Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:30 pm**

Title says it all. Constructive criticism would be very appreciated:

Part 1:
http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com/20 ... ool-or-ne/

Part 2:
http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com/20 ... ew-part-2/

Part 3:
http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com/20 ... ew-part-3/

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 4:15 pm**

First criticism, shouldn't this be in the Transformers forums?

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:46 pm**

Blah blah blah, the movies suck, blah blah blah, not enough robots, blah, twins are annoying, blah blah blah blah, G1 is the coolest ever, blah blah blah blah blah, I hate everything new, blah blah blah, it's not like my childhood so it's bad, blah blah blah, nostalgia, blah.

Same argument as always.

But I agree that the original is better.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:50 pm**

Treetop Maximus wrote:G1 is the coolest ever, blah blah blah blah blah, I hate everything new, blah blah blah, it's not like my childhood so it's bad, blah blah blah, nostalgia, blah.

Same argument as always.

Not really an accurate summary, but I can see where you're coming from. Maybe when I post the devil's advocate argument for why the new movies are better and then make my final overall decision, the whole thing won't seem so pigeonholed into the same old arguments. Thanks for reading!

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:57 pm**

Treetop Maximus wrote:Blah blah blah, the movies suck, blah blah blah, not enough robots, blah, twins are annoying, blah blah blah blah, G1 is the coolest ever, blah blah blah blah blah, I hate everything new, blah blah blah, it's not like my childhood so it's bad, blah blah blah, nostalgia, blah.

Same argument as always.

That's pretty much it. The whole thing just parrots a bunch of old arguments, I recognize some of those points from before the '07 movie even came out. All in all, this is about the deadest horse you can possibly beat, there's nothing really new to add to it, no matter how far in-depth you go, it's been done.

The movies weren't perfect, especially ROTF, but it's not like G1 wasn't equally flawed.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:12 pm**

These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:13 pm**

plates wrote:
Treetop Maximus wrote:G1 is the coolest ever, blah blah blah blah blah, I hate everything new, blah blah blah, it's not like my childhood so it's bad, blah blah blah, nostalgia, blah.

Same argument as always.

Not really an accurate summary, but I can see where you're coming from. Maybe when I post the devil's advocate argument for why the new movies are better and then make my final overall decision, the whole thing won't seem so pigeonholed into the same old arguments. Thanks for reading!

Actually, I didn't get very far. It was too much for me to read in one sitting, but I did skim. I disagreed about the G1 humans. I liked them.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:40 pm**

SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I like how, whenever someone raises an argument against the movies, you're there to tell them they're wrong. Even if some of them ARE legit reasons, it's BS because you, Sly, like the movies.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:47 pm**

Shadowman wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I like how, whenever someone raises an argument against the movies, you're there to tell them they're wrong. Even if some of them ARE legit reasons, it's BS because you, Sly, like the movies.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:50 pm**

Dr. Heavy B wrote:
Shadowman wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I like how, whenever someone raises an argument against the movies, you're there to tell them they're wrong. Even if some of them ARE legit reasons, it's BS because you, Sly, like the movies.

[Fairly large image I'm omitting for the broadband-impaired]

He's not a troll, dude, we've already established that.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2011 9:02 pm**

Shadowman wrote:
Dr. Heavy B wrote:
Shadowman wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I like how, whenever someone raises an argument against the movies, you're there to tell them they're wrong. Even if some of them ARE legit reasons, it's BS because you, Sly, like the movies.

[Fairly large image I'm omitting for the broadband-impaired]

He's not a troll, dude, we've already established that.

Yeah, I'm the troll on this site.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:32 am**

Shadowman wrote:
Dr. Heavy B wrote:
Shadowman wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I like how, whenever someone raises an argument against the movies, you're there to tell them they're wrong. Even if some of them ARE legit reasons, it's BS because you, Sly, like the movies.

[Fairly large image I'm omitting for the broadband-impaired]

He's not a troll, dude, we've already established that.

Creating a thread to get people trolling does not a troll make. Constently arguing with EVERYBODY is troll like quality

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 9:26 am**

SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I can understand if you didn't enjoy the article or disagreed with it... but at least use substantial evidence to back up your claims instead of just assuming what I wrote. "Just because it's not exactly like the originals," is never once my argument.

