The Energon Pub

by **roy_flagg00** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:50 pm

dont get me started on you canadians wit your bacon, mayo on fries, and your efficient healthcare, and "i don't know what your talkin aboot"
:lol:

you think your better than me with your metric system buddy, well your not

by **Ballistic90** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:56 pm

Spark Light wrote:
I'm tired of threads like this one where everyone tries to get their opinion across to someone who doesn't agree with it.

Um, you do realise you just described "A Debate", right? Opinions shouldn't be held inherently sacred - they are very often faulty. But you're right in that this is madness, it doesn't excuse people to be dicks.

You know, it's amazing that you can say such stupid thingws when the movie itself is readily available to prove you wrong. The cars still have proper mechanics to work, as they've shown Ssm OPENING THE HOOD TO THE CAR. Not to mention SITTING in the car. Yes, that is probably not the correct engine for a '76 Chevy Camero, BUT it's the same type of engine AND in the correct place. It's not much of a disguise if someone can open the hood and immediately tell that it's not the right kind of car at all. Once again, the engine compartment is incredibly tiny in a VW Bettle, and can't really fit much of an engine. In fact, the engine is quite often being described as being "Not much more powerful than a lawnmower". This has LITTLE to do with the cost of the engine, and all to do with the size of the engine compartment. You can't fit anything besides the exact same type of engine that came with that car.

It's impossible for all those to be working vehicle internals as well as work robot internals both at the same time, without some kind of supertransformation/morphing/nanotech. Not to mention, they also only have to have the illusion of an engine, which could be achieved through holograms that only stay online while the hood is open(and the hood can automatically close after a set amount of time) , or hell, just don't have the hood open. Or even have them look inside and think "What the hell is that?"

Alternators already have decent interiors, and show that there may be room for stuff "Under the hood" too(if you had it on the back of the arms, for instance).

Bumblebee appears to fold out more than he ought to - he looks "solid" but I don't think it would be possible, in real life, under any tech level that could be applicable to the bots as they were presented, to have all those real working parts collapse so much. I understand that they had to expand the bots so the Deceps didn't tower over them - this is fine. But it's still not very realistic if you're saying that's okay and not some limited morphing/mass-shifting(which Frenzy's head does, by the way, I hear), and proves quite a few things.

TFs were never meant to be full on disguised up close, because they were never "meant" to find themselves in that situation. The movie bots have an extra layer of disguise which is kind of cool on one hand, but also feels like cheating on the other.

Your insistance that TFs still have to conform to the limits of their car is idiotic - again, those CANNOT be the actual real, working parts, without some kind of supertransformation and if it DOES have that, it counters other parts of your argument. You're fighting a loose/loose, here.

What other parts of my argument? They have to conform to size as well as certain characteristics of the vehicles they are in. Otherwise you'd see the autobots flying... much like they did in the cartoon. It wouldn't have a lot to do with how strong they are in robot mode, but it would limit their size one way or the other. And Frenzy breaks every rule they seem to put into the movie. No one could possible make me believe that thing turns into a CD player.

The engine could power the vehicle mode, and there are some (albeit small) evidence of it being possible or likely. Bumblebee can't talk, or make any noises outside of his car radio. And yet, he sounds exactly like a car should in his alternate form. I find it unlikely that he would have recorded all the possible noises a car makes. Either the engine is a huge noisemaker, or it has some significance to the car mode. Otherwise, you'd see them going at impossible speeds.

You want more? Ok. Have you ever seen a rescue vehicle that looked like the ones used in the original cartoons? No. I've never seen ones that looked like those odd vans. Themost common ones have a similar design to Ratchet, being the large box-like back and a typical pick-up like front. Using a Hummer for this is something I've never cared to think about because I don't like Hummers. Another thing that I think is incredibly stupid is the fact that you're forgetting that they got these vehicles STOCK from GM. Why is Ratchet a yellow Hummer-Ambulance? BECAUSE THEY HAD ONE TO GIVE THEM. Rescue vehicles are NOT forced to be red and white. They can be decided by the operators. Near me, there are some fire engines that are yellow. I've seen odd colored ambulances before, and I'm baffled why you think it's some huge damn deal that ruins the movie.

