The Energon Pub

Oh don't worry, I'm acutely aware of the intent, however misdirected it may be.

Being facetious is just something I do...

I'm still trying to figure out what you wanted Optimus to do with the enemy? The only (and sensible)thing to do would be to kill the bastard. If Optimus let him go, that would just freaking destroy the entire concept of their war.

I didn't like Transformers 2 so much because of the excessive fan services (Megan Fox). I mean sexy is great but when its too much, it kinds of lowers the credibility of the film. I'm pretty much expecting the upcoming movie to be better than the last one.

SlyTF1 wrote:I'm still trying to figure out what you wanted Optimus to do with the enemy? The only (and sensible)thing to do would be to kill the bastard. If Optimus let him go, that would just freaking destroy the entire concept of their war.

Indeed. Let's also not forget that in the films, the two warring sides aren't held back by the FCC. The childish concept of war shown in cartoons just doesn't translate to film at all. Hell even the '85 film had to limit it's content evidenced by Spike saying "sh*t" being a reletive extreme where the FCC was concerned.

TL;DR version: The movies have no reason to make either side play nice in a freakin war.

Nothing different needs to have happened, nor do I want it to. I'm not going to be baited into a completely separate argument, so stop trying. There was one point I wanted to make, which I have made. We can all go back out into the forums now.

i don't think the killing of Decepticons is unwarranted. I like the fact that the Autobots went out to hunt down the Decepticons. I was kind of surprised when Optimus shot a defenseless Con in the face. I am not saying I disapprove, but it was rather Un-Optimus-like.

SlyTF1 wrote:I'm still trying to figure out what you wanted Optimus to do with the enemy? The only (and sensible)thing to do would be to kill the bastard. If Optimus let him go, that would just freaking destroy the entire concept of their war.

yikes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

all this talk about what demolisher did.

Lets look at what happened

1. The autobots launched a pre-emptive attack in a heavily populated area

2. Sideways tried to escape capture and was eviscerated, with a sign off quip

3. Demolisher seeing that he was outnumbered, defended himself and tried to escape. he was hunted down, wounded and whilst injured executed.

Why didnt he surrender. Well considering that this isnt the first incursion by the bots (its mentioned in the movie) and that they seemingly didnt take any hostages, and seeing what happened to sideways he may not believe that bots have mercy in their programming. He chose to escape, and there was collateral damage. Any deaths for NEST or citizens are as much the responsibility of the bots for engaging in a pre-emptive attack in a populated area.


As for the argument that this is war and grow up. yes I know soldiers have to kill, thats the way of aggressive intervention, however I dont want soldiers to show no remorse, or be unfazed by the taking of life. Prime carried out that execution in a cold and brutal manner, with a quip. Soldiers who become immune to the sheer enormity that is taking a life are a liability (as has been seen in reality). Yes you may have to kill, but one should be humbled and in awe of the power that is in taking a life, not do it without reluctance and with some pleasure.

the greatest battle in war is to not become like those you oppose, the bots seem to edging into that territory

the arguments that this isnt gee wun prime and wasnt meant to be are correct.

However that wasnt the subject of the thread, it was what turned you off the movies.

Props to Autobot 023 for not sharing my viewpoint but engaging ina mature and rational manner. That is what debate is.

I accept the points regarding the body work on bee, and sort of with the cash, it was clumsily put together in the movie.

As for those who cant even go one thread without personally insulting those who disagree with them, well whats new. I appreciate people liek things I dont, and vice versa, you shoudl try doing the same.
As for trolling, to me the person who replies to any criticism of the movie with "you are a trolL" is in fact engagin in trollish activity themselves, as they are trying to shut down debate by labelling posters who oppose their sensibilities

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I'm still trying to figure out what you wanted Optimus to do with the enemy? The only (and sensible)thing to do would be to kill the bastard. If Optimus let him go, that would just freaking destroy the entire concept of their war.

yikes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

all this talk about what demolisher did.

Lets look at what happened

1. The autobots launched a pre-emptive attack in a heavily populated area

2. Sideways tried to escape capture and was eviscerated, with a sign off quip

3. Demolisher seeing that he was outnumbered, defended himself and tried to escape. he was hunted down, wounded and whilst injured executed.

