by Spark Light » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:36 pm
Wow.
Here's my story, I'm in the UK, waiting for the movie to come out, so I thought I'd check back on some of the boards to see general opinion.
I wanted to gauge how people were feeling about the designs, especially, since I was very critical of them. Instead I feel like gouging things.
I've quite frankly, never read more bullshit regarding any Pseudo Science or Movie Updating than in this thread.
I can't stand this "Oh but I AM a G1 fan, even bigger than you! But let's face it, Ironhide, Bumblebee, Prime, Megatron, Jazz's alt modes sucked" talk one bit.
I would say I'm not saying anyone can't like or love the movie, like some of you are pressuring others to like it, but I will challenge you saying these designs are the ONLY ones that could work as a fact, and the general ridiculous air of optimism towards the movie, and hatred towards it's detractors. But, you'll only hear what you want anyway.
I don't understand why the people who love this movie cannot just allow the people who do not their opinion. I do not understand why the moderation staff are so lax on comments like "Geewunner" which are being used in the same way "Fag" or "Nigger" would be. It's immensely disrespectful to make such a mockery of someone purely because of their views on what their hobby should be.
If you can do one thing for me, can you PLEASE cut this out? I'm not going to take any of your arguments seriously as long as you're using them. I would be very interesting in debating, in a serious matter, what redesigns would have worked best on the big screen, but not if you're going to be inherently childish and insulting.
This goes double for the "I'm SICK of people having [opposing opinion x]". That's something I'm certainly quite bemused has not been moderated in any fashion.
As for comments on the arguments themselves, I will say that the "G1 designs wouldn't work, they were good for cartoon but not Live Action" fails on a conceptual level. Not only do you have no proof whatsoever(when shown examples of what could be, you say it looks like a cartoon with no real reasoning to back it - though this is expected, you have said that any attempt to bring G1 designs to the big screen would be cartoonish, are you really going to go back on your opinion? No.) you're also not thinking what you're saying through at all.
G1 would not have been popular unless something resembling those designs could look feasible in real life. G1 is not some art-deco or trippy Wonderland setting - it was set in a version of our Real World, too.
It sickens me to see people post beautiful images of G1 Prime saying "Do you seriously believe this could work in real life?" - trying to goad people into changing their opinion, feeling ridiculous.
That image you posted is a cartoon. It is NOT an instance of that particulat design made from real materials with real proportions - there is a massive distance. Some people cannot distinguish between art-style, and designs - the controversy over the TF Animated "Designs" too shows this, it's the bendy artstyle that looks questionable, not the designs themselves.
TF movie is not animated, does not use any weird Sin City like attempts to bring stylism into the real world, it is a "photo-real" film. Thusly, it makes no sense to "Stylise" the bots.
The G1 characters HAD to work, because otherwise, they would not be popular. If kids could not imagine them, if adults could not then they would not have had the following they did prior to the reveal of the movie aesthetic, they would NOT have been successful, they would have been ridiculous *despite* being a cartoon.
If you're not an imaginative person, I can see how you MIGHT have difficulty seeing the G1 designs tweaked for realistic 3D. And considering it's a Popcorn flick, it's not a massive leap to. Of course, very smart and creative people migth like it anyway for different reasons. But they're generally not the ones with the stupid arguments.
Most G1 bots were basically re-arranged vehicles. This cannot be cartoony, as vehicles are not cartoonyunless you do not have a decent enough tech level to successfully render cars, in which case overcomplicating them to this level makes sense - but it's not the case here. The Citreon Transformer, the Ice skating one anyway, is done on a relatively small budget, but still looks good. The way it moves and reacts to the light is what makes it look slightly fake - this would change with more money.
Do any of you understand the psychological point I'm trying to make here? A cartoon or comic is generally a representation of something that could occur in our reality - unless it's purposely surrealistic, which Transformers was not(as it was successful in a real world setting). To say that what it represents could not happen, or would look ridiculous when few thought that prior to the release of the designs is laughable.
The G1 designs COULD work, absolutely. Not the same aesthetic - that has to be changed. Jazz, especially if you tidied up some of the revealed internals, is a GREAT example of what COULD have been for the rest of the bots. The own movie you're defending defeats itself!
Yes I would like Ironhide to be a Minivan. Yes I would like Ratchet to be an Ambluence. Why? Because that's what they were. G1 is not the be all and end all of Transformers, but it's still THE Transformers, in title and in consideration to the general public, and even Hasbro who keep coming back to it far far more than any of the other generations.
