The Energon Pub

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:I think there is precedent for it, considering McCarthy went after Comic Books as a deviant product for young people..

Now this is something I need to see a factual citation on. The attacks on comics books came about during the McCarthy era and were similar, but Joseph McCarthy was not the one behind the attacks, that was Frederic Wertham. McCarthy wasn't even part of the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency that held hearings on the matter: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8580/kefauver.html

And again, what is the similarity between these and in-fighting between fans over a Transformers movie, outside of the vague connection to the "With us or Against us" argument? It belittles the importance of these events to connect them to such a trivial matter.

Persecution is persecution no matter how trivial the subject.. it still stings the same way..

Who's being persecuted again?

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:And again, what is the similarity between these and in-fighting between fans over a Transformers movie, outside of the vague connection to the "With us or Against us" argument? It belittles the importance of these events to connect them to such a trivial matter.

I think the intention was to point-out that, regardless of the context, all that "you're with us or against us" nonsense is an irrational argument and form of demagoguery as opposed to a valid point.

Chris™ wrote:Who's being persecuted again?

The Geewunners who are having their childhood's raped and destroyed by Michael Bay!

Burn wrote:

Chris™ wrote:Who's being persecuted again?

The Geewunners who are having their childhood's raped and destroyed by Michael Bay!

Oh Ok. Carry on then.

skywarp-2 wrote:Persecution is persecution no matter how trivial the subject.. it still stings the same way..

How on earth would you know what it feels like to have someone use fear and lies to try and ruin your life for their own political gain?

And I've forgotten to point out the logical fallacy you've committed by, while putting some on the pedestal of being persecuted, putting those doing the "persecuting" on the same level as Joseph McCarthy.

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:Persecution is persecution no matter how trivial the subject.. it still stings the same way..

How on earth would you know what it feels like to have someone use fear and lies to try and ruin your life for their own political gain?

And I've forgotten to point out the logical fallacy you've committed by, while putting some on the pedestal of being persecuted, putting those doing the "persecuting" on the same level as Joseph McCarthy.

yeah but by your standards of logic, the same could be said if someone were to point out that Joseph mcCarthy was not on the same level as of persecution as Magistrates John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin whom burned/hanged innocent or crazy women at the stake during the Salem Witch trials of 1692.. Use of Joseph McCarthy and his trials against that attrocity, would belittle what happened there in Salem..

What your trying to do is take what I said out of context, and make yourself look "Smart" which many do here on this forum.. unfortunatley you miss the point of my analogy and waisted my time explaining it...


Again i say, Persecution is persecution no matter how trivial the subject.. it still stings the same way..

AbsumZer0 said it best:

"I think the intention was to point-out that, regardless of the context, all that "you're with us or against us" nonsense is an irrational argument and form of demagoguery as opposed to a valid point."

that was the point of what I was trying to say.. your analysis is, I believe, a way to make you look "smart" and not an understanding of the big picture or the fact that anyone labeling a fellow transfan as "not a true transfan, because they do not support this movie" is wrong...

My favorite example of trivial disagreement:

The faction quarrels between the High Heel Party and the Low Heel Party. The conflict, he says, started over a religious question: At which end should the faithful break their eggs: at the big end or at the little end? The Blefuscudians break theirs, in the original style, at the big end. But, by royal edict, the Lilliputians must break their eggs at the little end. There are rebels in Lilliput, Reldresal says, and already 11,000 of them—Big Endians—have been put to death; others have fled to the court of Blefuscu. He explains further that the Lilliputians have lost 40 ships in the war. The dilemma seems hopeless, for Lustrog, the prophet of their religion, has said, “All true believers shall break their eggs at the convenient end.”


Taken from Gulliver's Travels by Jonathon Swift

skywarp-2 wrote:yeah but by your standards of logic, the same could be said if someone were to point out that Joseph mcCarthy was not on the same level as of persecution as Magistrates John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin whom burned/hanged innocent or crazy women at the stake during the Salem Witch trials of 1692.. Use of Joseph McCarthy and his trials against that attrocity, would belittle what happened there in Salem...

That argument could very well be made.

What your trying to do is take what I said out of context, and make yourself look "Smart" which many do here on this forum.. unfortunatley you miss the point of my analogy and waisted my time explaining it...

I saw the point of your analogy. I said the point of your analogy. I disagreed with your using McCarthyism as a comparison figure due to their radically different natures.

Again i say, Persecution is persecution no matter how trivial the subject.. it still stings the same way..

AbsumZer0 said it best:

"I think the intention was to point-out that, regardless of the context, all that "you're with us or against us" nonsense is an irrational argument and form of demagoguery as opposed to a valid point."

that was the point of what I was trying to say.. your analysis is, I believe, a way to make you look "smart" and not an understanding of the big picture or the fact that anyone labeling a fellow transfan as "not a true transfan, because they do not support this movie" is wrong...

I never said it wasn't wrong to do so, and I never said your point was wrong. I said your comparison to the McCarthy era was not apt. Plus, both sides have used that argument, and it hasn't been right for either to do so.

yeah, your right about that...

Phategod1 wrote:Can we please see what the following guys are doing..

Steven Speilberg

Er, Phate? Speilberg was executive producer here. I think he'd be on Bay's side.

