The Energon Pub

First Gen wrote:My official stance on this film is that the action was great the story was atrocious.

I loved the first film, this one did not do it justice story wise.

Starscream:...somebody had to assume command.

Megatron: Nobody commands the Decepticons but me, even in death.

Two seconds later...

Megatron: Master, I've failed you...

WTF?!!!

Agreed. I finally saw it today and found myself wanting some parts to be more like the first one while others to be less like it. In the end, I liked the first one a lot more.

And am I the only person who thought the effects were no were near a seamless as they were in the first one? All the bots seemed to stand out a little too much. And the Fallen in Time Square was laughable.

Maybe I'll like it more if I see it again.

originaldave77 wrote:Poor movie critics. They all seem so disillusioned. They seem to think they are the deciding factor in the Box Office when they never were. People are smart. They choose what appeals to them. I thought the Star Wars prequels indicated as much!

Franchises have a track record, a built-in audience. Spider-Man 3 sucked and still did big business. I don't know of anyone who says "I'll wait for the reviews" when it comes to an event movie. They pretty much decide beforehand.

Critics are only good for spotlighting obscure films that deserve some attention.

I agree, instead of telling people what they should and shouldn't like, critics should bring attention to good movies we probably don't know about. Especially in the day of the internet where we have access to thousands of people who see movies for the right reason, to be entertained.

You know despite my ranting and arguing back and forth I gotta say you guys rock. No ones bashing anyones opinion and giving really good arguments on their respective points of view. If u guys liked the movie dont let me rain on your parade cause there was a good portion I enjoyed as well. Im just a continuity nut.

wingdarkness wrote:I'll always be proud of being true to Transformers and to the fanbase that only wants something with coherency to go along with cool action

Who died and made you the spokesperson of the entire fanbase?

Burn wrote:

wingdarkness wrote:I'll always be proud of being true to Transformers and to the fanbase that only wants something with coherency to go along with cool action

Who died and made you the spokesperson of the entire fanbase?

You did Burn, you did...Yeah that deep...

The critics are too old-fashioned to enjoy a movie like this. The $400+ million the film has made show that disparity between the critics and the moviegoers.

All this was expected already. Bad reviews, awesome box office. At least a studio executive confirmed TF3.

There are things that I do and dont agree with in the mixture of reviews and opinions here.

I agree that people going to see this film shouldn't be expecting too much more then explosions, hot chicks, witty snippets of diologue and lot and lot and lots of special effects. Thats what I expected, and I saw it at the Arclight in the Cinedome which was an awesome experience.

However, I would say degrading someone because they expected some kind of story or plot or because they are calling notably uglier looking robotic designs just that won't make this film any better or above the areas it obviously falls short of.

For me, I'm an artist and a film buff and a fan of special effects and I like this film for that reason....but, beyond the special effects and the long marathon of track shots and pyrotechnics it just felt like ILM's Demo reel. As if key speaking roles that was needed to glue the film together was left on the cutting room floor for the sake of eye candy. And designs were made revolved around actions shots and stunt work instead of around "Characters". Best example are the wheel feet bots (Demolisher, Arcee Triplets, Sidways) tailor made for a car chase scene lasting a few seconds.... only to then fade to the Background because there's no roads amid Egypt's sand dunes.

And there are tons of plot holes here, anyone saying there isnt should really examine the following evidence:

Death was relative in the movie. Most dead robots from the first film and even during this film came back.....with no explanation, they were just back. Bonecrusher was back. Blackout was back. Even a few of the Constructicons came back. I forgot which one was destroyed whilst diving for Megs, but sure enough he was back come time to throw down in Egypt. So when Prime died....I really wasn't too worried. Hell I was expecting Jazz to come back as well at one point.

The energon sliver giving Sam the location of the Matrix, or rather the location of someone who could read the glyphs to tell him where the matrix was....or didn't know where it was but knew a poem to give him a hint, or....hell just forget it. While Megatron had a giant chunk of of it jammed into his chest to revive him.....but was clueless...but even if he knew I don't think it would have helped.

This next one is a catch 22. Pending on what you want to believe. Devastator was not the Constructicons. Or rather, he was made of of the same scanned vehicles, but he wasn't made up of the actual bots. Which for me was the biggest let down. But if you want to argue he was made up of the Constructicons....then they too defied death in which humans coming back form being blown to bits wouldn't be too far fetched in the third film....wait, wait, Sam did that didn't he? Well there you go.

