Submit News Contact Us Translate Sign in Join

Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far)

Transformers News: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far)

Monday, July 14th, 2014 3:05AM CDT

Category: Movie News
Posted by: Autobot032   Views: 15,642

Topic Options: View Discussion · Sign in or Join to reply

Thanks to Seibertron.com member VirusCarnage we have a link showing that not only is Age Of Extinction the biggest film of the year (so far, Apes or Guardians could take first place), but it did it in 2.4 weeks! That beats the previous 2014 record holder, X-Men: Days Of Future Past, by $21,158,000 and 5 weeks! For awhile there, we had some good news and some semi- bad news when it came to the box office, because domestic numbers are still down, but they're getting better. The film's close to breaking even with it's domestic total currently at $209,031,000, which is very close to the $210 million it cost to make it. If nothing else, it'll at least break even domestically, which won't make it a total dud here. This also doesn't account for the impending home video sales that'll be coming this fall.

To see this year's chart, click here: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/cha ... 014&p=.htm

Keep your optics tuned to Seibertron.com for the latest in news and updates, plus the best galleries around!
Credit(s): Box Office Mojo, VirusCarnage
Search Got Transformers News? Let us know here!

Most Popular Transformers News

Most Recent Transformers News

Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590591)
Posted by Slashercon on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:16am CDT
Cthulhunicron wrote:
noctorro wrote:It scored lower than ROTF on Rotten Tomatoes, the guys who only like The Godfather II and Amelie.



Rotten Tomatoes gave X-Men Days of Future Past a 92% rating; they gave the Matrix an 87%. Just because someone doesn't like the Michael Bay Transformers movies doesn't mean that they don't enjoy sci-fi/action movies.

Take me for instance. I like Star Wars, Pacific Rim, Aliens, Robocop, Terminator, Predator, the Matrix, the Avengers, Iron Man, and Batman Begins. However, I can't stand the live-action Transformers movies. To me, they have sporadic moments of entertaining action and cool-looking robots, but for the most part I just find them to be unbearable. All of those other movies I mentioned, I can watch from start to finish and enjoy them in their entirety. On the rare occasions where I watch one of the Transformers films, I pretty much have to skip about 75% of each movie.


Love all the movies you mentioned with the exceptions of Pacific Rim (it was just okay for me) , Robobcop and The Matrix only because I haven't seen them (yet). You also make very valid points on people liking action oriented movies that aren't the live action movies.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590592)
Posted by Slashercon on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:31am CDT
Sub-Prime wrote:Let me see if I can find a few of them that critics bitch about.

1. Micheal Bay showed ass shots in TF films? Ok we're not gonna talk about how Avengers had a nice as shot of Black Widow that wasn't mentioned as a negative.
The shot wasn't in advertising lol. Not only that, but I can't even remember what scene it was where as with the Transformers films, I can sadly recall several times where I've seen these shots.

Sub-Prime wrote:2. Micheal Bay likes pretty women in his movies only? So every chick in other movies are all down right ugly then.
There's only maybe 2-3 "pretty women" in these movies. I don't get it.

Sub-Prime wrote:3. Women wear skimpy stuff in his movies? A lot of women wear skimpy stuff in real life and in other movies that the same critics don't complain about.
This is just petty. Half agree here.

Sub-Prime wrote:4. All I see is explosions!explosions! and too much destruction? Why yes of course the Transformers aren't regular men fighting martial arts. They are big giant robots with futuristic weaponry for fighting.
Honestly, James Cameron seems to have more explosions in his films than Bay (IMO of course). Then again, I like Cameron's films more-so than Bay's. Pacific Rim had bigger robots and still had seemingly less explosions though.

Sub-Prime wrote:5. Incoherent plot? Yet numerous folks understood what was going on.
Point for you. People often only think of movies via trailers and clips without actually watching them in their entirety. They make assumptions.

Sub-Prime wrote:6. Unlikable characters? I actually liked Cade, Harold,Joshua,Tessa and Savoy's characters. 5/6 main characters.
N/A for me.

Sub-Prime wrote:7.Micheal Bay believes in statutory rape? Smdh with this one.
I've never even heard of this complaint before.

Sub-Prime wrote:8. The dialogue is terrible? Not every character is gonna speak like a super intelligent character.
Often characters will speak as in previous directors' works. There's "Bay-talk", "Whedon-talk", "Shyamalan-talk" (the worst of the bunch), etc.

Sub-Prime wrote:9. Micheal Bay is racist? Just because a character is called Lucky Charms it makes him racist. How about Cade just having a weird sense of humor? He plays a character with a bad temper. He is also a very angry dad in this so I could see him being kind of f'd up to Shane.
Bay clearly isn't racist, otherwise he wouldn't keep making movies with diverse casts in them.

Sub-Prime wrote:10. In Transformers 2 the twins was considered racist robots for their words to Leo? The twins was obviously stupid bots who mirrored their mannerism through the world wide web . I understand that little kids are watching the movie and it might come across as vulgar. But let's be real these kids is going to learn hateful words irregardless and their parents probably already taught them it. I remember when Obama first ran for president and the things folks had their kids saying on TV about Obama was f'd up.
Um, ok then. Agreed for the www part.

Society is just too sensitive about a lot of things.[/quote] Including negativity.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590593)
Posted by Clunker on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:56am CDT
There was a shot near the beginning where it was the dad talking to his daughter and all you saw was the daughters in short shorts and her tanned legs, it was like trying to redo the whole megan fox scene where she's leaning over bumblebee's engine all over again.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590594)
Posted by Slashercon on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:58am CDT
Sub-Prime wrote:
Evil_the_Nub wrote:
Burn wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.

On a more positive not AoE is #1 on the 2014 Box Office charts!

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/cha ... 014&p=.htm


That's exactly what it is. Especially with AOE. It fixed everything that everyone complained about with the first 3, and they still love to attack it. All they ever say is that it's "long and loud." And the people who have tried to explain why the movie was "dumb" or "stupid," I've been able to disprove them. None of them ever said a word back to me about it. Even a professional.


It was too long.

The Lord of the Rings movies are just as long, if not longer, and they're some of the most highly praised movies of all time. Gone with the Wind is even longer. Why do the critics suddenly have a problem with a movie being too long?