Why didnt he surrender. Well considering that this isnt the first incursion by the bots (its mentioned in the movie) and that they seemingly didnt take any hostages, and seeing what happened to sideways he may not believe that bots have mercy in their programming. He chose to escape, and there was collateral damage. Any deaths for NEST or citizens are as much the responsibility of the bots for engaging in a pre-emptive attack in a populated area.


As for the argument that this is war and grow up. yes I know soldiers have to kill, thats the way of aggressive intervention, however I dont want soldiers to show no remorse, or be unfazed by the taking of life. Prime carried out that execution in a cold and brutal manner, with a quip. Soldiers who become immune to the sheer enormity that is taking a life are a liability (as has been seen in reality). Yes you may have to kill, but one should be humbled and in awe of the power that is in taking a life, not do it without reluctance and with some pleasure.

the greatest battle in war is to not become like those you oppose, the bots seem to edging into that territory

why would you let that thing live? Demolisher is nothing but a mindless machine of destruction, there is no point in letting him live

shamone wrote:the arguments that this isnt gee wun prime and wasnt meant to be are correct.

However that wasnt the subject of the thread, it was what turned you off the movies.

Props to Autobot 023 for not sharing my viewpoint but engaging ina mature and rational manner. That is what debate is.

I accept the points regarding the body work on bee, and sort of with the cash, it was clumsily put together in the movie.

As for those who cant even go one thread without personally insulting those who disagree with them, well whats new. I appreciate people liek things I dont, and vice versa, you shoudl try doing the same.
As for trolling, to me the person who replies to any criticism of the movie with "you are a trolL" is in fact engagin in trollish activity themselves, as they are trying to shut down debate by labelling posters who oppose their sensibilities

Troll is such a stupid term, I hate it

sentinelprime1234 wrote:

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I'm still trying to figure out what you wanted Optimus to do with the enemy? The only (and sensible)thing to do would be to kill the bastard. If Optimus let him go, that would just freaking destroy the entire concept of their war.

yikes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

all this talk about what demolisher did.

Lets look at what happened

1. The autobots launched a pre-emptive attack in a heavily populated area

2. Sideways tried to escape capture and was eviscerated, with a sign off quip

3. Demolisher seeing that he was outnumbered, defended himself and tried to escape. he was hunted down, wounded and whilst injured executed.

Why didnt he surrender. Well considering that this isnt the first incursion by the bots (its mentioned in the movie) and that they seemingly didnt take any hostages, and seeing what happened to sideways he may not believe that bots have mercy in their programming. He chose to escape, and there was collateral damage. Any deaths for NEST or citizens are as much the responsibility of the bots for engaging in a pre-emptive attack in a populated area.


As for the argument that this is war and grow up. yes I know soldiers have to kill, thats the way of aggressive intervention, however I dont want soldiers to show no remorse, or be unfazed by the taking of life. Prime carried out that execution in a cold and brutal manner, with a quip. Soldiers who become immune to the sheer enormity that is taking a life are a liability (as has been seen in reality). Yes you may have to kill, but one should be humbled and in awe of the power that is in taking a life, not do it without reluctance and with some pleasure.

the greatest battle in war is to not become like those you oppose, the bots seem to edging into that territory

why would you let that thing live? Demolisher is nothing but a mindless machine of destruction, there is no point in letting him live

I dont know that, I can only tal;k about what i saw in movies (didnt read comics) and in that he was a con, who was outnumbered and fled for his life. if he wanted wanton destruction he would stay and try and kill s many of those around him as possible.

Killing the mindless, or seeing no point in letting something lvie is far too brutal and chilling for my sensitivities

shamone wrote:

sentinelprime1234 wrote:

shamone wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I'm still trying to figure out what you wanted Optimus to do with the enemy? The only (and sensible)thing to do would be to kill the bastard. If Optimus let him go, that would just freaking destroy the entire concept of their war.

yikes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

all this talk about what demolisher did.

Lets look at what happened

1. The autobots launched a pre-emptive attack in a heavily populated area

2. Sideways tried to escape capture and was eviscerated, with a sign off quip

3. Demolisher seeing that he was outnumbered, defended himself and tried to escape. he was hunted down, wounded and whilst injured executed.

Why didnt he surrender. Well considering that this isnt the first incursion by the bots (its mentioned in the movie) and that they seemingly didnt take any hostages, and seeing what happened to sideways he may not believe that bots have mercy in their programming. He chose to escape, and there was collateral damage. Any deaths for NEST or citizens are as much the responsibility of the bots for engaging in a pre-emptive attack in a populated area.