Taken from first paragraph of point 6: "I wasn’t hoping for carbon copies of the originals, but there is still a lingering feeling of that “just not right” when watching the Bayformers. Sure they look great and all when they’re flying around all nimbly bimbly over the screen, but they had the template for some of the coolest looking and most recognizable characters ever just sitting there staring them in the face and this was the best they could muster?"

"... wasn't hoping for carbon copies." That right there refutes your claim alone. If you're going to argue against, at least present a truthful argument.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:47 pm**

it's not like they just tossed the old designed out the window, they actually kept a good amount of recurring design elements. Take Optimus, for instance, yes, they changed the coloring, slightly, (From what I hear red is a really hard color to properly use in CGI, hence the need for flames) but the rest of him is the same, blue legs and head, red torso and arms, windshield chest, smokestacks on his shoulders, and pointy things on the side of his helmet. "Oh but he has a mouth, that ain't cool!" So did both Optimus Primal and Optimus Prime in Cybertron.

And Megatron...well, he has no recurring design elements. It's like each of his designs is contained in each series. G1, Beast Wars, (Where he radically changed his design TWICE) RID, Armada, Energon, Cybertron, the movies...it wasn't until Animated that they started to use elements of his G1 design. Well, okay, the comics would primarily use his G1 design (Unless they were specifically based on another series) but still.

As for Skids and Mudflap...eh, I don't think they're as bad as most people say. (I don't see them as racist mostly because I didn't actually attach a race to them) But I do agree that they weren't really needed. They had a couple good lines, but a couple of good lines doesn't make up for having more screen time than most of the other Autobots. Probably would have been better to replace them with, say Sideswipe and Jolt, two (Potentially) great characters that got barely any screen time.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:14 pm**

Moved for obvious reasons to the right forum.
In other news, Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley are still dead and still the Kings of their respective music genres.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:37 pm**

Shadowman wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:These "reasons" are BS. Just because it's not exactly like the originals, doesn't make it suck.

I like how, whenever someone raises an argument against the movies, you're there to tell them they're wrong. Even if some of them ARE legit reasons, it's BS because you, Sly, like the movies.

I still disagree.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 3:12 pm**

The movie sucked because
1)Michael bay did it
2)greedy spielberg AKA -Mr Throw Money at it till its better- was also involved

These new TF movies needed a decent director like James Cameron/Ridley Scott/Peter Jackson ect - basically directors who would FOCUS on the main theme - TRANSFORMERS

not sam and his wooden stick girlfriend who cant act for ****. Seriously hiring rosey when she cant act for **** simply because spielberg didnt like Megan Foxes 'Nazi' comment to bay is just stupid. Yeah steven your a jew, get over yourself. It isnt like Megan fox went upto spielberg and asked why his nose is so long or anything like that. She simply said Bay is running people into the ground like a nazi. To fire her and hire some clothes model who ISNT an actress was just stupid. Its like me making the butcher a fireman

The 6 reasons given are valid points, yeah they have been said time and time again but at least in the G1 movie all the characters had different looks and seperate personalities and you actually cared about them. I really didnt care in the slightest when ironhide died in DOTM because he has always come across as......well.....no real personality at all. In fact NONE of the figures come across with any real personality aside from prime and megatron and thats basically it

HOPEFULLY the 4th TF movie WONT have anything to do with spielberg OR michael 'only makes crap movies' bay. To be honest i think after pearl harbor ect they just GAVE bay the transformers film to do THINKING it would just be a 1 off thingy like all the other '80s bring back films' have done such as the terrible A-Team film or charlies angels ect

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm**

Swindle01 wrote:greedy spielberg AKA -Mr Throw Money at it till its better- was also involved

Yeah, a multiple Academy Award-winning director. Sure does suck to have him around.

Swindle01 wrote:James Cameron

James Cameron can do good visuals but his dialogue makes Michael Bay look like Shakespeare.

Swindle01 wrote:Ridley Scott

Ridley Scott hasn't made a good movie since Black Hawk Down. After the way he butchered Robin Hood, do you really want him anywhere near Transformers?

Swindle01 wrote:Peter Jackson

Peter Jackson hasn't made a good movie since Lord of the Rings. Lovely Bones is, as I've heard, godawful, and King Kong was the movie that taught me, no, I don't want to watch a movie for three hours.

Swindle01 wrote:Yeah steven your a jew, get over yourself.

Wow, good job being an anti-Semite.

