The Energon Pub

Who thinks Ridley Scott should have a go at directing the sequal, because I still want Speilburg in and Micheal bay out

Skullgrin140 wrote:Who thinks Ridley Scott should have a go at directing the sequal, because I still want Speilburg in and Micheal bay out

Spielberg said Bay was born to do Transformers, why would he bother doing it now?

i think bryan singer could probably pull it off well.. x-men, x2, great comic/toy/cartoon type flick. but it's great. it has:
character development
jokes making fun of itself w/o piss jokes
intruiging story
very few / if any plot holes
superb special fx (especially for being several years old)
human interaction, but not too much
military government involvment - much more realistically displayed

not trying to comapre the tf with any xmen, just showing that these type of movies can be done, and done quite well when all parties involved are excited about a franchise, understand it, and are able to make it seam much more "real life" than it really is

Briggs, I know you love Bay and his crap movies...so I can't really relate to you.

Guys, Bay has had his chance to direct this movie and he has failed. Forget the money that has been made, people flocked to see this film based on the bots...not anything of Bay's. Bay should go do that comedy movie he wants to do and make way for another director.

Spielberg IN, Bay OUT

Conceptron wrote:Briggs, I know you love Bay and his crap movies...so I can't really relate to you.

Guys, Bay has had his chance to direct this movie and he has failed. Forget the money that has been made, people flocked to see this film based on the bots...not anything of Bay's. Bay should go do that comedy movie he wants to do and make way for another director.

Spielberg IN, Bay OUT

So Bay made his movie, it made money for the studios involved and hasbro. So where is this "failure" you speak of. You delude yourself into thinking that this movie was made for you as a fan, well it wasnt. It was made for the people en masse. Bay has the praise of the executive producer involved as well as the studio's but you're right just because some fanboy on a message board doesnt like him he should forego the opportunity to expand the world he has helped to create and line his wallet and the wallets of the studio a little bit more.

Lets not let him look at what worked and what didnt work and then go from there. You are absolutely right, I can't say it enough, as a matter of fact I think we should put you up for consideration to make the sequel because you know what we all want as a collective and are the only one capable of uniting us under one common goal.

Oh God, you're trolling over here, too?

It's what he doe's

we all know bay effing killed it(in the good sense). Anyone who isnt happy with this film just has a personal baydetta going. You didnt have to love, but you got to admit you liked it.

Baydetta. See conceptron, even when you use bay as a prefix in a statement that actually makes sense, it still sounds retarted.

Conceptron wrote:Briggs, I know you love Bay and his crap movies...so I can't really relate to you.

Guys, Bay has had his chance to direct this movie and he has failed. Forget the money that has been made, people flocked to see this film based on the bots...not anything of Bay's. Bay should go do that comedy movie he wants to do and make way for another director.

Spielberg IN, Bay OUT

Actually, if the numbers were based purely on the bots, then it would probably have been a mediocre showing at best. Bay made a balls to the wall, blow 'em up, summer blockbuster (which is what he's known for), that is what was advertised, and that is what drew the audiences. I don't see the failure in which you speak of.

cyclonus11 wrote:Oh God, you're trolling over here, too?

cmon, thats a lil harsh...i mean, Trolls deserve a lot better than to be compared to jack-off, negative internet nancys. Sure a few bad apples live under dark bridges and eat small goats and children, but let us not forget the colorful haired ones that live only to bring us luck and love with their bejeweled tummies. Please, when referring to internet douchebags, find another slang term and leave the noble Troll out of it!!!

Actually I don't pay attention to who directs movies, I didn't know he directed those previous movies until I heard he was doing Transformers. But feel free to assume whatever need to.

You don't need to relate to me. I am open minded about every aspect of Transformers that has popped up in the past 20 years, you, on the other hand, are not, and refuse to even allow yourself to understand why something was made the way it was.

Man, it's embarassing to see you spout yourself off on here. "Guys, Bay failed".

Not sure how it is where you are from, but making lots of cash in a money making business doesn't really constitute as a failure. Perhaps it was a failure to you, but that doesnt really mean anything to anyone.

