The Energon Pub

Coolyfett wrote:It was a typo, but it has been edited to 3 years, if so ridiculous, why post in it?, do you think you have the skills to change my mind about how Bay does TF movies? Its funny that you say bishop shouldn't remain civil...I think it is great he didn't lash out angrily at me. It shows fairness and equality. Although I can not say the same for others on here. People get so upset that I wont spend my money on this project. Its like peer pressure to gang up on the person with a different opinion. BUT, I hope Mr. Bay can finally give us REAL fans a great Tranformers movie. Nothing ridiculous about that. Have a good night man.

I am saying this thread has remain civil, not talking about bishop. And if you recall, I did not post in this thread untill you decided it was time to mention be by name.


What makes you such a REAL fan compared to the rest of us on here? DO tell, I'm sure it will be a good read.

Robinson wrote:

Coolyfett wrote:It was a typo, but it has been edited to 3 years, if so ridiculous, why post in it?, do you think you have the skills to change my mind about how Bay does TF movies? Its funny that you say bishop shouldn't remain civil...I think it is great he didn't lash out angrily at me. It shows fairness and equality. Although I can not say the same for others on here. People get so upset that I wont spend my money on this project. Its like peer pressure to gang up on the person with a different opinion. BUT, I hope Mr. Bay can finally give us REAL fans a great Tranformers movie. Nothing ridiculous about that. Have a good night man.

I am saying this thread has remain civil, not talking about bishop. And if you recall, I did not post in this thread untill you decided it was time to mention be by name.


What makes you such a REAL fan compared to the rest of us on here? DO tell, I'm sure it will be a good read.

It remained civil because I did not respond to an arrogant poster, plus Bishop stopping by was a plus.

I mentioned your name because of the PMs we got, I was showing you and Shadowman love and no hard feelings, you both had addition negative remarks and I left it at that. If you noticed Ive ask folks to be calm and relax.

Now back to this "WE" "US" thing man? Coolyfett is not against any member. I wish you would simply understand this logic. I have no enemies on here. Seriously. If people are forming an "I hate Coolyfett team" then hey that is there wasted energy. I don't hate any of you cats. Peace & Love

Coolyfett wrote:Now back to this "WE" "US" thing man? Coolyfett is not against any member. I wish you would simply understand this logic. I have no enemies on here. Seriously. If people are forming an "I hate Coolyfett team" then hey that is there wasted energy. I don't hate any of you cats. Peace & Love

Stop the pity party. Like I said before the is no cooly initiative against you (although if things keep up I could see it happening)


YOU said and I quote "us REAL fans" so given your perpensity to not like Mr. Bays style of filmmaking it wouls suggest you consider yourself a "REAL" fan while those of us who do like said style are not "Real" fans so I ask you what else is it that makes you a "real" fan compared to the rest of us?

Coolyfett wrote:It normally takes about 3 years to make a great film..."normally" TF2 was made in like a year and 1 half.

Raiders of the Lost Ark was in production for only one year before release. Robocop was in production for a year and a half I think. Aliens was in production for 10 months. The Dark Knight was in production for one year. Terminator 2 was in production for one year. The original Star Wars was in production for 2 years (Which I'm marking the founding of ILM as the start of production), while Empire Strike Back was in production for one year. The Matrix was in production for I think a year or so.

No, not three years.

"The press don't like to say nice things because nice is boring. It's much better to label me the devil. What we do is not brain surgery. We are entertainers, plain and simple, and we're responsible to bring that money back, to make a profit. "
Michael Bay

It's either Michael Bay makes a movie, or he doesn't. There is no 'the third will be better'. If you never liked the previous two, you'll never like the third. Why? Because Michael isn't going to bend over for the fans. He's going to do what he's been doing the past two movies. Blow **** up. Robots going mono-e-mono. If you don't like it, then fine, don't like it, but don't drag the rest of the TF Fandom in your anti-Michael Bay campaign.

