The Energon Pub

by 009* » Sat May 10, 2008 7:00 pm

It came out on Friday, I was wondering if anyone has seen it yet?

News Credits: 8 · by **Liege Evilmus** » Sat May 10, 2008 7:03 pm

no, it looks like it would be fun, but far from good, so unless I go sneek in after I eventualy see IronMan, I'm just gonna wait for Cable.

News Credits: 26 · by **Wheeljack35** » Sat May 10, 2008 7:04 pm

I know I don't want to see it

I wonder if anybody actually did go to see it

News Credits: 8 · by **Liege Evilmus** » Sat May 10, 2008 7:13 pm

I know Stephen Colbert went, as for anyone else :???:

Kinda makes me hope that the Voltron movie never happens, cause I can't help but envision more of the same candy coated green screen drival.

Again, it looks fun, just not "spend money on it fun", which is sad cause I know I'm not the only one noticing the same size display at TRU that the TF movie had.

The sad difference, it was a struggle to keep those TF shelves filled, while these are overflowing.

by **Keeperofthespark** » Sat May 10, 2008 7:15 pm

You're curiosity ceases, I saw it in theatres just right now. It was a loavable and enjoyable movie, but not one of which I'd watch again personally...Or pruchase on DVD or watch heavily on television.

News Credits: 8 · by **Liege Evilmus** » Sat May 10, 2008 7:23 pm

So in short, wait for HBO

News Credits: 1 · by ***Galvatron*** » Sat May 10, 2008 8:00 pm

A friend of mine was just over visiting and he saw it and liked it, he was not uber enthused about it but it was good he said.

I could not go because of my continuing kidney problems...I spent six hours in urgent care today, they took blood work and did a CT scan and found no stones but they did rule out diabetes...further testing to follow.

now i'm down two movies I wanted to see, Ironman and Speedracer!

News Credits: 668 · by **Autobot032** » Sat May 10, 2008 10:58 pm

***Galvatron*** wrote:A friend of mine was just over visiting and he saw it and liked it, he was not uber enthused about it but it was good he said.

I could not go because of my continuing kidney problems...I spent six hours in urgent care today, they took blood work and did a CT scan and found no stones but they did rule out diabetes...further testing to follow.

now i'm down two movies I wanted to see, Ironman and Speedracer!

Wow, I'm really sorry to hear about your suffering.

I hope they find a cause soon so you can get back to your life as it was.

On the main topic: I have no interest in seeing it other than on DVD. I mean it looks visually impressive, but way too much like a video game, and probably has the same intelligence.

Though Christina Ricci looks absolutely incredible. Grrrrowl. (she's not my type, but this time...whoa.)

News Credits: 1 · by ***Galvatron*** » Sat May 10, 2008 11:15 pm

Autobot032 wrote:
***Galvatron*** wrote:A friend of mine was just over visiting and he saw it and liked it, he was not uber enthused about it but it was good he said.

I could not go because of my continuing kidney problems...I spent six hours in urgent care today, they took blood work and did a CT scan and found no stones but they did rule out diabetes...further testing to follow.

now i'm down two movies I wanted to see, Ironman and Speedracer!

Wow, I'm really sorry to hear about your suffering. I hope they find a cause soon so you can get back to your life as it was.

On the main topic: I have no interest in seeing it other than on DVD. I mean it looks visually impressive, but way too much like a video game, and probably has the same intelligence.

Though Christina Ricci looks absolutely incredible. Grrrrowl. (she's not my type, but this time...whoa.)

Thanks Autobot032...at least I'll be able to make mothers day I almost thought I'd still be in the hospital but I'm feeling much better tonight.

To each his own but I still plan to see it, I know it looks like a total eye candy type movie which is why I don't expect much in the way of a plot and since there is an Imax theater ten minutes away from me then I'm there for the experience.

News Credits: 2 · by **Shadowman** » Sun May 11, 2008 12:42 am

Autobot032 wrote:and probably has the same intelligence.

This quote makes Solid Snake, Jack Ryan, and Gordon Freeman cry.

News Credits: 2 · by **hyperconvoy69** » Sun May 11, 2008 1:58 am

I saw it on friday. It was an entertaining film. Definitely not the best film of the summer, but it was a fun watch. I would only recommend it if you're a fan of Speed Racer, or a greenscreen fanatic. Otherwise, it's a family film with enough kick to entertain adults.

by 009* » Sun May 11, 2008 12:18 pm

I saw it yesterday. It is a fun movie, not a serious film like the superhero movies, and of course our movie from last year, but still fun.

(Spoilers; high light to read)

The auto-jacks are standard equipment for the race cars in the movie and are the most used feature. They're used to launch the cars over obstacles, although Speed uses them to dodge attacking cars, and launch his car to take advantage of the terrain. In the final race, Speed uses the jacks to expose Royalton's cheating.

The Mach 6 isn't an upgrade from the Mach 5. The Mach 6 is a specialty car built to race on the huge race tracks we've seen. It's the same deal for the two cars Racer X uses.

The Mach 5 was first used by Rex, who gave it to Speed as a farewell gift. It's used for racing on more conventional terrain, it's street legal as well, but it can handle the huge race tracks we've seen.

The main race of the film, The Crucible, follows the formula of the old series. Speed uses all the new equipment on the Mach 5, except for the robot bird, which is mentioned but never used. To be honest, I think the Mach 5 gets the most screen time of Speed's various cars.

There are two Mach 6 cars. The first one is destroyed in a race in Fiji when Speed turns down Royalton's offer. One of his drivers uses an illegal weapon to latch onto the car, forcing them into a crash that takes out both cars. The second, which is more powerful, is built in an all-nighter by the family so Speed can enter the final race.