Now, my $30 for movie tickets and a couple hundred dollars worth of TF movie merch has a bit more of a punch then your silly uneducated, close minded opinion.

No, you can't relate to me.

P.S. I would LOVE to meet you in person.

On another note, so many people post logical, conceptron smashing replies, 10x more effective then mine, and he doesn't reply to them, because he doesn't know how to.

It's like he's sitting there thinking "Ok, they made a valid point, but I'm not going to reply to it because I won't look like the Internet bad ass I think I am"

Guys, the fact that you can even BEGIN to defend this movie is very scary. Just look at what PROFESSIONAL CRITICS have said AGAINST this movie. They raise sensible points that you should take note of. A dumb, loud movie= rubbish. No two ways about it.

Who cares what critics think? Look at what users are rating the film. B+ to A- across the board. That's the rating that matters.

I have yet to meet a person (in real life) who did not absolutely love it. To be honest, I have no idea how anyone could possibly hate this film. They must either have no soul, or be Decepticon spies.

Decepticons...

Conceptron wrote:Guys, the fact that you can even BEGIN to defend this movie is very scary. Just look at what PROFESSIONAL CRITICS have said AGAINST this movie. They raise sensible points that you should take note of. A dumb, loud movie= rubbish. No two ways about it.

Sorry, wrong again, over and over. Always wrong, everything you post is your opinion in whcih you try to insinuate is the opinion of everyone else.

Sorry buddy, professional critics don't matter, its us "lowly non fans" and normal folk who go pay to see the movie that actually matter. Hence why, oh, say a critic says a movie sucks, yet it still brings in the dough and people like it. But I guess none of that matters, if the professional critics say it sucks, right?

Conceptron wrote:Guys, the fact that you can even BEGIN to defend this movie is very scary. Just look at what PROFESSIONAL CRITICS have said AGAINST this movie. They raise sensible points that you should take note of. A dumb, loud movie= rubbish. No two ways about it.

Oh yes the professional critics. Everyone thinks they are a professional critic. I would rather have regular people tell me what they thought as well as forming my own opinion. Why can't you respond to the questions raised to you? Are you conveiniently avoiding them bacause we do not share you prejudice? You are obviously in the minority so far when it comes to this particular topic.

Robinson wrote: Why can't you respond to the questions raised to you? Are you conveiniently avoiding them bacause we do not share you prejudice?

This is his M.O. This was, he just keeps thinking he is right. If he doesn't read it, he isn't proven wrong. Hence why most of his posts are either..

A) THread starters, then dont see him for awhile.
B) Replies don't actually reply to anything said to him, just re-hashed version of his previous post.

I am expecting in the future, to see Michael's Bay blog with a post from Bay,"Guys, I'm Conceptron".

You guys want to talk about the money it's made? Ok, it's something called ADVERTISING and JULY 4TH

Also, all because lots of people say its good, does not make it an objectively good movie. Lots of people loved Armageddon but that film was atrocious. Money don't mean anything...Shawshank Redemption hardly made any money but is considered one of the best films ever made...critically and by regular folk.

So, at the end of the day, you need to properly analyse Bayformers for what it is...a very bad film.

Sorry, but it's the truth. The film will be forgotten about very quickly.

Chaoslock wrote:
Spielberg read only the first part of the book? The second half is so, that you won't recognize it! War of the Worlds? The only thing common with the book are the tripods, nothing else. The aliens, the invasion, the originations, places, nothing.

Hot damn, you've really got me PO'd again! I can't believe that they would so totally screw up the form of the original martians, which was grotesque and horrid, bizarre and nauseating. The concept of an entire, bear-sized head like oily leather has been emblazoned in my mind like forever, ever since I first saw the illustrations in a Moby Dick Illustrated version of WOTW. Instead they had to come up with a totally new alien that didn't even hint at what HG Wells described.

By the way if anyone has a picture of that version of the Martians and can send me a scan I'd be EXCEEDINGLY grateful. I can't find my Moby Illustrated Book version of it at all.

