The Energon Pub

OK and this is to the origional post.

I am a origional fan, I use to get DaiClones even before TFs even came around. My dad worked in shipping so...

I also love Beast Wars, it roped me right back in after many years of faining intrest, but no activity.

So anyway, here's my 2 cents...

I am very tired of the constant rehashing, I would like 1 point to be picked, and a progression made from there.

I've stated this before, shows like Star Trek, Star Wars, even the new Terminator series hold strong to past detail. and tie them in. These are the things that help make these shows great.

So moving forward, and stopping the constant rehashing is a good thing.

However closing the door completly on G1 which inherently is the source of the idea is not a good idea.

Weither in activity or memory, a franchise normaly does it's best when nods are given to the source matterial. Beast Wars is a fine example of this. The series would not have done as well as it has if it didn't start incorporating the source. Even it's creators mention that on the DVD extras.

Move on, YES, however forget the past, NO.

Forget your roots and you forget yourself. I'd rather have a sense of continum, then another new story. After all, what is this, Power Rangers!?!

Starting over again just to refrence new characters that are no G1 would just be another rehashing in itself would it not?

Let the comics tell the before time tales, let them develope the old as apose to dismissing them , let the toys and shows embrace that as new characters are introduced to expand the fray. Let them all merge into a growing evolving structure...

till all are one.

Jeysie wrote:

Saber Prime wrote:The Transformers never got any sceen time. How is anyone supose to care about these characters if they don't know who the hell they are.

So... what exactly were all the scenes with Bumblebee and Sam/Mikaela, the scene with the Autobots landing and explaining their situation, Frenzy's various spy forays, the Autobots trying to blend into suburbia, Blackout in the opening sequence, Scorponok in the desert, the Autobots vs. Sector Seven, Barricade vs. Bumblebee, the entire last third of the movie, etc., etc.?

I will say that I wish the Decepticons got more screen time, but saying the TFs didn't get *any* screen time (or even saying they only got a little screen time) is just complete exaggeration.

I'll addmit it is an exaggeration to some exstent but look at it this way.

There are only 5 Autobots and the only one who was actully there for the entire movie was Bumblebee. Jazz got a couple of small scenes and by the time he died he did not have enough screne time for me to even care about his death. It felt like as if he was just an extra. I know nothing about movie Jazz so it makes it impossible to give a flying rats arse about him. Had he actully been in the movie as much as Bumblebee I might have gotten to like him and really been upset with his death.

Saber Prime wrote:Here's a couple good example of the crappieness that is the Transformers movie, what the hell were Starscream and the other Decepticons doing all that time Megatron was frozen? When exactly did they arrive on Earth?

What the hell was Optimus and the other Autobots doing while Bumblebee was alone on Earth. Why even send Bumblebee alone to a straige alien planet in the first place?

Neither one had any bearing on *this* story. The driving point of the plot was that both the Autobots and Decepticons had come to Earth to look for Sam and the Allspark. Therefore, the movie quite rightly started as close to the point where both sides actively started looking as possible. While your questions are valid and interesting ones, it would have been pointless to focus the first part of the movie on all the backstory that took place beforehand... that's a whole other prequel story in and of itself, and wasn't relevant to understanding the driving plot of the movie.

But it is something nessisary in order to make the movie about the Transformers themselfs not just human reaction to them. We need their backstory in order to know who these aliens are and to actully care about them.

It may not be relivant to the plot but it is relivent in portraying to the audience who these aliens are.

Saber Prime wrote:Where were the scenes with the TFs fighting each other?

Barricade vs. Bumblebee

Was never shown. Their fight happened off camera while all the audience saw was the kids vs. Frenzy.

Saber Prime wrote:Spider-man 2 completly ruined Doc Oct's character, tried to tell too much of a story in too short a time, and had Spider-man looseing his powers for what seemed like no reason at all.

I loved Doc Ock in Spiderman 2, personally. I liked the fact that instead of being your typical evil genius type, he was a nice guy who made the mistake of letting both the inherent power of his inventions and his grief over losing his wife overcome his reason until it was too late.

I hated him because of that. The Doc Oct I know started out evil he wasn't a good guy that turned evil. Pluse after Green Goblin was allready the same thing, a good guy gone evil, it didn't make sence to put another villian of the same type in the verry next movie.