The Decepticon Army of hatchlings keep dying from a lack of energon but as soon as Prime Dies, Fallen reigns down hell on a few destroyers with the hatchlings all grown up, to harvest the sun for more energon to raise his army of.....hatchlings? Aw hell I did it again.

And there's more I'm sure....but for those arguing that there are no considerable plot wells (Not holes mind you, wells) please feel free to explain the above list. And for those of you who do enjoy a good story that makes sense and are being rediculed as to why you didn't enjoy the sequel, please feel free to use the above list to your leisure.

I stand on these grounds. I liked this movie, but I liked the First one more. The first film, design wise, development wise, plot hole wise (As in there were acceptable plot holes) and mixing the right amount of humor.....was great. This film, the bad outweighed the good for me. Design wise I was cringing every time I saw those damn twins....not because they were ugly, even though they were, but because they served a moot point. There were comedy relief when there was more then enough comedy relief. They had their moment to shine in the sun with Devastator, and Devi is shot with a gun from a ship nearly an ocean away while there right under the bots balls! They seemed to steal screen time from Jolt (I would argue we wasn't even in the film really, acting more like Ratchets first aid kit) Arcee triplets, Sideswipe, or even newer villans like the Constructicons. They just seemed useless to me, and they made up a good chuck of the film. The movie in general was trying too hard to be funny after a certain point. If Simmons didn't save the later half of this movie for me I would have just forgot about the humans all together.

The only reason I would watch this film again, is to see Prime take on the three Decepticons on his own, Prime fuse with Jetfires carcass....or the beginning fight sequence in Shanghai. Which is what the movie should have been thoughout. Old robots doing what they do best, newer characters shining in battle, and those damn twins in the background being given only two to three seconds of screen time.....somewhere in the middle of this film, Bay thought it wise to switch the equation. Thank God Prime came back....

This film I will say is Michael Bay's Phantom Menace, it will make alot of money, but wont out shine the original. I do not think it will gross a Billion domestically. And as always, Bay or no Bay, Hasbro will push to get this third film underway with Production. They won't have a choice if the money keeps raking in, which is fine with me. I would like to see a fresh directors take on this franchise.

Laters,
Josh

First Gen wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

First Gen wrote:My official stance on this film is that the action was great the story was atrocious.

I loved the first film, this one did not do it justice story wise.

Starscream:...somebody had to assume command.

Megatron: Nobody commands the Decepticons but me, even in death.

Two seconds later...

Megatron: Master, I've failed you...

WTF?!!!

The way I see it, Megatron commands the Cons while The Fallen commands him, kinda like Cobra Commander and Serpentor in GI Joe if I'm correct.

Um, no DM. If you remember Serpentor assumed full command of the Cobra forces and everyone was glad he did it. And no, Megatron answered to no one in the first film, he was to rule the Universe with the power of the Allspark, now he's the Fallen's bitch, a crap TF that has to have Megatron beat Prime for him cause he can't do it himself. Thats just sad.

I don't know the only GI Joe I ever watched was Resolute but I read on some wiki a while ago that Serpentor was Cobra Commanders superior while Cobra Commander lead the organization. And I too thought it was weird that Megatron changed so much from the first but with just a little bit of bending here and there it does kinda work.

wingdarkness wrote:I'll always be proud of being true to Transformers and to the fanbase that only wants something with coherency to go along with cool action

Isn't there a rule that any time you reference the "TRUE FAN" talking point, you automatically lose the argument and essentially all credibility with it?

Every time I have watched it (4 times btw), I have loved it. There were plot holes and things that didn't make sense but it entertained me for nearly 3 hours. One thing that got to me was some pretty bad editing and reuse of footage. For example, Wheelie transmits to Soundwave that Mikaela has the cube sliver and Soundwave says "Soundwave acknowledges, pursue her, retrieve it". Later the same footage of Soundwave plays again with different dialogue. There is a similar example when Director Galloway is talking to Optimus on the base there is a part that pans behind him and shows Optimus. 30 seconds later the footage plays again. It was probably due to financial reasons but it is noticable. The Decepticons traveling to earth with the Fallen was also stock footage of the Autobots from the first movie with other comets in the background.

