The Energon Pub

Burn wrote:

Banjo-Tron wrote:Really? What's so wrong with suggesting better ways these films could be made? Are we not allowed to make reasoned criticisms?

Your criticisms have what exactly to do with Titus Welliver being seen on set?

Because the Titus Welliver article asserts that, in essence, the 'tone' of the film will be different this time. In my opinion, with the same creative team and remit in place, this will not be the case. I may be proved to be wrong (this would be far from the first time) however this is my belief, and I have suggested other prominent directors who I feel have either turned an ailing franchise (critically if not commercially, as is the case with Starwars) around or have a better understanding of how to convey action sequences full stop. Because this movie is supposed to have several space sequences I suggested Alfonso Cuaron who directed Gravity and, on top of that he directed 'Children of Men' which for my money has the most intense and visceral action scenes I have ever seen. I think it has the longest single-shot action sequence in the history of film. If you haven't seen it, I urge you to because I.ve not seen anyone do better. He also directed Pan's Labyrinth so he is not averse to fantasy either. Anyway I don't feel I have meandered off topic but that is your call to make.

Burn wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:You don't see dinosaurs just walking down the street everyday, after all.

Given that crocodiles are considered dinosaurs, yes ... yes I do.

Crocodiles go walking down you streets?

Burn wrote:Oh and time for the obligatory "give up on bashing Michael Bay" post.

Seriously, knock it off. You don't like Michael Bay's directing style? Then go out and do a better job yourself. Harping on about it continuously like some of you do is just pointless, we've all heard it a thousand plus times before.

Burn... not once in this topic have I been referring to Bay or his style. My original point in this thread was how, despite Mr. Welliver claiming that this film will be different from the first three by being "not a kids movie", none of these films have been "kids movies", so to refer to this one as such is nothing special.

Then I got talking with Sly about how he desires an R-rated TF film and how what he wants for one wouldn't give it an R-rating because the thing he wants--a Decepticon/Human alliance--isn't R-rated material.

It then switched to how he wants this for an R-rated movie in an attempt to make an even more realistic film than the what we've gotten so far, which I tried to explain how it isn't realistic because of how it is out of character for both the Decepticons and humanity itself.

Then we discussed how such an alliance could involve more human army vs. human army material, which I tried to explain how that conflicts with both what it is that these films try to give to people and what it is that people want to get from the movies: Robots fighting robots instead of humans fighting humans.

This then turned to my noting how much realism the brand has been injected with since 2007 and how it had since began to feel like it was suppressing its more fantasy-based elements that it had come to embrace prior to then, and how only recently has it been trying to get back into the fantasy-based stuff with last year's Predacon focus and this year's Dinobot focus, which I praised. Your response here was to something I was praising.

Then TurboMMaster responded to my earlier post about people want to see robot fights over human fights in these movies by reminding us of how crucial the humans have been in these films, which I responded with the notion of how, as more focus is put on the humans, the less focus the TFs get, making the title characters feel more like the secondary characters in their own movies.

And that isn't a knock on the films because it is true. These films do put the humans in the spotlight over the TFs in terms of characterization and development, which is how it has been since the first movie and likely isn't going to change no matter how many of us wish that it would. Wouldn't we like the TFs to take center stage? Of course we would. Is that ever likely to happen? Probably not. And is there anything we can do about it? Not if we don't have the resources to. So, even if we don't like the method that these films use, it's still a method that works for them financially that they'll likely to continue using whether we like it or not.

So, tl:dr - I wasn't harping on Bay, I was carrying on discussion built upon discussion built upon discussion.

Sabrblade wrote:I was carrying on discussion built upon discussion built upon discussion.

Yo dawg, we heard you like dicussions...

Sabrblade wrote:

Burn wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:You don't see dinosaurs just walking down the street everyday, after all.

Given that crocodiles are considered dinosaurs, yes ... yes I do.

Crocodiles go walking down you streets?

Normally after floods yeah. Some idiots even take them home to cuddle with in bed.

Of course these days you wouldn't have Optimus Prime riding a croc. But a lot of people still love dinosaurs.

Sabrblade wrote:So, tl:dr - I wasn't harping on Bay, I was carrying on discussion built upon discussion built upon discussion.

It was a generalised comment aimed at no one in particular. Guilty much?

Guess I should have specified "giant dinosaurs".

Unless your crocodiles stand at at least ten feet tall.