The whole thing about him talking to his tenticles was allso a complete turn off and highly unbeliveable. The line "What's to prevent them from controlling you" and the thing with that chip in the back should have never been in there. It's a machine, it doesn't have a mind of it's own and therefore can not controll it's user. That whole thing was just stupid.

okaaaaay

this is getting way off topic.........

I like all the series of transformers. I dont collect toys and comics are something i cant afford.

I think they are all good the series . Beast Wars was good but it had its day.
Remember Beast Machines?Thats good but its weird.A step too far maybe. One last attempt to get the money when the ideas ran out.

Whats is wrong with transformers as machinery?

Unless they can get write something that dosnt disregard every thing that happened after the first series of BW then dont bother.
Why cant we have both and together.

Saber Prime wrote:Jim Carrey as Carnage.

Bug-WHA???

That wouldn't suck. At. All. [/sarcasm]

I like the Spider-Man movies, personally.

As for G1, I'm not a purist, but it's still my favourite. And I feel there's still a hell of a lot of stories yet to tell.

The only angle I can think of with BW/BM is that Megatron now makes up part of Cybertron's core, so possibly something could be made of that.

Dreadwind wrote:

Saber Prime wrote:Jim Carrey as Carnage.

Bug-WHA???

That wouldn't suck. At. All. [/sarcasm]

I like Jim Carrey... allthough his last couple movies have been really bad. He needs to go back into the comedy, drama sucks. Robin Williams too.

Megatron now makes up part of Cybertron's core

Where in the world did you get that idea? Megatron died in Cybertron's core along with Primal but there's nothing to say that they are now part of that core. The way I see it is Optimus Primal used the power from the Oracle to reformat the planet and Megatron just before they both died.

wow, it amazes me that no matter what the topic, people still find a way of putting an argument for/against the movie in it lol.

Anyways, i love G1, always have, i watched a bit of BW but not alot as i thought it was terrible to say the least. As for RiD Armarda etc, well i liked Rid, not as much as G1 but it was cool, and i havent seen enough of armarda as we only have 4 short dvds out here but what i have seen isnt bad imho. ive seen nothing of energon and cybertron so i cant comment on that. I just think G1 may be the past, but i think its such a huge universe it has been massivky underused. For example, how about the story of the war on cybertron. What were the series 3/4 bots doing during series 1+2, even carrying on series 4 without totally losing all the characters. It may be a biased opinion, but i believe enough people would be more than happy to see some offshoot from G1 rather than a new universe everytime.

Pottermus_Prime wrote:wow, it amazes me that no matter what the topic, people still find a way of putting an argument for/against the movie in it lol.

Well given that the topic seems to be for or agenst starting new universes apart from G1 it's not that entirely off topic.

yes, but you seemed to manage quite nicely to turn it into a how bad was the movie thread. I swear, someone should sticky a thread in the movie forum, one full of good things, one full of bad, so we dont have to hear the same arguments every other thread. People can just use a link and we can skip the continual repeatings

RagingBull wrote:i say if you old schools love your G1 characters so much why not evolve the characters of G1 and bring them into the current cybertron of that universe bring em to the BW/BM era.

cheers guys, keep the discussion going.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression everyone considers BW/BM as part of a continuation the "G1 Universe" - I can't stand Beast Wars, and so for me it ISN'T part of G1, just another of the TF spin-offs.

Also, you need to remember, even for many G1 fans, the cartoon is not the "G1" they love. For many of us, it's good old Marvel that supplied the definitive storyline and "universe".

This is a good discussion, though. All the pro-Animated comments, makes me really want that series to start up over here in the UK!

Saber Prime wrote:The only things wrong in Spider-man was his different origin and shooting webs from his hands insted of building web shooters. Green Goblins costume was vastly different but I never liked the original Green Goblin to begine with. They say everyone allways likes the original version they grew up with but in this case I hated the original version I grew up with and saw movie Green Goblin as a huge inprovement.

Your comments on Spiderman explain a lot about your views on the TF movie. You're approaching it all as a fanboy - which is fine, but you need to recognise that. Both the Spiderman movie and TF one needed to appeal BEYOND the fanboy community - needed to change things in order to create that appeal. Just giving drooling fans everything they've already seen would not have accomplished the huge success (and yes, it upset some fanboys, but the movie was a hit) it has, and guaranteed sequels. Number 2 has been PUSHED forward for a 2009 (instead of 2010) release because of the huge success.

