The Energon Pub

I think the single reason why the reception of the movie is so skewered is because not everyone in the world share the same attention span. As Transformer fans, we tend to keep track of minutia and continuity very well, just like Star Wars fans, Trekkers, etc. John Q Public forget the previews they saw before the movie and can't remember what the yellow robot's name is. John Q Public also tend to ask questions because they can't make the same assumptions we do because they don't know the lore like we do.

This is the criticism I agree with - if it's not on the page, and it's not in the movie, then you can't expect an audience to get it. Well of All Sparks, the Nemesis, or anything mentioned briefly in the first movie is lost on casual viewers.

Nemesis37 wrote:I think the single reason why the reception of the movie is so skewered is because not everyone in the world share the same attention span. As Transformer fans, we tend to keep track of minutia and continuity very well, just like Star Wars fans, Trekkers, etc. John Q Public forget the previews they saw before the movie and can't remember what the yellow robot's name is. John Q Public also tend to ask questions because they can't make the same assumptions we do because they don't know the lore like we do.

This is the criticism I agree with - if it's not on the page, and it's not in the movie, then you can't expect an audience to get it. Well of All Sparks, the Nemesis, or anything mentioned briefly in the first movie is lost on casual viewers.

Well, maybe they should have payed some damn attention to the first movie and read up on it a little before watching the sequel.

Nemesis37 wrote:I think the single reason why the reception of the movie is so skewered is because not everyone in the world share the same attention span. As Transformer fans, we tend to keep track of minutia and continuity very well, just like Star Wars fans, Trekkers, etc. John Q Public forget the previews they saw before the movie and can't remember what the yellow robot's name is. John Q Public also tend to ask questions because they can't make the same assumptions we do because they don't know the lore like we do.

This is the criticism I agree with - if it's not on the page, and it's not in the movie, then you can't expect an audience to get it. Well of All Sparks, the Nemesis, or anything mentioned briefly in the first movie is lost on casual viewers.

A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar, I don't blame the movie for that. Star Wars throws droids, hyperspace, jedi, the force, and all kinds of crazy crap at the audience and no one complains about that. They've changed the rules a movie is supposed to follow out of nowhere and criticize RotF for not following these sudden rule changes. Since when is a movie supposed to follow the laws of physics? Or give EVERY character an elaborate backstory?

I agree that a lack of attention is part of the problem. I'm so tired of hearing "why didn't Sam use the Allspark sliver to revive Optimus?" It very clearly shows that when the Decepticons revived Megatron they had to kill one of their own for parts first. Or the "multiple Constructicons" thing, they never show multiple Constructicons in the movie. It's vehicles that combine into Devastator, they never show those vehicles as individual robots, why is everybody assuming they are?

Sorry to go off on a rant, but when people don't pay attention to whats going on then blame the movie it really grinds my gears.

Evil_the_Nub wrote:

Nemesis37 wrote:I think the single reason why the reception of the movie is so skewered is because not everyone in the world share the same attention span. As Transformer fans, we tend to keep track of minutia and continuity very well, just like Star Wars fans, Trekkers, etc. John Q Public forget the previews they saw before the movie and can't remember what the yellow robot's name is. John Q Public also tend to ask questions because they can't make the same assumptions we do because they don't know the lore like we do.

This is the criticism I agree with - if it's not on the page, and it's not in the movie, then you can't expect an audience to get it. Well of All Sparks, the Nemesis, or anything mentioned briefly in the first movie is lost on casual viewers.

A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar, I don't blame the movie for that. Star Wars throws droids, hyperspace, jedi, the force, and all kinds of crazy crap at the audience and no one complains about that. They've changed the rules a movie is supposed to follow out of nowhere and criticize RotF for not following these sudden rule changes. Since when is a movie supposed to follow the laws of physics? Or give EVERY character an elaborate backstory?

I agree that a lack of attention is part of the problem. I'm so tired of hearing "why didn't Sam use the Allspark sliver to revive Optimus?" It very clearly shows that when the Decepticons revived Megatron they had to kill one of their own for parts first. Or the "multiple Constructicons" thing, they never show multiple Constructicons in the movie. It's vehicles that combine into Devastator, they never show those vehicles as individual robots, why is everybody assuming they are?

Sorry to go off on a rant, but when people don't pay attention to whats going on then blame the movie it really grinds my gears.

The reason why so many people complain about the Constructicons and Devastator is that they have been advertised as one and the same thing prior and during the movie's run.
The toys show that, the bios do and even the crew did so in interviews. All said that the Constructicons combine to form Devastator while in the movie Devastator shows up while the Consturcticons still runn around blowing stuff up. Even Devastator's concept art has the 6 Constructicons as individual robots and in combined mode.

Dead Metal wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:

Nemesis37 wrote:I think the single reason why the reception of the movie is so skewered is because not everyone in the world share the same attention span. As Transformer fans, we tend to keep track of minutia and continuity very well, just like Star Wars fans, Trekkers, etc. John Q Public forget the previews they saw before the movie and can't remember what the yellow robot's name is. John Q Public also tend to ask questions because they can't make the same assumptions we do because they don't know the lore like we do.

This is the criticism I agree with - if it's not on the page, and it's not in the movie, then you can't expect an audience to get it. Well of All Sparks, the Nemesis, or anything mentioned briefly in the first movie is lost on casual viewers.

A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar, I don't blame the movie for that. Star Wars throws droids, hyperspace, jedi, the force, and all kinds of crazy crap at the audience and no one complains about that. They've changed the rules a movie is supposed to follow out of nowhere and criticize RotF for not following these sudden rule changes. Since when is a movie supposed to follow the laws of physics? Or give EVERY character an elaborate backstory?