I understand your hatred for the movies. Most people don't like how Transformers has been turned into this jockey filled fight fest. CGI. Cheesy Dialogue. But when you think of it, don't all movies these days have that? As time goes on, as technology and humans evolve, so most our hobbies. If there was another movie based directly off Generation One. Same characters, whatever you make of it, then what's the point of it? A cash grab? Just go rewatch Transformers '87 again.

Robinson wrote:

Coolyfett wrote:Now back to this "WE" "US" thing man? Coolyfett is not against any member. I wish you would simply understand this logic. I have no enemies on here. Seriously. If people are forming an "I hate Coolyfett team" then hey that is there wasted energy. I don't hate any of you cats. Peace & Love

Stop the pity party. Like I said before the is no cooly initiative against you (although if things keep up I could see it happening)


YOU said and I quote "us REAL fans" so given your perpensity to not like Mr. Bays style of film making it would suggest you consider yourself a "REAL" fan while those of us who do like said style are not "Real" fans so I ask you what else is it that makes you a "real" fan compared to the rest of us?

If things keep up? You mean my opinion? Never stated you were a fake fan, YOU put yourself in that category. No pity here I am just not wasting my energy attacking posters. If you want to hate me be my guess. I know what to do when you get out of hand, if you get out of hand. Many of the people that feel the way I feel are afraid of the ganging up style of insecure posters. Fortunately for me I am not afraid of any of you. If you can not deal with my opinion, gracefully leave, if you want to debate peacefully do so. My message is consistent.

Shadowman wrote:

Coolyfett wrote:It normally takes about 3 years to make a great film..."normally" TF2 was made in like a year and 1 half.

Raiders of the Lost Ark was in production for only one year before release. Robocop was in production for a year and a half I think. Aliens was in production for 10 months. The Dark Knight was in production for one year. Terminator 2 was in production for one year. The original Star Wars was in production for 2 years (Which I'm marking the founding of ILM as the start of production), while Empire Strike Back was in production for one year. The Matrix was in production for I think a year or so.

No, not three years.

Grasping for straws...AGAIN

Keywords: GREAT FILMS & NORMALLY

I said "NORMALLY" not "ALL THE TIME" because I know YOU would mention the few exceptions sheesh.

Coolyfett wrote:If you can not deal with my opinion, gracefully leave, if you want to debate peacefully do so. My message is consistent.

But that's the problem. You're not debating peacefully. In your messages you come across as an overbearing ass. I am surprised you haven't gotten a 3 day cool off ban yet. it's gotta be coming soon. You gotta slow down a bit and take it easy. You're not making any friends among posters or the mods.

Coolyfett wrote:

Robinson wrote:

Coolyfett wrote:Now back to this "WE" "US" thing man? Coolyfett is not against any member. I wish you would simply understand this logic. I have no enemies on here. Seriously. If people are forming an "I hate Coolyfett team" then hey that is there wasted energy. I don't hate any of you cats. Peace & Love

Stop the pity party. Like I said before the is no cooly initiative against you (although if things keep up I could see it happening)


YOU said and I quote "us REAL fans" so given your perpensity to not like Mr. Bays style of film making it would suggest you consider yourself a "REAL" fan while those of us who do like said style are not "Real" fans so I ask you what else is it that makes you a "real" fan compared to the rest of us?

If things keep up? You mean my opinion? Never stated you were a fake fan, YOU put yourself in that category. No pity here I am just not wasting my energy attacking posters. If you want to hate me be my guess. I know what to do when you get out of hand, if you get out of hand. Many of the people that feel the way I feel are afraid of the ganging up style of insecure posters. Fortunately for me I am not afraid of any of you. If you can not deal with my opinion, gracefully leave, if you want to debate peacefully do so. My message is consistent.

How did I put myself into the cagetory of FAKE fan? YOU claimed that you are a REAL fan.

I have no hate, theres no need you show more with your posts than I would ever need to have "hate"

Hating a movie because you've read a couple reviews and a storyline that would be based on the screenplay of the movie which is not always the most accurate source. Why don't you form an opinion for yourself by watching the movie by however means you have available to you and forming an opinion from there.


