The Energon Pub

Straya wrote:Who cares if he has lips? Fans wanted the voice of Peter Cullen coming out of Prime and that's what we ended up with. Content and characterization will make or break, not a set of lips.

Great. Then bring on the yellow version of Spiderman if you are so confident in this.

Content and characterization would allow an incredibly great and iconic character like Optimus Prime to have a face shield 100% of the time. Again, Darth Vader comes to mind.

if you want to go back to even classier imagry, think phantom of the opera.

Hot_Rod wrote:Quote Bay: "If you don't like the choices, fine. And if you do, good for you."

He obviously could care less. I say if you don't like it, do the only thing that matters. Don't pay for it, and don't give him your money for something you don't approve of. If fans just forfiet their money despite still not agreeing with the choices made, they WON'T care that you disagree and will continue in that direction.

In our society the only thing that people listen to is the "CHA-CHING" sound that is money.

Exactly. I've been teetering on the brink ever since they snubbed Frank Welker (a disgraceful decision given how good he sounds in the tie-in game and his history with Cullen) and this latest news about destroying Prime's face has kind of cemented my resolve to not pay for this in a cinema. Feels crappy to not go and see it, but that's the way it is for me now.

durkadurka wrote:if you want to go back to even classier imagry, think phantom of the opera.

New version, 80s musical, or Lon Chaney version?

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

durkadurka wrote:if you want to go back to even classier imagry, think phantom of the opera.

New version, 80s musical, or Lon Chaney version?

dunno....i didn't watch much of either. I'm thinking the Lon Chaney version and the newer movie version that came out a couple of years ago. That guy showed some emotion under the mask, well...the scenes that I saw anyways hehe.

hey! how come i turned into a decipticon!?!? I ain't no crazy d-con! hehe

Hot_Rod wrote:As for needing a mouth to project emotions: A good actor will make you feel the emotions of the character by emoting well through sound in the voice. The voice of a person is where approximately 85% of your emotions are communicated and portrayed to another life form. I.E. Your dog knows when you are angry only by the tone in your voice. I've also seen some curl up next to you when they can tell you are feeling a little sad.

The tone, accent, and all that good stuff in a voice is where the actor is the one who gets the characters emotions across. You can have the saddest looking face in the world but that will never matter if the actor sucks and sounds like he/she's reading lines monotone from a piece of paper.

Indeed. The tone of voice, physical gestures, the eyes, even the right lighting or camera angles can all be used to emphasis the mood and personality of a character.

Hot_Rod wrote:This whole movie just reaps of flawed logic. Hopefully they'll see how flawed when they get the box office totals back in.

I don't wish any ill will on the success of the Transformers Movie. I hope that the movie folks are right. I hope that I'm just the rabid fan who has no idea what he's talking about because he's so entwined with the hobby. I hope the movie is a huge success. I hope it makes everyone involved tons of money so that we do all of this over again. I hope that everyone who visits this website will go to see the movie. I will be one of those people who says after the movie that you can't complain about the movie if you haven't seen it yet. As a Transformers fan, you owe it to yourself and to the community to see this movie. After the movie is released, if you haven't seen it yet, you can't complain about it anymore in my books. You should see the movie to further validate your claims that the movie is as bad or as good as you think it is. Trust me, the lack or contribution of your $10 for a movie ticket isn't going to make or break the movie as much as you want to support or boycott the movie. Your contribution to the fandom is far greater if you actually go see the movie and can form logical opinions about the movie AFTER you've seen it. I won't tolerate the excuse "I won't see the movie because I think it looks horrible" AFTER the movie's release. I think that is a weak and arrogant excuse. You owe it to the fans that you're trying to express your opinion to about the movie to at least have seen the source material so that you can talk intelligently about the whole product.

Until the movie comes out, all of our opinions are fair game. After the movie comes out, anyone who hasn't seen the movie should sit back and keep quiet. You want to diss the movie after it comes out? Go see it and then come back and talk all of the **** that you want to say about the movie. Just see it first before you do that.

Hot_Rod wrote:I have not heard one good reason from those in charge as to why these changes were made. All the excuses are just the kinds of things that make your face cringe and go: "Huh?!" with the idea in the back of your mind that they can't possibly be serious. Then as soon as you find out they are serious about it, you're next reaction is, "That is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard."

