The Energon Pub

So Bay himself admits he made a faulty product. Do we all get refunds now on our ticket prices.

I still like how it wasn't his fault. It was all the writer's strike. I can see him in the editing room saying "None of this makes any damn sense. If only I had some one who could write to clean this up. I'm a director and in no way expected to have storytelling abilty."

I LOOOOOOOOOVED Reveng of the Fallen. RoTF was a fun and entertaining movie and that's all I need. I watch it every other weekend.

Hasn't he already said this like a million time already?
I personally thought ROTF was okay...it wasn't awful but at the same time not brilliant.

Capt.Failure wrote:

MINDVVIPE wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:so it took him over a year to find out what we and every one else on the planet knew 2 years ago?

Except everyone who loved it. You know, $800+ million's worth of moviegoers. Just sayin', ya know?

Yea man, don't you know? so many people loved the movie, so its gota be good. When lots of people like something, thats how you know its good, how else would you know its good?
Lots of people do crack, I bet crack is good for ya too. Time for some crack.

Movies don't earn that much when they're hated. Hated by critics and Transformers fans, sure. But they're in the vast minority. When you keep to a tight circle who all agree it's easy to see that opinion as fact.

Fact is, just because critics (who I gave up on years ago) and most Transformers fans hate it does not mean "everyone hated it." Way more people loved it. I'm sorry if this angers you, but that's just how it is.

And your sarcasm doesn't help your point. I didn't like Avatar, ALOT of people didn't love Avatar. But legions more loved it. I know I'm in the minority there, but I don't deny the fact people still liked it.

His sarcasm points to the issue dead on! Hell, even 100 billion served at Mcdonalds only proves that people don’t always know what’s good for them so why raise an argument on who's the best unhealthy fast food chain. Is mindless entertainment any different? Just because your opinion weighs solely on democracy doesn’t mean that the next man with any ounce of common sense should be forced to follow your example!

And for the record the 72million or more people around the world who saw the last film obviously didn’t all like it. So when you throw in the fact that the actual director of the film is calling it crap along with its star co-signing critics after making millions off of it… at what point does defending this film sound ridiculous?

YoungPrime wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

MINDVVIPE wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:so it took him over a year to find out what we and every one else on the planet knew 2 years ago?

Except everyone who loved it. You know, $800+ million's worth of moviegoers. Just sayin', ya know?

Yea man, don't you know? so many people loved the movie, so its gota be good. When lots of people like something, thats how you know its good, how else would you know its good?
Lots of people do crack, I bet crack is good for ya too. Time for some crack.

Movies don't earn that much when they're hated. Hated by critics and Transformers fans, sure. But they're in the vast minority. When you keep to a tight circle who all agree it's easy to see that opinion as fact.

Fact is, just because critics (who I gave up on years ago) and most Transformers fans hate it does not mean "everyone hated it." Way more people loved it. I'm sorry if this angers you, but that's just how it is.

And your sarcasm doesn't help your point. I didn't like Avatar, ALOT of people didn't love Avatar. But legions more loved it. I know I'm in the minority there, but I don't deny the fact people still liked it.

His sarcasm points to the issue dead on! Hell, even 100 billion served at Mcdonalds only proves that people don’t always know what’s good for them so why raise an argument on who's the best unhealthy fast food chain. Is mindless entertainment any different? Just because your opinion weighs solely on democracy doesn’t mean that the next man with any ounce of common sense should be forced to follow your example!

And for the record the 72million or more people around the world who saw the last film obviously didn’t all like it. So when you throw in the fact that the actual director of the film is calling it crap along with its star co-signing critics after making millions off of it… at what point does defending this film sound ridiculous?

How can a movie be bad for you? It can't make you dumber, it can't make you overweight or clog your arteries. It was made to be entertaining and for most of us it was. And where did you get that 72 million number?

Evil_the_Nub wrote:

YoungPrime wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

MINDVVIPE wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:so it took him over a year to find out what we and every one else on the planet knew 2 years ago?

Except everyone who loved it. You know, $800+ million's worth of moviegoers. Just sayin', ya know?

Yea man, don't you know? so many people loved the movie, so its gota be good. When lots of people like something, thats how you know its good, how else would you know its good?
Lots of people do crack, I bet crack is good for ya too. Time for some crack.

Movies don't earn that much when they're hated. Hated by critics and Transformers fans, sure. But they're in the vast minority. When you keep to a tight circle who all agree it's easy to see that opinion as fact.