And yes your message is very consistant in that your opinion is the only one that matters anyone whose opinion differs from you needs to be reported because they are "harassing" you.

Coolyfett wrote:
Good post man. Thank you for responding. I have read a few reviews on TF2 and I did search for some consistent info. The film was rushed. It normally takes about 3 years to make a great film..."normally" TF2 was made in like a year and 1 half.

To be honest, this was also one of my fears. That they were rushing the movie just for sake of making another cash cow.

But then i thought about it for a sec..
A lot of the hard work has already been done. Many of the robot designs were done, and Dream Works now had an idea of how difficult, as well as a time frame of what it was going to take to bring all the bots to life. For the first movie they were threading into unknown territory. Now that they had a trail to follow with some experience behind them, things I'm sure went a lot smoother. We'll find out within a few weeks time if they learned and made improvements, or just made a movie just for the sake of making a movie. Like Bay or not, the later doesn't describe him. And from what I've seen in clips and previews, it looks like they've listened a bit more about what fans wanted.

Blurrz wrote:

If you don't like it, then fine, don't like it, but don't drag the rest of the TF Fandom in your anti-Michael Bay campaign.

I understand your hatred for the movies.

Cute, honestly little buddy it is not even about the movies. Mike gets off irritating REAL TFs fans, the others just except what he does. Coolyfett irritates Bayformer fans, the rest just except what I say. Its the circle of life. It MY computer and IM going to type what I want because its MY fingers, if you don't like it then tough ****.......sound familiar anyone?

Theres that word again, "Real TF Fans"


What does that mean exactly?

Coolyfett wrote:

Blurrz wrote:

If you don't like it, then fine, don't like it, but don't drag the rest of the TF Fandom in your anti-Michael Bay campaign.

I understand your hatred for the movies.

Cute, honestly little buddy it is not even about the movies. Mike gets off irritating REAL TFs fans, the others just except what he does. Coolyfett irritates Bayformer fans, the rest just except what I say. Its the circle of life. It MY computer and IM going to type what I want because its MY fingers, if you don't like it then tough ****.......sound familiar anyone?

Alrighty then. Guess I'm not a Real TF Fan then. I guess my TF Fandom is just fake. I've collected a multitude of toys, just for the sake of collecting them, not because I'm a fan. I just watch Transformers just to waste my time. Damn, and I thought I would've fooled you all.

Seriously whatever. I don't want to argue with you. Seibertron.com is like my home, and I do not like bickering in it.

Good night.

Coolyfett wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Coolyfett wrote:It normally takes about 3 years to make a great film..."normally" TF2 was made in like a year and 1 half.

Raiders of the Lost Ark was in production for only one year before release. Robocop was in production for a year and a half I think. Aliens was in production for 10 months. The Dark Knight was in production for one year. Terminator 2 was in production for one year. The original Star Wars was in production for 2 years (Which I'm marking the founding of ILM as the start of production), while Empire Strike Back was in production for one year. The Matrix was in production for I think a year or so.

No, not three years.

Grasping for straws...AGAIN

Keywords: GREAT FILMS & NORMALLY

I said "NORMALLY" not "ALL THE TIME" because I know YOU would mention the few exceptions sheesh.

Few exceptions? Sheesh, I was hoping to sleep, but if I must I must:

Close Encounters of the Third Kind- One year
Superman- One year
Blade Runner- one year
Alien- One year
Planet of the Apes (Original)- One Year
ET: The Extra Terrestrial- One year
Star Trek II- One year
Back to the Future- About a year
X-Men- One year
Serenity- One Year
Star Trek (2009)- two years
Men in Black- one year
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory- One year
All three Lord of the Rings movies were shot back-to-back, taking about two and a half years
Pirates of the Carribean: Curse of the Black Pearl- One year
Hellboy- About a year
Spider-Man 1- About a year
Lethal Weapon- One year
Predator- One year
Escape from New York- About two years
Minority Report- About one year
The Bourne Identity- Two years
Batman Begins- One year
Iron Man- One year

So I'm going to go ahead and say One year is normal.

