Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Proof in the pie is in the eating! I must say, despite despising the Bayverse franchise(most especially the toys! They suck!), the first movie was arguably the BEST. This "prequel" hopefully puts to a close to the last 4 with a bang(a good one at that)!

Plotwise, do we just forget episodes 2,3, 4 and 5 did not exist ) Bee here seems to be a far cry from the badass 'bot in WWII.

The director in charge does give hope (a least if the script/story is just as good and that they aren't using the same chimpanzees who wrote the last 4 movies). Kubo, Coraline were great thoughtful movies!(Though Ron Howard is also an equally great director.....just see how great Solo is in the box office )

Va'al wrote:

Mr.MicroMaster wrote:

EvasionModeBumblebee wrote:

WreckerJack wrote:

william-james88 wrote:Hasbro confirmed this movie is not directly related to the previous films, it is not meant to connect to them or be part of their specific timeline.

Praise the lord.

Wait, what? We hear Bobby B.’s voice, Bee’s design is a variation of his existing movie design, his transformation noise is his unique one from the previous movies, and we see Sector 7. How isn’t this connected to that timeline?

We've slided!

I believe Will is misquoting stuff.

Travis Knight said this:

So, what I was kind of trying to do with this film because it's set in the 80s, was harken back to the great, original, G1 vibe and feeling and tone. So, there are definitely Easter eggs for fans who are down with that sort of thing. There's a lot of continuity between this and the film's that Michael has done. But the film does stand on its own.

Spreading misinformation......FAKE NEWS? Shouldn't we verify first before, like you know, typing out a sentence?

fenrir72 wrote:

Va'al wrote:

Mr.MicroMaster wrote:

EvasionModeBumblebee wrote:

WreckerJack wrote:

william-james88 wrote:Hasbro confirmed this movie is not directly related to the previous films, it is not meant to connect to them or be part of their specific timeline.

Praise the lord.

Wait, what? We hear Bobby B.’s voice, Bee’s design is a variation of his existing movie design, his transformation noise is his unique one from the previous movies, and we see Sector 7. How isn’t this connected to that timeline?

We've slided!

I believe Will is misquoting stuff.

Travis Knight said this:

So, what I was kind of trying to do with this film because it's set in the 80s, was harken back to the great, original, G1 vibe and feeling and tone. So, there are definitely Easter eggs for fans who are down with that sort of thing. There's a lot of continuity between this and the film's that Michael has done. But the film does stand on its own.

Spreading misinformation......FAKE NEWS? Shouldn't we verify first before, like you know, typing out a sentence?

Mistakes are one thing. Being intentionally ignorant another.
If you have issues with how staff reports news, please let me know directly, via email.

Va'al wrote:

Mr.MicroMaster wrote:

EvasionModeBumblebee wrote:

WreckerJack wrote:

william-james88 wrote:Hasbro confirmed this movie is not directly related to the previous films, it is not meant to connect to them or be part of their specific timeline.

Praise the lord.

Wait, what? We hear Bobby B.’s voice, Bee’s design is a variation of his existing movie design, his transformation noise is his unique one from the previous movies, and we see Sector 7. How isn’t this connected to that timeline?

We've slided!

I believe Will is misquoting stuff.

Travis Knight said this:

So, what I was kind of trying to do with this film because it's set in the 80s, was harken back to the great, original, G1 vibe and feeling and tone. So, there are definitely Easter eggs for fans who are down with that sort of thing. There's a lot of continuity between this and the film's that Michael has done. But the film does stand on its own.

Yes, but Brian Goldner said this:

it is an alternative; a different chronology. So, rather than going to a sequel from what people had seen last time, this takes place in the 1980s.

However, I do trust the director more than the man handling the brand, so Brian could be saying it in an unintentionally misleading way.

william-james88 wrote:Yes, but Brian Goldner said this:

it is an alternative; a different chronology. So, rather than going to a sequel from what people had seen last time, this takes place in the 1980s.

However, I do trust the director more than the man handling the brand, so Brian could be saying it in an unintentionally misleading way.

Chronology does not necessarily mean continuity, but I get why there might be confusion - and yes, the director might be better equipped in this case!

william-james88 wrote:Yes, but Brian Goldner said this:

it is an alternative; a different chronology. So, rather than going to a sequel from what people had seen last time, this takes place in the 1980s.

However, I do trust the director more than the man handling the brand, so Brian could be saying it in an unintentionally misleading way.

How a corporate executive uses the word "chronology" and how sci-fi/fastasy fiction nerds use the word "chronology" are two different things.

Goldner was probably using the word to mean "This movie will not be another sequel set in the present day like the previous films have all been. It is set in a different time era of its own, separate from the forward-moving path that begin with the 2007 movie, serving as a new jumping-on point for fresh viewers just coming into this film franchise for the first time."

It is off the path of the first five movies in that it precedes them chronologically.

I feel like by this point people are in denial about this being in the bayverse which it obviously is, from the beginning this movie was to be a prequel of the first film and that never changed. Guess people jusf have a hard tkme admitting they like a tf film thats in the bayverse even if its by a new director.