It's been this way since the first movie, everything they complain about there's a movie out there that's far worse, but higher rated. They don't like the humor, but loved Ted. They don't like the shaky came, but Cloverfield was good. Some things they complain about just don't make any logical sense. Like too much action, in an action movie? That's like giving a comedy a bad review because it's too funny.

It's just a bunch of high school level social circle bullshit. Michael Bay is the most popular guy in school and the critics are the nerds in the AV club who just can't stand him for no real reason.


My favorite post! I'm glad some folks have seen the critics BS that I have noticed for a while.

I"m going to be the odd one here.
1. The Lord of The Rings warranted a long run time due to everything in those movies actually being important to the story and characters as well as epic battles. I can't speak about AOE, but for DOTM, that movie definitely felt a tad long to me. Not because of its running time, but because it was trying my patience. Some scenes were pointless, unnecessary and the scenes I would like the makers to focus on weren't. The ending was the biggest offender. No aftermath at all. Just a sudden stop. Reminds me of that terrible Halloween remake by Rob Zombie. I would prefer a movie to focus on the important aspects first and foremost.
2. What works/doesn't work for one movie may or not necessarily work for another. For example, Saving Private Ryan also utilized a shaky cam effect but it was used to better effect there to put emphasis on the horrors of war. Whereas an action film that focus on running and hand to hand fights is instantly muted by the shaky cam. If a film has great choreography, it won't be fully appreciated when you can see the action clearly.
3. Ted is a raunchy comedy whose target audience is purposely for those who enjoy that kind of humor, while the Transformers films are meant to reach a broader demographic. Not everyone is going to go into a movie and enjoy the brand of humor presented.
4. An action film CAN have too much action. More and more action =/= a good movie. Your argument is very illogical as a comedy can't theoretically be "too funny". It can however have too many jokes and slapstick, which can or cannot work depending on how humorous it may be.
5. More often then not, I find the high school "social circle" stereotype to be the nerds wanting to BE the most popular guy.

My two cents.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590596)
Posted by RhA on July 14th, 2014 @ 6:12am CDT
Slashercon wrote:
5. More often then not, I find the high school "social circle" stereotype to be the nerds wanting to BE the most popular guy.

My two cents.


Image
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590598)
Posted by Bleak5170 on July 14th, 2014 @ 6:16am CDT
Evil_the_Nub wrote:
Burn wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.

On a more positive not AoE is #1 on the 2014 Box Office charts!

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/cha ... 014&p=.htm


That's exactly what it is. Especially with AOE. It fixed everything that everyone complained about with the first 3, and they still love to attack it. All they ever say is that it's "long and loud." And the people who have tried to explain why the movie was "dumb" or "stupid," I've been able to disprove them. None of them ever said a word back to me about it. Even a professional.


It was too long.

The Lord of the Rings movies are just as long, if not longer, and they're some of the most highly praised movies of all time. Gone with the Wind is even longer. Why do the critics suddenly have a problem with a movie being too long?



Because a really long movie is even more unbearable when it's not very good to begin with. The other movies you mentioned were all awesome and would have been whether they were 90 minutes or three hours.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590604)
Posted by Rodimus Prime on July 14th, 2014 @ 6:41am CDT
I thought that the length of the movie being good or bad depended on the content. If it had been a pure TF story (for example, my dream of a straight adaptation of the Marvel Comics) I could have sat for 5-6 hours and watched it. But as the Bay movies are, I think there is simply too much human stuff in it, whether it be Sam's family, Cade's family, or the military. If those elements were reduced (and in AoE the military aspect was, thankfully), they could either tighten up the run time a bit or replace human time with TF time. That would only improve the movies. Don't get me wrong, I like the entire series so far, I'm not bashing it. I do have my favorite and my least favorite, but I'd still rather see them on screen than not. As for the cash they're raking in, I hope it burns all the bashers' and critics asses how successful the franchise is so far. I know Bay is laughing all the way to the bank. And why shouldn't he? Regardless of the quality of the films meeting fans' expectations or not, it's making money, and in the end that's what matters in Hollywood.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590620)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 9:22am CDT
Clunker wrote:There was a shot near the beginning where it was the dad talking to his daughter and all you saw was the daughters in short shorts and her tanned legs, it was like trying to redo the whole megan fox scene where she's leaning over bumblebee's engine all over again.


At least it was a bit relevant to the story, this time.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590621)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 9:34am CDT
It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590623)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 9:39am CDT
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.


Yes, that's why it's the highest grossing movie of the year. People always say the movies "appeal to the lowest common denominator." What does that even mean? It sounds like some tagline everyone who doesn't like these movies, who have no imagination whatsoever, spout to put down those who do like them. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies? What have you contributed to the world?
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590625)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 9:52am CDT
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590627)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:02am CDT
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590628)
Posted by RhA on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:07am CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


Well, you certainly did not get any more nice from watching all those high-end movies.

Would you care for a hug?
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590629)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:14am CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Good news; AOE has absolutely none of that. But I guess you'll still find a way to complain about it.

cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


In my experience, it's the idiots who don't like the movies. They just hop onto the bandwagon mentality and don't know how to think for themselves. And they aren't "dumb action movies." The people who say that are the idiots I mentioned before.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590631)
Posted by Clunker on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:18am CDT
I think it has the proportions all off, that's the major problem I think.

If I was to compare it to Pacific Rim which is my go to film that delivers action with a bit of substance on the side then it would be something like this.

With Pacific Rim you get a general outline of the story, monsters are coming through a rift, men have made giant piloted robots to beat them and two pilots, a rookie and veteran with sad pasts come together to beat them down. There's a lot of robot on monster action with the context of the pilots relationship taking a back seat for the time being.

With Transformers you have these intelligent senitent robots that have come to earth and cause a lot of trouble as they are split in two by warring factions and the humans are caught up in the middle of this, but it's not about the transformers beating each other to a pulp it's about the humans trying to get a one up on both of the transformer factions and in the process just messing everything up, pushing the two warring factions to the sideline as two "human factions" i.e the hero (Cade) and the villain (Fraiser) fight to do what they believe is right for humanity.