Sabrblade wrote:Guess I should have specified "giant dinosaurs".

Unless your crocodiles stand at at least ten feet tall.

Maybe not tall, but certainly that long.

Burn wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Guess I should have specified "giant dinosaurs".

Unless your crocodiles stand at at least ten feet tall.

Maybe not tall, but certainly that long.

Now that sounds normal.

But it's the height that matters in this case.

Sabrblade wrote:

Burn wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Guess I should have specified "giant dinosaurs".

Unless your crocodiles stand at at least ten feet tall.

Maybe not tall, but certainly that long.

Now that sounds normal.

But it's the height that matters in this case.

I dunno ... I think the only way to settle this is to have a 10+ foot Croc take on a T-Rex.

Winner gets ridden by Prime.

Burn wrote:I dunno ... I think the only way to settle this is to have a 10+ foot Croc take on a T-Rex.

Winner gets ridden by Prime.

BW Megs vs. himself, eh? Wonder if either knows what the prize is.

Burn wrote:
Of course these days you wouldn't have Optimus Prime riding a croc.

Why not?

Sabrblade wrote:BW Megs vs. himself, eh? Wonder if either knows what the prize is.

Whatever, he should be able to deal with Movieverse Prime, Optimus didn't fight well against someone who fights back.

TurboMMaster wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:BW Megs vs. himself, eh? Wonder if either knows what the prize is.

Whatever, he should be able to deal with Movieverse Prime, Optimus didn't fight well against someone who fights back.

But BW Megs is tiny compared to Movieverse Prime. Prime could just step on him and be done with it.

Sabrblade wrote:But BW Megs is tiny compared to Movieverse Prime. Prime could just step on him and be done with it.

In hes "tiny" Transmetal form he was able to competent fight with Optimal Optimus, which has nerly god-like power level. Movieverse shouldn't be harder than him.

Then TurboMMaster responded to my earlier post about people want to see robot fights over human fights in these movies by reminding us of how crucial the humans have been in these films, which I responded with the notion of how, as more focus is put on the humans, the less focus the TFs get, making the title characters feel more like the secondary characters in their own movies.

Well, in Terminator Universe humans are crucial either, yet still Skynet and he's robot army was quite well developed. I know it's kinda silly, but this movie is made for ordinary action-movie lover, and human role is understendable considering all these "marketing stuff". And humans have their role as a villians in Transformers Franchise, yet still it's all about HOW it is done. I don't belive that Cameron's Transformers, Jackson's Transformers or Spielberg's Transformers could be done different way, but with better director idea could be used with more interesting ressults.

TurboMMaster wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:But BW Megs is tiny compared to Movieverse Prime. Prime could just step on him and be done with it.

In hes "tiny" Transmetal form he was able to competent fight with Optimal Optimus, which has nerly god-like power level. Movieverse shouldn't be harder than him.

Movieverse Prime is much bigger than Optimal Optimus.

And, what? Godlike power levels? Um, no, he doesn't.

Sabrblade wrote:And, what? Godlike power levels? Um, no, he doesn't.

Maybe Optimal Optimus isn't as powerfull as Tigerhawk, or TM2 Megatron. But he is still more powerfull than Rampage, which was able to get rid off entire colony. And despite the fact how many times he was owned, what he have done in "Optimal Situation" was sweet.

Sabrblade wrote:Movieverse Prime is much bigger than Optimal Optimus.

And is from Universe where Transformer could be killed very easily.

TurboMMaster wrote:Well, in Terminator Universe humans are crucial either, yet still Skynet and he's robot army was quite well developed.

The Terminator films are completely different case because the Terminators are played by human actors, not CGI cartoon animations set in front of real life backgrounds. Because they are played by human actors, audiences find them more relatable than they do with CGI animations whose only human qualities are their voices. They get more exposure because of that greater human element that they have production-wise than the Transformers do.

TurboMMaster wrote:I know it's kinda silly, but this movie is made for ordinary action-movie lover, and human role is understendable considering all these "marketing stuff".

My point exactly. Casual audiences don't relate to the TFs as well as they do to the humans, so these films thusly put the humans in the spotlight over the titular Transformers.

TurboMMaster wrote:And humans have their role as a villians in Transformers Franchise, yet still it's all about HOW it is done.

Agreed. And nine times out of ten have had human villains in other TF series upstaged by the Decepticons, making them feel less appealing than ever.