Conceptron wrote:You guys want to talk about the money it's made? Ok, it's something called ADVERTISING and JULY 4TH

Also, all because lots of people say its good, does not make it an objectively good movie. Lots of people loved Armageddon but that film was atrocious. Money don't mean anything...Shawshank Redemption hardly made any money but is considered one of the best films ever made...critically and by regular folk.

So, at the end of the day, you need to properly analyse Bayformers for what it is...a very bad film.

Sorry, but it's the truth. The film will be forgotten about very quickly.

You talk about objectivity and yet you are the most subjective of the bunch. We all know that money doenst equal good. But public opinion (much like what you are using with your inclusion of shawshank redemption) helps to determine what is deemed "good or not". Also take a look at this "July 4th" only really means something to us americans, it really means squat to the rest of the world and it has made just as much if not more in those other countries, so that kinda kills you theory on that.

And for the final time none of us have seen a movie called "Bayformers" we watched "Transfomrers" and that is what this website is discussing.

Robinson wrote:

Conceptron wrote:You guys want to talk about the money it's made? Ok, it's something called ADVERTISING and JULY 4TH

Also, all because lots of people say its good, does not make it an objectively good movie. Lots of people loved Armageddon but that film was atrocious. Money don't mean anything...Shawshank Redemption hardly made any money but is considered one of the best films ever made...critically and by regular folk.

So, at the end of the day, you need to properly analyse Bayformers for what it is...a very bad film.

Sorry, but it's the truth. The film will be forgotten about very quickly.

You talk about objectivity and yet you are the most subjective of the bunch. We all know that money doenst equal good. But public opinion (much like what you are using with your inclusion of shawshank redemption) helps to determine what is deemed "good or not". Also take a look at this "July 4th" only really means something to us americans, it really means squat to the rest of the world and it has made just as much if not more in those other countries, so that kinda kills you theory on that.

And for the final time none of us have seen a movie called "Bayformers" we watched "Transfomrers" and that is what this website is discussing.

It's called Bayformers and you need to look at public opinion AND the view of professionals.

Conceptron wrote:

Robinson wrote:

Conceptron wrote:You guys want to talk about the money it's made? Ok, it's something called ADVERTISING and JULY 4TH

Also, all because lots of people say its good, does not make it an objectively good movie. Lots of people loved Armageddon but that film was atrocious. Money don't mean anything...Shawshank Redemption hardly made any money but is considered one of the best films ever made...critically and by regular folk.

So, at the end of the day, you need to properly analyse Bayformers for what it is...a very bad film.

Sorry, but it's the truth. The film will be forgotten about very quickly.

You talk about objectivity and yet you are the most subjective of the bunch. We all know that money doenst equal good. But public opinion (much like what you are using with your inclusion of shawshank redemption) helps to determine what is deemed "good or not". Also take a look at this "July 4th" only really means something to us americans, it really means squat to the rest of the world and it has made just as much if not more in those other countries, so that kinda kills you theory on that.

And for the final time none of us have seen a movie called "Bayformers" we watched "Transfomrers" and that is what this website is discussing.

It's called Bayformers and you need to look at public opinion AND the view of professionals.

Why? Do the "professional critics" dictate to me what I like and won't like? Do they tell me what my opinions are?

NO!!!

And sorry but there is no such movie called "Bayformers" It is and always will be "Transformers".

I don't want to go this route but you seriously need to get your head out of your ass and stop behaving like a little kid when it comes to this movie. There are those that like it, those that don't, those that praise Bay as the new messiah. Who the hell do you think you are that you can tell people that there opinion is wrong simply because you do not like the movie?

I can respect your opinion for not digging the movie or whatever. But the argument that Bay killed the movie because of a "crappy plot" is hardly applicable.

Instead of wasting your time with countless tired bullshit threads about "bayformers" you might want to open up discussion about who should write the script this time around instead...

We had someone like this when Armada came out.

He came on saying Armada sucked, and all that. People, Mods included, tried to reason that they liked it.

He called them retarded for liking Armada.

Conceptron is exactly the same. We try to reason that we like it, and he insults us openly. At the same time, he's not very good at it. (Just like the Anti-Armada guy.)

You know, I was going to provide facts in this argument, but changed my mind because there's no point in debating someone like this. My only recommendation is DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.