In the editing, Simmons knows that Megatron is back. How? The Fallen is the one on TV. In the adaptations, Megatron is one who addresses the planet on TV not the Fallen. Megatron makes more sense as he is the one who taps into all the satellite dishes.

Some criticisms don't make sense. Some people complain that at some points characters appear only in vehicle mode when they should be in robot mode (Sideswipe in Egypt). If they used logic they would realise that the cost of putting a car in the desert is far cheaper that a CGI robot in the desert. Having the car establishes that the character is there (hmm, where was Jolt). Skids and Mudflap get too much criticism. I thought they were both good on screen and provided much needed relief from the (sometimes intense) action scenes. The racism thing doesn't exist and is only there because viewers have convinced themselves it is there. If it was would Reno Wilson (Mudflap) or Tom Kenny (Skids and Wheelie) have accepted the part?

As for people wanting/expecting Unicron in the next movie, I don't think he is a viable choice. He will cost a lot to make and putting him onscreen would be near impossible with other characters. That was one of the reasons for the change of Galactus in Fantastic Four. He would look cool but probably won't happen. Anyway, his story has been done to death. Oh, and please no Megatron becoming Galvatron.

First Gen wrote:

Shadowman wrote:While I'll admit that the first two parts are pretty good (Although interchangeable with the Dooku-Sidious comparison, Megatron ruled the Decepticons, he wasn't just a mean scary face) you might want to watch Return of the Jedi again, because that last part is all wrong; Luke was busy writhing on the floor when Vader killed Sidious. And even if Vader hadn't killed Sidious, they would have both died when the Death Star blew up moments later, thanks to Lando.

And what I didn't "get" was how the prequels are not relevant.

You just proved my whole argument, yes Luke was writhing on the floor and yes Vadar killed him but that doesn't change the fact that Luke was the Emperor's biggest threat, the only one that could kill him, and essentially Luke did cause he made his father realize he still loved his son and that the dark side was not his master. The fear of the Emperor was realized cause the one thing that could destroy him did.

And really, you're gonna bring up Lando blowing up the Death Star? Like there was no way for them to get out in time? C'mon.

I'd like to reinforce First Gen's anti-Lando statement by saying that Luke was able to get off the Death Star in time while dragging Vader's 7-foot dying carcass to a shuttle, while, had Vader not thrown him over the edge, the Emperor could easily have gotten out just by walking without any dead weight to slow him down.

g2grimmy64 wrote:

First Gen wrote:

Shadowman wrote:While I'll admit that the first two parts are pretty good (Although interchangeable with the Dooku-Sidious comparison, Megatron ruled the Decepticons, he wasn't just a mean scary face) you might want to watch Return of the Jedi again, because that last part is all wrong; Luke was busy writhing on the floor when Vader killed Sidious. And even if Vader hadn't killed Sidious, they would have both died when the Death Star blew up moments later, thanks to Lando.

And what I didn't "get" was how the prequels are not relevant.

You just proved my whole argument, yes Luke was writhing on the floor and yes Vadar killed him but that doesn't change the fact that Luke was the Emperor's biggest threat, the only one that could kill him, and essentially Luke did cause he made his father realize he still loved his son and that the dark side was not his master. The fear of the Emperor was realized cause the one thing that could destroy him did.

And really, you're gonna bring up Lando blowing up the Death Star? Like there was no way for them to get out in time? C'mon.

I'd like to reinforce First Gen's anti-Lando statement by saying that Luke was able to get off the Death Star in time while dragging Vader's 7-foot dying carcass to a shuttle, while, had Vader not thrown him over the edge, the Emperor could easily have gotten out just by walking without any dead weight to slow him down.

Eh...I don't think the sequences were shown with minute to comparable miniute accuracy.

Not weighing in either way, I just don't think this is good standing for anyone to be on.

If critics loved the movie I would be worried. They usually accalaim movies that put you to sleep.

Counterpunch wrote:

wingdarkness wrote:I'll always be proud of being true to Transformers and to the fanbase that only wants something with coherency to go along with cool action

Isn't there a rule that any time you reference the "TRUE FAN" talking point, you automatically lose the argument and essentially all credibility with it?

haha, One of the better points in here.


