The Energon Pub

sorry little angry caused first version post to be too long, basically, I find it to be rather bad story telling to have rely on spin offs to provide characters well charcter.
Characters should not dissappear for no reason, once maybe due to bad editing, three times you strike out (barracade, Skorpy, and Starscream who should have been atleast given a scene showing him running away, not simply vanishing and no autobot even noticing...) Even Meg's line to Starscream falls flat for me because before that scene, or even sans Ironhide's comment, we have no clue who starscream is or even the fact he was leading the con's while megs was gone... for the movie purposes Megs could have just as easily said that line to any other con.
The cons fail to get even little characterization scenes like the autobots do (jazz's transformation, the way Bumblebee plays with his visor in the final battle.) Barracad and bone crusher get a little of this (Bonecrusher's way of dealing with traffic, barracade's bumber fun with Sam) but it doesn't really help the characters seem any more unique, they're things the other cons would have just as easily done if they had the oppertunity.
I really can't stand for things like this, just because they're villains should not mean they should get shafted. It really says something aswell if you can't make a gaint tranformable tank memorable...

Hi-Q wrote:

Rolling Thunder wrote:

Darth Bombshell wrote:This is where reading into the big picture becomes necessary. Both "Ghosts of Yesterday" and the movie prequel do more than a good job of establishing the Decepticons, and it's not hard to see that there's a loose trilogy of sorts between them, where reading one is necessary for understanding the other two.

It's sort of like how the Star Wars Expanded Universe is treated by Star Wars fans. The people who claim the movies should go deeper into things like character development and explanations don't seem to realize that's what the books are for.

Ok, except you got movies like Spider-man that succeed in explaining everything within the movie, no comic books/videogames needed.

I shouldn't have to buy a comic book or videogame to understand a movie. If done right, the movie should be able to stand solid on its own, and all the comic and videogame tie ins should do nothing more than add to the experience if the person in question is wanting more after seeing the movie.

So have to totally disagree with you on that point, sorry.

Um, when was the last comic book movie that had TWELVE superheros/villians?

Not even close to a fair comparison.

LOL, fair enough but you still prove MY point. They had too much going on. They sacrafice characterization for a greater number of characters even when it was a longer than average movie as riotflea pointed out.

Darth Bombshell wrote:

Rolling Thunder wrote:I shouldn't have to buy a comic book or videogame to understand a movie. If done right, the movie should be able to stand solid on its own, and all the comic and videogame tie ins should do nothing more than add to the experience if the person in question is wanting more after seeing the movie.

No one's "making" you do anything. You don't "have" to buy a novel or a comic to understand the story. I doubt that pleasing the most hardcore of fans (or those who had automatically decided to hate the movie just because Michael Bay's name was attached to it) was on the minds of Chris Ryall, Alan Dean Foster and Simon Furman when they crafted the prequel tales. They wanted to create the backdrop upon which the movie events would be based, so they did. People who wanted to look for it could. Those who didn't...well, they didn't have to. You don't exactly criticize the opening twenty minutes of "Revenge of the Sith" just because it's coming off of a combination novel/cartoon that set it up, do you? (Putting aside for a moment the fact that both mediums, which presenting the same info, diverge very widely in how they tell it.)

First off I don't know if you read my other posts, but I loved this movie and going to go see it at least one more time. Just want to make that clear. No I know I don't HAVE to go buy the comics, but I just don't think it all that fair to say well the only reason you felt the decepticons lack character was cause it was all covered in the comic prequals. My impression was that you felt that we couldn't really complain as the material was cover in a different media and I'm saying that a lame decission by Bay, Hasbro, whoever as they could've managed their time and edited better. But I'm talking about minor setbacks here, like going from an A- to A+. The movie was awesome, but if I had to pick something wrong with it, it would be the deceptions lack characterization and I think I'm reasonable to exspect all of the characters to be covered somehow in the movie.