"****, Ratchet's yellow. Might as well go home guys, because that just lost us the Allspark. Way to go, Ratchet."

None of that matters; what matters is that Ratchet COULD have been a colour set that was more pleasing to more people, and he wasn't. It doesn't matter if there are puke yellow/green rescure vehicles, or if they're the most common - nobody's going to care, if they see a rescue vehicle that's a hummer or a van-type vehicle, they won't ask questions.

You're just rambling now, and proving you'll defend something for the sake of it instead of for a good reason.

I'm not rambling. Something was posted about Ratchet's design and color, so I REPLLIED. How is that rambling?

News Credits: 1 · by **Bottom Out** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:07 pm

Ballistic90 wrote:
Bottom Out wrote:
Predaprince wrote:
Bottom Out wrote:the engine inside bumble bee is just there for looks, it doesnt actually power bumblebee at all

Was that stated in the prequel or something?

Just curious.

nah but, i never seen him, or any of the other bots stop and get gas

Then why would Bumblebee choose to have the engine so new and 'pimped out'? Why wouldn't he have left it in the same decrepit state as the rest of his form?

when bumblebee scanned his alt form, the car he scanned most likely was a "sleeper". not sure if your into streetracing or not, but a sleeper is a car that looks like ****, but has major work done under the hood....a lot of old cars like that have really nice and powerful engines in them..even though they look like total crap on the outside

by **Ballistic90** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:11 pm

Bottom Out wrote:
Ballistic90 wrote:
Bottom Out wrote:
Predaprince wrote:
Bottom Out wrote:the engine inside bumble bee is just there for looks, it doesnt actually power bumblebee at all

Was that stated in the prequel or something?

Just curious.

nah but, i never seen him, or any of the other bots stop and get gas

Then why would Bumblebee choose to have the engine so new and 'pimped out'? Why wouldn't he have left it in the same decrepit state as the rest of his form?

when bumblebee scanned his alt form, the car he scanned most likely was a "sleeper". not sure if your into streetracing or not, but a sleeper is a car that looks like ****, but has major work done under the hood....a lot of old cars like that have really nice and powerful engines in them..even though they look like total crap on the outside

Well, the video game wasn't really canon, but the developers stated that at the very least the origin of Bumblebee's alt mode was implied to be regardless. He actually scanned a car at the dump.

News Credits: 1 · by **Bottom Out** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:18 pm

prequel comics show him scanning a car drive by on the highway to get away from the s7 agents..thats what im going by

by **babylon queen** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:24 pm

Computer animation would have helped.

by **homelessjunkeon** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:22 pm

Ballistic90 wrote:
homelessjunkeon wrote:
Autobobby1 wrote:So you're saying that G1 is realistic because they have human faces and regular hands and that the movie looks cartoonish because it looks different? Wow, you sure are a Geewunner. I am SICK of people like you who don't like the movie because of the designs.

Translation:
"HAI GUYZ I DDUNT REED DIS FRED, SPESHULLY NOT TEH PERTS WERE PPL SED DEY DDIUNT WONT A G1 MOVEH, BURT INSTED KWESHTUNED TEH RELISEM OF TEH NU DESINES, SO IMMA JUST HURL M'SELF IN AND FLAEM PPL FOR BEEN G-WUINNERz!!!111DURDURDUR"

So instead of attempting to argue, you act like a total jackass? Yeah, THAT will make people see things your way.

No, I pointed out someone else's jack-assery to shame them into reading a thread before making a stupid post that betrays a willful ignorance of the discussion, and serves only to flame other people for opinions that they don't even hold.

by **Spark Light** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:57 pm

Ballistic90, what you said applies EXACTLY to Autobobby's post. Both homelessjunkeon and Autobobby's posts were insulting, but Autobobby was the only one who expressed a complete lack of respect to the opposing viewpoint and those who hold it. Not only that, homelessjunkeon's was an understandable response - Autobobby's was unprovoked, not to mention his post is nothing but a strawman, why should he attempt to argue against such a blatant misrepresentation of his argument?

So why then, with all the odds stacked against it, do you pick on Homelessjunkeon?