You must understand that in any adaptation of media (you can see it in books-to-film versions as well) some things will be sacrificed, changed etc. 98% of the time its necessary, even if we as fans can't see it. Especially in franchises like X-Men, TF etc, that have literally hundreds of characters they could draw from!

Magnus' Mate wrote:Also, you need to remember, even for many G1 fans, the cartoon is not the "G1" they love. For many of us, it's good old Marvel that supplied the definitive storyline and "universe".

Good point. Following on from that, I, for one, didn't like either the cartoon or the comics as a child. I just enjoyed playing with the toys so my definitive G1 was my own invented narrative.

Magnus' Mate wrote:

Saber Prime wrote:The only things wrong in Spider-man was his different origin and shooting webs from his hands insted of building web shooters. Green Goblins costume was vastly different but I never liked the original Green Goblin to begine with. They say everyone allways likes the original version they grew up with but in this case I hated the original version I grew up with and saw movie Green Goblin as a huge inprovement.

Your comments on Spiderman explain a lot about your views on the TF movie. You're approaching it all as a fanboy - which is fine, but you need to recognise that. Both the Spiderman movie and TF one needed to appeal BEYOND the fanboy community - needed to change things in order to create that appeal. Just giving drooling fans everything they've already seen would not have accomplished the huge success (and yes, it upset some fanboys, but the movie was a hit) it has, and guaranteed sequels. Number 2 has been PUSHED forward for a 2009 (instead of 2010) release because of the huge success.

You must understand that in any adaptation of media (you can see it in books-to-film versions as well) some things will be sacrificed, changed etc. 98% of the time its necessary, even if we as fans can't see it. Especially in franchises like X-Men, TF etc, that have literally hundreds of characters they could draw from!

Actully you don't have a really good understanding of my opinion at all. You're under the impression I judge the movie ONLY by comparison to the original product. That is a part of how I base my opinions but that is not even close to ALL I base my opinion on.

I've actully spent my life learning about the movie buisness. I ended up working in a live theater but that's only been sense maybe late 2001 early 2002. The majority of my opinion comes from that exsperience.

One of my biggest issues with Transformers is not that's different from what I know. Even RID and Animated are different from what I know growing up with Beast Wars but I still like them.

No the biggest issue I have with the Transformers movie is I don't belive any of the Transformers characters got enough screen time for anyone to really get to know thoughs characters. This is a huge issue especially with characters like Jazz and whatever Decepticons died. The job of the movie is that by the time that characters dies the Audience should allready know who that character is and be able to care about his death. I don't know who Jazz was as a character in the movie. His death ment nothing to me.

Updated designs, that's fine too. Transformers has been updated in every series but at least for the most part some of a characters more recognizable features are still in the new designs. Not soo with the movie characters. Only Optimus Prime looks anything like what he should look like. That's only a minor detail with the designs though.

The major flaw in the designs is that from a distance they all look the same. Like a pile of walking scrap metal fighting another pile of walking scrap metal. All the fighting at the end of the movie, can you tell who's fighting who? I can't, not without squinting so hard my eyes fall out.

Now Spider-man the first movie was great I loved that movie. Yeah his origin was different and stuff but that's only a small part of it.

Spider-man 2, Doc Oct's character change was only a small part in me not likeing that movie. The major factor in my dislike for the movie was the fact that they tried to tell too much of a story in too short a time period. 3 did the same thing.

The first Spider-man was just his origin which even though they changed it still turned out great.

The sequills rather than each telling a single story tried to cram the entire Spider-man life history into them from Peter Parker getting married to Harry Osborn becomming a villian, and Spider-man looseing his power, and yadda yadda yadda. Every major event of Peter's life after the first movie happened all in about 4 hours.

The way they handled Peter looseing his powers was done verry well either. I've heard it had something to do with his emotions but that's the stupidest thing to tie to looseing your powers ever. Fan boy you gotta agree that's just stupid. Pluse I don't think that stupid reason was even exsplained verry well.

Anyway, getting to my point, you gotta read passed all the fan boy comments. They actully have verry little to do with how I form my opinions.

