Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Does it matter? It's foolish to take the haters seriously since most of them are just butthurt geewunners.
MOST OF THEM.
NOT ALL.
Do you have anything to back up that claim?
You're right. For all I know, they could ALL be butthurt geewunners. Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my claim.
Exactly.
Though I think context is important. Do you mean in general, or on these boards?
shamone wrote:- emphasis on human characters -No, again they want to sell toys not people
Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Does it matter? It's foolish to take the haters seriously since most of them are just butthurt geewunners.
MOST OF THEM.
NOT ALL.
Do you have anything to back up that claim?
You're right. For all I know, they could ALL be butthurt geewunners. Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my claim.
Exactly.
Though I think context is important. Do you mean in general, or on these boards?
My bad. I meant amongst the Transformers fandom.shamone wrote:- emphasis on human characters -No, again they want to sell toys not people
Human Alliance
shamone wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Does it matter? It's foolish to take the haters seriously since most of them are just butthurt geewunners.
MOST OF THEM.
NOT ALL.
Do you have anything to back up that claim?
You're right. For all I know, they could ALL be butthurt geewunners. Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my claim.
Exactly.
Though I think context is important. Do you mean in general, or on these boards?
My bad. I meant amongst the Transformers fandom.shamone wrote:- emphasis on human characters -No, again they want to sell toys not people
Human Alliance
want do you think was the usp of those toys
Treetop Maximus wrote:shamone wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Screamfleet wrote:Treetop Maximus wrote:Does it matter? It's foolish to take the haters seriously since most of them are just butthurt geewunners.
MOST OF THEM.
NOT ALL.
Do you have anything to back up that claim?
You're right. For all I know, they could ALL be butthurt geewunners. Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my claim.
Exactly.
Though I think context is important. Do you mean in general, or on these boards?
My bad. I meant amongst the Transformers fandom.shamone wrote:- emphasis on human characters -No, again they want to sell toys not people
Human Alliance
want do you think was the usp of those toys
Usp? No idea.
My bad. I meant amongst the Transformers fandom.
5150 Cruiser wrote:So you don't think Hasbro should have looked things since its there product thats going to be represented?
Its not like they haven't been involved in story telling in other TF prodjects, so why would it be any different now?
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds
T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach
shamone wrote:lets see what we can blame hasbro for
- immature unfunny adult themed (but not adult standard) humour. - NO this alienates their target market
- emphasis on human characters -No, again they want to sell toys not people
- bad editing and scritping - no they are toy makers not movie makers
- superfilous characters and novelty bots (the kitchencons for example) - yes put as many pointless toy potentials in
- the shallow characterisation - hard to judge, they may have laid down basic character profiles but it was up to creators to elaborate upon these
Shadowman wrote:I will put forth the theory that it was the internet itself trying to punch him in the face.
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote: Do you mean "looked things over"?
If so then yes, and I'm sure they did, but bottom line I dont see how that would have helped.Hasbro signed over the rights for a movie.Unless the film differes from the source martial so much that its not recognizable then they dont have much recourse to change things
Not to mention that M.Bay showed us in the first film that he's going to do things his way no matter what Hasbro has to say about it. I'm talking about the DELIBERATE nameing of the tank as Devestator and not Brawl.
I know many believe it was a mistake but Bay admited it wasnt..
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Its not like they haven't been involved in story telling in other TF prodjects, so why would it be any different now?
Thats just it, they havent been very involved, they hire out for their writting needs since day 1.And its not like Hasbro is in the buisness of making films.They are going to put their trust in Paramount, Spelberg and who ever they hire to direct the film.
Shadowman wrote:I will put forth the theory that it was the internet itself trying to punch him in the face.
5150 Cruiser wrote: Habro can be held acountable for all of this. Why? Because its their product. Giving the producers free rein to do what they want and then saying its not Hasbros fault is like giving the keys to an interior designer for your house and then being pissed cause they painted the inside pink, purple and orange. ya, it may have been there vision, but if its not what you had envisioned, then you should have overlooked the prodject a bit better and put your foot down.
I understand that there first, and foremost goal is to sell toys, but if hasbro didn't like the potty humor then they should have spoken up
5150 Cruiser wrote:You sure Bay said it wasn't a mistake?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418279/faq#.2.1.35
but i could have sworn in the DVD comentray of the first movie it was stated it was a mistake.
So your trying to tell me that in 25yrs they have never, and i mean never overlooked any of the writing that has been done for them? Sorry, i just don't by that.
