Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

by **shamone** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:00 pm

Capt.Failure wrote:
Tekka wrote:I'd hazard a guess that our friends have incorrectly labelled these very weak story elements as plot holes simply because there's no familiar common term for them that comes to mind. Make of that what you will.

I'm curious as to why you'd bring this up again though. Are you a glutton for punishment or just love fanning the flames?

It's because the vast majority of people who comment on this don't know what they're talking about. While some elements of the film's stories are indeed weak they're a far cry from a plot hole as the term is defined (see the top of the first post).

shamone wrote:call them plot holes, call them gaps in logic they exist

Explanations like, rule of drama, rule of comedy arent really explanations but excuses.

As for other plot holes/gaps in logic

You've just demonstrated that you don't know the difference between a plot hole and a trope. Now, on to your examples...

- how come bumblebee couldnt detect the pretender

She's an infiltrator, and we know Autobots and Decepticons can shield their energy signatures at times.

- why did the primes sacrifice themselves if they were the only ones who could stop him

"The Fallen was stronger than his brothers..." is a fact Jetfire outright states. It took a Prime's power combined with that of a Seeker to kill him for good. The original Primes combined could only take him down long enough to hide the Matrix. These are well known facts you chose to ignore.

- how does one become a descendent of a prime. How do TF's propogate / (i dont want bay to answer that one)

Transformer reproduction is never clearly defined in any of the sattelite media or other continuities. The movieverse only elaborates on the fact that the AllSpark is involved to some degree, but all Transformers it produces are feral. The fanboy in me wants to speculate transferal of an aspect of a "parent" spark is required to give the Transformer sentience, but I'll give you half this one.

- Why did they place the matrix, the key to the sun eater, so close to the sun eater.

1. The Fallen was right there.
2. They couldn't kill him.
3. It was do or die, and Earth hung in the balance.

- why did sam and the warrior goddess decide to walk a few miles to prime, when bee was beside them and could have driven them in a matter of minutes

We argued back and forth about this before, but upon a recent viewing of RotF this one falls apart as a plot hole even more. Simmons and Leo with the Twins, and 'bee by himself distracted Star Scream. Sam and Mikaela took off on foot. However, it wasn't until the pair approached the ruined villiage that the battle lines were drawn. Until that moment it appeared to be a clear sprint to Optimus and the soldiers.

- what was bee doing from that point until he turned up later to protect sam

The fact he's clearly trying to stay hidden indicates he was sneaking.

- why did simmons need to climb the pyramid to say fire on my co-ordinates. surely the great pyramids of giza's co-ordinates would be pretty well known

Did you read my second post? For Simmons it's something his character would do. The guy's insane, remember? I thought two movies established this.

- why didnt they destroy the sun eater as opposed to devestator. The rason being egypt wouldn tlike it. They just entered egypt without permission, there was already a diplomatic incident in place.

You don't know how railguns work. Prototypes used in testing right now require complete barrel realignment after a single shot, a process that takes hours. Considering the Sun Harvester was still burried mostly, Devestator was the obvious threat. Also I'm not sure you understand the political fallout of destroying a histoic landmark without permission, especially with the Egyptians and the Pyramids.

- how did the population of mission city/la all get MIB mind zapped in order for the TF's to be a secret. likewise the citizens in Shanghai

As demonstrated, money talks or in this case prevents talking. Sam's parents would basically get anything they wanted to keep quiet, so it's not outside the realm of possibility that the US government paid the entire city to keep their mouths shut. Though it's clearly becoming a problem considering how Galloway reacted.

convenient that you use tropes as an excuse for gaps in logic, but not susprising

if the primes are the only ones who could defeat him, how could he be stronger. where is the logic in that. Six of them couldnt take him down, but one prime and a ruined seeker could.

starscream fired the emp, starscream was seen landing on pyramid beside megatron. how was bee distracting him exactly

if he was acting as decoy why did h sneak around. Surely a decoy is meant to be open not covert

so firing aat the machine at the op of the pyramid is destroying and desecrating. Shooting at the machine hanging onto the side of the pyramid isnt destroying and desecrating. The greater threat was the sun eater. Destroying devestator delayed the inevitable, in fact it didnt even do that as the sun eater was already exposed and ready to be used.

bribing a city, to quote the miz, really, really, REALLY, really

i will concede the matrix/sun eater proximity. the hiding signals, i dont remember it in the movie, but im sure you wouldnt make it up

by **Capt.Failure** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 pm

Attempting to say I'm covering up non-existant gaps in logic with tropes only shows further that you're selectively reading what I type, and selectively paying attention when watching these films. Just because you don't want to pay attention doesn't mean we didn't. You can't even remember certian aspects of the films.