Saber Prime wrote:The sequills rather than each telling a single story tried to cram the entire Spider-man life history into them from Peter Parker getting married

None of the sequills featured Peter Parker getting married.

Saber Prime wrote:The way they handled Peter looseing his powers was done verry well either. I've heard it had something to do with his emotions but that's the stupidest thing to tie to looseing your powers ever.

It was pschyosematic over his self doubt at being a hero.And it happened in the comics once in a simular way.

And by the way the first time I read your post this is what I thought I read:

Saber Prime wrote:tried to cram the entire Spider-man life history into them from Peter Parker getting married to Harry Osborn

This had me laughing so hard I fell of my chair.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Saber Prime wrote:The sequills rather than each telling a single story tried to cram the entire Spider-man life history into them from Peter Parker getting married

None of the sequills featured Peter Parker getting married.

Saber Prime wrote:The way they handled Peter looseing his powers wasn't done verry well either. I've heard it had something to do with his emotions but that's the stupidest thing to tie to looseing your powers ever.

It was pschyosematic over his self doubt at being a hero.And it happened in the comics once in a simular way.

And by the way the first time I read your post this is what I thought I read:

Saber Prime wrote:tried to cram the entire Spider-man life history into them from Peter Parker getting married to Harry Osborn

This had me laughing so hard I fell of my chair.

I noticed a typo when reading my 2nd quote. Not blameing you for that just thought I'd point that out. I fixed it in this quote but I didn't go back into my original post to fix it. But I accidently wrote "was" where I ment to say "wasn't". Probly a fairly clear typo because "was" doesn't make any sence in that sentence but still I screwed up when I was typeing that.

Thoughs are supose to be seperate thoughts Peter getting married to as in to another plot that plot being Harry Osborn turning evil but that is really funny.

Oh and the movies did have Peter Parker getting married. The whole thing with Spider-man 3 was him getting married. (or possibly just getting engaged which is part of the whole getting married proccess anyway. I don't care to watch it again and find out.)

The main point being that the movies are trying to tell too many storys all at once. It's not really possible to tell all the storys and tell them as well as the comics or cartoon did if you're trying to cram 10 years of storys into 6 hours.

i love spiderman, its one of my favourite cartoons, comics, basically anything to do with it, however, i dont dislike the movie, but they do bore me a bit, and the first was by far the worst imho. They are so slow paced its unreal, and the guy that plays him drives me up the wall he's such a sap. The issue isnt trying to tell so many stories all at once, its the fact that none of the stories have any depth about them. I actually feel quite annoyed about how poor the spiderman films are, they couldve been so much better, but for me, the script is poor, and the 2 main actors just dont do it for me. (saying that, i still own them all on dvd, and will go and see the next one the second it comes out.)

i think change can be good for things like transformers, spiderman, xmen etc, otherwise its the same story over and over again, and while its nice to see your favourite issue or episode on the big screen or whatever, its better to see something entirely new, which will keep you guessing throughtout.

Saber Prime wrote:Thoughs are supose to be seperate thoughts Peter getting married to as in to another plot that plot being Harry Osborn turning evil but that is really funny.

I know.I figured that out the second time I read the post.Still didnt stop me from laughing my a$$ off.

Saber Prime wrote:Oh and the movies did have Peter Parker getting married. The whole thing with Spider-man 3 was him getting married. (or possibly just getting engaged which is part of the whole getting married proccess anyway. I don't care to watch it again and find out.)

Boy you must have really hated the film to not remember those details.Again he did not get married in Spiderman 3 nor did he get engaged.

He planed on giving her a ring but they had a fight just before giving it to her in a restarunt.MJ got pissed Peter introduced her to Gwen Stacey [the blonde] at dinner because he had earlyer kissed her at a photo opp.Then he was infected by the black suit.

They broke up and he dated Gwen Stacey [the blonde]

Saber Prime wrote:The main point being that the movies are trying to tell too many storys all at once. It's not really possible to tell all the storys and tell them as well as the comics or cartoon did if you're trying to cram 10 years of storys into 6 hours.

If were talking comics its more like 50 years but I know what your talking about.And I cant blame you for not wanting to watch it again.

I bought the DVD when it came out just so that I have all 3 but I havent even opened it yet.