Fact is, just because critics (who I gave up on years ago) and most Transformers fans hate it does not mean "everyone hated it." Way more people loved it. I'm sorry if this angers you, but that's just how it is.

And your sarcasm doesn't help your point. I didn't like Avatar, ALOT of people didn't love Avatar. But legions more loved it. I know I'm in the minority there, but I don't deny the fact people still liked it.

His sarcasm points to the issue dead on! Hell, even 100 billion served at Mcdonalds only proves that people don’t always know what’s good for them so why raise an argument on who's the best unhealthy fast food chain. Is mindless entertainment any different? Just because your opinion weighs solely on democracy doesn’t mean that the next man with any ounce of common sense should be forced to follow your example!

And for the record the 72million or more people around the world who saw the last film obviously didn’t all like it. So when you throw in the fact that the actual director of the film is calling it crap along with its star co-signing critics after making millions off of it… at what point does defending this film sound ridiculous?

How can a movie be bad for you? It can't make you dumber, it can't make you overweight or clog your arteries. It was made to be entertaining and for most of us it was. And where did you get that 72 million number?

72! That's the number, 72! I think he's from the government; that's where he got that number from...I think. Or it could be coincidence.

8oo million doesnt make the movie good

it also doesnt mean that of those who spent the money t watch the movie thought it was good

its a rather silly defence to say the movie was good because of its takings.

i dont trust bay to make a better movie and believe that this i pure hype for dotm.

shamone wrote:8oo million doesnt make the movie good

it also doesnt mean that of those who spent the money t watch the movie thought it was good

its a rather silly defence to say the movie was good because of its takings.

i dont trust bay to make a better movie and believe that this i pure hype for dotm.

Except it's a perfect defense.

Let's do a little rough math. $400 million (the film's US earnings) divided by $12 (the rough amount a movie ticket costs).

The answer is 33,333,333.33 repeating. Let's just say thirty million people saw the movie once. Of course it's silly to imagine that many saw it once since the financial earnings of high grossing films come from repeat viewings, which is a well known fact. What you're left with is either many people seeing it over and over, something you don't do with a movie you hate, or millions seeing it once. The latter is something that doesn't happen when a movie gets reviews as bad as RoTF.

The only logical conclusion is that despite the Transformer fan community opinion, the movie is insanely popular. I'm not saying you're wrong for not liking it, but it's flat out assinine to say it's hated by everyone. Proof shows that's far from the truth, close to being an outright lie.

Capt.Failure wrote:

shamone wrote:8oo million doesnt make the movie good

it also doesnt mean that of those who spent the money t watch the movie thought it was good

its a rather silly defence to say the movie was good because of its takings.

i dont trust bay to make a better movie and believe that this i pure hype for dotm.

Except it's a perfect defense.

Let's do a little rough math. $400 million (the film's US earnings) divided by $12 (the rough amount a movie ticket costs).

The answer is 33,333,333.33 repeating. Let's just say thirty million people saw the movie once. Of course it's silly to imagine that many saw it once since the financial earnings of high grossing films come from repeat viewings, which is a well known fact. What you're left with is either many people seeing it over and over, something you don't do with a movie you hate, or millions seeing it once. The latter is something that doesn't happen when a movie gets reviews as bad as RoTF.

The only logical conclusion is that despite the Transformer fan community opinion, the movie is insanely popular. I'm not saying you're wrong for not liking it, but it's flat out assinine to say it's hated by everyone. Proof shows that's far from the truth, close to being an outright lie.

I think the DVD sales are a good indication that it was well liked.

Capt.Failure wrote:

shamone wrote:8oo million doesnt make the movie good

it also doesnt mean that of those who spent the money t watch the movie thought it was good

its a rather silly defence to say the movie was good because of its takings.

i dont trust bay to make a better movie and believe that this i pure hype for dotm.

Except it's a perfect defense.

Let's do a little rough math. $400 million (the film's US earnings) divided by $12 (the rough amount a movie ticket costs).

The answer is 33,333,333.33 repeating. Let's just say thirty million people saw the movie once. Of course it's silly to imagine that many saw it once since the financial earnings of high grossing films come from repeat viewings, which is a well known fact. What you're left with is either many people seeing it over and over, something you don't do with a movie you hate, or millions seeing it once. The latter is something that doesn't happen when a movie gets reviews as bad as RoTF.