Sabrblade wrote:

william-james88 wrote:Yes, but Brian Goldner said this:

it is an alternative; a different chronology. So, rather than going to a sequel from what people had seen last time, this takes place in the 1980s.

However, I do trust the director more than the man handling the brand, so Brian could be saying it in an unintentionally misleading way.

How a corporate executive uses the word "chronology" and how sci-fi/fastasy fiction nerds use the word "chronology" are two different things.

Goldner was probably using the word to mean "This movie will not be another sequel set in the present day like the previous films have all been. It is set in a different time era of its own, separate from the forward-moving path that begin with the 2007 movie, serving as a new jumping-on point for fresh viewers just coming into this film franchise for the first time."

It is off the path of the first five movies in that it precedes them chronologically.

This.

100%

It almost feels weird to have a positive outlook on a new Transformers movie. To be on here again, it almost feels like 2007.

fenrir72 wrote:Proof in the pie is in the eating! I must say, despite despising the Bayverse franchise(most especially the toys! They suck!),

So very wrong. Some of the best Transformers figures ever made are 'Bayverse' figures.

I'm still not sure how I feel about this film. Actually not so much the film but moreso some of the reactions that are postive but can't seem to express that without being further negative about the stuff I love ( and I can't help it if I love 'Bayverse' Starscream's design and was never a big fan of the G1 Seeker look which I always felt looked absolute crap in comparison to the Macross mold used for Jetfire when it comes to robots from jets... fold the wings awaaaaay) But yeah it's ok. I never really fit in anywhere anyways.

fandom kinda sucks really. Even had to mute the words 'Star Wars' and similar things from my twitter feed cos of all the fans of that arguing with each other (and I don't even caaaare about Star Wars... I just got sick of all the toxicity filling up my timeline)

Carnivius_Prime wrote:

fenrir72 wrote:Proof in the pie is in the eating! I must say, despite despising the Bayverse franchise(most especially the toys! They suck!),

So very wrong. Some of the best Transformers figures ever made are 'Bayverse' figures.

I'm still not sure how I feel about this film. Actually not so much the film but moreso some of the reactions that are postive but can't seem to express that without being further negative about the stuff I love ( and I can't help it if I love 'Bayverse' Starscream's design and was never a big fan of the G1 Seeker look which I always felt looked absolute crap in comparison to the Macross mold used for Jetfire when it comes to robots from jets... fold the wings awaaaaay) But yeah it's ok. I never really fit in anywhere anyways.

fandom kinda sucks really. Even had to mute the words 'Star Wars' and similar things from my twitter feed cos of all the fans of that arguing with each other (and I don't even caaaare about Star Wars... I just got sick of all the toxicity filling up my timeline)

It's very true that sometimes it feels like positivity can't exist without some negativity coming along for the ride, especially when it comes to fans of anything.

That said, I am really, really excited for this new Bumblebee movie. Yes it's been said to death already, but it feels like 2007 again for me too - back to being a kid excited to see Transformers on the big screen, awestruck at the sense of wonder such an idea brings along with it. It might be partly because I'm exactly the right age for the '07 movie to hit childhood nostalgia for me, but this trailer is really making me feel like the Bumblebee movie might be something great.

But will it come true venom movie may still be up to be its completion that’s marvel not only that but critics and sheep who follow movie critics yet still get to realize critics don’t make movies money regardless what critics score is it’s people who want to see those and bay did do the impossible what no transformer cartoon, comic, video game could not have done take average ordinary people who do NOT watch cartoons and do not read comics and turn them into transformer fans, but if transformers movies where made by fans there would not be new fans to transformers bots would have look boring, cartoony giant LEGO mess average adults people I work with that don’t watch cartoons do not read comics they don’t want to see live action movie giant robots look like blocky cartoons that 99 percent of old fans had wanted

First time I watched the trailer, I legit said “WOW” out loud. I was super surprised in a good way. I fully expected it to be another fireworks show like all the other movies had been, but I am totally on board with this.

Also, Starscream is bae

I have to admit, the trailer looks very promising. Starscream's new look is probably my favorite part of it. Let's hope the movie itself lives up to the hype.

Carnivius_Prime wrote:

fenrir72 wrote:Proof in the pie is in the eating! I must say, despite despising the Bayverse franchise(most especially the toys! They suck!),

So very wrong. Some of the best Transformers figures ever made are 'Bayverse' figures.

I'm still not sure how I feel about this film. Actually not so much the film but moreso some of the reactions that are postive but can't seem to express that without being further negative about the stuff I love ( and I can't help it if I love 'Bayverse' Starscream's design and was never a big fan of the G1 Seeker look which I always felt looked absolute crap in comparison to the Macross mold used for Jetfire when it comes to robots from jets... fold the wings awaaaaay) But yeah it's ok. I never really fit in anywhere anyways.

fandom kinda sucks really. Even had to mute the words 'Star Wars' and similar things from my twitter feed cos of all the fans of that arguing with each other (and I don't even caaaare about Star Wars... I just got sick of all the toxicity filling up my timeline)

Hey pot! Say hello to kettle!8-}

When was there a TF who didn't talk trash about a certain subline in the franchise? I loved the first movies and hate the toys. My preference. Hopefully, the last movie won't suck ballz too.