However there is a third faction which is neither autobot or decepticon but who has allied with the "evil" human faction who in the end splits in two when part of it realized the poop storm they've created. Due to the this the decepticons briefly get the upper hand and return, only for the autobots to introduce a fourth faction in the form of the dinobots.


So in total you have 6 elements in the film competing for screen time. Previous to this film you only have 3 to 4 but even then it still suffered by the common denominator - There's to much time given to the humans and not enough in developing the other factions.

The autobots have new transformers you've not been introduced to before and are drastic to the point they get by by their stereotypes (cunning samurai robot, gun loving drill sergeant bots, all for himself desperado bot)They have very little dialogue and the dialogue they do have is rather unremarkable, I mean did anyone else find it odd they fell into in fighting as soon as Optimus turned up, shouldn't of that solidified them?

Then there's the decepitcons which are actually absent for the majority of the film and when they do arrive have like 2 random lines, less than in the first film which had barely any either and in general have a new transforming style but apparently still die as simply as the previous films decepticons.

Then there's the bounty hunter faction who was pretty cool and had some decent lines and interaction with the evil humans but for all intent and purposes was limited to just one transformer whilst the others were lackies.

Then there's Wahlberg and his family who takes up the majority of the screen time with all sort of things like wanting to create robots himself, to being an over protective father, to having to deal with a co-worker and having their house repossessed and fighting off an estate agent. To then having to deal with finding out his daughter is not so innocent and has an older boyfriend who hides behind some legal defence that goes by the name of the Romeo and Juliet defence..then his daughter gets caught up in the action and they have to rescue her and on and on and on.

Finally there's the evil corporation faction headed by a not so bad guy, just misguided and an evil mastermind fraiser with a hired thug who goes head to head with Wahlberg and his family all because they think they know best.

...Oh and I forgot, you also have the dinobots who show up at the end, get hit in the face by Optimus to make them do as they are told and then go on a rampage.

Compare all that to Pacific Rim, you have humans and their jaegers, you have kaiju and you have government intervention who thinks they know best, but for the most part you have at least half of the film having the jaegers actually fighting the kaiju.

Where as in Transformers you have over half the film with the humans front stage (what was with the chinese government bit, it was so out of place) and then you have the transformers either sitting around whilst the humans chat or you have them fighting with a tiny bit of dialogue from them between the two and whilst the humans are on screen, they're fighting in the background somewhere, and you have to imagine the majority of the stuff that's going on.

Pacific Rim delivers on the entertainment front, you want robots fighting monsters, it does exactly that with some context. You want Transformers fighting Transformers? it kind of does that but only for about a quarter of the film as it struggles to give you an adequate story line which becomes to convoluted with so many things going on. It's the same thing I kind of thought for the new Godzilla after I'd seen that, but more so.

If this film had been just about Lockdown coming to Earth to capture or kill the transformers and Optimus ends up finding the dinobots with the help of that archaeologist at the start it would of been perfect, but no it added evil humans and family problems and a dodgy resurrection of Megatron, who could of been reintroduced as the key feature of the next film.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590632)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:18am CDT
RhA wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


Well, you certainly did not get any more nice from watching all those high-end movies.

Would you care for a hug?



Ha, ha! Yes, thank you for the hug.

No, it just drives me nuts when people say things like, "you only hate those movies because it's cool."

Hey, if you like these things, fine. That’s your deal. But when someone says my opinion is based on trying to be cool, that’s ridiculous.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590634)
Posted by RhA on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:22am CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
RhA wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


Well, you certainly did not get any more nice from watching all those high-end movies.

Would you care for a hug?



Ha, ha! Yes, thank you for the hug.

No, it just drives me nuts when people say things like, "you only hate those movies because it's cool."

Hey, if you like these things, fine. That’s your deal. But when someone says my opinion is based on trying to be cool, that’s ridiculous.


I agree. And don't let Sly's comments get to you. He loves the movies, but has been feeling the need to defend them a little too long.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590637)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:32am CDT
SlyTF1 wrote:1. Good news; AOE has absolutely none of that. But I guess you'll still find a way to complain about it.

2. In my experience, it's the idiots who don't like the movies. They just hop onto the bandwagon mentality and don't know how to think for themselves. And they aren't "dumb action movies." The people who say that are the idiots I mentioned before.


1. I was fooled into watching the third one based on the same claims. So I got gay sex in the bathroom stall gag instead.
Sorry, fool me once, shame on you, fool me three times, shame on me. I'm not falling for it this time.
2. Oh, I hated these movies long before it was cool. I was posting criticisms of them when I got my hands on a leaked copy of the first one's script months before it was released. People assured me that they "fixed all that" during shooting. Yet Bumblepee was still there.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590641)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 10:51am CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:1. Good news; AOE has absolutely none of that. But I guess you'll still find a way to complain about it.

2. In my experience, it's the idiots who don't like the movies. They just hop onto the bandwagon mentality and don't know how to think for themselves. And they aren't "dumb action movies." The people who say that are the idiots I mentioned before.


1. I was fooled into watching the third one based on the same claims. So I got gay sex in the bathroom stall gag instead.
Sorry, fool me once, shame on you, fool me three times, shame on me. I'm not falling for it this time.
2. Oh, I hated these movies long before it was cool. I was posting criticisms of them when I got my hands on a leaked copy of the first one's script months before it was released. People assured me that they "fixed all that" during shooting. Yet Bumblepee was still there.


I'm not trying to fool you. Just stating facts. I don't care if you believe me or not.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590651)
Posted by Va'al on July 14th, 2014 @ 11:38am CDT
UK based cinema chain company Vue Cinemas have posted a brief featurette including producers from the Transformers: Age of Extinction movie talking about the RealD 3D technology used in the Michael Bay film, from Lorenzo DiBonaventura to Mark Vahradian to Ian Bryce. Check it out embedded below!

Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590662)
Posted by Dagon on July 14th, 2014 @ 12:30pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
No, it just drives me nuts when people say things like, "you only hate those movies because it's cool."

Hey, if you like these things, fine. That’s your deal. But when someone says my opinion is based on trying to be cool, that’s ridiculous.