Not to mention how many times they've contradicted themselves with previous reasons/excuses. I just want someone official to come out and say that Hasbro wouldn't let them use the classic designs which is why all of these robots look so different. Of course, if that's not the reason, then I want someone to come out and arrogantly say that they think they know what's best and that what's worked for the past 23 years won't work on the big screen. We'll see at the box office. I guess I just want to remind those people that it took the success of Spiderman to show the world that a superhero can indeed wear tights on the big screen and not look like a frikkin' idiot.

Hot_Rod wrote:These people want to spoon feed you anything they can to get you to fork over you money for THEIR creation. Personally, I think it's rather obvious they just USED the Transformers property and name and the popularity and prestigue that comes with it to make their own "Robots from outter space attack" kind of movie that Bay always wanted to make but never had the resources or aliby to make. I think this is Bay's excuse to do his own version of a Terminator or Preditor movie, but being protected from copyright infringment by using an available copyright that was for rent like Transformers.

I'm not sure that I agree with that. From what I've heard, Bay seemed pretty disinterested in making this movie initially. I honestly believe that the "boy and his car" concept is what drew Michael Bay to this movie. Fortunately, in our case, this movie can start out similarly to the Island where it's about the illusion (people thinking they can go to the Island versus a boy thinking he just bought a 1970s Camaro) which then switches gears half way through the movie (In the case of the Island, it just switches to an all-out action/chase scene movie which is what happens with the Transformers as well). I think Transformers fits the bill very well for a Michael Bay type flick. I don't have a problem with the story for the most part. Again, it's just the designs that I have a major issue with.

Hot_Rod wrote:. Personally, I think it's rather obvious they just USED the Transformers property and name and the popularity and prestigue that comes with it to make their own "Robots from outter space attack" kind of movie that Bay always wanted to make but never had the resources or aliby to make. I think this is Bay's excuse to do his own version of a Terminator or Preditor movie, but being protected from copyright infringment by using an available copyright that was for rent like Transformers.

Definitely agree with this. Bay is a bit similar to Emmerich (who was the other choice of director apparently) and he stated his intention to make Transformers an "alien invasion movie"..It is obvious he wanted to make his own equivalent of Independence Day or War of The Worlds, with sci-fi designs cribbed from The Matrix and Terminator thrown into the mix. This was his opportunity to do this, piggy-backing on a lucrative, established brand. I despair at the wasted potential through letting this man take the reigns.

durkadurka wrote:if you want to go back to even classier imagry, think phantom of the opera.

That's a great example as well though you can see 1/2 of his face which some people might argue in this situation.

Seibertron wrote:

durkadurka wrote:if you want to go back to even classier imagry, think phantom of the opera.

That's a great example as well though you can see 1/2 of his face which some people might argue in this situation.

It's hard to find a still image from the Chaney version to make sure, but I believe his face was basically entirely covered to hide the specialized make-up he did to his face so the audience would not expect anything. But Chaney was a silent film actor so he was an expert at conveying character through nothing but body gestures and the like.

And there is no way you can tell me Prime without his faceplate on is anywhere near as frightening as Chaney.

You dont need lips to convey emotion. All you need is good voice acting and some good eye movment. Flashback to the 86 movie. Remember when prime died? There was a **** load of emotion in that scene. And prime had no lips. It was all conveyed by eye motion and acting. They just wanted lips to show off what ILM can do. Wich is pointless because if you want to see ILMs abiliteis see Star Wars ep3. And if Hasbro wanted Prime to have lips why are there no movie toys with lips? They all have faceplates. They dont even have one like Cybertron prime that has a mouth and a faceplate. I still think that even hasbro likes the faceplate more than the mouth. Either that or they want to make us fans happy in some way.

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:[quote="Seibertron

And there is no way you can tell me Prime without his faceplate on is anywhere near as frightening as Chaney.

lol, he's pretty scary, but...yeah, I can safely say Prime without the faceplate looks worse. Kinda like a scary, brawny drag queen

durkadurka wrote:lol, he's pretty scary, but...yeah, I can safely say Prime without the faceplate looks worse. Kinda like a scary, brawny drag queen

I think Lon would be sad for people to say a CGI robot is scarier than this :

hey! that's my uncle Hary! No seriously though, he's pretty scary. Maybe i'm just biased cause I thought Prime was the coolest thing in the world when i was a kid. Ahh...the 80s...