And since I don't feel like quoting you I'll just list the responses:

1. Because when two Transformers (ala Jetfire/Optimus from Armada as opposed to Combiner teams) combine in any media, the power is multiplied, not added. That's basic knowledge. A Prime x a Seeker (who are nearly equal to Primes) is alot more strength than seven Primes independant of each other. One of these combinations in Beast Wars was nearly able to withstand a direct hit from the main gun of the Nemesis, which can level cities.

2. Because, last I checked, Starscream was among those Decepticons hunting them. He reported back to Megatron and took off to find Sam. Again, pay attention for once.

3. Because how are they supposed to know what happens when you shoot the thing? What happens when you disarm a bomb with a sledge hammer? 50/50 chance you make it stop working or set it off. This thing blows up suns.

4. I don't know or care who "The Miz" is. And no, this isn't a plot hole. Read up to us discussing "weak story elements." This is one of those. Again some basic knowledge.

by **shamone** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:28 pm

Capt.Failure wrote:Attempting to say I'm covering up non-existant gaps in logic with tropes only shows further that you're selectively reading what I type, and selectively paying attention when watching these films. Just because you don't want to pay attention doesn't mean we didn't. You can't even remember certian aspects of the films.

And since I don't feel like quoting you I'll just list the responses:

1. Because when two Transformers (ala Jetfire/Optimus from Armada as opposed to Combiner teams) combine in any media, the power is multiplied, not added. That's basic knowledge. A Prime x a Seeker (who are nearly equal to Primes) is alot more strength than seven Primes independant of each other. One of these combinations in Beast Wars was nearly able to withstand a direct hit from the main gun of the Nemesis, which can level cities.

2. Because, last I checked, Starscream was among those Decepticons hunting them. He reported back to Megatron and took off to find Sam. Again, pay attention for once.

3. Because how are they supposed to know what happens when you shoot the thing? What happens when you disarm a bomb with a sledge hammer? 50/50 chance you make it stop working or set it off. This thing blows up suns.

4. I don't know or care who "The Miz" is. And no, this isn't a plot hole. Read up to us discussing "weak story elements." This is one of those. Again some basic knowledge.

im saying you are using tropes for certain excuses like

you are excusing a post 9/11 airport security letting a metal box that has noise coming out of it bumping around independently as a rule of comedy - yeh im selective

the combiners rule is stated where in this movie, or is that an assumption you are making.

well if that was the last time you looked, look at the scene again. Screamer doesnt go looking for sam at all. He hits emp and reports back to megatron

Seriously if you firing a rail gun with that much power, within the close vicinity of a sun eater, its likely to set it off, juts as much as if you were to aim directly at it. if its going to go off, from that range a direct hit or not probably wont make much difference.

its a gap in logic, or weak story telling or a plot hole. it could be all and one of those things. its not selective.

by **Capt.Failure** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:48 pm

shamone wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:Attempting to say I'm covering up non-existant gaps in logic with tropes only shows further that you're selectively reading what I type, and selectively paying attention when watching these films. Just because you don't want to pay attention doesn't mean we didn't. You can't even remember certian aspects of the films.

And since I don't feel like quoting you I'll just list the responses:

1. Because when two Transformers (ala Jetfire/Optimus from Armada as opposed to Combiner teams) combine in any media, the power is multiplied, not added. That's basic knowledge. A Prime x a Seeker (who are nearly equal to Primes) is alot more strength than seven Primes independant of each other. One of these combinations in Beast Wars was nearly able to withstand a direct hit from the main gun of the Nemesis, which can level cities.