I guess I'll post before this thread gets locked. a couple of things
1. bay has ONE style of directing movies He'll never change that his movies are loud and bombastic. The only upside is if makes one more flop he will be forgotten like Paul WS Anderson, or Joel Schumacher.

2. Shadow I don't know if you really consider those lines cheesy but almost everyone of line resonated with me. But the other guy (sorry I forgot his name)mentions the cheesy lines in The Motion picture 2007 you didn't say anything about those and explain which is more forgivable cheese in 1984 or cheese in 2007.

3. Were did you get all this info on how long it took for those movies to be made and are actually saying it took 1 yea for movies o be made from screen play concept to final editing because that list reeks of BS.

Phategod1 wrote:I guess I'll post before this thread gets locked. a couple of things
1. bay has ONE style of directing movies He'll never change that his movies are loud and bombastic. The only upside is if makes one more flop he will be forgotten like Paul WS Anderson, or Joel Schumacher.

Um. If he makes one more flop, he'll be forgotten? No.
Let's go over his list, shall we?

Bad Boys, in 1995, starring Will Smith and Martin Lawrence. The movie became a success with a total of almost $141 million in ticket sales worldwide

The Rock (1996), The movie won a number of minor awards, including 'Best On-Screen Duo' for Connery and Cage at the MTV Movie Awards as well as an Academy Award nomination for Best Sound.

1998, Armageddon. Despite the poor reviews and criticism, Armageddon was nominated for four Academy Awards at the 71st Academy Awards in the technical categories of Best Sound, Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Editing, and Best Original Song, and went on to gross over US$550 million worldwide. (I bolded the important parts, of course. Even though it was considered a dud with the critics, it was a box office SMASH.)

2001, Pearl Harbor. Critical response was largely negative and many critics dismissed the film. At the 2002 Academy Awards, Pearl Harbor was nominated for four awards, winning one for Sound Effects Editing. Its other nominations were for Best Sound, Best Visual Effects, and Best Song. (Again, critics bashed it, but for a movie that low on the ratings totem pole, it still was considered a financial success.)

Bad Boys II, The film, though the subject of some vicious criticism for its length, brutality, bloated plot, misogynistic depiction of women and violent sense of humor—some have said it is the ultimate example of Bay's aesthetic—was a success at the US box office. It made $138 million domestic gross, enough to cover the production budget, and $273 million worldwide, almost twice as much as the original movie. (Critically panned, yet a massive success)

In 2005, The Island, his first to be a disappointment in the US domestic box office earning only $36 million; it was more successful overseas, where it netted a respectable $163 million worldwide. Although not particularly well-received, some critics did note a gentler, more humanistic side to the film, and praised the special effects, stunts, Mauro Fiore's cinematography, and Bay's handling of the movie's intense, multiple chase scenes. (so far...one flop. ONE.)

In 2007, Transformers, The preview screenings earned $8.8 million, and in its first day of general release it grossed $27.8 million, a record for Tuesday box office attendance. It broke Spider-Man 2's record for the biggest July 4 gross, making $29 million. On its opening weekend, Transformers grossed $70.5 million, amounting to a $155.4 million opening week, giving it the record for the biggest opening week for a non-sequel. As of November 2007, the film has made over $319 million domestically and over $708 million worldwide, it was well received by audiences, and received average to positive reviews from critics. (A B+ on Yahoo! Movies. That's rare.)

So, tell me. With only one film considered a flop (but only domestically), but the rest of his movies being MASSIVE hits. How is it that another flop would ruin his career?

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

Yeah...didn't think you'd have an answer for that one.

ROTF is already being tracked and is expected to pull in $175 million in it's first 5 days. That's 25 mil short of it's total production cost. It'll clear far, far, far more than that. It's going to mop up the competition this summer.