I think it usually results when people just cannot handle the idea that you don't like something that they like. It's kind of the last childish resort to argument. I agree with the 'if you like things, fine' argument all day though.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590664)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 12:41pm CDT
I guess it would be better if we were all to preface everything we said with an "in my opinion ..." but I figured that since this is the Internet, that's a given. So when I say, "these movies are terrible" I'm not saying they are objectively terrible, just in my opinion they are terrible. But don't say that it's not my opinion or imply that it's impossible to honestly not like these movies, because it is. Especially in a summer with X-Men DOFP, Captain America The Winter Soldier and the new Apes flick.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590667)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 12:49pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:I guess it would be better if we were all to preface everything we said with an "in my opinion ..." but I figured that since this is the Internet, that's a given. So when I say, "these movies are terrible" I'm not saying they are objectively terrible, just in my opinion they are terrible. But don't say that it's not my opinion or imply that it's impossible to honestly not like these movies, because it is. Especially in a summer with X-Men DOFP, Captain America The Winter Soldier and the new Apes flick.


DOFP was stupid. All it did was reset the entire universe, and as soon as I heard that the movie had to do with time travel, I knew it would do exactly what it did. So, there was no surprise there. The entire movie was a cheap ass "reset" button.

Captain America was awesome, but it didn't have giant alien robots with personalities, whereas AOE did, which makes AOE better.

Haven't seen the Planet of the Apes movie, but I doubt that has giant alien robots, too.

You haven't even seen AOE, so why are you comparing it to all these other movies?
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590669)
Posted by dragons on July 14th, 2014 @ 12:54pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Possibly a lot of people who like these don't over analyze them like everyone else does with plots, acting and all other crap those people let critics judge on plot who get paid to judge movies but for people who like these movies are fan of series or don't judge everyyyy little detail in movie and go see movie what they are meant to made for entertainment pourpuse use watch movie for action, adventure, excitement, scared, laughter. When was last time have most of you memebers saw movie for entertainment use and did not over anayalize every little aspect of a film watched it out of pure enjoyment to be scared, laughed, see great fights that is why people like them with bonus what other city's country's look like outside of the U.S.?

What I like with movies about my family sister, cousin, father they don't talk about acting sucks characters are bland they need be outgoing, plot holes all that other nonsense crap like to I movies with family for this they stuff as that was good movie action was good funny think they be sequel I liked ending they don't over anayalize act like paid critics If I knew someone who acts like paid critic after seeing movie give there opinion I won't go see it with them any more they fun out of movies which is entertainment, same with comics, music, anything
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590673)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 1:05pm CDT
dragons wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Possibly a lot of people who like these don't over analyze them like everyone else does with plots, acting and all other crap those people let critics judge on plot who get paid to judge movies but for people who like these movies are fan of series or don't judge everyyyy little detail in movie and go see movie what they are meant to made for entertainment pourpuse use watch movie for action, adventure, excitement, scared, laughter. When was last time have most of you memebers saw movie for entertainment use and did not over anayalize every little aspect of a film watched it out of pure enjoyment to be scared, laughed, see great fights that is why people like them with bonus what other city's country's look like outside of the U.S.?

What I like with movies about my family sister, cousin, father they don't talk about acting sucks characters are bland they need be outgoing, plot holes all that other nonsense crap like to I movies with family for this they stuff as that was good movie action was good funny think they be sequel I liked ending they don't over anayalize act like paid critics If I knew someone who acts like paid critic after seeing movie give there opinion I won't go see it with them any more they fun out of movies which is entertainment, same with comics, music, anything


I over analyze the hell out of these movies. And I enjoy them best when I do.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590687)
Posted by chuckdawg1999 on July 14th, 2014 @ 1:55pm CDT
Ya know people complain about the length but for what a movie ticket costs nowadays I expect a long film, two news reels, and a couple cartoons.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590693)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 2:11pm CDT
chuckdawg1999 wrote:Ya know people complain about the length but for what a movie ticket costs nowadays I expect a long film, two news reels, and a couple cartoons.


Exactly. I get pissed when I go see a movie and it's anything less than 2 hours and 30 minutes. It feels to me, like the movie was of no significance if its any shorter. Like it was just something to waste time and money.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590698)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 2:45pm CDT
dragons wrote:
1. plots, acting and all other crap
2. action, adventure, excitement, scared, laughter. When was last time have most of you memebers saw movie for entertainment use and did not over anayalize every little aspect of a film watched it out of pure enjoyment to be scared, laughed, see great fights that is why people like them with bonus what other city's country's look like outside of the U.S.?

3. What I like with movies about my family sister, cousin, father they don't talk about acting sucks characters are bland they need be outgoing, plot holes all that other nonsense crap

4. l that was good movie action was good funny think they be sequel I liked ending they don't over anayalize act like paid critics If I knew someone who acts like paid critic after seeing movie give there opinion I won't go see it with them any more they fun out of movies which is entertainment, same with comics, music, anything


1. So story, acting and all that other crap are unimportant. Good to know. Therefore the Star Wars prequels are incredible films by your judgement. Good to know.

2. Inception would fall apart if you "over-analysed" it. However, it was so much more intelligent than any Bayformers, it doesn't invite that level of criticism. Also, China's tourism division is suing the makers of this latest Transformers movie because it does an extremely terrible job in portraying what China looks like to the outside world.

3. These movies are not family movies. They are full of crude humor and dialogue. I don't let my kids watch them because they are so crude they skirt the PG-13 rating.

4. Punctuation is your friend. Perhaps if you learned how to competently use the English language, you'd understand why people feel the dialog in Bayformers is bad.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590699)
Posted by Autobot032 on July 14th, 2014 @ 2:47pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.


This ^ is absolutely unnecessary and what started this whole mess.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... enominator

Read 1, especially 2 and then 3. Which you admit to in the following post here:

cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


You have no right to call the audience a bunch of idiots with no class. A lot of people who happen to like the movies are members of this board and you just stated something that was not only offensive, but a blanket statement. It's not only rude, it IS against the rules. You don't like the movies? That's fine. Critique them directly, do not drag people into it. You know better than to do something like this.

cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


And then there's this. You have no right to tell a person how or what to think. You are not to speak for them, either. If you want to ingratiate yourself with the people around here, you're not off to a good start. There's no need to be so new here and be so rude. You can get your point across without being offensive, so knock it off right now.

SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.


Yes, that's why it's the highest grossing movie of the year. People always say the movies "appeal to the lowest common denominator." What does that even mean? It sounds like some tagline everyone who doesn't like these movies, who have no imagination whatsoever, spout to put down those who do like them. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies? What have you contributed to the world?


Sly, stop feeding into things like this. It's not worth it and you could end up in trouble for stoking the fire. Sometimes it's better to just take a breather, ignore the person and move onto other aspects of the thread. Pretend he doesn't exist, or something. You have that capability.

SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Good news; AOE has absolutely none of that. But I guess you'll still find a way to complain about it.

cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


In my experience, it's the idiots who don't like the movies. They just hop onto the bandwagon mentality and don't know how to think for themselves. And they aren't "dumb action movies." The people who say that are the idiots I mentioned before.


Sly! I don't want to see a post like this again. I realize cruizerdave started this, but there's no need for you to try and finish it. You should just leave well enough alone! You're no better when you say things like "it's the idiots who don't like the movies." you cannot say stuff like that! It's offensive and it's not true. Plenty of people do not like this and other movies and doesn't diminish their mental capacity in any way. Again, please don't feed into this.

cruizerdave wrote:
RhA wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:It's a sad day for movies.

I'm sorry, but Bay's films are terrible and appeal to the lowest common denominator.

1. What does that even mean?
2. Who are the highest common denominators? People who don't like the movies?
3. What have you contributed to the world?


1. It means these movies are designed for idiots. It doesn't matter that the plots are nonsense, the robots aren't characters and the most of the humans are, for the most part, terrible characters. It doesn't matter because, look pretty ’plosions, special effects, over-saturated colors and hot girls!

2. People who forgo seeing Bayformers and go see the latest X-men again. I'm no movie snob, but I've had a distain for Bay since Armageddon.

3. Really? I post an opinion about a series of movies that opinions range from "cinematic excrement" on the low end to "it's just a dumb action movie, what do you expect?" on the high end, and you're calling me out to justify my existence? What am I supposed to do, give you a list of my charitable donations and hours spent volunteering in my community? Because I could do that if that's what you want.


Well, you certainly did not get any more nice from watching all those high-end movies.

Would you care for a hug?



Ha, ha! Yes, thank you for the hug.

No, it just drives me nuts when people say things like, "you only hate those movies because it's cool."

Hey, if you like these things, fine. That’s your deal. But when someone says my opinion is based on trying to be cool, that’s ridiculous.


No, it apparently isn't, at least to you. You started this by attacking people for liking these films (and yes you did). Just because you can say something doesn't mean you should. Ever hear the saying "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all"? You could've given your opinion of the film without saying a word about the people. You chose to do it, you chose to be problematic. That drives ME nuts. Don't do it again.

cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:1. Good news; AOE has absolutely none of that. But I guess you'll still find a way to complain about it.

2. In my experience, it's the idiots who don't like the movies. They just hop onto the bandwagon mentality and don't know how to think for themselves. And they aren't "dumb action movies." The people who say that are the idiots I mentioned before.


1. I was fooled into watching the third one based on the same claims. So I got gay sex in the bathroom stall gag instead.
Sorry, fool me once, shame on you, fool me three times, shame on me. I'm not falling for it this time.
2. Oh, I hated these movies long before it was cool. I was posting criticisms of them when I got my hands on a leaked copy of the first one's script months before it was released. People assured me that they "fixed all that" during shooting. Yet Bumblepee was still there.


You are more than welcome to hate the films and post criticisms of them. You are not allowed to call people idiots because their opinion differs from your's. You cannot personally attack people because they like something you don't. You're better than this, so don't do it any more. I won't try and sell you on the 4th film, your mind is already set, and that's fine, but I have to ask: If you haven't seen the film, why are you posting in this thread? You're welcome to, but I don't understand it.

If you had just wanted to post a negative review of the films as whole, that would've been fine. Why, oh why, did you have to cross the line and go after the people as well? (I'm not really looking for an answer, I already know, it's more of a rhetorical question than anything.)

SlyTF1 wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:1. Good news; AOE has absolutely none of that. But I guess you'll still find a way to complain about it.

2. In my experience, it's the idiots who don't like the movies. They just hop onto the bandwagon mentality and don't know how to think for themselves. And they aren't "dumb action movies." The people who say that are the idiots I mentioned before.


1. I was fooled into watching the third one based on the same claims. So I got gay sex in the bathroom stall gag instead.
Sorry, fool me once, shame on you, fool me three times, shame on me. I'm not falling for it this time.
2. Oh, I hated these movies long before it was cool. I was posting criticisms of them when I got my hands on a leaked copy of the first one's script months before it was released. People assured me that they "fixed all that" during shooting. Yet Bumblepee was still there.


I'm not trying to fool you. Just stating facts. I don't care if you believe me or not.


But you do care, Sly, otherwise you wouldn't have kept this going. STOP. IT.

Dagon wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
No, it just drives me nuts when people say things like, "you only hate those movies because it's cool."

Hey, if you like these things, fine. That’s your deal. But when someone says my opinion is based on trying to be cool, that’s ridiculous.


I think it usually results when people just cannot handle the idea that you don't like something that they like. It's kind of the last childish resort to argument. I agree with the 'if you like things, fine' argument all day though.


Plenty of people can handle someone not liking what they like. They can't handle being called the lowest common denominator (aka classless idiots), especially when it's not true. There was no need for it, there was no rhyme or reason for it. That kind of behavior is not welcome here.

cruizerdave wrote:I guess it would be better if we were all to preface everything we said with an "in my opinion ..." but I figured that since this is the Internet, that's a given. So when I say, "these movies are terrible" I'm not saying they are objectively terrible, just in my opinion they are terrible. But don't say that it's not my opinion or imply that it's impossible to honestly not like these movies, because it is. Especially in a summer with X-Men DOFP, Captain America The Winter Soldier and the new Apes flick.


No, prefacing it with "in my opinion" would not have made it better. You still would've been offensive to people with your comments. You can say "these movies are terrible" and LEAVE IT AT THAT. You do not have to add things that offend people.

