what you personally wanted, not in what we should have gotten.

ps. Stovokor stated that 'we should have gotten', I replied to it.

JOP wrote:Firstly, how precisely does one determine "...what we should have gotten"?

I base it on taking the best of what we have gotten over the years and at least expecting that much.

Secondly, the qualities that sto_vo_kor_2000 appears to be seeking in a finished Transformers film - consistent narrative, emotional depth, character development, polished dialogue and so on - are generally considered to be measures of cinematic excellence. Why would we not, as Transformers fans, desire for a Transformers-branded film to feature such measures?

Exactly

RhA wrote:Excuse the gargantuan quote.

I do it all the time

RhA wrote: I do not claim that either of you can't want something. That's your call. My point is that you should not speak about what 'we should have gotten', because when I read something like that I feel like you're telling me that I should want somethin else in a movie. Can I please pick for myself what I like? Thank you.

All your arguments revolve around you personal tastes. You want more character delevopment, less explosions, less potty humor and that's fine. You need to be able to speak about preferences, that's what we're here for. But you cannot state with a straight face that everyone should want what you want and that's why I say;

no, the problem lies in what you personally wanted, not in what we should have gotten.
ps. Stovokor stated that 'we should have gotten', I replied to it.

Very well said. And i agree that what it all boils down to is personal prefferance. What one conciders the best of the franchise, doesn't nessasarly equivilet to what someone else does.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

JOP wrote:Firstly, how precisely does one determine "...what we should have gotten"?

I base it on taking the best of what we have gotten over the years and at least expecting that much.

What exactly detirmes the best? That is the point I believe RHA is trying to make.
Again, what exactly is "The best we have gotten over the years" without being subjective?

What you concider "The best" doesn't mean the next person is going to feel the same way.

5150 Cruiser wrote:Very well said. And i agree that what it all boils down to is personal prefferance. What one conciders the best of the franchise, doesn't nessasarly equivilet to what someone else does.

Again, what exactly is "The best we have gotten over the years" without being subjective?

What you concider "The best" doesn't mean the next person is going to feel the same way.

Exactly. Another way to look at it is this way:

Come at this issue from the toy standpoint.

Kids are the primary audience, always have been, always will be, nothing's going to change that. We come in at a very distant second. Kids want Bumblebee and Optimus Prime. Those two are their heroes. We, as adults and collectors, can't stand another one of those two. Not at all. Yet majority rules and says "MUST MAKE MOAR! NAO!" and majority vote wins.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." "Or the one."

The movie contents are accepted by the majority (by that I mean, people in general, not the fandom.) and either you're on board or you're not. If you're not, sorry. Nothing we can do. There are other options to enjoy, give it a whirl.

Or...you can continue to tighten that sphincter until it folds you in half.

I hope you don't mind me replying to this out of order, but...

RhA wrote:Stovokor stated that 'we should have gotten', I replied to it.

Agreed.

RhA wrote:I do not claim that either of you can't want something. That's your call. My point is that you should not speak about what 'we should have gotten', because when I read something like that I feel like you're telling me that I should want something else in a movie. Can I please pick for myself what I like? Thank you.

I understand your point - I truly do - but I believe you are interpreting sto_vo_kor_2000's comment in an excessively literal manner. Certainly, one could argue that the phrase "...We should have gotten" is more than a little hyperbolic; but it's a far cry to consequently deduce that svk2K intends to choose our opinions for us!

As for svk2K's point that we should perhaps expect more from the live-action films; I ask again: why not? The measures under discussion - character development, emotional depth, and so on - are hallmarks of cinematic excellence. Why should we, as fans, not want the Transformers films to succeed along a critical axis, as well as those of financial outcome and raw entertainment value? To what end specifically would we seek to 'pick for ourselves' a film that is marred with narrative flaws, or stilted dialogue?

(So we are clear: I am not disputing the personal choices of fans to seek something else in their Transformers film experience; but I do not, at this time, understanding the underlying logic supporting said choices - and I would very much like to.)

5150 Cruiser wrote:Again, what exactly is "The best we have gotten over the years" without being subjective?

That statement was made by sto_vo_kor_2000, and is therefor for svk2K to qualify. Insofar as I have been discussing the issue however, it has been in (loosely-defined) terms of inserting narrative coherence, character development, emotional depth and so forth into a franchise in which these things have either been notoriously lacking or poorly handled.

Now, I would like to respond to Autobot032's comment, as I feel this rather gets at the crux of the matter:

Autobot032 wrote:Kids are the primary audience, always have been, always will be, nothing's going to change that. We come in at a very distant second. Kids want Bumblebee and Optimus Prime. Those two are their heroes. We, as adults and collectors, can't stand another one of those two. Not at all. Yet majority rules and says "MUST MAKE MOAR! NAO!" and majority vote wins.

If I understand correctly, the argument here could be paraphrased as "Your personal desires as a Transformers fan, regarding the Transformers brand, are secondary to the desires of the intended audience" - whether in regard to the proliferation of Bumblebee toys, or catering films toward the modern movie-going populace.

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?

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?

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?