Phategod1 wrote:2. Shadow I don't know if you really consider those lines cheesy but almost everyone of line resonated with me. But the other guy (sorry I forgot his name)mentions the cheesy lines in The Motion picture 2007 you didn't say anything about those and explain which is more forgivable cheese in 1984 or cheese in 2007.

It's TransFormers for the masses! Not Shakespeare! To expect anything resembling Shakespeare is just silly and kinda crazy.

And sure, there were cheesy lines in the '07 film, but a good portion of them were recycled from TFTM in '86!

But, to counter those cheese lines, ROTF has one piece of gold. It might be cheesy to some, but it's deep enough to actually be worth a damn.

"Fate rarely calls upon us at a time of our choosing." It's true! It's got enough impact to be worth something.

And this thread was doomed from the getgo. Not so much the topic, the tone.

Joel shumacher had his share of successes to till he did Batman and Robin and Shakespeare; really your still making that same lame argument Batman isn't Shakespeare, Ironman isn't Shakespeare, The Xmen isn't Shakespeare but each property was treated with a million times more respect then Transformers. and why is Shakespeare the only standard when it comes to drama. Why does something either have to dumb as a box of rocks or Shakespeare? have a little respect for self and the franchise you hold dear. imagine if Chis Nolan said well this is just another stupid Comic Book movie not Shakespeare. My point there is no reason Micheal should not have approached the 1st Transformers with the same respect and insight the Chris Nolan showed Batman, however Micheal is pretty inept at everything except blowing thing up nice.

No Robinson.. I do not like to babysit..
And when I get involved in threads in a negative way that means that something is wrong somewhere.
I do read through posts, all the time and it seems that there is a trend now as it happened before the first movie and it is happening again now..

Last chance..

As per the board rules stated here
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=9614

1. No flaming, trolling, harassing, or baiting other guests.
Flaming should be self evident, trolling means to make posts or threads for the intended purpose of starting an argument, while baiting is any post intended to make another user resort to flaming. Harassment means following a user or group of users around through multiple threads to flame them, bait them, or otherwise cause them to want to avoid the boards because of a user's actions towards them. If there is a discussion and there ends up some sort of disagreement on someones personal opinion, simply try and respect each others opinions without forcing them on others.

Coolyfett the bolded part is what the complaints are about.
You have an opinion and that is good. So do others.
Say your peace and move along. If someone does not agree with your opinion then it is their given right not to. Do not get argumentative if someone else has an opinion that varies from yours.

Phategod1 wrote:2. Shadow I don't know if you really consider those lines cheesy but almost everyone of line resonated with me.

Are you sure? Because I can't find a single line I listed that isn't terrible.

Phategod1 wrote:But the other guy (sorry I forgot his name)mentions the cheesy lines in The Motion picture 2007 you didn't say anything about those and explain which is more forgivable cheese in 1984 or cheese in 2007.

I'm not saying the 2007 movie was devoid of bad lines, it had quite a few. However, it doesn't have nearly as many bad lines as the cheese-covered script of the 1986 movie.

are you serious I used to respect John Tuturro, but every line he had in that 1st movie was terrible and cheesy. and don't get me Started on Shai labeaf or the military scenes.

Phategod1 wrote:are you serious I used to respect John Tuturro, but every line he had in that 1st movie was terrible and cheesy. and don't get me Started on Shai labeaf or the military scenes.

Grimlock, Swoop, Slag, Sludge, Blurr, Wheelie, Kup. Seven characters, who have not once said anything worth saying in the '86 movie.

So you want to blame Dinobots for acting like Dinobots I will spot you wheelie but still nothing compares to John tuturro dreadful performance.

Phategod1 wrote:So you want to blame Dinobots for acting like Dinobots I will spot you wheelie but still nothing compares to John tuturro dreadful performance.

John Turturro, Shia LeBeouf, maybe, and Megan Fox. Three bad performances for the '07 movie, but seven for the '86 movie.

hmm. Cooly reminds me of Tramp for some reason.

Pontimax 01 wrote:hmm. Cooly reminds me of Tramp for some reason.

I was getting a very distinct BlueBullet vibe from him.