So, let me make it clear now that I've addressed all of the offending posts (and some that weren't offending, but pertained to the discussion at hand), cruizerdave: Do not willfully offend people "just because" again. You're more than welcome to voice your opinion, negative, positive or in between, but do it about a movie, a toy, whatever inanimate object you wish, just not people. It's not necessary, it's not polite, it's not welcome.

Sly: You know better than this, you've been told before in the past. You get too riled up over these movies and it brings out the worst in you. It's just some movies, it's not worth it. I understand why you were upset, I really do, but your responses were no better.

With that all said, any questions, bring them to PM. This part of the discussion is over and dead, now. No more derailing the thread with stuff like this, I mean it! From this point on, the conversation is going in another direction.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590700)
Posted by Burn on July 14th, 2014 @ 2:52pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:1. It means these movies are designed for idiots.


For the record, just because you don't like something doesn't give you the right to come onto these forums and insult people who think differently from you.

A lot of people go to the movies for an escape from reality, to relax, to be entertained, that doesn't make them idiots.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590702)
Posted by Cthulhunicron on July 14th, 2014 @ 3:08pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Well said!
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590708)
Posted by chivesbot20 on July 14th, 2014 @ 3:37pm CDT
I love the movies :grin: Its the reason im a fan. Critics will never change my mind and honestly shouldnt change a movie goers mind either. I love the robot action and these are my favorite movies of all time. The human stuff i think just develops the plot, and im not a fan for most of the human stuff, i am for the actual transformers. Ive cried for days :sad: :sad: because i am unable to see AOE for 1 more day, but it looks and sounds great :michaelbay: :BOT: :CON:
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590709)
Posted by Clunker on July 14th, 2014 @ 3:43pm CDT
I made a huge post earlier which I now think was tldr material lol overall I was just saying they complicated the movie by having to many aspects to cover but still spent to much on the human aspect.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590716)
Posted by chivesbot20 on July 14th, 2014 @ 4:14pm CDT
I get what Clunker said. The humans should be considered in the plot but there is a a lot more "importance" or "emphasis" on the humans. They should be considered as the least important or the less focused race or facion during the films. But remember whos involved and, not that its bad, but michael bay and hollywood friends. Any mover goer is gonna catch in the trailer most likely first Mark and second optimus.Sooooo.......ya
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590719)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 4:26pm CDT
I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590722)
Posted by Autobot032 on July 14th, 2014 @ 4:35pm CDT
SlyTF1 wrote:I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.


I think that would make a LOT of fans angry. It's made them mad enough that the film series has borrowed from past storylines as it already has, but something like that? A straight up ripoff? Oh, I think that'd get people upset.

Critics especially.

Plus with the damage sustained to both, I doubt you could make it work, really. In the scenario you're presenting, the source material had one of those two still alive, barely, but still alive.

Taking two dead and making one whole new life just doesn't seem feasible in this universe. Plus with all the talk of souls, etc, it just won't work. I get where you're coming from, though.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590727)
Posted by Sabrblade on July 14th, 2014 @ 4:46pm CDT
SlyTF1 wrote:I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.
That would be very unoriginal and uninspiring.

And like Autobot 032 said, it wouldn't make sense since both were already dead while Silas was still somewhat alive. KSI doesn't have the power to breathe life into lifelessness. They're not God.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590728)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 4:49pm CDT
Autobot032 wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.


I think that would make a LOT of fans angry. It's made them mad enough that the film series has borrowed from past storylines as it already has, but something like that? A straight up ripoff? Oh, I think that'd get people upset.

Critics especially.

Plus with the damage sustained to both, I doubt you could make it work, really. In the scenario you're presenting, the source material had one of those two still alive, barely, but still alive.

Taking two dead and making one whole new life just doesn't seem feasible in this universe. Plus with all the talk of souls, etc, it just won't work. I get where you're coming from, though.


But, they could work a way where Attinger isn't dead. I mean, the movie didn't show a big gaping hole in his chest, but a bloody wound. What if he survived and is just comatose or something?
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590733)
Posted by Sabrblade on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:01pm CDT
SlyTF1 wrote:
Autobot032 wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.


I think that would make a LOT of fans angry. It's made them mad enough that the film series has borrowed from past storylines as it already has, but something like that? A straight up ripoff? Oh, I think that'd get people upset.

Critics especially.

Plus with the damage sustained to both, I doubt you could make it work, really. In the scenario you're presenting, the source material had one of those two still alive, barely, but still alive.

Taking two dead and making one whole new life just doesn't seem feasible in this universe. Plus with all the talk of souls, etc, it just won't work. I get where you're coming from, though.


But, they could work a way where Attinger isn't dead. I mean, the movie didn't show a big gaping hole in his chest, but a bloody wound. What if he survived and is just comatose or something?
How likely is it that an ordinary human would have survived a close range (not a pointblank range, but still very near) plasma blast fired from a TF-sized cannon wielded by a gunner shooting to kill?

You'd have to work in something like magic or divine powers to explain his not being dead.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590735)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:04pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
Autobot032 wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.


I think that would make a LOT of fans angry. It's made them mad enough that the film series has borrowed from past storylines as it already has, but something like that? A straight up ripoff? Oh, I think that'd get people upset.

Critics especially.

Plus with the damage sustained to both, I doubt you could make it work, really. In the scenario you're presenting, the source material had one of those two still alive, barely, but still alive.

Taking two dead and making one whole new life just doesn't seem feasible in this universe. Plus with all the talk of souls, etc, it just won't work. I get where you're coming from, though.


But, they could work a way where Attinger isn't dead. I mean, the movie didn't show a big gaping hole in his chest, but a bloody wound. What if he survived and is just comatose or something?
How likely is it that an ordinary human would have survived a close range (not a pointblank range, but still very near) plasma blast fired from a TF-sized cannon wielded by a gunner shooting to kill?

You'd have to work in something like magic or divine powers to explain his not being dead.