Seibertron wrote:This really pisses me off. It's Optimus-f'in-Prime for crying out loud. Can we at least have ONE thing in this movie not be changed for the sake of changing? I can't believe how passive so many people are being about this decision. And don't bring up the whole Optimus Primal thing. I would have been fine if they did the Beast Wars or Cybertron approach with movie Prime. This just looks ridiculous. How anyone at ILM or Dreamworks or even at Hasbro thought this looked even remotely good or "cool" seriously needs to get their eyes checked.

Please keep the entire design staff as far away as possible from G.I.Joe and any future Super Hero movies. Next thing you know we'll have a yellow Spider-Man with a visor and pinchers on his face as well as the Blue Lantern, a red Batman, a green Superman and a pink Wolverine. After seeing Spider-Man tonight and seeing how faithful they are to his costume, it helped me realize how disappointed I am to this day in the robot designs in this movie. I don't care what the reasons are for it, these design changes were poor decisions from the get-go and are completely unnecessary regardless of what mumbo-jumbo they want to make up to spin these changes to the public.

Don't get me wrong ... I'm extremely excited about the movie. But I feel a strong sense of Deja Vu. Beast Machines comes to mind. Great story. Absolutely horrible designs.

Someone who agrees. Thanks.

The (Non-removable) faceplate on Prime is part of his design. It helps make him who he is.

I just love how they are screwing this all up.

Like the new Beowulf coming out this fall, Grendel will be played by Crispin Glover...

seriously, he is a great actor, a bit weird, but what the hell? Grendel, for those who do not know, is a giant monster, like a troll, acording to the story...not some puny, whiny little man! How can Crispin Glover fill that role? How can any mere human? Grendel was f-ing HUGE in the original story.

That is just an example of how the source material is absolutely smeared and discarded at will by these egomaniac directors/producers.

I will still go see TF...but I feel it is going to suck. Badly.

YouFearGalvatron wrote:Like the new Beowulf coming out this fall, Grendel will be played by Crispin Glover...

seriously, he is a great actor, a bit weird, but what the hell? Grendel, for those who do not know, is a giant monster, like a troll, acording to the story...not some puny, whiny little man! How can Crispin Glover fill that role? How can any mere human? Grendel was f-ing HUGE in the original story.

That is just an example of how the source material is absolutely smeared and discarded at will by these egomaniac directors/producers.

First, the Beowulf movie is going to be motion-capture, similar to Robert Zemeckis' (he's directing this) The Polar Express. Considering how Tom Hanks portrayed 6 different characters in it, including an eight-year-old, I think it's possible for them to alter Grendel into a monster.

Second, even if they don't do that, why can't directors do their own interpretations on things? Should Francis Ford Coppola not have been allowed to do Apocalypse Now because it differed too much from Heart of Darkness? What about Stanley Kubrick's The Shining? Hamlet can be performed countless ways due to its ambiguity.

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

YouFearGalvatron wrote:Like the new Beowulf coming out this fall, Grendel will be played by Crispin Glover...

seriously, he is a great actor, a bit weird, but what the hell? Grendel, for those who do not know, is a giant monster, like a troll, acording to the story...not some puny, whiny little man! How can Crispin Glover fill that role? How can any mere human? Grendel was f-ing HUGE in the original story.

That is just an example of how the source material is absolutely smeared and discarded at will by these egomaniac directors/producers.

First, the Beowulf movie is going to be motion-capture, similar to Robert Zemeckis' (he's directing this) The Polar Express. Considering how Tom Hanks portrayed 6 different characters in it, including an eight-year-old, I think it's possible for them to alter Grendel into a monster.

Second, even if they don't do that, why can't directors do their own interpretations on things? Should Francis Ford Coppola not have been allowed to do Apocalypse Now because it differed too much from Heart of Darkness? What about Stanley Kubrick's The Shining? Hamlet can be performed countless ways due to its ambiguity.

I know its a bit off topic but Is Beowulf going to be based on the short story or the novel?