2. Because, last I checked, Starscream was among those Decepticons hunting them. He reported back to Megatron and took off to find Sam. Again, pay attention for once.

3. Because how are they supposed to know what happens when you shoot the thing? What happens when you disarm a bomb with a sledge hammer? 50/50 chance you make it stop working or set it off. This thing blows up suns.

4. I don't know or care who "The Miz" is. And no, this isn't a plot hole. Read up to us discussing "weak story elements." This is one of those. Again some basic knowledge.

im saying you are using tropes for certain excuses like

you are excusing a post 9/11 airport security letting a metal box that has noise coming out of it bumping around independently as a rule of comedy - yeh im selective

the combiners rule is stated where in this movie, or is that an assumption you are making.

well if that was the last time you looked, look at the scene again. Screamer doesnt go looking for sam at all. He hits emp and reports back to megatron

Seriously if you firing a rail gun with that much power, within the close vicinity of a sun eater, its likely to set it off, juts as much as if you were to aim directly at it. if its going to go off, from that range a direct hit or not probably wont make much difference.

its a gap in logic, or weak story telling or a plot hole. it could be all and one of those things. its not selective.

1. You admit your bias, not that it's a plot hole.

2. I didn't say it was. Watch some of the Transformers series other than the movies sometime then come back to this one.

3. Why don't you? I said I looked at the scene again. You are willfully saying that you don't need to yet you don't even remember how it went.

4. Right, because last I checked Sun Harvesters automatically go off when something shoots at something else in their vacinity. And you accuse me of gaps in logic? :roll:

by **HoundimusPrime** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:10 pm

You forgot to mention the BIGGEST plothole in ROTF:

When The Fallen gives his mention to the humans, nobody reacts, they all treat it like it's not a serious issue, there's no panic, no nothing. On top of that Sam just walks around with his hood up, and no one takes him; I would've much rather had a scene where a riot breaks out when someone sees Sam, Starscream lands in the city, and the Humans try give Sam to him, then Bumblebee and the Twins fight him off, that makes sense.

by **Capt.Failure** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:27 pm

HoundimusPrime wrote:You forgot to mention the BIGGEST plothole in ROTF:

When The Fallen gives his mention to the humans, nobody reacts, they all treat it like it's not a serious issue, there's no panic, no nothing. On top of that Sam just walks around with his hood up, and no one takes him; I would've much rather had a scene where a riot breaks out when someone sees Sam, Starscream lands in the city, and the Humans try give Sam to him, then Bumblebee and the Twins fight him off, that makes sense.

Emergencies and mass panic do not go hand in hand, just look at Japan after the recent earthquake and all the subsequent disasters that followed. It's also hard to judge when all we see are the inside of a deli, a closed museum, and a small Egyptian town before the film permanently positions itself outside civilization.

And who's to say that people didn't report him, but it wasn't until the Egyptian secret service at the checkpoint got an ID on him and told the CIA that they were able to pin him down? That and a hood can do a pretty good job of hiding you. Cameras don't have x-ray vision last I checked nor magic Star Trek "film from any angle" abilities.

by **shamone** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:10 am

Capt.Failure wrote:
shamone wrote:
im saying you are using tropes for certain excuses like

you are excusing a post 9/11 airport security letting a metal box that has noise coming out of it bumping around independently as a rule of comedy - yeh im selective

the combiners rule is stated where in this movie, or is that an assumption you are making.

well if that was the last time you looked, look at the scene again. Screamer doesnt go looking for sam at all. He hits emp and reports back to megatron

Seriously if you firing a rail gun with that much power, within the close vicinity of a sun eater, its likely to set it off, juts as much as if you were to aim directly at it. if its going to go off, from that range a direct hit or not probably wont make much difference.

its a gap in logic, or weak story telling or a plot hole. it could be all and one of those things. its not selective.

1. You admit your bias, not that it's a plot hole.

2. I didn't say it was. Watch some of the Transformers series other than the movies sometime then come back to this one.

3. Why don't you? I said I looked at the scene again. You are willfully saying that you don't need to yet you don't even remember how it went.