That said, at least we didn't wind up with George Lucas... He'd have TOTALLY fumbled this. Bay can at least blow things up right.

I'll reserve judgement 'til I see the movie, like I've said already... But I hope the next one does a better job of changing what needs to be changed and leaving the things that don't need to be changed alone.

Seriously, no faceplate, but they kept the name "Witwicky"?

skywarp-2 wrote:yeah, your right about that...

Well, at least now we're back on a somewhat similar page.

no matter which director was chosen to make the TF movie everybody will bash at him. every director has his own vision. you think that some directors will listen to the fans. probably not. if they make TF2 ppl will rant about that director changing everything. trust me. doesnt matter which director is hired. he will get ranted by the TF fans.

Mr.RobotAutoMan wrote:no matter which director was chosen to make the TF movie everybody will bash at him. every director has his own vision. you think that some directors will listen to the fans. probably not. if they make TF2 ppl will rant about that director changing everything. trust me. doesnt matter which director is hired. he will get ranted by the TF fans.

I'd be fairly less bothered by a talented director who uses artistic license to attempt to 'elevate' the content than a director like Bay who makes changes while shooting for the LCD. Consider Fantastic Four, Catwoman, Batman and Robin, and The Hulk.

I didn't like any of those films but Fantastic Four remained considerably faithful to the source material (and fared quite well at the box-office) so I can respect that. The Hulk, on the other hand, veered off considerably and bombed in theatres but Ang Lee had a vision that he followed through on; it was more of an art-house film. It bored me, but I can still respect that.

Pitof's Catwoman and Schumacher's Batman films, on the other hand, were altered considerably from their source material but, unlike Ang Lee's Hulk, the films were big schlocky messes. It's like Uwe Boll's films. Boll was given a faithful screenplay adaptation for Alone in the Dark by a genuine fan of the property but he wanted it to include more T&A, gun fights, and car chases (in other words, things that have nothing to do with the licensed property) because he felt it was too stupid otherwise and nobody would want to see a movie that's faithful to the IP he licensed. He just wants to 'give the people what they want', the fans of the licenses be damned. Bay's the same way, he apparently doesn't have any respect for the property itself, he just values it as a license through which he can make a giant robot movie with explosions, T&A, and cheesy jokes that 14 year-old who can barely read will love. If not for the producers and, to some degree the writers, this movie would have nothing at all to do with Transformers other than the name.

I look at this to be somehwhat good. Maybe, (Note, I said MAYBE) he will learn from his mistakes & give our beloved TF's normal Cybertronian faces other than Prime. And mouths. (Except Prime, I cannot stress that enough). No pieces of round metal w/no oriface. It's ugly. And for the love of Primus, put in my favorite character! And don't make him an f'ing helicopter for Primus' sakes! Seriously, if he sees the reaction that the faces ARE actually insulting to TF's, he'll give Megs, Jazz, Bumblebee, Starscream, & the rest of them their old (Or at least something that resembles) G1 faces. I would even settle for G2. (Even though it's roughly the same) I really, really hope he doesn't mess it up.

if there is another transformers movie and bay does direct it he should let fans help decide what should be in the movie like how snakes on a plane was basically a fan made movie

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

Chris™ wrote:

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:I don't know, I just think the whole. "If you don't support this movie, your not a true transformers fan" thing is like the whole "If you don't support the war in Iraq, your UnAmerican" thing.. its not right to label people that way...It reminds me of the McCarthy era stuff...

You're comparing an argument over a Transformers movie to Joseph McCarthy and the Communist witch hunts? There is no comparison between the two.

Yeah. These transformers arguments are much more divisive to the country

I know! This Transformers movie is doing a much better job of ruining people's lives through by lying and taking advantage of the fear of the masses solely for political gain, consequences be damned.

Micheal Bays Transformers, is really George W. Bush! Who knew.

Bay already has ruined the first one that's coming out. Why the heck would he make a second one for? To make the whole fandom sufer even more?

SpacerAM2 wrote:Bay already has ruined the first one that's coming out. Why the heck would he make a second one for? To make the whole fandom sufer even more?

Because its success isn't based on the complaints of people on a Transformers message board.

SpacerAM2 wrote:Bay already has ruined the first one that's coming out.

How come you got to see the movie before everyone else?

Burn wrote:

SpacerAM2 wrote:Bay already has ruined the first one that's coming out.

How come you got to see the movie before everyone else?

The designs are enough to ruin things for a lot of people.

I hope so! Bay makes great action movies, i dont care what anyone else says!

First and for most for anyone who thinks this movie is going to be crap... OPEN YOUR EYES!!!!

Does anyone think that Steven will let anyone make this crap...

Does anyone remember Back To The Future?

Transformers will be Great, with or with out Bay.

Oh and if anyone thinks the movie should be G1, well the mythology is. I prey no REAL fan would want the movie to look like the 80's. Get with the times.....Jees....

Optimus Pepsi wrote:if there is another transformers movie and bay does direct it he should let fans help decide what should be in the movie like how snakes on a plane was basically a fan made movie

And you want transformers to be like snakes on a plane....?
come on give Bay more credit then that.

I like this guy. A little blunt, but he get's the point across nonetheless.

Have a drink, Mr. Bay.