As for the argument that this is war and grow up. yes I know soldiers have to kill, thats the way of aggressive intervention, however I dont want soldiers to show no remorse, or be unfazed by the taking of life. Prime carried out that execution in a cold and brutal manner, with a quip. Soldiers who become immune to the sheer enormity that is taking a life are a liability (as has been seen in reality). Yes you may have to kill, but one should be humbled and in awe of the power that is in taking a life, not do it without reluctance and with some pleasure.

the greatest battle in war is to not become like those you oppose, the bots seem to edging into that territory

why would you let that thing live? Demolisher is nothing but a mindless machine of destruction, there is no point in letting him live

I dont know that, I can only tal;k about what i saw in movies (didnt read comics) and in that he was a con, who was outnumbered and fled for his life. if he wanted wanton destruction he would stay and try and kill s many of those around him as possible.

Killing the mindless, or seeing no point in letting something lvie is far too brutal and chilling for my sensitivities

Shamone, think of the people in the cars that Demolisher threw & ran over.

Think of the house Sideways ran through.

Think of people in the Library that Alice blew up.

Think of Boncrusher running through that bus in TF1.

Think of Megatron.

Think of The Fallen trying to BLOW UP THE SUN!

And tell me Decepticons should be allowed to live.

The Autobots don't like what they're doing (for the most part) but they understand that it has to be done, and that Freedom is the right of all sentient beings. The Decepticons threaten innocent live wherever they go, they've killed thousands, they've killed A PUPPY! They are evil, and evil must be stopped, no matter the cost.

Also, to answer your question, i like the movies.

The who arguement of "the Autobots struck first" is moot. How long until Demolisher decided he was gonna go Godzilla on Shanghai, or some other city? When a known threat to human life is in your sights you do not question, or reason, or rationalize. You pull the trigger and stop it right there.

Capt.Failure wrote:The who arguement of "the Autobots struck first" is moot. How long until Demolisher decided he was gonna go Godzilla on Shanghai, or some other city? When a known threat to human life is in your sights you do not question, or reason, or rationalize. You pull the trigger and stop it right there.

Exactly, he's an enemy soldier who's only on Earth to cause destruction and kill people. He started it by being on the wrong planet.

Capt.Failure wrote:The who arguement of "the Autobots struck first" is moot. How long until Demolisher decided he was gonna go Godzilla on Shanghai, or some other city? When a known threat to human life is in your sights you do not question, or reason, or rationalize. You pull the trigger and stop it right there.

Exactly. For those that think that Optimus was to "agressive" or what not, what do you think Demolisher would have gone if let go? What would he have done? With a name like demolisher, i doubt he would hae left to go pick daisies.
I also don't buy the defense of...
"He was defending himself."
He is a known enemey of the autobots, and the Decepticons cause is still stands.
And if you think about it... Technicly, the autobots didn't strike first. Demolisher did. They surrounded him, he Transformed, and smashed the nest team. If he was really as "Innocent" as some think he is, then he would have surendered.

Evil_the_Nub wrote:Exactly, he's an enemy soldier who's only on Earth to cause destruction and kill people. He started it by being on the wrong planet.

Well, i think he started it by being a decepticon. But your right. He was on Earth to carry out the fallen's plans.

To be honest though, i think this more agressive Optimus is the result of fans. Anyone remember all the bitching and complaining from how weak he was in the first movie? Megatron pretty much handed Optimus his ass. I remember several threads of people upset to no end on how much of a pussy he was. This time around he kicks some ass and people still complain. GO figure.

5150 Cruiser wrote:To be honest though, i think this more agressive Optimus is the result of fans. Anyone remember all the bitching and complaining from how weak he was in the first movie? Megatron pretty much handed Optimus his ass. I remember several threads of people upset to no end on how much of a pussy he was. This time around he kicks some ass and people still complain. GO figure.

Well, if anything the Transformers fanbase is never happy. We wanted a Transformers movie. We get it and complain there's not enough robots and not enough action. So there's a sequel with twice the robots and twice the action, and what happens? We complain there's not enough story because there's too much action and not enough character development because there's too many characters.