4. Right, because last I checked Sun Harvesters automatically go off when something shoots at something else in their vacinity. And you accuse me of gaps in logic?

1. im saying i knwo you like selective quoting and misrepresenting, but admittance of bias !!!????? WTF, can you tell me that quote or inference of that in my post

2. The movie isnt other animated series or comics, its the movie version. You cant pick and choose the canon you want when it suits your points, well you can, but it proves nowt, other than selective thought processes. In that case then the matrix is all wrong, devestator should have autonomous parts, not drones, and so on and so on. no where is it said in the movie that one recently resurrected autobot, and one recently killed seeker are more powerful that six out of seven of the strongest transformers.

3. I do remember, i even gave you a scene by scene precis of it, but you ignored it. so here we go again

- sam tells bee to act as decoy for starscream
- sam says its 3/4 klicks to optimus
- starscream fires emp
- devestator scenes
- starscream lands on pyramid beside megatron
- sam arrives in the first set of buildings.
- starscream and other cons are seen scouring buildings for sam
- rampage appears and produces the parents
- bee sneaks in behind a building

so what was bunblebee doing that he couldnt drive them the 3/4 kicks to prime.

4. no they dont go off if you fire directly at them or near them. because they dont exist, same with rail guns. but to say well its ok to fire near to them but not directly at them is a gap in logic, because you are firing an imaginary gun, at a fictional sun destroyer.

5. Thinking back on the primes decision to bury the matrix, its missing something. the primes were fighting the fallen on earth. where was the fallen when they decided to sacrifice themselves and meld with the matrix in the rock. Did he look away for a minute or something. I mean in the heat of the battle did they say, close your eyes for a few minutes there fallen, no peeking, we are going to play hide and seek.

and try to keep it civil from here on out if possible, rolly eyes, passive aggressiveness and hinting at ignorance are neither helpful nor productive to your argument. I dont want a flame war

by **Evil_the_Nub** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:40 am

shamone wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:
shamone wrote:
im saying you are using tropes for certain excuses like

you are excusing a post 9/11 airport security letting a metal box that has noise coming out of it bumping around independently as a rule of comedy - yeh im selective

the combiners rule is stated where in this movie, or is that an assumption you are making.

well if that was the last time you looked, look at the scene again. Screamer doesnt go looking for sam at all. He hits emp and reports back to megatron

Seriously if you firing a rail gun with that much power, within the close vicinity of a sun eater, its likely to set it off, juts as much as if you were to aim directly at it. if its going to go off, from that range a direct hit or not probably wont make much difference.

its a gap in logic, or weak story telling or a plot hole. it could be all and one of those things. its not selective.

1. You admit your bias, not that it's a plot hole.

2. I didn't say it was. Watch some of the Transformers series other than the movies sometime then come back to this one.

3. Why don't you? I said I looked at the scene again. You are willfully saying that you don't need to yet you don't even remember how it went.

4. Right, because last I checked Sun Harvesters automatically go off when something shoots at something else in their vacinity. And you accuse me of gaps in logic?

1. im saying i knwo you like selective quoting and misrepresenting, but admittance of bias !!!????? WTF, can you tell me that quote or inference of that in my post

2. The movie isnt other animated series or comics, its the movie version. You cant pick and choose the canon you want when it suits your points, well you can, but it proves nowt, other than selective thought processes. In that case then the matrix is all wrong, devestator should have autonomous parts, not drones, and so on and so on. no where is it said in the movie that one recently resurrected autobot, and one recently killed seeker are more powerful that six out of seven of the strongest transformers.

3. I do remember, i even gave you a scene by scene precis of it, but you ignored it. so here we go again

- sam tells bee to act as decoy for starscream
- sam says its 3/4 klicks to optimus
- starscream fires emp
- devestator scenes
- starscream lands on pyramid beside megatron
- sam arrives in the first set of buildings.
- starscream and other cons are seen scouring buildings for sam
- rampage appears and produces the parents
- bee sneaks in behind a building

so what was bunblebee doing that he couldnt drive them the 3/4 kicks to prime.

Not getting shot at, a bright yellow car casually driving around would be easy to spot.