And yes, while I saw Star Wars: Clone Wars on CT Network and knew who Grivious was and why they were fighting over the planet going into Episode III, I still think it was a lame way of doing it and if someone who didn't watch cartoon network came to me and said, wtf is going on, I'd think they have a valid reason to.

decepticonjon wrote:i dunno.. with all the synergy this movie had: the prequel novel, video game, prequel comics, all telling different parts to the main story of the movie, it's hard to think that some could be combined to make a better story altogether.

didn't the matrix reloaded suffer from story holes that were filled in by the video game?

EXACTLY, and we all know what RAV reviews that movie got, same with Revenge of the Sith. Thankfully, I don't think the ones in Transformers will hurt it all that much, however critics have critized the movie over this exact issue.

To be Frank I think the possible sequel has the opportunity's to do the dark middle part of the story role very well by exploring the decepticons.

The Decepticons lost an opportunity to quickly and easily build character thanks to a decision made by either Bay or Murphy (or both?) early on... that "alien robots from space don't need ships". (Which is an insanely STUPID statement in itself, but...)

How could they build character among the bad guys if their attacks are initially pretty much just one-on-one suprise attacks?
How can there be character developement through interaction with their comrades if there's no home base they mmet up at?
How can you get to know a character as it's jumping around atop a building behind some other character? The best you can hope for in that situation is simple commands or quick personal remarks, as let's face it, they're in the middle of a military operation.

Darth Bombshell wrote:This is where reading into the big picture becomes necessary. Both "Ghosts of Yesterday" and the movie prequel do more than a good job of establishing the Decepticons, and it's not hard to see that there's a loose trilogy of sorts between them, where reading one is necessary for understanding the other two.

It's sort of like how the Star Wars Expanded Universe is treated by Star Wars fans. The people who claim the movies should go deeper into things like character development and explanations don't seem to realize that's what the books are for.

Agreed, id you read the books, you'd find out that Barricade is like the Decepticon Wheeljack, etc.

Darth Bombshell wrote:This is where reading into the big picture becomes necessary. Both "Ghosts of Yesterday" and the movie prequel do more than a good job of establishing the Decepticons, and it's not hard to see that there's a loose trilogy of sorts between them, where reading one is necessary for understanding the other two.

It's sort of like how the Star Wars Expanded Universe is treated by Star Wars fans. The people who claim the movies should go deeper into things like character development and explanations don't seem to realize that's what the books are for.

What a novel idea! If only Orson Welles had thought of that, Citizen Kane could've been cut down by an hour or so, and the "fans" could've been left with the weekly "Charles Foster Kane Radio Hour" to fill-in some important backstory, and have read the novelization to explain the history of Mr. Kane, his childhood, and help explain the significance of that damn "Rosebud" that keeps coming up.
Why, I bet Mr. Welles is just a-rolling in his grave because he didn't think of it, all those years ago...

Sorry, sorry, not a fair shot trying to compare the new Bay film to one of the masterpieces. But my point still stands: you shouldn't need tie-ins to effectively tell a story. People who have had no interest in the franchise prior to walking into that theater shouldn't be expected to have to read a novel and a comic book when it boils down to something like characterization.. And though I'm not necessarily saying that the movie was bad, I am saying that the kind of franchise-dependent storytelling that Star Wars and Star Trek have helped cultivate in the past couple of decades only leads to lazy film-making. After all, why bother trying to flesh-out some characters and fill some plot holes when some science fiction writer can plug the gaps in some book that only the fans will bother with?

Oh, and on the subject: I really want to know who was behind Frenzy, the wonderful cracked-out ninja robot hacker. People cheered for him in the theater whenever he popped-up. I suppose it leads to a bigger question: why is it, out of the three solidly done Transformer characters in the movie, did two of them not have any speaking parts?

just FYI, Megatron and Optimus are supposed to be the two baddest and strongest transformers.

That point was emphasized when Megatron tore Jazz in half.

