The Energon Pub

by **TurboMMaster** » Sat Apr 25, 2015 5:42 am

Megatron Wolf wrote:If bay is involved at all its going to be another terrible paint by numbers movie for the mindless masses that lasts for way to long. If hasbro wasnt so greedy they'd take this time to try something different, the franchise is established & the mindless moron will go & see the new one no matter what. Perfect opportunity to experiment & try to win back all the fans youve alienated over the years. But all they care about is lining their pockets & they're to short sighted to see the bigger picture so things will never change.

I couldn't agreed more. We really need something new, something different. They at least should let Galvatron win next round. Just to shock the audience and giving a lot of unexepected options for six and let's hope the final movie.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sat Apr 25, 2015 7:01 am

TurboMMaster wrote:We really need something new, something different.

That's what I keep saying about those who complain about the movies but they never do ... >:oP

by **Jeen0808** » Sat Apr 25, 2015 8:00 am

I wonder if Crosshairs, Drift and Hound will return or if they'll just kill them off in between the movies.

by **TurboMMaster** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 2:47 am

I think they will keep them alive until six movie, where one or two of them will die.

zatara1701 wrote:That being said... Bay is adequate, but I would love to see someone else out there take a swing at it. You cannot tell me there is not a director out there that loves the Transformers like Joss Whedon loves Marvel and JJ Abrams loves Star Wars....

Michael Bay was a mistake since the very beggining. He didn't screw the first movie only because it was so simple in the first place. He tried to fix it in the fourth movie and he partially succed, but still he's will to correct everything costs us two movies witch are completly unwatchable and unworthy of beign considered canon - that five real life years of Universe growing completly wasted. In this time, Marvel Cinematic Universe with very similiar main targets was estabilished as a interesting and large Universe - and none of this movies had some ambitious script with cunning plot. I think that all he needed to do is let writers do their work.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:00 am

Don't. Just don't even attempt to compare Transformer movies to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

MCU is in a league of its own. It has decades of history to draw from, it also has a number of different directors and writers. They have the guiding hand of a Marvel Executive who makes sure things tie together but are independent enough to stand alone.

TFCU is just a series of movies following each other.

You can NOT compare them.

Website · by **Fires_Of_Inferno** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:21 am

Burn wrote:Don't. Just don't even attempt to compare Transformer movies to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

MCU is in a league of its own. It has decades of history to draw from, it also has a number of different directors and writers. They have the guiding hand of a Marvel Executive who makes sure things tie together but are independent enough to stand alone.

TFCU is just a series of movies following each other.

You can NOT compare them.

Then I would suggest that Hasbro/Paramount reboot the Transformers movie franchise so they can get it rolling in the right direction. It's inconceivable to even consider them as being on the same level as the MCU as they are, and yet, Paramount wants a TFCU like the MCU. Can't very well do that now.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:50 am

Fires_Of_Inferno wrote:Then I would suggest that Hasbro/Paramount reboot the Transformers movie franchise so they can get it rolling in the right direction. It's inconceivable to even consider them as being on the same level as the MCU as they are, and yet, Paramount wants a TFCU like the MCU. Can't very well do that now.

Why can't they?

News Credits: 1 · by **SKYWARPED_128** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 4:06 am

Burn wrote:
Fires_Of_Inferno wrote:Then I would suggest that Hasbro/Paramount reboot the Transformers movie franchise so they can get it rolling in the right direction. It's inconceivable to even consider them as being on the same level as the MCU as they are, and yet, Paramount wants a TFCU like the MCU. Can't very well do that now.

Why can't they?

Too afraid to change the formula. They know the Bayverse movies won't remain a profitable formula forever, which is why they're playing around with the TFCU idea, but they're still not sure when to stop. AoE still made money, courtesy of China.

Also, there's no guarantee that the TFCU thing will perform better or even as well as the Bay-style flicks. My guess is, they'll try to maintain the status quo for as long as possible, until it finally bombs at the cinema.

by **TurboMMaster** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 4:37 am

Burn wrote:Don't. Just don't even attempt to compare Transformer movies to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

MCU is in a league of its own. It has decades of history to draw from, it also has a number of different directors and writers. They have the guiding hand of a Marvel Executive who makes sure things tie together but are independent enough to stand alone.