4. no they dont go off if you fire directly at them or near them. because they dont exist, same with rail guns. but to say well its ok to fire near to them but not directly at them is a gap in logic, because you are firing an imaginary gun, at a fictional sun destroyer.

First of all railguns are real. Second, shooting an unknown device to stop it is a really bad idea. It's like defusing a bomb by whacking it with a hammer.

5. Thinking back on the primes decision to bury the matrix, its missing something. the primes were fighting the fallen on earth. where was the fallen when they decided to sacrifice themselves and meld with the matrix in the rock. Did he look away for a minute or something. I mean in the heat of the battle did they say, close your eyes for a few minutes there fallen, no peeking, we are going to play hide and seek.

Obviously they managed to give him the slip. We see Jetfire use a space bridge and we see the Fallen teleport around. I don't see why the Primes wouldn't have similar abilities.

by **Capt.Failure** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:01 pm

The movie isnt other animated series or comics, its the movie version. You cant pick and choose the canon you want when it suits your points, well you can, but it proves nowt, other than selective thought processes. In that case then the matrix is all wrong, devestator should have autonomous parts, not drones, and so on and so on. no where is it said in the movie that one recently resurrected autobot, and one recently killed seeker are more powerful that six out of seven of the strongest transformers.

This problem with this is that you're saying picking and chosing things that show up in every continuity isn't allowed when this is often used to criticize the film as well. So it's not ok to use the same tactics to defend it?

Now, for your points:

1. The Matrix is all wrong? Unless you mean it's design then I'm afraid you're wrong. It's the symbol of leadership among the Transformers just like other continuities, it just also has the function of acting as the key to the Sun Harvester. Let's not forget the classic Matrix had new powers as the plot demanded (one-shot Unicron, cure plagues, etc).

2. They're not drones. The Contructicons are a unit of sixteen (fifteen after the one died in the opening) elite decepticons, and any combination of eight can form Devestator.

3. Final word on Bumblebee, and the final word is: staying hidden. It's usually a good tactical choice when you're outmanned, outgunned, and trying to get somewhere.

I'll just add this for icing on the cake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun

Now if you're only gonna argue semantics please leave the thread. We're talking plot holes here.

News Credits: 5 · by **5150 Cruiser** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:05 pm

I think both sides are starting to over think, and nit pic waaaaayy yo much. :roll:

All the exapmles given... From the pro and anti side of this debate.. can be found in 90% of moies out there. There is no such thing as a perfect movie were every asspect is going to fit perfectly toeghter. it preety much comes down to this..

For the Pro ROTF crowd..
-We (yes, i liked the movie

) need to accept that there were flaws in the movie. This isn't a bad thing because as i've said before, 90% of movies out there suffer from simular "continuity errors".

-Accept that while their might be an explanation if you dig/think hard enough, that in itself is an admitance of a flaw. This movie was a summer block buster and shouldn't require you to "dig" for explanations.

For the Anit ROTF crowd..
-While yes, the movie had its flaws, but no movies perfect. many movies out there have simular problems but nobody bats an eye.
-The nit picking is a little on the ridiculous side. I don't see how you can enjoy any movie when you pick it apart to the extent as many here have.
-accept there while it may not be to your liking, there are explanations to many of the "plot holes" you all claim are there.

Anyhow, the movie is 2yrs old. DOTM will be out in 2 days. Here's hoping this one will unite us all back together.
"Till are are one."

by **shamone** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:05 pm

Capt.Failure wrote:
The movie isnt other animated series or comics, its the movie version. You cant pick and choose the canon you want when it suits your points, well you can, but it proves nowt, other than selective thought processes. In that case then the matrix is all wrong, devestator should have autonomous parts, not drones, and so on and so on. no where is it said in the movie that one recently resurrected autobot, and one recently killed seeker are more powerful that six out of seven of the strongest transformers.

This problem with this is that you're saying picking and chosing things that show up in every continuity isn't allowed when this is often used to criticize the film as well. So it's not ok to use the same tactics to defend it?