I stick to my guns when I say RotF is a good movie because I enjoyed it. I can't tell people who didn't like it they're wrong because, well, that's their opinion. However, I can look at the fanbase (the people Hasbro listens to when giving Bay orders) and say, "If you didn't like it, you're partially to blame." You can fire back with "we expect better," but you'll never get better if you refuse to be happy.

I'll admit to the flaws the film's humor caused at times, but literally every other complaint can be traced back to fan demands. More robots = less characterization. More action = less time for plotting*. Personally I was happier with RotF than I was with the first film because of this, and I knew these would be the consequences ahead of time. The humor I can let slide because every major blockbuster that year suffered writing problems.

*Accusations of "it had no plot" will result in links to my thread about the nature of plots.

I knew it wasn't for me when I didn't enjoy the offerings of the movieverse and then was exposed to the no-win situation of either liking it or not liking it. When everyone's attitude became 'you can only (dis)like it if your reason is sufficient to ME,' I knew it was a doomed venture.
OP's examples, as I know it has been clarified, are either oversights or gaffs, and not exactly failings of the movies. I dont need anyone to give me an explaination of what plot means or anything for me to know that I'm not a fan of the movies, and that's rationale enough for me, even if it's not enough to soothe other people. I do have hopes for DOTM, but I'm not sure I've ever been less enthusiastic about something that I love before as I am about this movie opening. I feel like I'm obligated as a fan to see it.
Yes, I know there's no requirement that I do so, and I'm well aware that I'm not being forced to see it or like it or even be a TF fan.But, seeing as these things are choices, I'm content with the ones I've made, even if other people aren't.

To respond to the actual topic:

There were points in the movies that made me think "Eh, I don't really like my Transformers to say/do that". However, there weren't enough of those moments to make me dislike the movies. I mean, you can't go wrong with explosions coming from robots that transform into cars and military vehicles.

5150 Cruiser wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:The who arguement of "the Autobots struck first" is moot. How long until Demolisher decided he was gonna go Godzilla on Shanghai, or some other city? When a known threat to human life is in your sights you do not question, or reason, or rationalize. You pull the trigger and stop it right there.

Exactly. For those that think that Optimus was to "agressive" or what not, what do you think Demolisher would have gone if let go? What would he have done? With a name like demolisher, i doubt he would hae left to go pick daisies.
I also don't buy the defense of...
"He was defending himself."
He is a known enemey of the autobots, and the Decepticons cause is still stands.
And if you think about it... Technicly, the autobots didn't strike first. Demolisher did. They surrounded him, he Transformed, and smashed the nest team. If he was really as "Innocent" as some think he is, then he would have surendered.

Evil_the_Nub wrote:Exactly, he's an enemy soldier who's only on Earth to cause destruction and kill people. He started it by being on the wrong planet.

Well, i think he started it by being a decepticon. But your right. He was on Earth to carry out the fallen's plans.

To be honest though, i think this more agressive Optimus is the result of fans. Anyone remember all the bitching and complaining from how weak he was in the first movie? Megatron pretty much handed Optimus his ass. I remember several threads of people upset to no end on how much of a pussy he was. This time around he kicks some ass and people still complain. GO figure.

technically autobots did strike first, sideways was attacked

secondly there was no terms of surrender offered, remember the twins cwent round, broadcasting the message "come and get your ass whipped" not come out and surrender, so demolisher is justified in defending himself when cornered considering the threat from the twins and sideways fate

as for complaining about prime, and try and follow this please, there are some who did not complain about prime in the first movie (i felt he was too cold and detatched re jazz's death if anything) and did complain about him in second movie.

Its not a simple case of either/or, its not a go figure moment, people can have conflicting views and what makes one happy may not please another

Capt.Failure wrote:

5150 Cruiser wrote:To be honest though, i think this more agressive Optimus is the result of fans. Anyone remember all the bitching and complaining from how weak he was in the first movie? Megatron pretty much handed Optimus his ass. I remember several threads of people upset to no end on how much of a pussy he was. This time around he kicks some ass and people still complain. GO figure.

Well, if anything the Transformers fanbase is never happy. We wanted a Transformers movie. We get it and complain there's not enough robots and not enough action. So there's a sequel with twice the robots and twice the action, and what happens? We complain there's not enough story because there's too much action and not enough character development because there's too many characters.

