The Energon Pub

Zeds wrote:Well d'uh! The human cast didn't even have action figures made for them which IMHO was a mistake. No real extra exposure outside the movie.

Sarcasm or not, i am sure the Mrs. Witwicky action figure with 'were you masturbating?' sound effect would have went down a ruddy treat.

Also, is it just me, or did anyone else find Mikaela's character to be nothing more than an obnoxious, stuck up boot? If a girl didn't know who i was through umpteen years in the same school, i would have booked her arse out of my car, not been mr. sensitive no matter how attractive she is.

I like in the article it said, "And what about "Transformers 2"? Bernacchi said he couldn't comment on any future deals but said that GM hoped to reprise its starring roles in the sequel."... Uh 3 of the 4 main returning Autobots are GM, whats a no f***en brainer.

muswp1 wrote:That's shocking, shocking that someone in hollywood figured out what fans have been saying since the film came out. Hopefully, Bay and Spielberg take the hint...

Almost the truth. Bay is the one that needs to pay attention. Spielberg had actually followed the Transformers mythos from the beginning.

Damolisher wrote:

Zeds wrote:Well d'uh! The human cast didn't even have action figures made for them which IMHO was a mistake. No real extra exposure outside the movie.

What the hell do toys have to do with this? The humans aren't unpopular because they didn't get toys.

Um, they are doing the human figs in those special diorama sets that are coming out in time for the holiday season.

crazyfists wrote:90% of ducks go quack. where is my Pulitzer?

Ok, nothing to say about this other then it was just damn funny!

Damolisher wrote:Must be a slow bloody news day if this is what the papers are reporting. What next? Science determines that you stop breathing when you die?

No, they'll be breaking the news that you die when you stop breathing. Big difference there, you know.

In another thread someone mentioned that they ran out of CGI budget at the end of filming--is this true? (This was the explanation for why they showed Shia in the trench instead of Optimus when he said his famous "One shall stand, one shall fall" line.) If so, they are even stupider than usual. Why bother making a movie about the Transformers if you're not prepared to spend whatever it takes to put in sh*tloads of CGI? Did they not know that people would come to see ginormous robots and complex transformations?

*rereads stupid article again*

Well, nevermind. I guess they didn't. I'm tempted to roll my eyes at this, but if I start, I'll never stop, and that'll make driving to work tomorrow a bit of a hazard.

Yes, how DARE a movie about robots DISGUISING themselves as human vehicles on a planet where humans live DARE to have HUMANS in it. The film should have just been nothing but robots.

No Effing S#@&$!

iopele wrote:

Damolisher wrote:Must be a slow bloody news day if this is what the papers are reporting. What next? Science determines that you stop breathing when you die?

No, they'll be breaking the news that you die when you stop breathing. Big difference there, you know.

In another thread someone mentioned that they ran out of CGI budget at the end of filming--is this true? (This was the explanation for why they showed Shia in the trench instead of Optimus when he said his famous "One shall stand, one shall fall" line.) If so, they are even stupider than usual. Why bother making a movie about the Transformers if you're not prepared to spend whatever it takes to put in sh*tloads of CGI? Did they not know that people would come to see ginormous robots and complex transformations?

*rereads stupid article again*

Well, nevermind. I guess they didn't. I'm tempted to roll my eyes at this, but if I start, I'll never stop, and that'll make driving to work tomorrow a bit of a hazard.

Interesting that you mentioned the budget issue. I had been wondering about that for a while. Michael Bay was very gong-ho about using the latest and greatest CGI. If budget was an issue, then his desires certainly came at a price.

Making a Transformers movie: $300 million.

Repairing the damage from a recent Decepticon attack: $ 1 billion.

Laughing at the sheer stupidity of the people that wrote this article: PRICELESS!

Not sure about this site, but elsewhere I've seen many posters write about how crucial the (many) human characters were. So, the point is a fair one. And, of course, Bay (and probably Spielberg) would have thought the human characters easily more important than the robots.

sylvia wrote:Not sure about this site, but elsewhere I've seen many posters write about how crucial the (many) human characters were. So, the point is a fair one.

*raises her hand*

I think that framing things from the POV of the humans dealing with these aliens coming down to earth was a smart angle for the first movie, both from a narrative perspective and the perspective of drawing in new fans.

There were some aspects I would have cut out (mainly the vast majority of the hacker subplot), but otherwise I think the human aspects were useful.

Would I like a movie entirely about the Transformers and their war? Sure, it'd be really interesting. But, I also think it would have ended up as one of those "geek movies" that science fiction fans watch at conventions and is otherwise a virtual nobody in the realm of film.

I want the second movie to focus more on the Transformers, and I think that will work successfully now because the first movie already drew in everyone, geek *and* non-geeks, with a less niche narrative. I can't imagine a pure "mecha movie" being nearly as successful.