Toys from the movieline? No thank you.

D-Maximal_Primal wrote:

bacem wrote:i know this is just wishfull thinking, but looking at that travis in front of red muscle car, i really want it to be cliffjumper.

I'm betting it's Barricade

I actualy doubt its barricade since he is a police car and in another seibertron post i shows a drawing of him an he looks like a cop with his glasses. however, I THINK IT WOULD BE COOL IF IT WERE LOCKDOWN!!!!

Blitzwing is bae wrote:I actualy doubt its barricade since he is a police car and in another seibertron post i shows a drawing of him an he looks like a cop with his glasses.

That glasses artwork of Barricade was early TLK concept art that has nothing to do with the Bumblebee movie.

The last time we had G1 alt modes for a Bay film, and the script writers pretending they knew their stuff (We won't call him Swoop because this thing has two heads so it isn't Swoop) we ended up with age of extinction otherwise known as the consensual underage sex is fine movie among other stuff. Plus their is no time line, TLK proved that with Screams head and Barricade returning from his off screen BUT HAPPENED death in the first film (it's in the novelisation too, which yes sadly I read and the prequel novel which I kind of liked, if memory serves they are by Alan Dean Foster). Having said that, the VW Beetle Bumblebee looks like an insta buy for me and some of the Baynus toys and the inspired ones have been good despite how bad the source material is.

Either way, so going to call that there will be a masterbation joke in this movie other wise its just not a Transformers film, and it will be a female one just to fit in with the times

blackeyedprime wrote:and Barricade returning from his off screen BUT HAPPENED death in the first film (it's in the novelisation too, which yes sadly I read and the prequel novel which I kind of liked, if memory serves they are by Alan Dean Foster)

If you're taking the novels into account, then how do you explain Barricade playing a noteworthy role in the ROTF prequel novel, The Veiled Threat, which is set after the first movie? He and Optimus have a confrontation in the Roman Colosseum, even.

Regardless, though, IDW's The Reign of Starscream retconned out the idea of Barricade having been killed offscreen in the first movie by showing how he survived the highway battle en route to Mission City: He had been knocked into a pillar by Ironhide and fell offline for the remainder of the movie's events, only to be brought back to consciousness after the Mission City battle had ended, and by which point he was found by Starscream.

this looks like a step better than the previous live action installments. like the bot designs, though I’ll still probably stick to the comics. Will wait to see what the reviews are like before I see this.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this... So, it's a prequel to the Bay-Verse movies... Yet, it's also the reboot of a completely separate new movie series?

So... Isn't this still a Bay-Verse movie then? Hmmmm.

thedistinctroom wrote:I'm trying to wrap my head around this... So, it's a prequel to the Bay-Verse movies... Yet, it's also the reboot of a completely separate new movie series?

So... Isn't this still a Bay-Verse movie then? Hmmmm.

Depends how you define a bay verse movie. If it stands on its own, independent of the rest, with characters looking almost nothing like they appear in other films, and with limited explosions (as it seems to be the case), is it still a Bay-Verse movie?

At this point its baiscally the same as saying that the FOC/WFC games takes place in the same universe as the recent RID TV show.

dragons wrote:But will it come true venom movie may still be up to be its completion that’s marvel

Venom is a Marvel property but it's Sony made so it will more than likely NOT have a connection to the MCU.

Plus, Venom is released in October, it'll be out of cinemas by the time Bumblebee is released. Then there's the kid appeal that Bumblebee will have. Critics won't have much sway over the kids.

Burn wrote:

dragons wrote:But will it come true venom movie may still be up to be its completion that’s marvel

Venom is a Marvel property but it's Sony made so it will more than likely NOT have a connection to the MCU.

Plus, Venom is released in October, it'll be out of cinemas by the time Bumblebee is released. Then there's the kid appeal that Bumblebee will have. Critics won't have much sway over the kids.

The real competition would probably come from Spider-man which will be released around the same time. Its trailer debuted the same week as BUmblebe as well.

william-james88 wrote:

Burn wrote:

dragons wrote:But will it come true venom movie may still be up to be its completion that’s marvel

Venom is a Marvel property but it's Sony made so it will more than likely NOT have a connection to the MCU.

Plus, Venom is released in October, it'll be out of cinemas by the time Bumblebee is released. Then there's the kid appeal that Bumblebee will have. Critics won't have much sway over the kids.

The real competition would probably come from Spider-man which will be released around the same time. Its trailer debuted the same week as BUmblebe as well.

Maybe ... I don't see it though.

I would have said Wreck-It Ralph 2 would have been more competition buuuuuuut like all big animated movies the majority of the world gets it a month before Australia. So it'll be interesting to see how Ralph goes against Bumblebee in Australia at least. I'm inclined to see Ralph over Bumblebee.