Gonna go see it tomorrow and I'm sure I'll just enjoy it for myself.

Megatron Wolf wrote:No one listens to critics thats why. these days its all word of mouth and what ever people say on their blogs. The day of the critic is long gone and they are an extinct species. Only reasons why this movie is doing well is A) its a summer action movie,B) People have nothing better to do, C) explosions sell, D) Megan Fox in slow motion could sell a half eaten rotten burger with rat crap on top. ROTF is better then the first one ill give it that, but not by much. Im sure if i had the ability to shut off my brain id probably think it was a great movie to but i cant do that. Just trying to figure out how these damn transformations make any sense makes me want to hit my head against the wall. Not only that but, to much crap was thrown in, it was to damn long, humans ruin it....again, and bay cant wright a decent story to save his life. He has a great directing and visual style but thats about it. He could've done so much here and he really dropped the ball. He could've made a great action movie and a great TF continuity but he went the easy way and made a movie for the masses. And thats why i hate him & this franchise. When the third one comes out im not seeing it. Ill wait until its up on the net for free then ill decide if its worth my time and money to see in the theater. With this track record i doubt it. (Sorry for the long post/rant)

first its write and second Bay didnt write the story only directed it, Orci and Kurtzman wrote the story.

Joshua Vallse, I agree completely.

The action was great, The TF's were great designed (the twins could have
had better heads but they didn't annoy me that much).
But someone switched the screentime for characters. There was to much
comedy.

And Devastator should've been a lot stronger, he got taken out by HUMANS!
Never has there been a combiner (to my knowledge) been taken out by humans.

A new director for TF3 would be superawesome (Nolan?). Or at least a
fanboy student who will write the script (or me :p).

Going to watch it again this week, my high expectations are gone so I
can enjoy it even more now.

Primus C-00 wrote:

HECTOR wrote:Reading these comments makes me sad If this movie didn't please fans then what will? Seriously! What do you nay-sayers want??
I thought that it was an awesome flick! There were so many satisfying G1 tidbits! Devastator, Soundwave (voiced by Welker himself!), Ravage, Energon, Pretenders, the first 13 cybertronians, a super-bad dude from an obscure cancelled comic series (awesome!) and even the Matrix of Leadership itself! Complete with a near death revelation!

A lotta people seem upset over Megatron's association with the Fallen. The IDW prequel comics shed a lot of light on that but yeah the best way to describe it is it's like Darth Vader and the Emperor. He's still No. 1 but there's also an older bad guy who can offer him a lotta power, and he kinda owes him for saving his life.

Just an overall great time. Prime's death had me on the edge of my seat saying 'what? . . .' You know you were too! Admit it! If Optimus Prime dying doesn't make you sad then you don't deserve to be called a fan.

The first film pleased me immensely, so surely this film should've built on that and improved, not forsaken the best bits or rehashed quite possibly the worst elements of the first.

As I have stated before I had little or no expectations when I walked into the cinema at midnight, all those weeks ago, and that is why it hurt so much when I walked out nearly three hours later.

Again, as stated before, clusterbombing:

G1 tidbits

Soundwave, again, did very little except have tentacle sex with satellites and sound like Dr. Claw.

I'm not gonna even bother with the rest of your complaints because they've already been rebutted elsewhere, or are just too nitpicky to even address, but the fact that you complained about the dr claw voice for soundwave truly shows how little about g1 you really know. THAT is soundwaves g1 voice. Welker has admitted that the dr claw and soundwave voice are one and the same, the reason the soundwave voice sounds nothing like dr claw's in the show is because of the synths they used to add a harmonic sound to it. Otherwise its the same voice.

The only reason the plot in g1 is viewed as coherent and flowing is because with the exception of multipart episodes, they almost never had anything to do with the previous episodes. The fault alot of people here have is nostalgia overrides any other critique of the old show, simply because we have fond memories of the show growing up as kids. Don't get me wrong, I loved g1, but anyone who thinks that the show is any less at fault than the movies has been living in their own world.