TurboMMaster wrote:I don't belive that Cameron's Transformers, Jackson's Transformers or Spielberg's Transformers could be done different way, but with better director idea could be used with more interesting ressults.

I am not gonna switch this over to Bay bashing, as I've done a good job avoiding that route in this topic, so I will not comment on this matter.

TurboMMaster wrote:Maybe Optimal Optimus isn't as powerfull as Tigerhawk, or TM2 Megatron. But he is still more powerfull than Rampage, which was able to get rid off entire colony. And despite the fact how many times he was owned, what he have done in "Optimal Situation" was sweet.

Yet, all his power comes from the fact that he's bigger and more armed than the others. That's not godly, that's just being better equipped.

TurboMMaster wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Movieverse Prime is much bigger than Optimal Optimus.

And is from Universe where Transformer could be killed very easily.

The movies don't have the luxury of CR Chambers, especially because they want a realistic portrayal of warfare. If one were to take away the CR Chambers from Beast Wars, all of the Maximals and Predacons would have been permanently dead within a few short episodes.

Sabrblade wrote:

TurboMMaster wrote:Well, in Terminator Universe humans are crucial either, yet still Skynet and he's robot army was quite well developed.

The Terminator films are completely different case because the Terminators are played by human actors, not CGI cartoon animations set in front of real life backgrounds.

That wasn't really Arnie appearing in Salvation.

Burn wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

TurboMMaster wrote:Well, in Terminator Universe humans are crucial either, yet still Skynet and he's robot army was quite well developed.

The Terminator films are completely different case because the Terminators are played by human actors, not CGI cartoon animations set in front of real life backgrounds.

That wasn't really Arnie appearing in Salvation.

Was mostly speaking of the classic films featuring Arnie and Robert Patrick and such.

Just because they're rebooting the franchise doesn't mean you can ignore Salvation.

Burn wrote:Just because they're rebooting the franchise doesn't mean you can ignore Salvation.

Wasn't ignoring it. Was just citing the films that most people know of the best.

Anyway, even if it wasn't Arnold in that one, it was still a human actor, Roland Kickinger, playing the role (despite his CGI'd Arnold face).

Sabrblade wrote:The Terminator films are completely different case because the Terminators are played by human actors, not CGI cartoon animations set in front of real life backgrounds. Because they are played by human actors, audiences find them more relatable than they do with CGI animations whose only human qualities are their voices. They get more exposure because of that greater human element that they have production-wise than the Transformers do.

I quess you are partialy right, but it's not only that. Skynet have interesting origin with a twist, and there is a lot talking about him during movies. How much we know about Con's from the Movies? They are evil, they try to conquer our world, they were after Allspark, Later Sun Harverser, and Later Sentinel & Space Bridge Technology. Unless you have read the comics or novelisations, you have no idea what's going on.

Agreed. And nine times out of ten have had human villains in other TF series upstaged by the Decepticons, making them feel less appealing than ever.

Well, technically we don't know about AoE plot to discuss this for now...

Sabrblade wrote:The movies don't have the luxury of CR Chambers, especially because they want a realistic portrayal of warfare. If one were to take away the CR Chambers from Beast Wars, all of the Maximals and Predacons would have been permanently dead within a few short episodes.

CR Chember are not for ressurection, but for regeneration. If smashed Transformer can be repaired, it means that beign smashed in this universe is no fatal (at least not instantly).

Yet, all his power comes from the fact that he's bigger and more armed than the others. That's not godly, that's just being better equipped.

And beign an perceft fusion of Old and New Generations of Cybertronian isn't mean that Optimal Optimus is kinda special? Also: First moments in he's new forms were amazing!

TurboMMaster wrote:I quess you are partialy right, but it's not only that. Skynet have interesting origin with a twist, and there is a lot talking about him during movies. How much we know about Con's from the Movies? They are evil, they try to conquer our world, they were after Allspark, Later Sun Harverser, and Later Sentinel & Space Bridge Technology. Unless you have read the comics or novelisations, you have no idea what's going on.

Now, that's the fault of the writing, which is another factor in putting the humans in the spotlight of these films.

TurboMMaster wrote:Well, technically we don't know about AoE plot to discuss this for now...

Either way, based on the previous films, it seems safe to say that the human antagonists of this film will be more focused on than the Decepticons, despite the Cons' obvious superiority.