Now, for your points:

1. The Matrix is all wrong? Unless you mean it's design then I'm afraid you're wrong. It's the symbol of leadership among the Transformers just like other continuities, it just also has the function of acting as the key to the Sun Harvester. Let's not forget the classic Matrix had new powers as the plot demanded (one-shot Unicron, cure plagues, etc).

2. They're not drones. The Contructicons are a unit of sixteen (fifteen after the one died in the opening) elite decepticons, and any combination of eight can form Devestator.

3. Final word on Bumblebee, and the final word is: staying hidden. It's usually a good tactical choice when you're outmanned, outgunned, and trying to get somewhere.

I'll just add this for icing on the cake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun

Now if you're only gonna argue semantics please leave the thread. We're talking plot holes here.

no explanation on the bias claim, didnt think there would be one ...

1. the point about the matrix is that its use has now changed again... therefore you cant use previous continuity to explain the other plot holes

2. you see a different movie to me then, dont remember that explanation of the constructicons in the movie i saw

3. im confused, in a previous post you said he was acting as a decoy. now hiding, staying out of sight doesnt fulfil that role, unless bee is retarded. so now he is hiding and staying covert, whilst sam uns across open desert without cover.

4. do a prototype exists. doesnt say anything tabout blowing up sun harvesters or activating them if fired directly at them. Again your defence, saying that the reason they didnt shoot at harvester because it might make it activate is not verified.

And dont tell me what threads to leave or stay in............ i dont respond well to threats, however passive aggressive they may be. I politely asked you to keep this civil.

by **shamone** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:06 pm

5150 Cruiser wrote:I think both sides are starting to over think, and nit pic waaaaayy yo much. All the exapmles given... From the pro and anti side of this debate.. can be found in 90% of moies out there. There is no such thing as a perfect movie were every asspect is going to fit perfectly toeghter. it preety much comes down to this..

For the Pro ROTF crowd..
-We (yes, i liked the movie ) need to accept that there were flaws in the movie. This isn't a bad thing because as i've said before, 90% of movies out there suffer from simular "continuity errors".

-Accept that while their might be an explanation if you dig/think hard enough, that in itself is an admitance of a flaw. This movie was a summer block buster and shouldn't require you to "dig" for explanations.

For the Anit ROTF crowd..
-While yes, the movie had its flaws, but no movies perfect. many movies out there have simular problems but nobody bats an eye.
-The nit picking is a little on the ridiculous side. I don't see how you can enjoy any movie when you pick it apart to the extent as many here have.
-accept there while it may not be to your liking, there are explanations to many of the "plot holes" you all claim are there.

Anyhow, the movie is 2yrs old. DOTM will be out in 2 days. Here's hoping this one will unite us all back together.
"Till are are one."

i agree totally.
i love the dark knight, but i know there are plot elements stuck together with spit and paper and hope. but if some people cant accept the plot holes/gaps in logic and use assumption, hearsay, conjecture and fan theory to defend the most glaring ones, then i will point the flaws out

by **Capt.Failure** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:14 pm

5150 Cruiser wrote:I think both sides are starting to over think, and nit pic waaaaayy yo much. All the exapmles given... From the pro and anti side of this debate.. can be found in 90% of moies out there. There is no such thing as a perfect movie were every asspect is going to fit perfectly toeghter. it preety much comes down to this..

For the Pro ROTF crowd..
-We (yes, i liked the movie ) need to accept that there were flaws in the movie. This isn't a bad thing because as i've said before, 90% of movies out there suffer from simular "continuity errors".

-Accept that while their might be an explanation if you dig/think hard enough, that in itself is an admitance of a flaw. This movie was a summer block buster and shouldn't require you to "dig" for explanations.

For the Anit ROTF crowd..
-While yes, the movie had its flaws, but no movies perfect. many movies out there have simular problems but nobody bats an eye.
-The nit picking is a little on the ridiculous side. I don't see how you can enjoy any movie when you pick it apart to the extent as many here have.
-accept there while it may not be to your liking, there are explanations to many of the "plot holes" you all claim are there.

Anyhow, the movie is 2yrs old. DOTM will be out in 2 days. Here's hoping this one will unite us all back together.
"Till are are one."