TFCU is just a series of movies following each other.

You can NOT compare them.

Acutally, why not? The same main target audience, the same kind of a movie (summer blockbuster). I tell more: If MCU is able to spawn a new enjoyable blockbuster each few months, it proves that action movie can be a not so bad movie. For example: Both First Thor and Captain America were nothing more but 2-hour Avengers trailers, yet both were much better when compared to DOTM, witch in theory was much ambitious.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 4:54 am

TurboMMaster wrote:
Burn wrote:Don't. Just don't even attempt to compare Transformer movies to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

MCU is in a league of its own. It has decades of history to draw from, it also has a number of different directors and writers. They have the guiding hand of a Marvel Executive who makes sure things tie together but are independent enough to stand alone.

TFCU is just a series of movies following each other.

You can NOT compare them.
Acutally, why not? The same main target audience, the same kind of a movie (summer blockbuster). I tell more: If MCU is able to spawn a new enjoyable blockbuster each few months, it proves that action movie can be a not so bad movie. For example: Both First Thor and Captain America were nothing more but 2-hour Avengers trailers, yet both were much better when compared to DOTM, witch in theory was much ambitious.

I explained why not. Go back and read my post.

Oh and MCU only puts out two movies a YEAR. Not "each few months".

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Too afraid to change the formula. They know the Bayverse movies won't remain a profitable formula forever, which is why they're playing around with the TFCU idea, but they're still not sure when to stop. AoE still made money, courtesy of China.

Also, there's no guarantee that the TFCU thing will perform better or even as well as the Bay-style flicks. My guess is, they'll try to maintain the status quo for as long as possible, until it finally bombs at the cinema.

So you have inside knowledge of Paramount executives? (Because that's how you're sounding).

And you're right, there is no guarantee spin-off movies will perform just as well. They could do better, they could do worse, no one knows what the future holds.

News Credits: 1 · by **SKYWARPED_128** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:35 am

Burn wrote:So you have inside knowledge of Paramount executives? (Because that's how you're sounding).

My bad--didn't mean to sound like I was stating a fact.

With that said, IMO it's the most natural course of action for Paramount, considering what we do know so far. If it's one thing ROTF has proven to them, it's that the audience loves Transformers movies enough to overlook just about anything negative, as long as it's got cool-looking CGI robot action in it.

And Bay does CGI robot action very well, if nothing else.

It follows reason that Paramount wants to keep the status quo since it's proven quite successful.

Until now. The franchise is starting to show signs of growing stale, and even Bay seems to be suffering from creative exhaustion (he's never had to recycle an action scene until AOE, with the highway chase). Understandably, Paramount would want to inject a little new blood into the franchise, while still holding on to the proven formula just in case.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 4:05 pm

I just think the idea of spin-offs is stupid and they'll just come off looking like unoriginal copy cats. It works for MCU because of the reasons I listed above, TF's don't have that luxury.

Website · by **Fires_Of_Inferno** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:22 pm

Burn wrote:
Fires_Of_Inferno wrote:Then I would suggest that Hasbro/Paramount reboot the Transformers movie franchise so they can get it rolling in the right direction. It's inconceivable to even consider them as being on the same level as the MCU as they are, and yet, Paramount wants a TFCU like the MCU. Can't very well do that now.

Why can't they?

Burn wrote:Don't. Just don't even attempt to compare Transformer movies to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

MCU is in a league of its own. It has decades of history to draw from, it also has a number of different directors and writers. They have the guiding hand of a Marvel Executive who makes sure things tie together but are independent enough to stand alone.

TFCU is just a series of movies following each other.

You can NOT compare them.

That's why.

News Credits: 1 · by **SKYWARPED_128** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:47 pm

Burn wrote:I just think the idea of spin-offs is stupid and they'll just come off looking like unoriginal copy cats. It works for MCU because of the reasons I listed above, TF's don't have that luxury.

Quite likely. That's exactly why I don't have a lot of faith in the TFCU idea. Bay's movies are the only "template" for the new directors, and odds are, they'll try to ape his already flawed directing style, making things even worse. Either that, or Paramount will make the directors follow his style, even if they wanted to do something different.