You're biased as hell and I have no further reason to respect any of your opinions on this matter. Apologise to Junkeon or I suspect neither of us will bother with your folly any longer. This is absurd behaviour, and you and others have to learn that it's not acceptable, since the mods will not cite specifically.

by **blahbla** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:33 am

are you guys really trying to apply logic, and real world ideals of physics to transforming robots.....

its a freakin' movie.

some of you need to go back to the never ending "which captain would win in a fight, kirk or picard" because it seems the transformers are way above your ability to just sit back and enjoy.

THEY ARE NOT REAL, THEY ARE SPECIAL EFFECTS.

by **Riotflea** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:46 am

some of you need to go back to the never ending "which captain would win in a fight, kirk or picard" because it seems the transformers are way above your ability to just sit back and enjoy.

THEY ARE NOT REAL, THEY ARE SPECIAL EFFECTS.

Why... why... why didn't WE see this before as well?
YOU sir, are a VISIONARY.

EVERYONE... sage "blahbla" has brought to us a way of life that had previously gone unseen!
Let us all follow Him through the gates of gold, to the paradise of fools.
Lowered standards for all!
Oh, blissful, blissful mediocrity!
Oh, sweet, sweet milk squirted from the teats of cliche' repetition!

Praise be blahbla! Smartererest of us all!

by **roy_flagg00** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:20 am

I just want to describe somethiing that happened to me.
I was speaking about the movie with a fellow fan, and he said that he loved the movie. I said that I thought it was not that great and that I did not like the designs too much. He immediiatley went to the bag and claimed that, "you are a real g1 fan, huh?"
I had said nothing previously about g1.
the guy is cool, not an a-hole, but it is funny that that was his first impulse given no evidence.
my point is that this thread really exhibits how those who like the movie can't take the fact that there is a pretty sizable portion of the fan base that did not like the designs in the movie.
they try to stiffle debate by starting threads saying that "haters should go away", or complaining to site monitors when we voice our opinion in a manner they don't like.
This movie was big because of initial interest and fan boy obsession. The second movie is not going to have the same draw because the regular people will say "I saw that already, I'm bored".
some people like style some people like substance, face it.
Don't tell me I can't argue my point though, facist.

by **Riotflea** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:12 am

they try to stiffle debate by starting threads saying that "haters should go away", or complaining to site monitors when we voice our opinion in a manner they don't like.

Luckily, on seibertron here, there doesn't seem to be much repercussion from honestly speaking your mind.
Hell, it was the site administrator standing up to Don Murphy's rudeness that made me register an account to begin with.
No walking on eggshells here. : )

This movie was big because of initial interest and fan boy obsession. The second movie is not going to have the same draw because the regular people will say "I saw that already, I'm bored".

Totally. I knew THIS movie would kill, due to the media barrage of advertising and the fact a "robot" movie was looong overdue. (Robot Jox just didn't cover it lol).
But the lack of real substance in this movie?- I don't know if the numbers will be anywhere close a second time.

some people like style some people like substance, face it.

I love how one guy said we were "grasping at straws"... because we're able to give a comprehensive list detailing everything that was not cool with the movie?
Like "This movie ROCKED!" tells a story as to it's reason. >__<

One guy I spoke of the movie with decided to see it anyway.
He came back confused, asking (again) why I didn't like it.
Instead, I just asked, "No, why did you like it?"

He said, after waaaay too long a pause, "Big robots?"
"What else?"
"Um... his parents were funny".
"Like the kid in American Pie's parents?"
"...ok, it kinda' sucked but there WERE big robots".

I then proceeded to slap him till he cried nonotreally.

That doesn't scream sequel success to me, but then again, even X-Men managed to get a 3rd movie.

by **Auto Bot** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:03 am

I think the new designs worked for the autobots. Although they could have made them a little bit more of a solid look. Like putting obvious car parts and colors as part of the robot body. It's really fun to see a fender on the shoulder, or the rear glass or bumper on the legs, or wheels on the arms or legs... It's what makes them Transformers. It gets the gears in your head spinning, imagining which part goes where when they transform. Also helps identify the characters. Especially in fast action sequences. (By the way, the movie autobot toys looks much better than the art work in the big screen. I suggest collecting them.)

For the decepticons, Barricade, Brawl, and Blackout are great designs. You can really see parts of the Saleen, parts of the tank, parts of the chopper in these guys. Gives you that exciting feeling to see them in action that way.

