The Energon Pub

News Credits: 322 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:54 am

Transformers Movie director Michael Bay has made a post on his Shoot for the Edit forums regarding the new movie.

According to Bay there were 2 screenings of the new movie, which was seen by 850 people. He says that the scores they received were the highest of his career. Those scores were even better than Armageddon, which had an average score of 92!

Click here for the original post.

News Credits: 1 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:02 am

I'd prefer an account from someone impartial.

That's not to say I think this is lies. After all, if it had received bad scores, he might not have posted at all.

Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:06 am

The movie is gonna kick ass! Haven't heard anything bad about it yet. Even the naysayers loved the 4 preview clips they got to see.

News Credits: 665 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:11 am

Leonardo wrote:I'd prefer an account from someone impartial.

That's not to say I think this is lies. After all, if it had received bad scores, he might not have posted at all.

Sounds promising, but still... this is coming from the guy who... you know.... made the movie.

Let's hear one of those 850 people say what they thought, but of course, they are all most likely nuder some sort of gag-order.

News Credits: 1 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:26 am

I know. I heard he likes his test audiences to be nude.

News Credits: 409 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:46 am

According to Bay there were 2 screenings of the new movie, which was seen by 850 people. He says that the scores they received were the highest of his career. Those scores were even better than Armageddon, which had an average score of 92!

Armageddon got a 92 out of a 100? Oh please...

News Credits: 3 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:52 am

Bear in mind test screenings are just 'selected highlights'. It's excellent news that the movie scenes shown are testing well with audiences of random folk, but the success or quality of the entire feature won't be known until July. Or the end of June if you live in Australia or the Phillipines or are going to Botcon

-Nick

Fri Apr 27, 2007 10:51 am

Stormrider wrote:
According to Bay there were 2 screenings of the new movie, which was seen by 850 people. He says that the scores they received were the highest of his career. Those scores were even better than Armageddon, which had an average score of 92!

Armageddon got a 92 out of a 100? Oh please...

yeah my thoughts exactly. any ounce of credibility just went out the window.

News Credits: 38 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:15 am

I admit to being curious, yet still highly sceptical of this movie. I was talking to a friend of mine and he was not impressed with the ads so far and thought the "insectoid appearance was brutal"

I am used to the look of the chars by now. But I don't love the look.

I liked armageddon though, but I do like bruce willace and a couple of the other actors. I did not think armageddon was spectacular or anything. I am sort of facinated with asteroid meets planet thing.

News Credits: 8 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:28 am

Test screenings are good, so are reviews, and all things of that nature to inform us of quality.

This isn't Japan though so we do loose out on flyers telling us whats good and bad though.

However, when it all comes down to it, it will be our own opinions that count for ourselves.

Here's hoping for the best.

Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:08 pm

Aren't test screenings composed of random audience members? So isn't this the most impartial results we can get? I'm not sure how these things work, so someone clue me in if these are just Bay's friends or some people that showed up in response to an e-mail.

Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:05 pm

I was in a test screening audience for Terminator 3 and you are correct zoso504, it is made up of a completly random audience. Not sure how all films do it but for me I was just walking down 42nd St in NYC and fellow came up and asked if I was willing to take part in a survey. Not having anything to do I said sure and went to his office, which just happened to be a small theater. And yes, there is a non-disclosure form you sign but pretty much everything that was in the version ended up in the deleted scenes.

The score card was pretty much based on a 1-10, with 10 being the best of course. Hope that sheds some light on that subject.

Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:19 pm

Is it July 4th yet??

Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:27 pm

zoso504 wrote:Aren't test screenings composed of random audience members? So isn't this the most impartial results we can get? I'm not sure how these things work, so someone clue me in if these are just Bay's friends or some people that showed up in response to an e-mail.

No and yes. They're random insomuch as they tend to be people with a lot of time on their hands willing to watch a test screening, sometimes earning a few bucks in the process. If you've ever been called-up on jury duty you know that a most people find a way to excuse themselves so what you get is a room composed primarily of housewives, retired folks, unemployed people, and a few people in legal/police professions who know they're never going to be selected anyway. It's basicallly the same with random screenings except in the case of pg-13 films they get a lot of teens 'hanging at the mall' rather than old people. And, of course, when you're screening high-profile films months before release it isn't as if most are going to be hearing about it for the first time, so they bring their preconceived opinions in with them.

News Credits: 2 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:45 pm

In that case, we're seriously looking at a potentially enormous movie in terms of gross. Everyone knows that if you market to the tweens and teens and do it successfully you are going to make a mint. Look at "Titanic" for example: bad movie, predictable plot, horrible acting, decent effects, but they NAILED the teen/tween girls market. And like it or not, we really are going to see the VERY BEST of what Micael Bay can do. This really is a make or break movie for him...and honestly I don't know if anyone in Hollywood does better car chases than him. Can you imagine the amount of pressure on this guy, not only from his bosses but from the general public. If this movie bombs, Hasbro will blame him, Spielberg will blame him, PepsiCo will blame him, GMC will blame him the fans will blame him, everyone will blame him for potentially taking a franchise that has always been lucrative for Hasbro and flishing it down the toilet. It is a big gamble on Hasbro's part to stake the future of the TF's on his vision and ability. If these test audiences really are the target market (and let's not forget they aren't seeing the finished product) and they are liking it as much as he says they are, it is a VERY good sign. We are really only DAYS away from the true beginning of the marketing blitz for this movie...then we'll see just how vast this movie is going to be. Are we talking minicon here? Or will this movie just end up being PRIME?

Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:25 pm

First-Aid wrote:This really is a make or break movie for him...and honestly I don't know if anyone in Hollywood does better car chases than him.

If you mean someone who doesn't cut to another ridiculously placed camera angle every few seconds so that the viewer has no frame of reference as to what the hell is going on and doesn't have cars blowing-up left and right after denting their fenders, I can think of a few.

I do agree with you as to how popular it's likely to be with the teens though. I don't think much of Fifty-Cent either but that doesn't stop kids from walking around imitating him with the pants around their knees.

News Credits: 7 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:37 pm

Bay won't screw this up. He approached Hasbro and asked about a G.I. Joe movie, he wound up with a Transformers movie, and it's pretty obvious he has to make this a blockbuster to have any chance of making the Joe movie he wants to make. To that end, I think we can expect everyone worked their asses off to make this thing a good popcorn flick... And frankly, after the Unicron Trilogy, I think this movie is just what the franchise needs, in much the same way that it needed RiD to contrast Beast Machines.

Like I said before, Bay was typecast pretty well for this... They picked a guy who loves blowing stuff up and wrecking cars to make sure we don't get stuck with a movie that talks too much. The result may not be art, but I'm pretty sure it'll be entertainment.

News Credits: 3 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:45 pm

So the people in this screening may not have known Jack squat about Transformers...I can't wait to hear Transformers fans reactions.
After the first general release showings of this movie I think this website is going to explode, literally!

I wonder if Michael Bay has a higher than normal level of anxiety about how well this film is gonna do?

News Credits: 1 · Fri Apr 27, 2007 10:18 pm

Collector Maximus wrote:So the people in this screening may not have known Jack squat about Transformers...I can't wait to hear Transformers fans reactions.

So do I. Maybe we'll get a proper fan reaction prior to Botcon. But with this and Seibs preview of the movie, I'm pretty stoked. At least it'll end up doing well, financially.

Sat Apr 28, 2007 4:41 am

terrible movies can get high scores (armageddon), and phenomenal movies can get low scores (12 monkeys). it all depends on who happened to be in the audience that day, what expectations they have going in, what kind of movies they normally watch, what kind of mood they're in, and dozens of other variables.

in other words, it means nothing. i'm not saying the movie won't do well, which i'm sure it will for at least the first weekend or two whether it deserves to or not, but preview scores mean absolutely nothing in regards to the actual quality of the movie.

News Credits: 1 · Sat Apr 28, 2007 9:11 pm

Faceful of Kitchen wrote: in other words, it means nothing.

Rubbish. Why do you think they do these screenings in the first place?

If it meant nothing do you really think studios would bother?

It's a positive sign.

News Credits: 2 · Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:30 pm

A guy I know at school, who hates talking to me, said that it looks awesome.

Apparently, humans are able to look past superficial design elements. Because that doesn't matter.

So 850 like the movie. A bit of a generalization, but not as much as saying "I hate this movie, and this guy agrees, so it will fail."

And as for being popular for a couple weeks: As Burn said, Harry Potter 5 comes out a couple weeks later. That little British dude brings in money. He's more popular than Robin Hood and King Arthur COMBINED.

Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:59 am

Bender Prime wrote:
Faceful of Kitchen wrote: in other words, it means nothing.

Rubbish. Why do you think they do these screenings in the first place?

If it meant nothing do you really think studios would bother?

It's a positive sign.

so that hollywood executives can cover their asses. if a movie tests low, especially if it's one they're skeptical about, they can use that as an excuse to tamper with it to make it more "marketable" (unless of course the director got final cut, thank god that was the case with 12 monkeys). if a movie tests high, they deem it proof that they have made a fine film. but very well, i will slightly refine my statement: it means next to nothing.

seriously, so many movies have gotten scores that in no way represent public opinion of the movie once it's released that it's not really something you should pay much attention to. it's like the polls you always see leading up to elections: how often do they actually match the result? there are so many variables that can skew the test audience's opinion that these things amount to very little of value.

Mon Apr 30, 2007 4:08 am

Leonardo wrote:I'd prefer an account from someone impartial.

That's not to say I think this is lies. After all, if it had received bad scores, he might not have posted at all.

True right.

But a 92 for Armageddon? That says something about the people he picks to see his trahy films.

YES...I typed that.

But I will still go to see the TF movie...Damn you, logic! Why aren't you working?!