Swindle01 wrote:Its like me making the butcher a fireman

Except in this case it turns out the fireman you fired was an unbearable prick who was only moderately good, and the butcher makes a surprisingly good fireman.

Swindle01 wrote:To be honest i think after pearl harbor ect they just GAVE bay the transformers film to do THINKING it would just be a 1 off thingy like all the other '80s bring back films' have done such as the terrible A-Team film or charlies angels ect

They gave it to him knowing that his movies bring in a crapload of money on a relatively small budget. (Small by big summer movie standards, anyway) DOTM is the fifth highest-grossing movie of all time, the other two are in the top fifty.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:48 pm**

Shadowman wrote:
Swindle01 wrote:Peter Jackson

Peter Jackson hasn't made a good movie since Lord of the Rings. Lovely Bones is, as I've heard, godawful, and King Kong was the movie that taught me, no, I don't want to watch a movie for three hours.

I liked that movie because it was 3 hours. I wish more movies where that long.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:49 pm**

yeah ok....well if you do like terrible films then ok keep watching michael bay movies

also ridley scott and james cameron and peter jackson HAVE had some turds in there time but they have also produced some things michael bay will NEVER produce - Masterpieces such as Lotr/Alien/Terminator 2 ect ect. Mean while ive yet to see a single decent film ever produced by michael bay

also PLEASE dont give me that Anti-Jew crap. Im black but i dont get all upset everytime someone mentions the N/C word. Yeah megan fox might have acted an ass off set but the truth is shes the only decent thing in the 2 movies while the 3rd was just damn right boring. Rosie does NOTHING for my wang at all

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:59 pm**

Swindle01 wrote:yeah ok....well if you do like terrible films then ok keep watching michael bay movies

also ridley scott and james cameron and peter jackson HAVE had some turds in there time but they have also produced some things michael bay will NEVER produce - Masterpieces such as Lotr/Alien/Terminator 2 ect ect. Mean while ive yet to see a single decent film ever produced by michael bay

also PLEASE dont give me that Anti-Jew crap. Im black but i dont get all upset everytime someone mentions the N/C word. Yeah megan fox might have acted an ass off set but the truth is shes the only decent thing in the 2 movies while the 3rd was just damn right boring. Rosie does NOTHING for my wang at all

What the hell are you talking about!? She was the worst thing about the first 2 movies.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:51 pm**

you sure that wasnt bumblebee? or are you just into unattractive women?

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:55 pm**

Swindle01 wrote:The movie sucked because
The 6 reasons given are valid points, yeah they have been said time and time again but at least in the G1 movie all the characters had different looks and seperate personalities and you actually cared about them. I really didnt care in the slightest when ironhide died in DOTM because he has always come across as......well.....no real personality at all. In fact NONE of the figures come across with any real personality aside from prime and megatron and thats basically it

You complain that the arguments in the article have been said time and time again... then all you do in your own point is reiterate an argument used in the article. A buhhh?

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:58 pm**

Shadowman wrote:(From what I hear red is a really hard color to properly use in CGI, hence the need for flames)

If the color red being difficult to employ in CGI is the reason Optimus had flames then I'll change my name to Mecca World Peace. It can definitely be attributed to Bay and the yes men thinking it looked "cooler."

In terms of a new director when the time comes for a new Transformers movie? How about the guy who did District 9? I'd like to see someone such as him; hungry to prove their talent and not necessarily in it just for the money. (Although sadly, he may not have much choice in the matter).

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2011 6:07 pm**

plates wrote:
Shadowman wrote:(From what I hear red is a really hard color to properly use in CGI, hence the need for flames)

If the color red being difficult to employ in CGI is the reason Optimus had flames then I'll change my name to Mecca World Peace. It can definitely be attributed to Bay and the yes men thinking it looked "cooler."

Probably both, I don't know enough about either to say which one is right.

plates wrote:In terms of a new director when the time comes for a new Transformers movie? How about the guy who did District 9? I'd like to see someone such as him; hungry to prove their talent and not necessarily in it just for the money. (Although sadly, he may not have much choice in the matter).

Neil Blomkamp, maybe. The only reason District 9 happened is because he couldn't do Halo on a reasonable budget. But then he did that on a $30,000,000 budget, although the earlier parts of that were very light on CGI, and Transformers requires a lot of CGI. (Part of the reason the first movie was so light on bots is because CGI doesn't come cheap)

Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.

Re: 6 Reasons Why the Original Transformers Cartoon is Better than the Movies.