If anything, this movie was closer to g1 than the previous installment. Much larger cast of BACKGROUND characters (because lets face it, almost 75% of the characters in g1 never had a major role for more than 2 or 3 episodes. and as the cast got larger, even more characters fell through the cracks) with wasted potential, large scale fire fights between both factions (the only difference here is that in the movie getting shot actually hurt them, where as in the cartoon, ironhide had like 7 "close calls" in the first 2 seasons)

The appearance of a gestalt (as short lived as it was in the film)

Continuity errors as far as animation (I get it that there were multiple decepticons choosing similar vehicle forms, but come on, the entire set of constructicons that was combined as devastator, was also fighting individually where prime's body was. The cartoon is equally guilty of animation and continuity errors. Hell theres even arguments of whether or not wheeljack is really dead after the g1 movie. He shows up in a background scene or two fighting in season 3 or 4, along with some other "presumed dead" autobots and decepticons).

Hell even the plot of rotf is a cookie cutter approach of the original g1 movie. Replace Unicron with the fallen (this works, because his agenda is to destroy a planet sized object, namely the sun), Galvatron with megs (and you can debate this all you want, he gets brought back to life with a new body and agenda), and the matrix doesn't even get changed, its still the key plotpoint to all this.

People need to stop demanding shakespeare for a franchise that was never story first, action close second. The cartoons have always been action first, story a distant second, simply because the shows serve as 26minute commercials for the toys. If you want story, go to a comic book, because the stories there are actually what sell the comic...

Lastly, I would like to point out to megatronwolf, for the one billionth time since before the first movie even came out... BAY DID NOT WRITE THE SCRIPT OR STORY FOR EITHER MOVIE. I understand you hate Bay, and you hate "bayformers." We all know it, because every single one of your posts on seibertron for the last 2 and a half years is how much you hate it. We all get it already. SAY SOMETHING THAT CONTRIBUTES POSITIVELY, or go be a troll on imdb. We don't need the same thing posted 1000 times by the same person, especially when you clearly have not learned that your complaints aren't even accurate.

And before anyone calls me out on being a g1 hater, quite the contrary, as flawed as it was, g1 and beast wars are still my favorite cartoons. period. (Hated what they did with beast machines, hated armada/energon/cybertron, was indifferent to r.i.d., can't stand Transformers meets teen titans (aka animated). And the original transformers movie is in my top 5 of favorite movies in general. But just because I love the old stuff, doesn't mean I'm gonna overlook their flaws, and then complain that the new movie shares alot of the same flaws.

I thought the autobot twins were hilarious, I wasn't disturbed by the sector 7 thong, I wasn't disgusted by the pot brownies scene, I didn't even notice the constructicon testes until the second time I saw the film and even then it didn't put me off to the movie. I wasn't moved by prime's death as much as I was in the 86 movie, but I was a kid when the old one came out and I already knew he would be coming back in the same movie anyway. I loved seeing Prime kick some major deceptichops right before getting taken down, and I loved cranky and senile jetfire. My only major complaint is that the final battle scene wasn't quite as finished visually as the rest of the movie, but it still looked good.

People need to either accept their opinions as different from others, or just shut up, grumble to yourself, and move on. Its a movie... and whether you liked it or not, the movie did well financially for more than just the sake of hype. Even with all the hype I enjoyed it alot more than I thought I would, and hype usually kills things for me.

So, learn to accept opinions as being different, or shut up and move on, if you wanna debate over minor things in the film that apparently ruined the other 2 hours and 29 minutes for you, then go to imdb, the land of movie trolls. K THX BAI.

Megatron Wolf wrote:No one listens to critics thats why. these days its all word of mouth and what ever people say on their blogs. The day of the critic is long gone and they are an extinct species. Only reasons why this movie is doing well is A) its a summer action movie,B) People have nothing better to do, C) explosions sell, D) Megan Fox in slow motion could sell a half eaten rotten burger with rat crap on top. ROTF is better then the first one ill give it that, but not by much. Im sure if i had the ability to shut off my brain id probably think it was a great movie to but i cant do that. Just trying to figure out how these damn transformations make any sense makes me want to hit my head against the wall. Not only that but, to much crap was thrown in, it was to damn long, humans ruin it....again, and bay cant wright a decent story to save his life. He has a great directing and visual style but thats about it. He could've done so much here and he really dropped the ball. He could've made a great action movie and a great TF continuity but he went the easy way and made a movie for the masses. And thats why i hate him & this franchise. When the third one comes out im not seeing it. Ill wait until its up on the net for free then ill decide if its worth my time and money to see in the theater. With this track record i doubt it. (Sorry for the long post/rant)

Actually, Bay did'nt write the movie, he just directed it
If you wanna blame someone, blame the actual writers - Orci and Kurtzman, the guys who wrote the first TF movie back in 07 - and they also wrote this spring's biggest surprise - Star Trek -

I love you Head Shot. You understand!