I tossed a random number out there and didn't Peter get back with Marry Jane at the end of the movie?

Saber Prime wrote:I tossed a random number out there

What do you meen???

Saber Prime wrote:and didn't Peter get back with Marry Jane at the end of the movie?

It was hard to tell.She forgave him for hitting her and that was after both Peter and Harry saved her [Harry died doing so] but it was hard for me to tell if they were 100% back together.

I think they left it that way on perpous because C.Dunst [MJ] was not happy having to return for the 2nd and 3rd films and the Director figured if theres going to be a forth they may have to ether right her character out or re-cast her.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Saber Prime wrote:I tossed a random number out there

What do you meen???

Saber Prime wrote:and didn't Peter get back with Marry Jane at the end of the movie?

It was hard to tell.She forgave him for hitting her and that was after both Peter and Harry saved her [Harry died doing so] but it was hard for me to tell if they were 100% back together.

I think they left it that way on perpous because C.Dunst [MJ] was not happy having to return for the 2nd and 3rd films and the Director figured if theres going to be a forth they may have to ether right her character out or re-cast her.

Considering how bad thoughs two movies were I don't blame her for not wanting to be in them.

Of course considering she was willing to do all her own stunts and refused a stunt double in the third one I think whatever you heard about her might just be rumors. It's not likely anyone would be willing to do stunts for a movie that they didn't want to be in at all.

And to answer your first question, I was talking about my 10 years of Spider-man history cramed into 6 hours comment. The 6 hours part was an estimate but I wasn't sure how long Spider-man's story really was so the 10 years part of it was just a random number I wrote.

Saber Prime wrote:Considering how bad thoughs two movies were I don't blame her for not wanting to be in them.

Of course considering she was willing to do all her own stunts and refused a stunt double in the third one I think whatever you heard about her might just be rumors. It's not likely anyone would be willing to do stunts for a movie that they didn't want to be in at all.

I know that her bad aditude twards fans of the Spider fims its not all rumors.

Parts of all 3 movies were filmed in a few of my old neighborhoods and as a matter of fact the cemetery where they burried "Uncle Ben" and "Norman Osborn" in the film is where my father and grandmother are burried.And if you want to know thats the Cypress Hills Cemetery & Evergreen Cemetery which are connected and are on the border of Brooklyn and Queens NY.

So as a fan I went down to watch some of the filming and I can tell you her aditude grew worce witch each film.

With the first she just seemed anoide when fans aproched her and in filming of the second she was starting to get rude with people and at a special event durring the filming of the 3 rd film in "Forest Hills" she out right yelled at some people and was ignoring the request of people talking to her.

She just sat there stairing into space...it might have had to do with the event falling on her birthday but when they anounced "Happy Birthday" to her and brought out a cake made by fans she just looked at it , nodded and put it down right next to her with out ever taking a bite.She never said thank you out loud and she didnt even crack a smile.

All of this I saw with my own two eyes.No I wont presume to say that I understand the stress and presure of a holly wood actress but when fans make you a Bday cake the least you could do is taste it and say thanks.

Saber Prime wrote:And to answer your first question, I was talking about my 10 years of Spider-man history cramed into 6 hours comment. The 6 hours part was an estimate but I wasn't sure how long Spider-man's story really was so the 10 years part of it was just a random number I wrote.

Ok now I get it.

havent they both pulled out of the running for the movies now, i thought he was 'unable' to carry on being spiderman due to a bad back or something??

G1 is analogous to the original series of Star Trek. Some fans may prefer Next Gen, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, or Enterprise, but those who grew up with the original probably still like it best (I grew up with Next Gen). Even if you don't like the first series, it is still the start of the universe, and will always have its place. I know this has all been said before in different words, but everyone has their favorites. I, too, would enjoy a new series like Beast Wars, if it is done in similar style. These days, they are focusing on younger kids. Not that that's bad. I enjoyed the Armada/Energon/Cybertron cycle, and RID was funny! But something more serious with a great plot would be a good change. They would probably only do it if they were producing a little kids' show simultaneously, though.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Saber Prime wrote:Considering how bad thoughs two movies were I don't blame her for not wanting to be in them.

Of course considering she was willing to do all her own stunts and refused a stunt double in the third one I think whatever you heard about her might just be rumors. It's not likely anyone would be willing to do stunts for a movie that they didn't want to be in at all.

