The Energon Pub

Blackout wrote:

Riotflea wrote:

Autobobby1 wrote:

Robinson wrote:

Riotflea wrote:If you were allergic to peanuts and someone tried to give you a peanut butter sandwich on the basis that by the time they were done working on it, it'd taste GREAT... it wouldn't matter how much jelly (extreme CGI), marshmallow topping (explosions) or high quality bread (a handful of tossed in tips of the hat to G1) were added... you'd STILL be in physical harm's way from the peanut butter itself (cheesy acting, ass designs, inadequate character airtime, cliche humor).

And then the food preparer would have the nuts to ask you to pay for it, just to see if you like it first?

And to make things more preposterous, you hear him working in the kitchen, telling someone, "LOL, I'm gonna' spit in it lol!" (Bay's G1 comments definitely jive on that one).

THat has got to be the most hair brained analogy I have ever read.

Ditto. It tried to make sense, but didn't. Even if you hated the movie, you weren't harmed, just annoyed. And let's face it, G1 sucked, and Michael Bay has the right to voice his opinion.

Carpal tunnel syndrome.

A wrist problem?

Robinson wrote:

Riotflea wrote:If you were allergic to peanuts and someone tried to give you a peanut butter sandwich on the basis that by the time they were done working on it, it'd taste GREAT... it wouldn't matter how much jelly (extreme CGI), marshmallow topping (explosions) or high quality bread (a handful of tossed in tips of the hat to G1) were added... you'd STILL be in physical harm's way from the peanut butter itself (cheesy acting, ass designs, inadequate character airtime, cliche humor).

And then the food preparer would have the nuts to ask you to pay for it, just to see if you like it first?

And to make things more preposterous, you hear him working in the kitchen, telling someone, "LOL, I'm gonna' spit in it lol!" (Bay's G1 comments definitely jive on that one).

THat has got to be the most hair brained analogy I have ever read.

Buttz wrote:I know it's the summer and movies don't stay at the top for very long during the summer, but Transformers has a lot of things going against it. First of all, the novelty has worn off. Everyone who wanted to go see giant robots fighting has already gone and done so. And let's face it, that turned out to be the only thing the movie has going for it. Which brings me to my second point: what keeps a movie afloat after its opening weekend is repeat viewings, and what keeps people coming back is having an emotional connection to the characters. Star Wars, Titanic, Lord of The Rings, all of these, despite being heavy on the effects, had characters with genuine human conflicts, passions, emotions, etc. Establishing a connection with the one-dimensional archetypes in Transformers is not possible. They are, at best, forgettable.

So we've seen the robots, and we don't care much for the humans. Then we have the luke-warm reviews. Which, had they been favorable, might have convinced the fence-sitters to go watch it, but will most likely encourage them to go watch a different summer action flick instead, like Die Hard. These reviews are also a reflection of the bad word of mouth this movie has been getting. While the average joe may not know or care what the critics are saying, his friends' opinion may be enough to sway him one way or the other.

And finally, and possibly worst of all, you have Harry Potter coming out next week. Aimed at roughly the same target audience, it will severely cut into Transformers' second week profits. I'm sorry to say this, but I seriously doubt Transformers will pass the $200 million mark domestically.

Buttz wrote:I know it's the summer and movies don't stay at the top for very long during the summer, but Transformers has a lot of things going against it. First of all, the novelty has worn off. Everyone who wanted to go see giant robots fighting has already gone and done so. And let's face it, that turned out to be the only thing the movie has going for it. Which brings me to my second point: what keeps a movie afloat after its opening weekend is repeat viewings, and what keeps people coming back is having an emotional connection to the characters. Star Wars, Titanic, Lord of The Rings, all of these, despite being heavy on the effects, had characters with genuine human conflicts, passions, emotions, etc. Establishing a connection with the one-dimensional archetypes in Transformers is not possible. They are, at best, forgettable.

So we've seen the robots, and we don't care much for the humans. Then we have the luke-warm reviews. Which, had they been favorable, might have convinced the fence-sitters to go watch it, but will most likely encourage them to go watch a different summer action flick instead, like Die Hard. These reviews are also a reflection of the bad word of mouth this movie has been getting. While the average joe may not know or care what the critics are saying, his friends' opinion may be enough to sway him one way or the other.

And finally, and possibly worst of all, you have Harry Potter coming out next week. Aimed at roughly the same target audience, it will severely cut into Transformers' second week profits. I'm sorry to say this, but I seriously doubt Transformers will pass the $200 million mark domestically.

decepticonjon wrote:

Robinson wrote:

Riotflea wrote:If you were allergic to peanuts and someone tried to give you a peanut butter sandwich on the basis that by the time they were done working on it, it'd taste GREAT... it wouldn't matter how much jelly (extreme CGI), marshmallow topping (explosions) or high quality bread (a handful of tossed in tips of the hat to G1) were added... you'd STILL be in physical harm's way from the peanut butter itself (cheesy acting, ass designs, inadequate character airtime, cliche humor).

And then the food preparer would have the nuts to ask you to pay for it, just to see if you like it first?

And to make things more preposterous, you hear him working in the kitchen, telling someone, "LOL, I'm gonna' spit in it lol!" (Bay's G1 comments definitely jive on that one).

THat has got to be the most hair brained analogy I have ever read.

it may be hairbrained, but i like it! *thumbs up*
that took more thought an effort than a 2 1/2 hour movie.. wowee zowee

Autobot032 wrote:

Blackout wrote:

Riotflea wrote:
Carpal tunnel syndrome.

A wrist problem?

Well, it's possible, he *IS* being a jerk off...

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it, but of all the possible ways to dreate an analogy he chose peanut oil Shocked

Blackout wrote:Fair enough, but I don't get the reference to a disorder of the wrist.