The same guys who survived getting shot by Optimus earlier in the movie. It looked like the blast just hit in front of him, and like from a grenade, the shrapnel is what knocked him back and caused all those bloody spots on his chest. If they wanted to, I bet they could go with that. I'm not saying that's what happened, but the writers could spin it that way in the sequel.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590737)
Posted by Sabrblade on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:27pm CDT
SlyTF1 wrote:The same guys who survived getting shot by Optimus earlier in the movie.
Prime didn't fire on the bodies of the Cemetary Wind soldiers. He fired at the ground in front of their feet, knocking them back and away without killing them.

Speaking of which, the first time I saw the movie, I too thought he was shooting them directly. But upon viewing the movie a second time, I realized that there are actually a lot of places in this movie in which Optimus holds back and restrains himself from harming humans to his fullest extent. His shooting Attinger was really the first and only time in this movie in which he cuts loose and goes for the kill on a human being.

Another case of this is when he first reactivates in Cade's barn. Though he was screaming "I'll kill you!" upon his awakening, two things I didn't catch the first time about his initial brief rampage stood out to me on the second viewing. The first was that he didn't seem to be in his right mind. He acted as though he thought he was still in the midst of the ambush Cemetery Wind and Lockdown launched on him in New Mexico. So he wasn't really saying it to Cade/Tessa/Lucas.

The second was that, after he screamed his initial death threats, he seemed to take stock in his new surroundings and gave a warning to Cade/Tessa/Lucas with "Stay back!" And then he knocks Lucas aside with his cannon with a, while painful, nonlethal force. Had he really been as committed to his cries for murder towards Cade/Tessa/Lucas, I doubt he wouldn't have just murdered them right there on the spot instead of merely threatening them with is cannon without shooting them first.

So in a way, viewing the movie a second time showed me that Prime wasn't quite as murder-crazy (towards humans, at least) as I initially thought.

SlyTF1 wrote:It looked like the blast just hit in front of him, and like from a grenade, the shrapnel is what knocked him back and caused all those bloody spots on his chest. If they wanted to, I bet they could go with that. I'm not saying that's what happened, but the writers could spin it that way in the sequel.
It looked like that because it was a CGI blast. They couldn't really kill Kelsey Grammer and so it looks like that because the actor reacting to something that wasn't really there.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590740)
Posted by VirusCarnage on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:32pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Lol? So let me get this straight because you don't agree with my opinion it means I have no idea what I'm talking about?
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590743)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:43pm CDT
Fine. I'm sorry I offended so many by saying these movies are designed for idiots.

What I meant to express is that these films are low brow.

I think that's a fair statement. Any series of films that gains humor from piss, masturbation, dogs humping, porno-robot girl, "bros before hoes," bathroom stall sex misunderstanding, black guy working at da butcher shop to get money to fix his teeth is low brow.

So yeah, you are not an idiot for liking these films. However, they are low brow, which is what I meant when I said they appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590745)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:47pm CDT
VirusCarnage wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:
VirusCarnage wrote:I personally think that people hate the TF movies because it's 'cool' to hate them and because critics like to crap on Michael Bay.


Then you personally have no idea what you're talking about.

I prefer my movies without plot points that include robot piss, dogs humping, weird racists robots, racist depictions of most black characters on screen, gay sex in bathroom stall jokes, humans that all act like they are cocaine all the time, and endless amounts of irrelevant plot threads and characters who have no bearing on the story.

These movies go beyond dumb. They are assaultively stupid. It's terrible news for people who like good movies that these continue to be successful. Of course in a world where people can't get enough of Kim and Kanye, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that people pay for this garbage.


Lol? So let me get this straight because you don't agree with my opinion it means I have no idea what I'm talking about?


No, my point was that you were discounting everyone who doesn't like these films by saying it's some kind of desire to be cool rather than honestly just not liking them. Let me assure you the feelings of not liking Bayformers are very much genuine. That's what I meant when I said you don't know what you're talking about. Not liking these movies has nothing to do with wanting to be cool.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590746)
Posted by BERSEKAEL on July 14th, 2014 @ 5:57pm CDT
When something is really good, as is AoE, lot of haters try to push it down.

Does anybody remember the Oscar 2012, there was a movie that won in front of transformers, I don't even remember the name of that movie.... oh ya I just google it, "Hugo" a wtf movie with "mediocre" Visual Effects, small cast of actors and minimal scenography, I watch it to have my own opinion, a bad boring movie even the sound/music was flat boring, besides it won some oscars and them dissapear from the world... cuz bad movie. There are a lot of haters even on those Hollywood circles, and the fact Mr. Bay has become one important figure, has opened lot of frustrated people'eyes whom don't like it/him.

I saw AoE twice already, can't wait for the blueray, Amazing work there.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590748)
Posted by cruizerdave on July 14th, 2014 @ 6:10pm CDT
Burn wrote:
cruizerdave wrote:1. It means these movies are designed for idiots.


For the record, just because you don't like something doesn't give you the right to come onto these forums and insult people who think differently from you.

A lot of people go to the movies for an escape from reality, to relax, to be entertained, that doesn't make them idiots.


Let me apologize for inferring that people that like these movies are idiots. That was not a nice thing for me to do.

For the record, I like plenty of movies that were designed for idiots — the latest Star Trek, the last GI Joe, the Star Wars prequels.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/hsEU6DR_Hh0[/youtube]
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590753)
Posted by SlyTF1 on July 14th, 2014 @ 6:25pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:The same guys who survived getting shot by Optimus earlier in the movie.
Prime didn't fire on the bodies of the Cemetary Wind soldiers. He fired at the ground in front of their feet, knocking them back and away without killing them.

Speaking of which, the first time I saw the movie, I too thought he was shooting them directly. But upon viewing the movie a second time, I realized that there are actually a lot of places in this movie in which Optimus holds back and restrains himself from harming humans to his fullest extent. His shooting Attinger was really the first and only time in this movie in which he cuts loose and goes for the kill on a human being.

Another case of this is when he first reactivates in Cade's barn. Though he was screaming "I'll kill you!" upon his awakening, two things I didn't catch the first time about his initial brief rampage stood out to me on the second viewing. The first was that he didn't seem to be in his right mind. He acted as though he thought he was still in the midst of the ambush Cemetery Wind and Lockdown launched on him in New Mexico. So he wasn't really saying it to Cade/Tessa/Lucas.