Oh don't get me wrong, I know it's a flawed film. The plot is too shallow and the story is too big. The characters don't get much characterization and the humor is in a word, crap. There's also alot of missed moments they could have done in place of alot they could have left out. It is indeed a flawed film.

However the plot is not as full of holes as accused. Does it have holes, well yeah namely Wheelie and his mysterious stealth abilities. But bias on the part of the vocal minority has done alot of warp the plot's status as "full of holes" out of proportion. Anyone who pays attention to the film can notice that the plot holds itself together much better than advertised.

Though in review I will admit the Optimus/Jetfire combination thing was a bit of an asspull.

See shamone, even I can admit I was wrong.

News Credits: 6 · by **BeastProwl** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:14 pm

dirk2243 wrote:I thought his head looked exactly like Grindors head. look at Grindor's head right before Prime rips it in 2 during the forest scene and then again at the parents abductor.

wasnt the obductor rampage :???:

by **shamone** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:58 am

Capt.Failure wrote:
5150 Cruiser wrote:I think both sides are starting to over think, and nit pic waaaaayy yo much. All the exapmles given... From the pro and anti side of this debate.. can be found in 90% of moies out there. There is no such thing as a perfect movie were every asspect is going to fit perfectly toeghter. it preety much comes down to this..

For the Pro ROTF crowd..
-We (yes, i liked the movie ) need to accept that there were flaws in the movie. This isn't a bad thing because as i've said before, 90% of movies out there suffer from simular "continuity errors".

-Accept that while their might be an explanation if you dig/think hard enough, that in itself is an admitance of a flaw. This movie was a summer block buster and shouldn't require you to "dig" for explanations.

For the Anit ROTF crowd..
-While yes, the movie had its flaws, but no movies perfect. many movies out there have simular problems but nobody bats an eye.
-The nit picking is a little on the ridiculous side. I don't see how you can enjoy any movie when you pick it apart to the extent as many here have.
-accept there while it may not be to your liking, there are explanations to many of the "plot holes" you all claim are there.

Anyhow, the movie is 2yrs old. DOTM will be out in 2 days. Here's hoping this one will unite us all back together.
"Till are are one."

Oh don't get me wrong, I know it's a flawed film. The plot is too shallow and the story is too big. The characters don't get much characterization and the humor is in a word, crap. There's also alot of missed moments they could have done in place of alot they could have left out. It is indeed a flawed film.

However the plot is not as full of holes as accused. Does it have holes, well yeah namely Wheelie and his mysterious stealth abilities. But bias on the part of the vocal minority has done alot of warp the plot's status as "full of holes" out of proportion. Anyone who pays attention to the film can notice that the plot holds itself together much better than advertised.

Though in review I will admit the Optimus/Jetfire combination thing was a bit of an asspull.

See shamone, even I can admit I was wrong.

admitting you are wrong is the first step to recovery

as i have shown the plot doesnt hold together, there are gaps in logic.

i n fact the greatest problem with the movie is that it writes itself into corners and then produced deus ex machinas or mcguffins to get out of.

its like the plot was written as they went along, as opposed to having a clear vision of how it would get from a to b to c

by **Capt.Failure** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:03 pm

shamone wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:
5150 Cruiser wrote:I think both sides are starting to over think, and nit pic waaaaayy yo much. All the exapmles given... From the pro and anti side of this debate.. can be found in 90% of moies out there. There is no such thing as a perfect movie were every asspect is going to fit perfectly toeghter. it preety much comes down to this..

For the Pro ROTF crowd..
-We (yes, i liked the movie ) need to accept that there were flaws in the movie. This isn't a bad thing because as i've said before, 90% of movies out there suffer from simular "continuity errors".

-Accept that while their might be an explanation if you dig/think hard enough, that in itself is an admitance of a flaw. This movie was a summer block buster and shouldn't require you to "dig" for explanations.

For the Anit ROTF crowd..
-While yes, the movie had its flaws, but no movies perfect. many movies out there have simular problems but nobody bats an eye.
-The nit picking is a little on the ridiculous side. I don't see how you can enjoy any movie when you pick it apart to the extent as many here have.
-accept there while it may not be to your liking, there are explanations to many of the "plot holes" you all claim are there.