The only logical conclusion is that despite the Transformer fan community opinion, the movie is insanely popular. I'm not saying you're wrong for not liking it, but it's flat out assinine to say it's hated by everyone. Proof shows that's far from the truth, close to being an outright lie.

i see your point, but that wasnt point i was making

which is popular doesnt mean good.

just as unpopular doesnt mean good.


unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

I'll also note that I've seen the term "RotF apologists" used earlier. I'd like to ask a simple question. Why should we apoligize? What is there to apologize for?

The answer is nothing. But I'm curious to know what the crime.

i see your point, but that wasnt point i was making

which is popular doesnt mean good.

just as unpopular doesnt mean good.

You misunderstand as well. I'm trying to disprove the fallacy that "no one liked RotF." The truth is that those who disliked it are in the minority, enclosed within a fandom that mostly agrees, and seeing such as an undeniable fact.

Edit: As for whether it's good? Saying whether it is or isn't on a factual basis is an impossibility. I thought it was, personally. Obviously you didn't. The Academy of Motion Pictures must have thought The Black Swan was good. I thought it was boring, pretentious, exploitive, and pointless.

See where I'm going with this?

shamone wrote:unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

Why the hell should we care about plot, characters, or logic? As far as I'm concerned ROTF had a plot, I cared about some of the characters (Optimus, Sam, Megatron, The Fallen, Jetfire, Ironhide.), and the movie had logic. Robots get blown up and pieces fall off; that sounds logical to me.

Capt.Failure wrote:I'll also note that I've seen the term "RotF apologists" used earlier. I'd like to ask a simple question. Why should we apoligize? What is there to apologize for?

The answer is nothing. But I'm curious to know what the crime.

i see your point, but that wasnt point i was making

which is popular doesnt mean good.

just as unpopular doesnt mean good.

You misunderstand as well. I'm trying to disprove the fallacy that "no one liked RotF." The truth is that those who disliked it are in the minority, enclosed within a fandom that mostly agrees, and seeing such as an undeniable fact.

Edit: As for whether it's good? Saying whether it is or isn't on a factual basis is an impossibility. I thought it was, personally. Obviously you didn't. The Academy of Motion Pictures must have thought The Black Swan was good. I thought it was boring, pretentious, exploitive, and pointless.

See where I'm going with this?

i understand that with the numbers rotf did that the majority who saw it may have liked it.

that still doesnt make the movie good.

i understand that with the numbers rotf did that the majority who saw it may have liked it.

that still doesnt make the movie good.

Exactly. I can't say it's good to you because you didn't think it was good. I guess we agree to disagree.

SlyTF1 wrote:

shamone wrote:unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

Why the hell should we care about plot, characters, or logic? As far as I'm concerned ROTF had a plot, I cared about some of the characters (Optimus, Sam, Megatron, The Fallen, Jetfire, Ironhide.), and the movie had logic. Robots get blown up and pieces fall off; that sounds logical to me.

thank you for highlighting the problem for me

yes why should we care about some of the staples of cinema, that which have made cinema the dominant art form that it is !

the movie could not even be true to the mythology and internal logic it created for it self !

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

shamone wrote:unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

Why the hell should we care about plot, characters, or logic? As far as I'm concerned ROTF had a plot, I cared about some of the characters (Optimus, Sam, Megatron, The Fallen, Jetfire, Ironhide.), and the movie had logic. Robots get blown up and pieces fall off; that sounds logical to me.

thank you for highlighting the problem for me

yes why should we care about some of the staples of cinema, that which have made cinema the dominant art form that it is !

the movie could not even be true to the mythology and internal logic it created for it self !

Reread his statement please. He said it had those things (and it did), but such was icing on the cake. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a movie for the eyecandy. I could name another film that grossed more money than God that was pure eyecandy with a thin plot that came out the same year, but when people bring up this angle about RotF it's easily overlooked due to critical opinion.

Capt.Failure wrote:

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

shamone wrote:unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

Why the hell should we care about plot, characters, or logic? As far as I'm concerned ROTF had a plot, I cared about some of the characters (Optimus, Sam, Megatron, The Fallen, Jetfire, Ironhide.), and the movie had logic. Robots get blown up and pieces fall off; that sounds logical to me.

thank you for highlighting the problem for me

yes why should we care about some of the staples of cinema, that which have made cinema the dominant art form that it is !

the movie could not even be true to the mythology and internal logic it created for it self !