I stick to my guns when I say RotF is a good movie because I enjoyed it. I can't tell people who didn't like it they're wrong because, well, that's their opinion. However, I can look at the fanbase (the people Hasbro listens to when giving Bay orders) and say, "If you didn't like it, you're partially to blame." You can fire back with "we expect better," but you'll never get better if you refuse to be happy.

I'll admit to the flaws the film's humor caused at times, but literally every other complaint can be traced back to fan demands. More robots = less characterization. More action = less time for plotting*. Personally I was happier with RotF than I was with the first film because of this, and I knew these would be the consequences ahead of time. The humor I can let slide because every major blockbuster that year suffered writing problems.

*Accusations of "it had no plot" will result in links to my thread about the nature of plots.

i dont understand you never get better if you are never happy. Surely looking for and striving for perfection is the default mode for most people. Sure you can appreciate things, but you also want more, thats what makes humanity grow

I think some complained that there was to much human interaction in first and not enough robot time. We didnt get much more robot time, jsut more of them. The development which a lot of fans complained about in the first movie (lack thereof) was replicated in second movie, which is what irked some of the fanbase

And while you are so clear to define things, why not try with the word forum, i will give you a headstart

"A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged"

No need for superiority or dismissing those who dont share your views

Dagon wrote:I knew it wasn't for me when I didn't enjoy the offerings of the movieverse and then was exposed to the no-win situation of either liking it or not liking it. When everyone's attitude became 'you can only (dis)like it if your reason is sufficient to ME,' I knew it was a doomed venture.
OP's examples, as I know it has been clarified, are either oversights or gaffs, and not exactly failings of the movies. I dont need anyone to give me an explaination of what plot means or anything for me to know that I'm not a fan of the movies, and that's rationale enough for me, even if it's not enough to soothe other people. I do have hopes for DOTM, but I'm not sure I've ever been less enthusiastic about something that I love before as I am about this movie opening. I feel like I'm obligated as a fan to see it.
Yes, I know there's no requirement that I do so, and I'm well aware that I'm not being forced to see it or like it or even be a TF fan.But, seeing as these things are choices, I'm content with the ones I've made, even if other people aren't.

i suffer same afflication, except im a worse sufferer.

I believe the hypes and the bay lies. The trailers suck me in.

This time around im more wary, but i feel the optimism creeping up on me everytime i see a clip or trailer and think wow awesome.

I only hope that this around, the goofy humour, the love story and the poor characterisation and stereotyping are kept at a minimum, because if done right, these movies have potential to be amazing

shamone wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

5150 Cruiser wrote:To be honest though, i think this more agressive Optimus is the result of fans. Anyone remember all the bitching and complaining from how weak he was in the first movie? Megatron pretty much handed Optimus his ass. I remember several threads of people upset to no end on how much of a pussy he was. This time around he kicks some ass and people still complain. GO figure.

Well, if anything the Transformers fanbase is never happy. We wanted a Transformers movie. We get it and complain there's not enough robots and not enough action. So there's a sequel with twice the robots and twice the action, and what happens? We complain there's not enough story because there's too much action and not enough character development because there's too many characters.

I stick to my guns when I say RotF is a good movie because I enjoyed it. I can't tell people who didn't like it they're wrong because, well, that's their opinion. However, I can look at the fanbase (the people Hasbro listens to when giving Bay orders) and say, "If you didn't like it, you're partially to blame." You can fire back with "we expect better," but you'll never get better if you refuse to be happy.

I'll admit to the flaws the film's humor caused at times, but literally every other complaint can be traced back to fan demands. More robots = less characterization. More action = less time for plotting*. Personally I was happier with RotF than I was with the first film because of this, and I knew these would be the consequences ahead of time. The humor I can let slide because every major blockbuster that year suffered writing problems.

*Accusations of "it had no plot" will result in links to my thread about the nature of plots.

i dont understand you never get better if you are never happy. Surely looking for and striving for perfection is the default mode for most people. Sure you can appreciate things, but you also want more, thats what makes humanity grow

I think some complained that there was to much human interaction in first and not enough robot time. We didnt get much more robot time, jsut more of them. The development which a lot of fans complained about in the first movie (lack thereof) was replicated in second movie, which is what irked some of the fanbase

And while you are so clear to define things, why not try with the word forum, i will give you a headstart

"A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged"

No need for superiority or dismissing those who dont share your views

Problem is I'm not dismissing those who don't share my view. If that were true I'd just call you a long list of witty insults and tell you your opinion is wrong. I actually enjoy it when people state their stand on the films whether it's with or against my thoughts on them, within reason that these people are level headed and not doing things like, say...accusing me of trying to silence the opinions of those who disagree with me *coughnudgecough*.