Lon Chaney... <3<3<3<3<3

*Starts* Huh? What? Oh, yeah, Prime's lips. Yeah. *cough*

Prime's lack of a faceplate can't make or break the movie on its own. None of the designs, in fact, can make or break the movie on their own. None of the random name changes, character omissions/new characters from nowhere, or snaps-at-fans from the filmmakers can make or break the movie on their own. Not even a corny script could make or break the movie (good actors can make the most horrible material "look" okay).

The key phrase here is "on their own." None of these things are on their own. It's like the filmmakers knew better than to take a huge chunk out of Transformers with a chainsaw, but ended up removing just as much a little at a time with a tiny chisel.

And bravo to Galvatron to beating me to this one: if the designers' justification for the mangled Decepticons is that alien robots should not look like humans, why is it okay for Optimus Prime to have a human face?

On an unrelated note, death threats are never acceptable and the filmmakers have a right to be angry at the fans who are making/supporting them.

As for the the GI Joe film... not only did DiBonaventura say he was going to make the GI Joe movie about Action Man (or, to be fair, about Duke and Action Man and what swell buds they are), and not only did he write off the entire idea of Cobra as "stupid," he tore into Snake Eyes. I'm not the world's biggest SE fan, but even I refuse to ignore that whole "central to the story" aspect of his character.

But at least if he omits Cobra he has to omit Cobra Commander, which saves him from an embarrassing Hollywood makeover.

I really don't see the big deal with the mouth being under a faceplate. Galaxy force had the same concept and pulled it off, and if my memory serves me well, I do remember seeing a pic of 20th Anniversary Prime with faceplace removed, and there was a mouth

Megatron_Wolf wrote:

The Paragon of Virtue wrote:

YouFearGalvatron wrote:Like the new Beowulf coming out this fall, Grendel will be played by Crispin Glover...

seriously, he is a great actor, a bit weird, but what the hell? Grendel, for those who do not know, is a giant monster, like a troll, acording to the story...not some puny, whiny little man! How can Crispin Glover fill that role? How can any mere human? Grendel was f-ing HUGE in the original story.

That is just an example of how the source material is absolutely smeared and discarded at will by these egomaniac directors/producers.

First, the Beowulf movie is going to be motion-capture, similar to Robert Zemeckis' (he's directing this) The Polar Express. Considering how Tom Hanks portrayed 6 different characters in it, including an eight-year-old, I think it's possible for them to alter Grendel into a monster.

Second, even if they don't do that, why can't directors do their own interpretations on things? Should Francis Ford Coppola not have been allowed to do Apocalypse Now because it differed too much from Heart of Darkness? What about Stanley Kubrick's The Shining? Hamlet can be performed countless ways due to its ambiguity.

I know its a bit off topic but Is Beowulf going to be based on the short story or the novel?

The poem

When I saw Ryan's list of artistic licenses that they have taken, I took a step back and went, yeah they are screwing with it an awful lot aren't they???

The debate has been good. I read through all (17!!!) pages of posts. Some great thoughts and ideas.

I'm sad about Prime's face, I'm sad about Starscream's design--most characters designs, and I'm sad for the Decepticons only being monsters...basically.


Just wanted to say about the Joe movie... I won't be anywhere near the theater if that is what they are doing with it, which I had also heard. GI Joe is a little different though, because it has the older 12 inch line before the 3.75 cartoons, and so forth started.

Speaking of GI Joe, masked characters often show emotion (great examples given), even masked mute characters like Snake Eyes....

Snake Eyes is much like Darth Vader in that he can show what he is thinking with his body, and he can't even talk, etc..., and you can't see his eyes!!!

Tim Seeley just drew me a sweet masked Firefly this weekend , and you can quite obviously see the hatred, violence, and wickedness, purely in his eyes, and his posture...
Facial expression (while useful) is not the only thing to make a difference, it is in the camera angles, the body posture, the voice, the eyes, the reactions of other characters to him/her, the music, the setting...they all work together to let us know what a character is feeling, not just a facial expression.

so he will have a face under the the face-plate.
WHOOPTY$**+

it worked for me beastwars. besides, do you know how hard it is to act and show emotion under a mask? i know, and it's very amazing when you can but you lose something if you dont know how to act with a mask on. now picture trying to generate a cg masked charactor and trying to give emotion to it.

oh, trivia, OP never had a plate before the cybertron war as well.

still waking up so this is more random than normal...

coffieeeeee...