Reread his statement please. He said it had those things (and it did), but such was icing on the cake. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a movie for the eyecandy. I could name another film that grossed more money than God that was pure eyecandy with a thin plot that came out the same year, but when people bring up this angle about RotF it's easily overlooked due to critical opinion.

I know exactly what movie you're talking about. It was ok at first, then I watched it without 3-D and I thought it was crap. Dog crap, too.

Capt.Failure wrote:

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

shamone wrote:unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

Why the hell should we care about plot, characters, or logic? As far as I'm concerned ROTF had a plot, I cared about some of the characters (Optimus, Sam, Megatron, The Fallen, Jetfire, Ironhide.), and the movie had logic. Robots get blown up and pieces fall off; that sounds logical to me.

thank you for highlighting the problem for me

yes why should we care about some of the staples of cinema, that which have made cinema the dominant art form that it is !

the movie could not even be true to the mythology and internal logic it created for it self !

Reread his statement please. He said it had those things (and it did), but such was icing on the cake. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a movie for the eyecandy. I could name another film that grossed more money than God that was pure eyecandy with a thin plot that came out the same year, but when people bring up this angle about RotF it's easily overlooked due to critical opinion.

point still stands, the plot characters and logic in rotf are cretinous , yet the "fans" lap it up.

sure if thats what they are into fine, but sadly exec sees this, and as a result output becomes more and more simplistic as movies aimed at mature adults are seen as financial blackholes.

rotf is just one of many pieces which means that intelligent plotted movies are becoming a rarity



i hated that movie too !

point still stands, the plot characters and logic in rotf are cretinous , yet the "fans" lap it up.

sure if thats what they are into fine, but sadly exec sees this, and as a result output becomes more and more simplistic as movies aimed at mature adults are seen as financial blackholes.

rotf is just one of many pieces which means that intelligent plotted movies are becoming a rarity



i hated that movie too !

Gonna have to call b/s on that one too. As a film buff I think the idea that "simplistic" movies are killing the film industry to be absurd. The plague of remakes and rehashes are doing that, since the executives are afraid to spend money on new ideas. If you ask me it's a miracle the Transformers films got made due to that outlook since it was a new IP in terms of big budget films.

Simplistic films have their place alongside complex films. Liking one does not make you less than if you liked the other, or even both.

Capt.Failure wrote:

point still stands, the plot characters and logic in rotf are cretinous , yet the "fans" lap it up.

sure if thats what they are into fine, but sadly exec sees this, and as a result output becomes more and more simplistic as movies aimed at mature adults are seen as financial blackholes.

rotf is just one of many pieces which means that intelligent plotted movies are becoming a rarity



i hated that movie too !

Gonna have to call b/s on that one too. As a film buff I think the idea that "simplistic" movies are killing the film industry to be absurd. The plague of remakes and rehashes are doing that, since the executives are afraid to spend money on new ideas. If you ask me it's a miracle the Transformers films got made due to that outlook since it was a new IP in terms of big budget films.

Simplistic films have their place alongside complex films. Liking one does not make you less than if you liked the other, or even both.

right as a buff, compare the top tens in the seventies to the modern era. and i mean tp earning

you find it amazing transformers got made. thats naive.

lets see

1. based on existing franchise - check

2. established fan base - check

3. huge toy sales potential - check

the only amazing thing is it took so long to make it to the screen, partly because of the tech, and partly so that the g- oners would be old enough to feel nostalgic for th franchise.

right as a buff, compare the top tens in the seventies to the modern era. and i mean tp earning

you find it amazing transformers got made. thats naive.

lets see

1. based on existing franchise - check

2. established fan base - check

3. huge toy sales potential - check

the only amazing thing is it took so long to make it to the screen, partly because of the tech, and partly so that the g- oners would be old enough to feel nostalgic for th franchise.

Going by unadjusted domestic gross, the top three films of the 1970's are as follows...

1. Star Wars
2. Jaws
3. The Exorcist

The Exorcist and Jaws are not based on franchises, because only a single book was produced before each film and "film of the book" has always been a common basis for making a movie. Star Wars had toy potential yes, but even then it doesn't count because the Fox executives thought Star Wars was gonna flop, and many times tried to pull funding and cancel production. It was George Lucas who chose to market the film via toys/clothing/etc, and he who's still reaping the rewards. I'm sure Fox still kicks themselves over that little blunder.