Racer X is still Rex Racer, despite there being two different actors. This is explained at the end that Rex blew up his Mach 4 and went undercover. He had re-constructive surgery to change his face.

by **Predaprince** » Sun May 11, 2008 3:49 pm

I'm not interested in seeing it at all. I was never a fan of Speed Racer since it was more from the years of my brother's generation rather than mine and I agree that it seems to just be a classic "nothing but action" eye-candy film and there isn't anything substance or anything.

News Credits: 104 · by **Cyber Bishop** » Mon May 12, 2008 5:49 am

We went to see it Friday night and I have to say this..

I expected complete crap but was very entertained.

Let's put it this way, if you were a fan of the original toon OR like how crazy anime can be then you will like this movie.

I was a fan of the original show and I liked the movie.
It is a movie that is just fun t watch, it is colorful and fast paced.

Wheeljack35 wrote:I know I don't want to see it

I wonder if anybody actually did go to see it

Box office mojo has an estimate of $20,210,000.. So I guess some people went to see it.

It is the kind of movie that takes a nice break from taking movies seriously. It is one of those movies that you just go to see and have fun watching it without being hyper critical.

http://youtube.com/user/andrewcutter2 · by **andrewcutter** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:34 am

the trailer alone was a headache and a half.

News Credits: 49 · by **Senor Hugo** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:46 am

I was planning on seeing it, but then the trailers made it look like they slapped a green screen in front of one of those quarter race-car rides outside of supermarkets.

The environments looked overly fake and a bit too much like F-Zero. Which they should have included Captain Falcon anyway, if only for him to run into a scene and coldcock Speed yelling "Faaaaalcoooon Puuuuunch!"

and while fake environments are cool, it reminded me of the crap George Lucas pulled for Episodes I-III, especially Coruscant. Sure green screen lets you do all sorts of stuff with computer graphics, but then whats the point of making a live action movie if 90% of it is going to be computer animated anyway?

News Credits: 104 · by **Cyber Bishop** » Mon May 12, 2008 7:40 am

Senor Hugo wrote:whats the point of making a live action movie if 90% of it is going to be computer animated anyway?

In this instance to see a live person as a character that normally is only seen as a cartoon?

:?:

There is a lot of CGI (maybe 85 - 90% of the movie).

News Credits: 26 · by **Wheeljack35** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:04 am

Cyber Bishop wrote:We went to see it Friday night and I have to say this..

I expected complete crap but was very entertained.

Let's put it this way, if you were a fan of the original toon OR like how crazy anime can be then you will like this movie.

I was a fan of the original show and I liked the movie.
It is a movie that is just fun t watch, it is colorful and fast paced.

Wheeljack35 wrote:I know I don't want to see it

I wonder if anybody actually did go to see it

Box office mojo has an estimate of $20,210,000.. So I guess some people went to see it.

It is the kind of movie that takes a nice break from taking movies seriously. It is one of those movies that you just go to see and have fun watching it without being hyper critical.

I will see this when it hits DVD

We still have Prince Caspien and Indiana Jones to see the next two weeks

I guess being filmed mostly on greenscreen instead of the actual outdoors just turned me off

I know the action is great from what I saw

I remember watching this cartoon when I was in the first grade and I have allways loved the Mach 5

News Credits: 49 · by **Senor Hugo** » Mon May 12, 2008 3:22 pm

Cyber Bishop wrote:
Senor Hugo wrote:whats the point of making a live action movie if 90% of it is going to be computer animated anyway?

In this instance to see a live person as a character that normally is only seen as a cartoon?

There is a lot of CGI (maybe 85 - 90% of the movie).

True, but that gives them even more limits, and takes away from what they were trying to do with the computers, and the mass amounts of CGI takes away from the acting ability the actors have.

It would be like, if they made everything in the TMNT movie cgi, but kept the main characters(the turtles etc) as guys in animatronic suits or just live action actors.

I dunno, personally to make a live action movie look great, there needs to be that balance between live action and cgi. 300 had it(regardless of what you say about the film itself), Iron-man had it, Hellboy had it, as well as Pan's Labyrinth and LOTR.

Bleh, rant over, I hate being a 3d modeling/animation major.

by **calbob** » Mon May 12, 2008 3:46 pm

Nah, and I dont plan to, im waiting for Indiana Jones.

News Credits: 2 · by **Moonbase2** » Mon May 12, 2008 5:33 pm

On opening night I saw Iron Man again instead. The theatre was packed. Guess they didn't want to see Speed Racer either. Iron Man beat it by $30 million over the weekend. Ouch!

News Credits: 104 · by **Cyber Bishop** » Mon May 12, 2008 5:42 pm

Wheeljack35 wrote:We still have Prince Caspien and Indiana Jones to see the next two weeks

Yeah buddy!!! :grin:

News Credits: 2 · by **Moonbase2** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:55 pm

Eh, the buzz isn't good for Indy. I'm going to be so disappointed if it's not good. But I'll be there opening night.

News Credits: 26 · by **Wheeljack35** » Tue May 13, 2008 12:55 pm

What do you mean the buzz isn't good for Indy??

News Credits: 2 · by **Moonbase2** » Tue May 13, 2008 9:50 pm

Wheeljack35 wrote:What do you mean the buzz isn't good for Indy??

Aintitcool.com posted a few iffy reviews. I'm not entirely sure they are real reviews, but if they are the movie's not that great. They haven't shown a whole lot in the trailers, and I'm afraid it's because there isn't much to show.