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds
T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Hasbro really cant be blamed for any of that because of how the business operates.
Hasbro signed over the rights for a film to be made.Putting their foot down as you put it really isint an option.
True, its like "giving the keys to an interior designer for your house and then being pissed cause they painted wrong" but thats how it works in this business.Once they have signed over the rights thats pretty much it.
Unless the work completed deviates from what was wanted/agreed upon then the brand owner has no recourse to abide by the contract they signed or face fines for breach of contract.
And like them or nmot for their detail, the films do follow the basic TF formula..
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote: Yes, he out right said he felt "Devestator" was a KOOLER sounding name and stuck with it.
He also said that to him, its Devestator not Brawl, despite what the writers said.
He made these comments at an Australian press conference covering the first films opening.I once had pleanty of links to the interview on my old computer.I posted them here back in 07.
But all that is lost now.
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:So your trying to tell me that in 25yrs they have never, and i mean never overlooked any of the writing that has been done for them? Sorry, i just don't by that.
Thats not what I said.
But the fact is unless it deviates from the premise the contract was based on,[like making them Ponies] then Hasbro has to abide by the contract they signed.
Shadowman wrote:I will put forth the theory that it was the internet itself trying to punch him in the face.
5150 Cruiser wrote:Do you have proof that this is the way things operate? I'm not calling you a liar by any means, but i have a very hard time believing that in 25yrs time hasbro has never over seen a story and had changes made based on there like/dislike. I don't know anyone that just gives people that much free rien on any prodject.
5150 Cruiser wrote: Their's an old saying...
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me".
Lets say your correct, and thats the rules in movie making. First movie comes out with all the stuff fans generaly had a problem with was all Bay and Co. Hasbro had no say in production and/or script. Now what anout the second movie? Or the third? They knew about the character not havinf apmle screen time and dialoge that many would have liked to see, not to meantion the "Potty humor".
If hasbro had a problem with it, then before script writing took place those problems should have been addressed then and there.
I'd like to see these links. Cause intill then, everything i have seen points to it being an honest mistake.
http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Brawl_%28Movie%29#NotesAccording to a fan who attended the Australian press conference, Bay had confirmed that he had decided to use the name "Devastator" because he had preferred it
Do you have proof that this is the way things operate?
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds
T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach
OptiMagnus wrote:Incorrect claim #1Atary77 wrote:To me the films were proof that hasbro as well didn't care enough about the TF fan base either.
Incorrect claim #2 with clever responseTreetop Maximus wrote:Atary77 wrote:So let's see if they can learn anything from how we feel about these movies... not that they care.
Yeah, I hope they learn how much I loved this series.
Unfortunately for you, Atary, the claims I highlighted here invalidate your argument, especially the parts I put in bold and most especially the words I put in red. Treetop put it correctly.
The issue with these statements: You put every single Transformers "fan" in the same boat, which is the boat that dislikes the movies. You are assuming every "fan" who has seen these films is unsatisfied, basically pulling me onto a boat I don't want to be on, as I loved every (well, almost every) second of all three films, and bought tons of toys and love (nearly) all of them. Do you believe everyone dislikes these movies? Where's the boat I'm supposed to be on? Did it sink? Did I imagine it?
One of the biggest problems the TF fanbase has is that it's so common for someone to say "we", "us", or "the fans" to invalidate the opinions of those who don't share their opinion on a certain subject, and assume everyone thinks the same way as they do. I just hate it when someone says "Hasbro/Michael Bay doesn't care about the fans because they/he gave us movies we don't like". Also, one of these days you're going to realize that Hasbro doesn't serve "us": They do what they think is going to sell toys and keep Transformers alive. Yes, people, like yourself, dislike the films. Not everyone. Not everyone that calls themselves a Transformers fan. So, realistically, Hasbro can't serve "us". If they could, they'd have to have so many interpretations of everything so they could satisfy every individual. The world just doesn't work that way.
Unfortunately for you, the movies happened to accomplish more than Hasbro intended in the stae they were presented, and since there is a high demand for their toys and a majority satisfaction of the films, they aren't going to drop what they're doing, try to change what already happened, and listen to the rather unfortunate minority. Money talks, so who are they going to listen to? To avoid taking your quotes out of context, yes you did mention Hasbro is out to make money. But you never mentioned that they're out to please the majority. If the majority's happy, Hasbro's happy, and they claim success.