The fact that a large portion of those who dislike the films fall into the "would never be happy" camp, however, is simple fact. Not because I wish to label them because they disagree with me, but because that's how fanbases work. For example, I dare you to go onto a Harry Potter forum and say you liked the Half-Blood Prince movie. I'll wait here behind a lead blast shield.

Capt.Failure wrote:

shamone wrote:

Capt.Failure wrote:

5150 Cruiser wrote:To be honest though, i think this more agressive Optimus is the result of fans. Anyone remember all the bitching and complaining from how weak he was in the first movie? Megatron pretty much handed Optimus his ass. I remember several threads of people upset to no end on how much of a pussy he was. This time around he kicks some ass and people still complain. GO figure.

Well, if anything the Transformers fanbase is never happy. We wanted a Transformers movie. We get it and complain there's not enough robots and not enough action. So there's a sequel with twice the robots and twice the action, and what happens? We complain there's not enough story because there's too much action and not enough character development because there's too many characters.

I stick to my guns when I say RotF is a good movie because I enjoyed it. I can't tell people who didn't like it they're wrong because, well, that's their opinion. However, I can look at the fanbase (the people Hasbro listens to when giving Bay orders) and say, "If you didn't like it, you're partially to blame." You can fire back with "we expect better," but you'll never get better if you refuse to be happy.

I'll admit to the flaws the film's humor caused at times, but literally every other complaint can be traced back to fan demands. More robots = less characterization. More action = less time for plotting*. Personally I was happier with RotF than I was with the first film because of this, and I knew these would be the consequences ahead of time. The humor I can let slide because every major blockbuster that year suffered writing problems.

*Accusations of "it had no plot" will result in links to my thread about the nature of plots.

i dont understand you never get better if you are never happy. Surely looking for and striving for perfection is the default mode for most people. Sure you can appreciate things, but you also want more, thats what makes humanity grow

I think some complained that there was to much human interaction in first and not enough robot time. We didnt get much more robot time, jsut more of them. The development which a lot of fans complained about in the first movie (lack thereof) was replicated in second movie, which is what irked some of the fanbase

And while you are so clear to define things, why not try with the word forum, i will give you a headstart

"A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged"

No need for superiority or dismissing those who dont share your views

Problem is I'm not dismissing those who don't share my view. If that were true I'd just call you a long list of witty insults and tell you your opinion is wrong. I actually enjoy it when people state their stand on the films whether it's with or against my thoughts on them, within reason that these people are level headed and not doing things like, say...accusing me of trying to silence the opinions of those who disagree with me *coughnudgecough*.

The fact that a large portion of those who dislike the films fall into the "would never be happy" camp, however, is simple fact. Not because I wish to label them because they disagree with me, but because that's how fanbases work. For example, I dare you to go onto a Harry Potter forum and say you liked the Half-Blood Prince movie. I'll wait here behind a lead blast shield.

I agree, why post on these forums if you're just going to stirr up trouble about how much you hate the movies? You're either trying too hard to be a troll, or you're secretly in denial that you like them.

does this sound familiar, page two of this thread. silencing someone much or what. And well i wont call it witty but it is an insult.

Im afraid its not a fact that people who dislike the movies would never be happy, unless the definition of fact has changed now.

dont know anything about H potter so that goes over my head sorry

Yes, this is what I said...

Capt.Failure wrote:I agree, why post on these forums if you're just going to stirr up trouble about how much you hate the movies? You're either trying too hard to be a troll, or you're secretly in denial that you like them.

Because frankly alot of people have done this, though they aren't around anymore since the more sensible people on the forums (those who discuss things when they disagree instead of fling mud) outweigh them. Though I do admit I was sort of generalizing.

shamone wrote:Im afraid its not a fact that people who dislike the movies would never be happy, unless the definition of fact has changed now.

This is my second attempt to clarify this for you. Here's what I said.

Capt.Failure wrote:The fact that a large portion of those who dislike the films fall into the "would never be happy" camp, however, is simple fact. Not because I wish to label them because they disagree with me, but because that's how fanbases work. For example, I dare you to go onto a Harry Potter forum and say you liked the Half-Blood Prince movie. I'll wait here behind a lead blast shield.