I mean, really, who's the more memorable villain from DOTM? Megatron or Patrick Dempsey? Dempsey was, and he was even cooler a character than Megs despite the film consistently portraying Megatron as his master and superior.

TurboMMaster wrote:CR Chember are not for ressurection, but for regeneration. If smashed Transformer can be repaired, it means that beign smashed in this universe is no fatal (at least not instantly).

And several of the smashed TFs in the movies could have been repaired as well, but since they weren't, their sparks had no option but to give out. As long as the spark is intact with a working body to support it, a mortally damaged TF can survive if they are repaired. But since so many of them weren't repaired, they gave into their wounds and perished.

Same thing with Beast Wars. Dinobot could have survived if he'd stopped fighting during the battle and had gotten to a CR Chamber quickly enough, but he wouldn't quit fighting and the other Maximals arrived too late to help him. His death was a different case from the other kinds of fights in that show that have characters getting hacked to pieces and beheaded on a regular basis, such wounds they would have died from if not for the CR Chambers. But since they did get repaired, they didn't suffer the same fate as many of the Movieformers even though they suffered the same degree of damage.

For instance, Movie Optimus cuts off Bonecrusher's head, doing nothing with his spark. He doesn't get repaired, and so dies. Waspinator, however, routinely gets his head severed from his body, leaving his spark likewise unharmed, but since he gets repaired in time all the time, he continued to cheat death every time.

TurboMMaster wrote:And beign an perceft fusion of Old and New Generations of Cybertronian isn't mean that Optimal Optimus is kinda special? Also: First moments in he's new forms were amazing!

His metamorphosis came from having two sparks in his body. He could have put the spark from one of the Maximals or Predacons into himself instead and likely still would have changed. And the whole reason for the his awesomeness in his first episode was, according to the writers, to get kids to want to buy his toy.

Sabrblade wrote:Now, that's the fault of the writing, which is another factor in putting the humans in the spotlight of these films.

Yup. In the first 2 movies, there was just way too much focus on the humans--Shia in particular. DOTM gave us some balance with the TF's being more involved in the plot, as well as better characterization with Sentinel's betrayal and Megatron's loss of status.

Would have done with a more dignified end for Megs, but that's another story.

TurboMMaster wrote:I quess you are partialy right, but it's not only that. Skynet have interesting origin with a twist, and there is a lot talking about him during movies. How much we know about Con's from the Movies? They are evil, they try to conquer our world, they were after Allspark, Later Sun Harverser, and Later Sentinel & Space Bridge Technology. Unless you have read the comics or novelisations, you have no idea what's going on.

Which is ironic, since the Cons' plans and motives were pretty generic and simple. Which isn't to say it's necessarily a bad thing, but the movie tells you so little about them that you need novels, comics and video games to tell you more about them. I guess that gives Paramount and Hasbro more opportunities to sell tie-in products for the franchise, but still....

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Yup. In the first 2 movies, there was just way too much focus on the humans--Shia in particular.

And Sam&Mikela romance. Seriously, it is hilarious: So much screen time spend on uninportant love theme that leads us complelty nowhere. Later Sam have a new girfriend... And it leads us nowhere either

Sabrblade wrote:Now, that's the fault of the writing, which is another factor in putting the humans in the spotlight of these films.

The same problem we have in "Bad Boys" or "The Rock" the only Bay's movie with classic bad characters. So if writing is a problem in all of he's movies, so it seems the problem isn;t in writing at all...

Quick update to last week's statement from Titus Welliver. In an interview with Nerdist he stated that Transformers: Age of Extinction was, "not a kids movie". We have received and statement from Paramount Pictures Publicity Department to clarify Mr. Welliver's previous comments. See below:

Titus misspoke and released the following statement to clarify his comments: “I misspoke in my last interview when I said that Transformers 4 was not a kids movie…what I meant was that this film, will in fact expand their target audience and bring in a bigger fan base. Following the huge success of Transformers and their toy line, it is certainly a kids movie and with the addition of Mark Wahlberg, Transformers 4 will be the coolest in the franchise.”

What he means to say is that TF4 is not a kids movie, but he's going to tell people that it is anyway to sell toys because Hasbro and Paramount are now mad at him for telling the truth.

I like that he 'misspoke' by uttering a completely different statement and thought process than the one he actually offered. This has PR flack written all over it.