So, if Hasbro can learn anything from how I (not "we") feel about these movies, I want them to learn how much I love them and how much I want to see another movie like the other three in two years.
At the same time, I want them to learn from what you disliked about them, and how they can improve upon that, which may even make them richer.
Atary77 wrote:OptiMagnus wrote:You raise many interesting points. Mostly some errors that can be found in my statement which I'm glad you brought to my attention. Yes it is unfair to put every fan in the "I hated it" boat as there are in fact TF fans who love everything about these movies and wouldn't change anything about them. And if that's the case more power to you.
And yes you're right, Hasbro should try to learn and take in input from folks who weren't pleased with the movies and try to use that in order to make the movies a more rich experience than the last three.
However it's not cool to me when they totally disregard any criticism the films get simply cause a larger majority liked them.
And yes Hasbro is not a company that's not there for the sole purpose of pleasing it's fans. Matter of fact they are there to please the general public. But that's not to say they shouldn't make better efforts in order to KEEP pleasing the general public.
So yes to those that liked these movies Thank Hasbro, Bay, Spielberg, Kurtzman, and Orci as they've pleased you.
I on the other hand I guess will stick with my minority opinion on not liking these movies. I expect improvements to be made with the next trilogy of films. Most importantly that the robots are the stars of the movies, NOT the humans. To those of you who say that's not feasible to do in live action then by all means just make the whole thing CGI which would've been a better idea in my opinion.
Atary77 wrote:Bottom line, the Robots are the stars. Not the humans!
Predaprince wrote:I am very thankful to have posters like sto_vo_kor_2000 who is so energetic about improving others' understanding and enjoyment of the TF universe
Stormrider wrote:You often add interesting insights to conversations that makes the fledglings think and challenges even the sharpest minds
T-Macksimus wrote:I consider you and editor to be amongst the most "scholarly" in terms of your knowledge, demeanor and general approach
Atary77 wrote:To answer your question OptiMagnus I didn't watch the third film yet. However does that make my opinions any less valid? One would think so however while I didn't go to theaters to watch this film I did research it and spoke with many individuals who saw it both locally and online. Granted this would sound rediculas but those I spoke with and the critic reviews I read share much of my same views. One of the many reviews I read was from screened.com a website I agree with very often. As for the input from my friends I didn't just ask them what they thought I pretty much had them give me the spoilers as to what happened. And regardless what others may think that's what I'm basing my opinions on for now until I somehow get lucky enough to see the movie without having to pay my well earned money for it.
I will agree that yes I've heard the humor and innuendo was toned down and not as present in the films which shows they've made one step in the right direction. However they still manage to hit one constant pot hole of not having the main villain more present through out the movie. And yes I mean Megatron. Humans never will and never should be the main villain in something that has to do with Transformers. Seriously the way Megatron is treated in these films, it's like if they decided never to show the Joker in Dark Knight until the last 10 minutes or just show a few minutes of him here and there.. and then turn him into an insecure whiner.
Bottom line, the Robots are the stars. Not the humans!
Treetop Maximus wrote:The unique selling point is that they come wih humans, obviously. Hasbro is selling toys of humans under the Transformers brand name. Robots are not their main focus.
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote: That old saying doesnt apply here for 2 reasons.
1]The contracts signed arent for 1 movie.Its pretty standard for such contract to have provisions for multiple films.As long as they are done within a specified time frame.
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote: 2]Not having ample screan time is an opinion, even if its shared by many its just an opinion.The dialog issues are a matter of personal taste, some didnt like it but many did.
They arent going to bow to the opinions and dislikes of a few within the fanbase when the films are being liked and accepted by the general audience.
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:like I said the info is lost to me now.
The only source I can point to right now is a small mention of the interview on TF wiki.
From tf wikihttp://tfwiki.net/wiki/Brawl_%28Movie%29#NotesAccording to a fan who attended the Australian press conference, Bay had confirmed that he had decided to use the name "Devastator" because he had preferred it
the wiki artical refers to a post made by a member over at TFW2005.
But I hears a audio recording of the interview someone made.
Shadowman wrote:I will put forth the theory that it was the internet itself trying to punch him in the face.
Return to Transformers Live Action Film Forum
Registered users: -Kanrabat-, Bing [Bot], chosenprime, EvasionModeBumblebee, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Hero Alpha, Majestic-12 [Bot], molleking, MSN [Bot], Nemesis Primal, Overcracker, Till-all-R1