Some interesting points here already, I'd like to address some too...

Many defenders of the film have used the "It's not supposed to be Shakespeare" line. True, the film's only supposed to be a bit of fun, with a few explosions and close-ups of Megan Fox. But are people who expect more really being too demanding?

The fact is, there's no reason whatsoever why a film can't have action and excitement in addition to a bit of subtext or plot. Films such as Terminator 2, Starship Troopers, and even TV shows such as Battlestar Galactica prove that you can have your cake and eat it. It's certainly possible to make a film that combines action and thematic depth to great effect. Why couldn't ROTF do this?

Agreed, it's not supposed to work on as many levels as Citizen Kane or any of the other examples listed in previous posts. But I'd be happy if ROFT worked on any level alongside pure spectacle.

Another point: people are rushing to see this film, so does that mean the critics are worthless?

Not at all. A food critic would (justifiably) give a bad review to a McDonald's burger. Yet millions of people eat McDonald's every day. It doesn't mean that food critics are out of touch or irrelevant, just that "popularity" is no guage of "quality".

It's the job of a critic to assess a movie, not by how popular it is, but at how good it is. How good is the acting, the direction, the cinematography, the story?

On almost any critical level, I can't help but agree with the ciritcs. ROFT is a one-dimensional testosterone hit with characters that seem to have been taken out of failed sit-coms.

But that doesn't mean that people can't enjoy it, or that only stupid people can enjoy it. We all have our guilty pleasures (myself included), and I'm happy for the franchise that the film is proving to be so popular.

Personally, I enjoy reading film reviews (whether I agree with them or not). I don't care if people find them "irrelevant" or "stuffy". As long as they make for enjoyable reading, what's the problem? Different people have different opinions, a critic's view is no more valid than yours or mine. They're just fun to read, is all. If you don't like a particular film criticism, just shrug your shoulders and ignore it.

Reaper2004 wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:No one listens to critics thats why. these days its all word of mouth and what ever people say on their blogs. The day of the critic is long gone and they are an extinct species. Only reasons why this movie is doing well is A) its a summer action movie,B) People have nothing better to do, C) explosions sell, D) Megan Fox in slow motion could sell a half eaten rotten burger with rat crap on top. ROTF is better then the first one ill give it that, but not by much. Im sure if i had the ability to shut off my brain id probably think it was a great movie to but i cant do that. Just trying to figure out how these damn transformations make any sense makes me want to hit my head against the wall. Not only that but, to much crap was thrown in, it was to damn long, humans ruin it....again, and bay cant wright a decent story to save his life. He has a great directing and visual style but thats about it. He could've done so much here and he really dropped the ball. He could've made a great action movie and a great TF continuity but he went the easy way and made a movie for the masses. And thats why i hate him & this franchise. When the third one comes out im not seeing it. Ill wait until its up on the net for free then ill decide if its worth my time and money to see in the theater. With this track record i doubt it. (Sorry for the long post/rant)

first its write and second Bay didnt write the story only directed it, Orci and Kurtzman wrote the story.

Rut Roh i spelleded a words wrong!!!!!!! Guess the worlds going to end now huh? I like when people have to point out spelling errors to try and prove some thing. BTW it doesnt work. Any way, im sure bay had some influence on the script so all three are at fault. And how they were able to make a great movie like Star Trek and then this fail is beyond me. Oh wait Trek had JJ and ROTF had Bay. Just answered my own question.

Not really.


They had to do a rush job because of the strike is what I believe to be the case.

Megatron Wolf wrote:And how they were able to make a great movie like Star Trek and then this fail is beyond me. Oh wait Trek had JJ and ROTF had Bay. Just answered my own question.

Because JJ Abrams is always known for stories with coherent plots, like Cloverfield and Lost.

Yeah I dont see the hype with abrams.