Starscreams' alt mode is great. But the robot mode looks like an abnormal gorilla with a weird head. A little bit of improvements on the head and body proportions will make Starscream fantastic.

The worst of the new designs goes to Megatron. I can only describe him as "The Thing" (not the fantastic 4 guy), or just scrap metals magnetically attached to a skeleton. The robot mode is simply too disfigured. While the alt mode begs the question, why does he ever need to transform at all?? I agree that a gun simply won't do in this movie. But they could have made him into anything from jets to tanks, to any heavy duty military vehicle. Heck, they could even make him transform into a rocket ship.

by **Zombie Starscream** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:56 pm

As I haven't seen the movie yet, and so I must rely mainly on the pictures I've seen.

Some of the Decepticon designs worked, like Barricade, and Blackout. They have recognizable vehicle bits on them, yet they are clearly robotic. I do not like how Starscream was done, to be honest I think his vehicle mode was not as good a 'diguise' as a regular F-15e would have been. An F-22 is not as common as F-15s are, plus the F-15s will be around still for quite a while. (until the year 2030) So the F-22 is more 'eye catching' due to its rarety. Plus his head is UGLY and his face is something only a mommybot could love.

A lot of the Autobots were done well. Prime looks cool, and Bumblebee looks interesting.

I am a GEEWUNNER. I will clearly state that I like MOST of the stuff in the movie designs, but not all. I wish Starscream looked differant and had his original alt. mode. I do not care personally whether or not Prime had a faceplate, or that he had flames on him. I can not decide yet on Megatron. I like the idea that they have teeth and claws, but not the insectoid appearance. I like the eyes and how they look, and the fact that Transformers blink. I do not like the idea of the Allspark in this movie, at least the idea that it can create robots.

Can the designs look differant then this and still look plausible? Of course. Can they be G1 but not be blocky and toylike? Of course. Can they be G1 and look scary? Of course! It all depends on how Tfs are done, not the 'continuity' they happen to be based on.

by **Auto Bot** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:36 pm

It will be interesting to see both the autobots and decepticons in their original G1 disguises (except Megatron, Soundwave, and other size-changing bots), but vastly improved to this movie level in their robot modes.

by **Auto Bot** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:40 pm

I personally think the original G1 storyline, although riddled with inconsistencies and unanswered questions, is much better than the movie story about the Allspark.
It will be awesome for Speilberg & Bay to pick up the G1 storyline, plugged the holes of inconsistencies, and give it a make over in terms of human involvement and technology.

by **Nugget** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:30 am

Auto Bot wrote:I personally think the original G1 storyline, although riddled with inconsistencies and unanswered questions, is much better than the movie story about the Allspark.
It will be awesome for Speilberg & Bay to pick up the G1 storyline, plugged the holes of inconsistencies, and give it a make over in terms of human involvement and technology.

I loved the movie as a whole. The story line and plot were okay in my book. My biggest complaint was that they tried to cram too many subplots within the movie.

The designs worked for me. Unfortunately the humans got more screen time than the Bots.

I would give my left one at this point to see more of Bonecrusher and his nasty attitude. Hell I'd pay money to see two hours of nothing but Bonecrusher cruising up and down the 405 flipping cars and tossing humans with his Arm.

How about this for a T.V. series:

CSI L.A..... Horatio drives around in his side kick Barricade. Horatio identifies the suspects,, Barricade does the questioning...

Hrmmm that concept might make a good sig.. I'm photoshop challenged.. Any volunteers, payment will be made with beer.

I'm rambling,,, nows a good time to stop sniffing glue.

by **Auto Bot** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:13 am

nugget wrote:
How about this for a T.V. series:

CSI L.A..... Horatio drives around in his side kick Barricade. Horatio identifies the suspects,, Barricade does the questioning...

Hrmmm that concept might make a good sig.. I'm photoshop challenged.. Any volunteers, payment will be made with beer.

I'm rambling,,, nows a good time to stop sniffing glue.