I know that her bad aditude twards fans of the Spider fims its not all rumors.

Parts of all 3 movies were filmed in a few of my old neighborhoods and as a matter of fact the cemetery where they burried "Uncle Ben" and "Norman Osborn" in the film is where my father and grandmother are burried.And if you want to know thats the Cypress Hills Cemetery & Evergreen Cemetery which are connected and are on the border of Brooklyn and Queens NY.

So as a fan I went down to watch some of the filming and I can tell you her aditude grew worce witch each film.

With the first she just seemed anoide when fans aproched her and in filming of the second she was starting to get rude with people and at a special event durring the filming of the 3 rd film in "Forest Hills" she out right yelled at some people and was ignoring the request of people talking to her.

She just sat there stairing into space...it might have had to do with the event falling on her birthday but when they anounced "Happy Birthday" to her and brought out a cake made by fans she just looked at it , nodded and put it down right next to her with out ever taking a bite.She never said thank you out loud and she didnt even crack a smile.

All of this I saw with my own two eyes.No I wont presume to say that I understand the stress and presure of a holly wood actress but when fans make you a Bday cake the least you could do is taste it and say thanks.

There's a big difference between "Not wanting to be in the movies" and "being rude to fans" There's alot of things that could be going on here but what it sounds like is fans were trying to speak to her durring filming and probly hounding her for autographs every moment she wasn't in front of the camera. This is not a good idea.

I'm actully amazed fans were able to get anywhere near her at all. Generally there's a barrior around the film location so fans can watch from a distance but they're not allowed to pass that barrior.

As a general rule if you ever run into a famous person two things you should never do is call them by the name of a character they played and act like a total idiot.

By "Act like a total idiot" I mean jumping up and down screaming "Oh my gawd it's <insert famous person's name here>, I can't belive it" and then ask them to autograph parts of your body or an endless list of objects with their picture on it.

On a movie set you gotta realize that when they're not in front of a camera they're on a break. If they end up spending all of their breaks talking to fans who are most likely going to be a bunch of crazy idiots they're probly not going to be happy. You should really only speak to someone on a movie set if they approch you, you don't go to them.

If you run into someone in a real life situation again, they'd rather not be hassled by every crazy fan in the grocery store. The calmer you are when you try to speak to them and if you can do it without attracting unwanted attention to them the happier they'll be.

I'm not really trying to tell you personally how to act around famous people I'm just trying to exsplain that most fans don't know any of this about how to act around them and will most likely act in a way that will make the famous person uncomfterble and/or angry.

What you described with C. Dunst sounds to me like she wasn't verry happy with the unwanted fan presence at varrious on location filming sights not that she wasn't happy about being in the movie like you said originally.

As for the whole birthday cake thing, there's like a milloin things that could have been going on through her head there as well non of which has anything to do with being an actress but rather just normal problems everyone has. For all we know maybe she was upset because her friends forgot her birthday and was just in shock that the only people who bothered to say happy birthday were all strangers to her.

Whatever was going on does not nessisarily mean that she wasn't happy with the movie. From all you just told me it just sounds like she wasn't happy with the fans or just plain wasn't happy. And at a cementary too, who would be happy celibrating their birthday with a bunch of dead people.

Some actresses allso won't break character even off camera and given the filming location if she's one who's like that any emotions she exspessed might not of even been her own but rather she was still in the character of Marry Jane.

I've worked with one actress who was like that. She was one of the white horses in Cinderella for a play and that's when I first realized she never broke character till she was out of costume. Saw her after the show and tried to say hi because I had just come to see the show wasn't working that one. She was still in the horse costume and wouldn't talk to me or anyone and her moviements weren't normal. She walked around like she did on stage for the horse. One of the other horses was out there as well, don't remember who it was but the other horse was talking to people and acting normal while Emily was staying in character.

Pottermus_Prime wrote:havent they both pulled out of the running for the movies now, i thought he was 'unable' to carry on being spiderman due to a bad back or something??

Its been said that Toby's back was injured before they started filming the 2nd Spiderman film but he still found a way to make 2 and 3 so my guess is that if they pay him enough he might be back.