Capt.Failure wrote:

right as a buff, compare the top tens in the seventies to the modern era. and i mean tp earning

you find it amazing transformers got made. thats naive.

lets see

1. based on existing franchise - check

2. established fan base - check

3. huge toy sales potential - check

the only amazing thing is it took so long to make it to the screen, partly because of the tech, and partly so that the g- oners would be old enough to feel nostalgic for th franchise.

Going by unadjusted domestic gross, the top three films of the 1970's are as follows...

1. Star Wars
2. Jaws
3. The Exorcist

The Exorcist and Jaws are not based on franchises, because only a single book was produced before each film and "film of the book" has always been a common basis for making a movie. Star Wars had toy potential yes, but even then it doesn't because the Fox executives thought Star Wars was gonna flop, and many times tried to pull funding and cancel production. It was George Lucas who chose to market the film via toys/clothing/etc, and he who's still reaping the rewards. I'm sure Fox still kicks themselves over that little blunder.

im sorry but you missed my point there.

im saying compare the quality of the top grossing movies in the seventies to those in the modern era


now my point about transformers was in reference to your statement which stated you were susprised it was green lighted, when i would argue it was perfect for green light as it fit into the handy target market which has developed where movie logic is, robots get hit, bits fall off is the pinnacle.

different points, unrelated.

for example the top grossing movies of the 2000's nine were sequels. give the audience what they lapped up first time

shamone wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

shamone wrote:unfortunately dotm is representative of what studios realise the movie going market is, young dumb 15-22 year olds wno dont care about plot, characters or logic.

Why the hell should we care about plot, characters, or logic? As far as I'm concerned ROTF had a plot, I cared about some of the characters (Optimus, Sam, Megatron, The Fallen, Jetfire, Ironhide.), and the movie had logic. Robots get blown up and pieces fall off; that sounds logical to me.

thank you for highlighting the problem for me

yes why should we care about some of the staples of cinema, that which have made cinema the dominant art form that it is !

the movie could not even be true to the mythology and internal logic it created for it self !

Reread his statement please. He said it had those things (and it did), but such was icing on the cake. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a movie for the eyecandy. I could name another film that grossed more money than God that was pure eyecandy with a thin plot that came out the same year, but when people bring up this angle about RotF it's easily overlooked due to critical opinion.

point still stands, the plot characters and logic in rotf are cretinous , yet the "fans" lap it up.

sure if thats what they are into fine, but sadly exec sees this, and as a result output becomes more and more simplistic as movies aimed at mature adults are seen as financial blackholes.
rotf is just one of many pieces which means that intelligent plotted movies are becoming a rarity



i hated that movie too !

So...basically you're blaming people who are entertained Transformers and action for killing "intelligent" movies?

shamone wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

right as a buff, compare the top tens in the seventies to the modern era. and i mean tp earning

you find it amazing transformers got made. thats naive.

lets see

1. based on existing franchise - check

2. established fan base - check

3. huge toy sales potential - check

the only amazing thing is it took so long to make it to the screen, partly because of the tech, and partly so that the g- oners would be old enough to feel nostalgic for th franchise.

Going by unadjusted domestic gross, the top three films of the 1970's are as follows...

1. Star Wars
2. Jaws
3. The Exorcist

The Exorcist and Jaws are not based on franchises, because only a single book was produced before each film and "film of the book" has always been a common basis for making a movie. Star Wars had toy potential yes, but even then it doesn't because the Fox executives thought Star Wars was gonna flop, and many times tried to pull funding and cancel production. It was George Lucas who chose to market the film via toys/clothing/etc, and he who's still reaping the rewards. I'm sure Fox still kicks themselves over that little blunder.

im sorry but you missed my point there.

im saying compare the quality of the top grossing movies in the seventies to those in the modern era


now my point about transformers was in reference to your statement which stated you were susprised it was green lighted, when i would argue it was perfect for green light as it fit into the handy target market which has developed where movie logic is, robots get hit, bits fall off is the pinnacle.

different points, unrelated.

for example the top grossing movies of the 2000's nine were sequels. give the audience what they lapped up first time

Isn't that kind of the point of sequels?

So...basically you're blaming people who are entertained Transformers and action for killing "intelligent" movies?[/quote]


not at all. transformers isnt the progenitor of this phenomenon, its merely the end result. it acts as a self fulfilling prophecy for the studio execs.

we cant produce intelligent movies, the market isnt there. so we mass produce dumb ass movies, with minimal dialogue (so it selLs abroad), and when the numbers come in its dominated by these dumb ass movies, thus proving their point

when you reduce choice from the audience, then you cant say what they choose is what they want