I agree that a lack of attention is part of the problem. I'm so tired of hearing "why didn't Sam use the Allspark sliver to revive Optimus?" It very clearly shows that when the Decepticons revived Megatron they had to kill one of their own for parts first. Or the "multiple Constructicons" thing, they never show multiple Constructicons in the movie. It's vehicles that combine into Devastator, they never show those vehicles as individual robots, why is everybody assuming they are?

Sorry to go off on a rant, but when people don't pay attention to whats going on then blame the movie it really grinds my gears.

The reason why so many people complain about the Constructicons and Devastator is that they have been advertised as one and the same thing prior and during the movie's run.
The toys show that, the bios do and even the crew did so in interviews. All said that the Constructicons combine to form Devastator while in the movie Devastator shows up while the Consturcticons still runn around blowing stuff up. Even Devastator's concept art has the 6 Constructicons as individual robots and in combined mode.

I know, but a lot changes from the concept stage. Arcee was originally supposed to be in the first movie, then they replaced her with Ironhide. I'm going by the finished product, which shows 9 vehicles make Devastator.

Evil_the_Nub wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:

Nemesis37 wrote:I think the single reason why the reception of the movie is so skewered is because not everyone in the world share the same attention span. As Transformer fans, we tend to keep track of minutia and continuity very well, just like Star Wars fans, Trekkers, etc. John Q Public forget the previews they saw before the movie and can't remember what the yellow robot's name is. John Q Public also tend to ask questions because they can't make the same assumptions we do because they don't know the lore like we do.

This is the criticism I agree with - if it's not on the page, and it's not in the movie, then you can't expect an audience to get it. Well of All Sparks, the Nemesis, or anything mentioned briefly in the first movie is lost on casual viewers.

A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar, I don't blame the movie for that. Star Wars throws droids, hyperspace, jedi, the force, and all kinds of crazy crap at the audience and no one complains about that. They've changed the rules a movie is supposed to follow out of nowhere and criticize RotF for not following these sudden rule changes. Since when is a movie supposed to follow the laws of physics? Or give EVERY character an elaborate backstory?

I agree that a lack of attention is part of the problem. I'm so tired of hearing "why didn't Sam use the Allspark sliver to revive Optimus?" It very clearly shows that when the Decepticons revived Megatron they had to kill one of their own for parts first. Or the "multiple Constructicons" thing, they never show multiple Constructicons in the movie. It's vehicles that combine into Devastator, they never show those vehicles as individual robots, why is everybody assuming they are?

Sorry to go off on a rant, but when people don't pay attention to whats going on then blame the movie it really grinds my gears.

The reason why so many people complain about the Constructicons and Devastator is that they have been advertised as one and the same thing prior and during the movie's run.
The toys show that, the bios do and even the crew did so in interviews. All said that the Constructicons combine to form Devastator while in the movie Devastator shows up while the Consturcticons still runn around blowing stuff up. Even Devastator's concept art has the 6 Constructicons as individual robots and in combined mode.

I know, but a lot changes from the concept stage. Arcee was originally supposed to be in the first movie, then they replaced her with Ironhide. I'm going by the finished product, which shows 9 vehicles make Devastator.

Yea I know, but they still advertised Devastator as being the combined Constructicons while the movie was in theatres, that's what confused most people.

Evil_the_Nub wrote:A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar

I only remember 1...Jake. And that Aweywahh thing...

SlyTF1 wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar

I only remember 1...Jake. And that Aweywahh thing...

The characters had names in that movie?
I hardly ever remember names from movie or show characters. It took me 4 months just to memorize Son Goku's name, I only ever called him Dragonball boy the only characters who's names I instantly remembered after just 30 minutes where Optimus Prime and the Ghostbusters, I actually think I was the only guy who called Winston by his name instead of "the black Ghostbuster" at my school.
That's what I love about Jacky Chun movies, most of the time his character is simply called Jacky.

SlyTF1 wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar

I only remember 1...Jake. And that Aweywahh thing...

Without any help:

• Jake Sulley
• Neytiri
• Norm Spellman
• Tsu'Tey
• Grace (forget her last name)
• Eywa
• The name of the tribe is The Omaticaya People
• Their race is the Na'Vi
• The moon they're on is Pandora
• The giant planet it orbits (and they don't go to) is Polyphemus

Sabrblade wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:A lot of movies are the same way though. I can only remember two names from Avatar

I only remember 1...Jake. And that Aweywahh thing...

Without any help:

• Jake Sulley
• Neytiri
• Norm Spellman
• Tsu'Tey
• Grace (forget her last name)
• Eywa
• The name of the tribe is The Omaticaya People
• Their race is the Na'Vi
• The moon they're on is Pandora
• The giant planet it orbits (and they don't go to) is Polyphemus

Damn...now that yu've refreshed my memory I know: Jake, Norm, Grace and tha Na'Vi and Pandora! But still...

SlyTF1 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:
I only remember 1...Jake. And that Aweywahh thing...

Without any help:

• Jake Sulley
• Neytiri
• Norm Spellman
• Tsu'Tey
• Grace (forget her last name)
• Eywa
• The name of the tribe is The Omaticaya People
• Their race is the Na'Vi
• The moon they're on is Pandora
• The giant planet it orbits (and they don't go to) is Polyphemus

Damn...now that yu've refreshed my memory I know: Jake, Norm, Grace and tha Na'Vi and Pandora! But still...

I haven't even seen this movie yet (yeah, I know. Haven't seen Avatar yet. Gonna rent it this weekend.) and I recognize half of these names as being characters/places in Avatar.