Saber Prime wrote:There's a big difference between "Not wanting to be in the movies" and "being rude to fans" There's alot of things that could be going on here but what it sounds like is fans were trying to speak to her durring filming and probly hounding her for autographs every moment she wasn't in front of the camera. This is not a good idea.

I'm actully amazed fans were able to get anywhere near her at all. Generally there's a barrior around the film location so fans can watch from a distance but they're not allowed to pass that barrior.

The areas in question of NYC arent really set up to be effectly cut off by any barriors.Multiple homes and buissness'es clutter almost every square inch of the neighborhoods.

And the atea's I was refering to were closer to the trailers and not the filming site so no one was interupted durring filming.At least not for the short time I was standing there.

Saber Prime wrote:As a general rule if you ever run into a famous person two things you should never do is call them by the name of a character they played and act like a total idiot.

By "Act like a total idiot" I mean jumping up and down screaming "Oh my gawd it's <insert famous person's name here>, I can't belive it" and then ask them to autograph parts of your body or an endless list of objects with their picture on it.

On a movie set you gotta realize that when they're not in front of a camera they're on a break. If they end up spending all of their breaks talking to fans who are most likely going to be a bunch of crazy idiots they're probly not going to be happy. You should really only speak to someone on a movie set if they approch you, you don't go to them.

If you run into someone in a real life situation again, they'd rather not be hassled by every crazy fan in the grocery store. The calmer you are when you try to speak to them and if you can do it without attracting unwanted attention to them the happier they'll be.

I'm not really trying to tell you personally how to act around famous people I'm just trying to exsplain that most fans don't know any of this about how to act around them and will most likely act in a way that will make the famous person uncomfterble and/or angry.

The only person I tried to speak too [and did] was Stan "The Man" Lee.I wanted to see if he remembered me from the first time I met him or if he remembered me from my time at Marvel working as a intern.

I also spoke to other "comic" people that showed to watch the filming.

Saber Prime wrote:What you described with C. Dunst sounds to me like she wasn't verry happy with the unwanted fan presence at varrious on location filming sights not that she wasn't happy about being in the movie like you said originally.

Dunst seemed less enthusiastic durring interviews for the 3rd film then she did durring filming of the first film.

Dunst also kept a "production diary" durring filming of the first film that she allowed "Wizard" comic magazine to print exserts of.

When "Wizard" asked for the same premision to do the same for the 2nd film she egnored the request and for the 3rd film she out right said that she wasnt interested in keeping a production diary of her exuberance's on the 3rd film.

To me that smells of a actor thats not happy doing a film.But thats my opinion.

Saber Prime wrote:As for the whole birthday cake thing, there's like a milloin things that could have been going on through her head there as well non of which has anything to do with being an actress but rather just normal problems everyone has. For all we know maybe she was upset because her friends forgot her birthday and was just in shock that the only people who bothered to say happy birthday were all strangers to her.Whatever was going on does not nessisarily mean that she wasn't happy with the movie. From all you just told me it just sounds like she wasn't happy with the fans or just plain wasn't happy.

Well I felt it was messed up because those kids worked hard to make her that cake.Most of those kids were under 12 [at least they looked under 12] and I could see how sad most got afterwards.

Saber Prime wrote: And at a cementary too, who would be happy celibrating their birthday with a bunch of dead people.

Your getting the sequence of events mixed up.But that might be my fault.

The cementary scenes are from the first film and I wasnt there for any of that.

The birthday thing was just before the 3rd film was released and was a special event that was set up for the movie and just happened to fall on her birthday.

Sorry if I didnt make my post clearer.

Saber Prime wrote:Some actresses allso won't break character even off camera and given the filming location if she's one who's like that any emotions she exspessed might not of even been her own but rather she was still in the character of Marry Jane.

I've worked with one actress who was like that. She was one of the white horses in Cinderella for a play and that's when I first realized she never broke character till she was out of costume. Saw her after the show and tried to say hi because I had just come to see the show wasn't working that one. She was still in the horse costume and wouldn't talk to me or anyone and her moviements weren't normal. She walked around like she did on stage for the horse. One of the other horses was out there as well, don't remember who it was but the other horse was talking to people and acting normal while Emily was staying in character.[/quote]

I've thought of that but it seemed unlikely.The character of MJ was such a sweet heart and Dunst was being such a B#tZ*h.