The second was that, after he screamed his initial death threats, he seemed to take stock in his new surroundings and gave a warning to Cade/Tessa/Lucas with "Stay back!" And then he knocks Lucas aside with his cannon with a, while painful, nonlethal force. Had he really been as committed to his cries for murder towards Cade/Tessa/Lucas, I doubt he wouldn't have just murdered them right there on the spot instead of merely threatening them with is cannon without shooting them first.

So in a way, viewing the movie a second time showed me that Prime wasn't quite as murder-crazy (towards humans, at least) as I initially thought.

SlyTF1 wrote:It looked like the blast just hit in front of him, and like from a grenade, the shrapnel is what knocked him back and caused all those bloody spots on his chest. If they wanted to, I bet they could go with that. I'm not saying that's what happened, but the writers could spin it that way in the sequel.
It looked like that because it was a CGI blast. They couldn't really kill Kelsey Grammer and so it looks like that because the actor reacting to something that wasn't really there.


I noticed that he didn't shoot those people when I first watched the trailer. So, I was thinking he could have done the same thing to Attanger. And I know they couldn't kill him, but you can make anything look like it actually happened in a movie.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590757)
Posted by Burn on July 14th, 2014 @ 7:05pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:You'd have to work in something like magic or divine powers to explain his not being dead.


So you're saying that they'd really need to stretch to make people believe that something alien could resurrect a dead human?

'cause that's never been done in the Transformer live action movies before. Image
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590762)
Posted by SKYWARPED_128 on July 14th, 2014 @ 7:22pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:I was just thinking, and I came up with a theory for the sequel. What if KSI, or whoever's behind the man made TFs now puts Attanger's body inside of Lockdown's body to sustain his life? Just like they did with Silas and Breakdown in TFP.
That would be very unoriginal and uninspiring.

And like Autobot 032 said, it wouldn't make sense since both were already dead while Silas was still somewhat alive. KSI doesn't have the power to breathe life into lifelessness. They're not God.


There's also the question of willingness. Wasn't Tucci's character the head of KSI? Last time I checked, he's had a change of heart by the end of the movie. I don't think he'll consent to reviving two of the previous movie's villains.

But...a script is made to be rewritten and KSI can always be bought over by some other company with less scruples.
Re: Age Of Extinction Now The Highest Grossing Film Of 2014 (So Far) (1590765)
Posted by Sabrblade on July 14th, 2014 @ 7:45pm CDT
cruizerdave wrote:I think that's a fair statement. Any series of films that gains humor from piss, masturbation, dogs humping, porno-robot girl, "bros before hoes," bathroom stall sex misunderstanding, black guy working at da butcher shop to get money to fix his teeth is low brow.
I want to say that I am in full agreement in that these kinds of things are completely unnecessary and are sincerely disgusting and don't belong in media designed to market children's toys.

But, I also want to respond to your previous post about how people told you that DOTM didn't have this kind of stuff in it when it still did, so you don't want to fall for the same "trap" when people say that this movie doesn't have that stuff either.

Well, first off, let's look at the DOTM thing from a different angle. While that movie still did have the same vulgarity as ROTF had, it at least didn't have the same amount of it. Objectively speaking, there was a considerably smaller amount of such crudeness in DOTM when compared to the massive quantity that ROTF was overloaded with. So while it is false to say that DOTM didn't have the type of crass content that ROTF, it is at least true to say that DOTM had a lot less of it than ROTF had. So we could at least consider that an improvement (not a huge improvement, but an improvement nonetheless).

And secondly, having said all that, I want to tell you honestly that AOE... might have some of the same kind of crudeness in it. I use the more vague word "might" instead of a more absolute term like "does" or "doesn't" because, despite my having seen the film twice, and despite my distaste for vulgarity keeping me from forgetting the crudness in ROTF and DOTM, I honestly cannot recall any scene in AOE that contained this kind of content.

The closest I can think of is one point where the camera zooms in on actress Nicola Peltz's rear end, but it wasn't done for the sake of giving us a butt shot. Rather, it was a quick shot done to have Mark Wahlberg make a disapproving comment about her short shorts. Yes, the main protagonist in this Michael Bay movie written by the same guy who wrote ROTF and DOTM, is an advocate for decency and against sexual fanservice. And this isn't done as a means to appease the viewers who disliked the indecency of the previous films, but as a tie in to his character being an overprotective father who wants his daughter to stay pure all through high school. And every time a character makes a comment about his daughter's looks, he reacts accordingly, further expressing his distaste for people thinking dirty thoughts about his daughter.

The point I'm trying to get to is that when people say that this movie is light on the crudeness, they wholeheartedly are not pulling your leg like what happened to you with DOTM. This movie, this Michael Bay movie of all things, is surprisingly subdued on the grossness that plagued ROTF. There is virtually no toilet humor, no indecently exposed body parts, no pornographic content, none of that. There is one black woman who some might find a bit stereotypical, but it was a bit that was practically tame compared to the previous ones, and managed to put not her but Wahlberg in a negative light (other scenes redeem him, though). There's also another guy who people might call a "white surfer stereotype", but he's not nearly as loathsome as, say, Leo and he's... well, I'll just say that he's a minor role.

The only things that this movie has against it in a moralistic view are those that emphasize not grossness, but darkness. This is the most violent TF movie yet, with some shocking deaths in it that were a bit more intense than they needed to be. And Optimus is darker, more openly willing to commit murders to his foes. In the previous films, he would speak of freedom and peace one moment while brutally murdering his opponents the next. Here, though, his words match his actions with him regularly using the words "kill" and "die" in an aggressive manner. And the other Autobots are ALL jerks and maniacs (but many still find some of them likable).

So, in a way, it's like this movie traded out the grossness of the previous films for an extra dose of hostility and bloodlust. I don't want to completely say that it's a "cleaner" movie, but maybe "neater" would be a better term. It's certainly more "mature" in regards to diminishing the crass grossness, but swapped out that crudeness for being more "dark and serious".

Click here to view an additional 925 comments about this topic at the Energon Pub Forums ...

Transformers Podcast: Twincast / Podcast #104 - Wrath of Con
Twincast / Podcast #104:
"Wrath of Con"
MP3 · iTunes · RSS · View · Discuss · Ask
Posted: Sunday, November 2nd, 2014