Anyhow, the movie is 2yrs old. DOTM will be out in 2 days. Here's hoping this one will unite us all back together.
"Till are are one."

Oh don't get me wrong, I know it's a flawed film. The plot is too shallow and the story is too big. The characters don't get much characterization and the humor is in a word, crap. There's also alot of missed moments they could have done in place of alot they could have left out. It is indeed a flawed film.

However the plot is not as full of holes as accused. Does it have holes, well yeah namely Wheelie and his mysterious stealth abilities. But bias on the part of the vocal minority has done alot of warp the plot's status as "full of holes" out of proportion. Anyone who pays attention to the film can notice that the plot holds itself together much better than advertised.

Though in review I will admit the Optimus/Jetfire combination thing was a bit of an asspull.

See shamone, even I can admit I was wrong.

admitting you are wrong is the first step to recovery

as i have shown the plot doesnt hold together, there are gaps in logic.

i n fact the greatest problem with the movie is that it writes itself into corners and then produced deus ex machinas or mcguffins to get out of.

its like the plot was written as they went along, as opposed to having a clear vision of how it would get from a to b to c

And I bolded that bottom line for a good reason. You remember the part were the writers only got a quarter of the script written when the writer's strike forced them to quit, right? How they chose to finish the script for Star Trek 2009 instead and ran out of time on RotF's script?

by **shamone** » Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:51 am

Capt.Failure wrote:
shamone wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:
5150 Cruiser wrote:I think both sides are starting to over think, and nit pic waaaaayy yo much. All the exapmles given... From the pro and anti side of this debate.. can be found in 90% of moies out there. There is no such thing as a perfect movie were every asspect is going to fit perfectly toeghter. it preety much comes down to this..

For the Pro ROTF crowd..
-We (yes, i liked the movie ) need to accept that there were flaws in the movie. This isn't a bad thing because as i've said before, 90% of movies out there suffer from simular "continuity errors".

-Accept that while their might be an explanation if you dig/think hard enough, that in itself is an admitance of a flaw. This movie was a summer block buster and shouldn't require you to "dig" for explanations.

For the Anit ROTF crowd..
-While yes, the movie had its flaws, but no movies perfect. many movies out there have simular problems but nobody bats an eye.
-The nit picking is a little on the ridiculous side. I don't see how you can enjoy any movie when you pick it apart to the extent as many here have.
-accept there while it may not be to your liking, there are explanations to many of the "plot holes" you all claim are there.

Anyhow, the movie is 2yrs old. DOTM will be out in 2 days. Here's hoping this one will unite us all back together.
"Till are are one."

Oh don't get me wrong, I know it's a flawed film. The plot is too shallow and the story is too big. The characters don't get much characterization and the humor is in a word, crap. There's also alot of missed moments they could have done in place of alot they could have left out. It is indeed a flawed film.

However the plot is not as full of holes as accused. Does it have holes, well yeah namely Wheelie and his mysterious stealth abilities. But bias on the part of the vocal minority has done alot of warp the plot's status as "full of holes" out of proportion. Anyone who pays attention to the film can notice that the plot holds itself together much better than advertised.

Though in review I will admit the Optimus/Jetfire combination thing was a bit of an asspull.

See shamone, even I can admit I was wrong.

admitting you are wrong is the first step to recovery

as i have shown the plot doesnt hold together, there are gaps in logic.

i n fact the greatest problem with the movie is that it writes itself into corners and then produced deus ex machinas or mcguffins to get out of.

its like the plot was written as they went along, as opposed to having a clear vision of how it would get from a to b to c

And I bolded that bottom line for a good reason. You remember the part were the writers only got a quarter of the script written when the writer's strike forced them to quit, right? How they chose to finish the script for Star Trek 2009 instead and ran out of time on RotF's script?

yeh i meant to add the line, that it was probably due to the strike

but i do blame hasbro and paramounjt for rushing the movie in that case.

in fact i think two years turn around isnt enough for any movie to be sufficiently made, especially effects heavy movies like TF