They couldn't have Optimus struggle with Bonecrusher, who is simply another decepticon soldier.

Riotflea wrote:The Decepticons lost an opportunity to quickly and easily build character thanks to a decision made by either Bay or Murphy (or both?) early on... that "alien robots from space don't need ships". (Which is an insanely STUPID statement in itself, but...)

How could they build character among the bad guys if their attacks are initially pretty much just one-on-one suprise attacks?
How can there be character developement through interaction with their comrades if there's no home base they mmet up at?
How can you get to know a character as it's jumping around atop a building behind some other character? The best you can hope for in that situation is simple commands or quick personal remarks, as let's face it, they're in the middle of a military operation.

True, but all I asked for, in another thred, was just some real dialog between the autobots/army and the decepticons during the last battle, that's all. Heck even smack talk. Prime did, even Jazz and Ironhide had a few lines in there but on the Decepticon side it was all Megs... good stuff too "Give up the allspark and I'll let you be my pet!" classic stuff right there .

Rolling Thunder wrote:My impression was that you felt that we couldn't really complain as the material was cover in a different media and I'm saying that a lame decission by Bay, Hasbro, whoever as they could've managed their time and edited better.

I might have come off that way, but it really wasn't intended to be that way. I'm just saying for me, the problem of Deceptcions lack of personality wasn't readily evident, as I had read both the comic and the book, so I knew how they behaved and how they acted.

roy_flagg00 wrote:I am not a "G1 fiend".
I have to say from a completely objective perspective that I don't know anything more about the decepticons after seeing this movie. All I know is that starscream failed megatron again and that the decepticons talk funny. I was wondering if anyone else was disapointed with the lack of decepticon character development?

I could not agree more.

Also, did I miss something, or did Decepticons once have a faction symbol to show their allegiance proudly?

I never saw one.

YouFearGalvatron wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:I am not a "G1 fiend".
I have to say from a completely objective perspective that I don't know anything more about the decepticons after seeing this movie. All I know is that starscream failed megatron again and that the decepticons talk funny. I was wondering if anyone else was disapointed with the lack of decepticon character development?

I could not agree more.

Also, did I miss something, or did Decepticons once have a faction symbol to show their allegiance proudly?

I never saw one.

no, and i looked close, no decepticon faction symbol besides barricade of course, jesus he got a t shirt and hat.. course the counter to that is they were SUPPOSED to be undercover (however, the autobots came out of protoform with a symbol)
anyways, their two sidess to every coin it seems with this movie. it certainly didn't give the decepticons the treatment the autobots were given

YouFearGalvatron wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:I am not a "G1 fiend".
I have to say from a completely objective perspective that I don't know anything more about the decepticons after seeing this movie. All I know is that starscream failed megatron again and that the decepticons talk funny. I was wondering if anyone else was disapointed with the lack of decepticon character development?

I could not agree more.

Also, did I miss something, or did Decepticons once have a faction symbol to show their allegiance proudly?

I never saw one.

like Bay said, " the original cartoon was just a stupid toy advertisment."
The more I think about that quote the more I understand why this movie ended up the way it did.

roy_flagg00 wrote:

YouFearGalvatron wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:I am not a "G1 fiend".
I have to say from a completely objective perspective that I don't know anything more about the decepticons after seeing this movie. All I know is that starscream failed megatron again and that the decepticons talk funny. I was wondering if anyone else was disapointed with the lack of decepticon character development?

I could not agree more.

Also, did I miss something, or did Decepticons once have a faction symbol to show their allegiance proudly?

I never saw one.

like Bay said, " the original cartoon was just a stupid toy advertisment."
The more I think about that quote the more I understand why this movie ended up the way it did.

Gee, if that was the case, what does that make this film...?

A stupid adventisement for GM cars and trucks! And Apple computers, and HP computers, and Mountain Dew, and Panasonic memory cards, and Nokia phones, etc.

Give me a break.