Madeus Prime wrote:
This was my emotional reaction.
SlyTF1 wrote:ZeroWolf wrote:SlyTF1 wrote:As much as I like Bay, I kind of want him gone, too. Just because I want to see what someone else would do with these movies. And if someone else does direct TF5... I hope it's worse than anything Bay could have ever done.
Wait , you want bay gone but you want the fifth film to suck badly because bay isn't there?
Personally, I think bay should finish 5 & 6. Let him finish his TF movies then with number 7, complete change of everyone involved, maybe get some of the people behind the comics involved.
Yup. I want people to want Bay back.
Starscream5150 wrote:The sooner everyone realizes he is a talentless hack the franchises he has ruined will be better off.
So I take it you liked Bad Boys, The Rock, and Armageddon?Starscream5150 wrote:Bay sucks. He's a hack. Everyone of his movies from Pearl Harbor to TMNT completely misses the point.
AOE proved otherwise since Optimus, who is a bot, definitely underwent a character development arc in that movie.Starscream5150 wrote:The TF movies have absolutely no bot character development.
TMNT wasn't solely his. He was but one of six producers for that film. His name only came up once during the entire end credits, and wasn't one of the names that the credits gave emphasized attention to.Starscream5150 wrote:Everyone of his movies from Pearl Harbor to TMNT completely misses the point.
Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Sabrblade wrote:AOE proved otherwise since Optimus, who is a bot, definitely underwent a character development arc in that movie.Starscream5150 wrote:The TF movies have absolutely no bot character development.
It was just questionable development since, by the end of the movie, he ultimately wound up being almost exactly the same as he was in the first three movies.
But it was still development since he was completely off his rocker throughout the movie, only getting back on his rocker by the film's conclusion.
So even though his development was less "two steps forward" and more "one step back, then one step forward", making him end up right where he started prior to the fourth movie, it was still development for a bot. Not necessarily well done development, but development nonetheless.TMNT wasn't solely his. He was but one of six producers for that film. His name only came up once during the entire end credits, and wasn't one of the names that the credits gave emphasized attention to.Starscream5150 wrote:Everyone of his movies from Pearl Harbor to TMNT completely misses the point.
Jonathan Liebesman, A.K.A. "Diet Michael Bay Lite", was the director of that film.
All I was responding to was the claim that the movies were completely devoid of character development for any of the bots, in which I pointed out the sole instance of character development that was given to a bot (Optimus) by these movies.dreadwing95 wrote:what about the other other autobots? what about the decepticons? the only development we got from the other autobots is they sort of like humans again. as for the cons we only have megatron/galvatron and starscream who have had any sort of personality. this area needs a lot of work still
Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Starscream5150 wrote:Ok. So everyone has the inexplicable compulsion to counter a point on the Internet. I say he's a hack and didn't develop any characters we care about (the bots) and the best support for Bay is "well he did kinda develop an arc (well not an arc, a circle) for one of them but not the others." So is that saying Bay is good for the franchise or are you agreeing he's a shat director?
Starscream5150 wrote:Ok. So everyone has the inexplicable compulsion to counter a point on the Internet. I say he's a hack and didn't develop any characters we care about (the bots) and the best support for Bay is "well he did kinda develop an arc (well not an arc, a circle) for one of them but not the others." So is that saying Bay is good for the franchise or are you agreeing he's a shat director?
Starscream5150 wrote:lol. Or maybe someone who's not a hack can make a better TF movie. They did it for other reboots. Can't wait for a TF reboot.
Starscream5150 wrote:Not trying to be negative. If you've looked through the prior posts you can see we are having a discussion. I'm making the claim the Michael bay leaving would be great for the franchise. Then people debated the validity of that statement. I posted examples of why and how he's terrible and peoples retorts are about how he's "not that terrible, but not good." And the last guy basically said if I wanted character development I should read the comics. That's a shame that the fans here accept that rather than vocally complain that Bay can't get the job done. I'm encouraging a rally cry. "Baiting" would be if I came on the TF forum and just posted "GI Joe is way better than TF could ever be" and leave it at that, baiting fans to argue with me.
RhA wrote:This is what we call 'baiting'. Another form of solliciting a reply in a negative manner. See out section on 'mild trolling' for further information on the subject.
Burn wrote:Agamemnon wrote:Let's get back to talking about Burn's mammoth snout flopping...
Well I am Australian. It's kinda what we're known for.
Starscream5150 wrote:Not trying to be negative. If you've looked through the prior posts you can see we are having a discussion. I'm making the claim the Michael bay leaving would be great for the franchise. Then people debated the validity of that statement. I posted examples of why and how he's terrible and peoples retorts are about how he's "not that terrible, but not good." And the last guy basically said if I wanted character development I should read the comics. That's a shame that the fans here accept that rather than vocally complain that Bay can't get the job done. I'm encouraging a rally cry. "Baiting" would be if I came on the TF forum and just posted "GI Joe is way better than TF could ever be" and leave it at that, baiting fans to argue with me.
Cobotron wrote:RhA wrote:This is what we call 'baiting'. Another form of solliciting a reply in a negative manner. See out section on 'mild trolling' for further information on the subject.
One might consider the above comment to also be "baiting".
I too hope for a reboot.
Return to Transformers Live Action Film Forum
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Bumblevivisector, chuckdawg1999, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], TF-fan kev777