Unfortunately, i don't drink beer... hehe

by **Cliff Jumper** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:58 pm

The original designs and transformations work WAY WAY WAY better in real life than the movie ones. I don't get why it can't work if the Alternators can. Scale up the alts and BAM and you've got a realistic looking tf.

by **wingdarkness** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:19 am

I'm kinda new here so I don't know how much it's been discussed and if it has please forgive me, but does anyone think the transformations of the cars in the GMC commercials are more pleasing to the eye than the Morphing that takes place in this movie?? In the GMC commercials you actually see it turning into a car and it looks practical...I was hell-bent on not seeing this movie but the GMC commercial kinda gave me some optimism atleast on how some of them would transform (I mean I had seen optimus and others thru previews too)...Imagine my shock though to see many of the transformers designs render them into balled up peices of foil that morphed in and out of car mode...Or so many moving parts that the enjoyment of the transformations were just to over-the-top...

Anyone felt this way about the design factors of the differing transformations?

News Credits: 2 · by **Autobobby1** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:23 am

Cliff Jumper wrote:I don't get why it can't work if the Alternators can.

Hmm...maybe because they're toys designed as toys that only are supposed to have realistic alternate modes.

I DARE you guys to find a clip using G1-ish designs that looks realistic. I have yet to see one that doesn't look cartoony, goofy, or spead up so that you don't notice the designs.[/quote]

by **Nugget** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:30 am

wingdarkness wrote:I'm kinda new here so I don't know how much it's been discussed and if it has please forgive me, but does anyone think the transformations of the cars in the GMC commercials are more pleasing to the eye than the Morphing that takes place in this movie?? In the GMC commercials you actually see it turning into a car and it looks practical...I was hell-bent on not seeing this movie but the GMC commercial kinda gave me some optimism atleast on how some of them would transform (I mean I had seen optimus and others thru previews too)...Imagine my shock though to see many of the transformers designs render them into balled up peices of foil that morphed in and out of car mode...Or so many moving parts that the enjoyment of the transformations were just to over-the-top...

Anyone felt this way about the design factors of the differing transformations?

When I first saw Blackout transform I was pessimistic, too many moving parts, it looked too messy. However I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the other transformation scenes. Especially when the Autobots transformed in the alley.

The scene where Ironhide transforms at speed were well done.

by **Cliff Jumper** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:35 am

Autobobby1 wrote:Wow, to imagine I missed this thread! I guess I'll give my opinion...

The designs rock. Seriously. They're very cool looking and PERFECT for live action. Would they work in a cartoon? No, cartoons are less realisic. But could you really imagine a robot that looks like this in a live action movie?:

While they could have made them a little more like G1, they did a great job.

And you know what? G1 wouldn't even look good in a modern CARTOON. If that's true, how could the G1 designs be in a film?

As for faces...

They show more emotion than ever before. There's tons of little intricate pieces that move around so that you CAN see emotions. My only problem with Prime's face is that the mouth is too low. A little higher and it'd be perfect.

And Rubber Ducky (Megsy) has fangs because they make him look like an alien harbinger of death.

Starscream? Are you joking? Watch the movie and say that Screamer looks like crap, and you must be going BLIND.

If they did Prime like that in the movie. It would have been unimaginably better!! I've seen the movie twice and still don't like chicken walker Starscream.

by **Cliff Jumper** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:39 am

Autobobby1 wrote:
Cliff Jumper wrote:I don't get why it can't work if the Alternators can.

Hmm...maybe because they're toys designed as toys that only are supposed to have realistic alternate modes.

I DARE you guys to find a clip using G1-ish designs that looks realistic. I have yet to see one that doesn't look cartoony, goofy, or spead up so that you don't notice the designs.

[/quote]

Okay, but the robot modes look like funtional humanoid robots and still retain the look of a real car. How would that not transfer to real life if it is real life?

by **wingdarkness** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:42 am

@nugget - I liked Barricade and Jazz's transformations, but that's about it...Optimus was cool too, but again Bay's nonsensical zoom-ins couldn't let me appreciate it...

But I thought B-Bee's transformation (especially after he beat barricade) was a joke...He just crumbled in a car and during the final fight almost every transformer except Starscream and Optimus just Eddie-Gordo'd there way in and out of transformations, looked like liqued aluminum at times...I just think they went so detailed that when they had to do non-optimus high speed transformations they just cheapened it into a morph effect...