That, and it'd be good to get high-detail Ironhide and Ratchet that looked like their G1 counterparts.
I would not mind Ironhide being a pickup and Ratchet being a Hummer - they're reasonable choices. Not only that, they NEEDED redesigns as they were quite bland, the only recognisable features being windshield chests, colour and their heads.
Does that excuse the redesigns changing everything? No, it doesn't! Why do they need new designs? We have NEVER seen high detail, realistic interpretations of Ironhide and Ratchet - why do we have to have these new guys in their place? Why couldn't they be actual new characters with new names? If a character has the same name and role as the original, it is MEANT to be that character. Ironhide and Ratchet are also very specific names, unlike Frenzy or Inferno - it's the difference between "Guybrush Threepwood" and "Jake". So of course using specific names(like Starscream) and roles(like snotty second in command jet) are going to upset people, if their personalities and/or designs go against the originals.
Hollywood execs are NOT the guys you turn to, to provide imaginative new takes to revitalise a franchise.
Why couldn't Ironhide have been red, Ratchet white? Both with more recognisable heads? Maybe you like their new designs - but couldn't these have been Expanded Universe new characters instead?
This is meant to be a movie of the Transformers - it should be a representation of what TFs are, not some new random stuff - you need new series and comic books for that, because again, Hollywood guys aren't creative, and straying from the source material will always result in tears(In TF's case, it seems to be the split of the fanbase from this thread, rather than bad critical success, though it didn't perform well in that regard either).
G1 is by far the generation with the most mainstream penetration, respect, and source material in general - you have 90 eps of a cartoon, about 40 of an anime, hundreds of comics - it would be madness for any movie not to be dominated by G1. It's sad that they didn't use more stories from the comic - even if the plot isn't far off from what could be a TF plot, there's still so much better material there. Not to mention with THAT much material - "It doesn't need a good plot to be awesome" doesn't work - it's based on something with hundreds of comics and episodes in the first iteration alone - do you really think you're going to cover enough of that by having barely any plot?
I am tired, reading through this thread, of all the FAN hating. Like being a fanboy is the worst thing in the world. Don't you realise that fans are MEANT to get upset by change?
What's all this "open-mindedness" rubbish?
If someone is a fan of something, they have no inherent reason to remain a fan. If Spider-man starts to become more of a Private Dick than a Superhero, I have no inherent reason to keep reading. I might like the new direction, I might not.
This is why the "Open mindedness" argument is bullshit - but it's why so many people claim to love the movie, nobody wants to be immature, to be a hater.
And before you nark on me for claiming that many people don't hold their own opinion - you are aware of what Hype IS aren't you? The whole point of it is to cause this kind of almost unthinking worship of the movie. So many people are claiming they thought this was the only way - but where are the threads? Where are the sketches? They don't exist. It's more like they had an "inkling" they're exagerrating to further their current argument.
So much here is a priori reasoning. I'm sure I'll get people coming up with whole NEW reasons - but don't bother. I've seen what you said up until the point which I invalidated them - if I'm right, your original reasons for having that position are wrong, if you find new ones, you're finding them merely for the sake of assuming that position, no doubt to stick it to the "Haters".
The first sign of a poorly defended opinion is when someone says "how dare you challenge my opinion with your supposed "Evidence", a few pages after calling someone a hater, or this "Geewunner" for their opinion.
Sometimes opinions can be wrong. The American way of doing things, as well as many other countries, seems to be to respect opinions more than evidence. This is why Fundamentalism exists. This is why creationism exists.
However - this does NOT give you the right to be a bastard to someone even if you do have evidence that these designs are the only way in which the movie would work, which you don't, and wouldn't unless there was a big enough sample space of different styled TF renders to judge from, which there isn't currently and probably never will be.
If you can't accept what I'm saying, then PLEASE, at least accept other people's opinions and outlook will differ. There is nothing wrong with being a "hater", it is only natural to question, and the minute someone tries to make out your moaning to be a bad thing - it's an attempt at thought control. Ignore them. Nobody should have the right to stop someone questioning something, if the person questioning has any decent basis for an argument.
Remember - Transformers is all about change, but also about changing back a few minutes after.
Last edited by Spark Light on Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
)
[ Click to attempt signal recovery... ]