You refuse to interpret what I say properly, twisting it around to fit your viewpoint. I'm saying that fandoms, ANY fandom, has this problem. Not aknowledging it is simply foolish. Generally speaking any hardcore fan of a series will never be pleased by any iteration of the series outside the one they grew accustomed to as it does not fit their vision of the show they believe it is their right to dictate the direction of as loyal fans. But the thing is that it's not their right, it's the producers/directors/owners of the series who make those calls. So these fans will never get what they want, and be forever miserable.

And that brings me back to my point: sure, there's numerous reasons not to like the movieverse. There's just as many reasons to love the movieverse. But if history has proven anything, most hardcore Transformers fans dislike the movieverse because it doesn't conform to their ideal vision of the franchise. Just like they disliked Beast Wars, Armada, Animated, Prime, etc. There's a reason the trope RuinedFOREVER was coined by the Transformers fandom.

technically autobots did strike first, sideways was attacked

Nope the Decepticons did. They entered a no fly zone without permission and paid the consequences. Demolisher started attacking soon as they got too close. if someone breaks into your house you can blow them away for same reason if you feel they're a threat. (especially if they're armed.) This is no different. You wouldn't wait for them to try to hurt you before defending yourself. Apply that logic to the planet as this trespassing for them to be here.

secondly there was no terms of surrender offered, remember the twins cwent round, broadcasting the message "come and get your ass whipped" not come out and surrender, so demolisher is justified in defending himself when cornered considering the threat from the twins and sideways fate

The Decpeticons fired first and made no effort to surrender. If they really wanted to live they would have stayed in space not on a hostile planet which wants them to stay out. There's nothing you can say to counter point this that justifies their presence on Earth. It would be like the marines having a picnic in middle of Tripoli and then being shocked it resulted in in a conflict.

as for complaining about prime, and try and follow this please, there are some who did not complain about prime in the first movie (i felt he was too cold and detatched re jazz's death if anything) and did complain about him in second movie.

Prime is a commander, and leaders are not allowed to be publicly overly emotional. It's unbecoming of an officer. He needs come across as somewhat of a hard ass to be in charge because he has to make all difficult decisions. You See more of this in beast wars when Optimus Primal reprimands Silverbolt for his stupidity in palling around with blackaracnia. (though in Silverbolt's defense she was willing change sides.)

Bay treated the transformers like real life combatants; In way they conduct themselves both on and off the battle field. This isn't just a translations of Transformers (while GI joe was more or less straight converted from the old show.Compete with the explosive awareness, as everyone can always perfectly avoid gunfire or jump out right as a vechile explodes.), it was more or less a what if Transformers appeared in the real world.

While I don't want to see all my favorites mowed down on either side without doing anything meaningful I dont' expect them to all walk away after every fight either. Key players endure, and the secondary characters may or may not make it back. I can live with that.

It is a simple matter of fact, the cartoon Prime would not have put down Demolisher in that fashion, the cartoon Prime WOULD have let him limp away to freedom as much as that might shock you, that's the kind of series G1 was.

And no one magically would have died from demolishers rampage either in G1. So Prime wouldn't have felt he was a threat to bother killing him. In context people did die...sorry Prime would have taken him out.

Prime had apoint where enuff is enuff and put things down. I mean he put down Kremzeek. Being cute didn't stop Prime from pulling the plug. (Basically if it wasn't human or named decepticon it was ok to blow away.) Prime ordered the dinobots to smash up Atlantis when the subatlantians attacked, which likely resulted in some of them dying during the fighting or the place exploding afterwards when Nergril set the self destruct.

Cartoon Prime was never directly responsible for anyone's death, even Megatron didn't die as a result of his battle with Prime because he became Galvatron.

As a commander he's directly reponsible for all deaths inflicted. Which bunch of the Decepticons that got tossed into space were destroyed by Prime himself when he came in with the touch playing. Megatron was going to die if he didn't get help, it wasn't because prime didn't inflict lethal damage or wasn't trying kill him. Which Galvatron pretty much became a whole new character thru out season 3, so for all intents and purposes Prime killed Megatron if you're looking pull techincalities.

Again there's War Dawn.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=649_5Chs ... 2C7ABF2672 @ 4 mins you see Prime blow away several Decepticons. Yeah Prime never kills anyone....sure.