Same thing happened when Joel Schumacher took over from Burton. You can see a lot of the trappings of Burton's quirky style in Batman Forever, but it just doesn't work because it's not Burton.

News Credits: 5 · by **Convoy** » Sun Apr 26, 2015 11:15 pm

Burn wrote:Don't. Just don't even attempt to compare Transformer movies to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The Transformers is in a league of its own. It has decades of history to draw from, it also has a number of different directors and writers. They have the guiding hand of a Hasbro Executive who makes sure things tie together but are independent enough to stand alone.

TFCU is just a series of movies following each other.

You can NOT compare them.

FTFY

If I wanted to watch garbage I'd drive to the nearest landfill, bring my own popcorn and leave before it was over for a fraction of the price Hollywood is charging these days.

Edit:
Just go and watch Birdman already.

by **G1COLLECTOR** » Mon Apr 27, 2015 8:23 am

I want someone else other than Michael Bay .

I think the Transformers movies are getting worse as they go. I own the first 3 on DVD, but yet to buy the 4th.
Also, no Mark Walburg please. He was as good as he could be for the 4th movie.

How about a movie that shows the story fully of what happened on Cybertron before part one in full details?? We would see all the bots in Cybertron modes >:oP

News Credits: 37 · by **SlyTF1** » Mon Apr 27, 2015 10:39 am

G1COLLECTOR wrote:I want someone else other than Michael Bay .

I think the Transformers movies are getting worse as they go. I own the first 3 on DVD, but yet to buy the 4th.
Also, no Mark Walburg please. He was as good as he could be for the 4th movie.

How about a movie that shows the story fully of what happened on Cybertron before part one in full details?? We would see all the bots in Cybertron modes

The comics already did that.

by **G1COLLECTOR** » Mon Apr 27, 2015 10:50 am

Ok, but I'm talking about Movie form ..... ? Better then some of this off the wall crap that will get handed to us anyway.

News Credits: 22 · by **Rodimus Prime** » Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:05 am

I know that Devastator was horribly butchered, both character- and design-wise, but I want to see Menasor and Bruticus on screen. Considering Bay's huge boner for cars and the military, I'm surprised they haven't been included yet. :michaelbay:

by **Doubledealer93** » Tue Apr 28, 2015 8:31 pm

and let the crying begin.

News Credits: 37 · by **SlyTF1** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:27 pm

Am I the only one hoping TF5 will be called Faces of Darkness? It just seems like the most fitting thing to do.

News Credits: 5 · by **Convoy** » Sat May 02, 2015 12:32 am

SlyTF1 wrote:Am I the only one hoping TF5 will be called Faces of Darkness? It just seems like the most fitting thing to do.

Hahahahaha! :lol:

It works on so many levels!

News Credits: 22 · by **Rodimus Prime** » Sun May 03, 2015 1:24 pm

SlyTF1 wrote:Am I the only one hoping TF5 will be called Faces of Darkness? It just seems like the most fitting thing to do.

IF the villains are indeed the Quintessons (which isn't for certain) then it would be a neat title. However, non-fans, or maybe even newer fans, wouldn't get it, unless the Quintessons actually had 5 faces.

News Credits: 37 · by **SlyTF1** » Mon May 04, 2015 1:14 am

Rodimus Prime wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:Am I the only one hoping TF5 will be called Faces of Darkness? It just seems like the most fitting thing to do.
IF the villains are indeed the Quintessons (which isn't for certain) then it would be a neat title. However, non-fans, or maybe even newer fans, wouldn't get it, unless the Quintessons actually had 5 faces.

That's why I left out the number in the title.

News Credits: 1 · by **SKYWARPED_128** » Mon May 04, 2015 3:57 am

SlyTF1 wrote:
Rodimus Prime wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:Am I the only one hoping TF5 will be called Faces of Darkness? It just seems like the most fitting thing to do.
IF the villains are indeed the Quintessons (which isn't for certain) then it would be a neat title. However, non-fans, or maybe even newer fans, wouldn't get it, unless the Quintessons actually had 5 faces.

That's why I left out the number in the title.

I don't think any TF live-action movie thus far has ever had a number. it's always been Transformers - Dark of the Moon, Transformers - Age of Extinction, etc.

Unless you mean actually calling the sequel itself, "Five Faces of Death."