Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:This is a double post. Can someone explain why I had double posts?

It could either be a glitch, a goof, or an accidental double-pressing of the Submit button.

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Technically speaking, only 2 Arcee's are confirmed dead in ROTF, although the last one might have been killed off in the comics or novels.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Technically speaking, only 2 Arcee's are confirmed dead in ROTF, although the last one might have been killed off in the comics or novels.

According the greater Movie continuity of the IDW comics, all three of Arcee's components survived ROTF.

So did Ravage, even (though, in his case, he was resurrected).

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Technically speaking, only 2 Arcee's are confirmed dead in ROTF, although the last one might have been killed off in the comics or novels.

According the greater Movie continuity of the IDW comics, all three of Arcee's components survived ROTF.

So did Ravage, even (though, in his case, he was resurrected).

I have a question, though. Do the comics count as "canon" as far as the live-action movies are concerned? I mean, even the movies themselves tend to contradict one another in certain areas, and many time fans have to come up with their own theories for some of the plot points to make sense.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee? :-x

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Technically speaking, only 2 Arcee's are confirmed dead in ROTF, although the last one might have been killed off in the comics or novels.

According the greater Movie continuity of the IDW comics, all three of Arcee's components survived ROTF.

So did Ravage, even (though, in his case, he was resurrected).

I have a question, though. Do the comics count as "canon" as far as the live-action movies are concerned? I mean, even the movies themselves tend to contradict one another in certain areas, and many time fans have to come up with their own theories for some of the plot points to make sense.

John Barber took great pains to make the comics, movies, and novels all fit with each other together as coherently as possible, in turn also working to patch up as many contradictions between the films and between the films and the comics/novels as possible.

Then came Age of Extinction. >:oP

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee? :-x

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Technically speaking, only 2 Arcee's are confirmed dead in ROTF, although the last one might have been killed off in the comics or novels.

According the greater Movie continuity of the IDW comics, all three of Arcee's components survived ROTF.

So did Ravage, even (though, in his case, he was resurrected).

I have a question, though. Do the comics count as "canon" as far as the live-action movies are concerned? I mean, even the movies themselves tend to contradict one another in certain areas, and many time fans have to come up with their own theories for some of the plot points to make sense.

John Barber took great pains to make the comics, movies, and novels all fit with each other together as coherently as possible, in turn also working to patch up as many contradictions between the films and between the films and the comics/novels as possible.

Then came Age of Extinction. >:oP

LOL, I get what you mean!

Going into "fanon" territory here, but AOE doesn't necessarily have to contradict the first trilogy. The Creators could have simply designed the Allspark as a device to mass-manufacture TF's on Cybertron...basically an automated bot factory in a cube.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee? :-x

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Technically speaking, only 2 Arcee's are confirmed dead in ROTF, although the last one might have been killed off in the comics or novels.

According the greater Movie continuity of the IDW comics, all three of Arcee's components survived ROTF.

So did Ravage, even (though, in his case, he was resurrected).

I have a question, though. Do the comics count as "canon" as far as the live-action movies are concerned? I mean, even the movies themselves tend to contradict one another in certain areas, and many time fans have to come up with their own theories for some of the plot points to make sense.

John Barber took great pains to make the comics, movies, and novels all fit with each other together as coherently as possible, in turn also working to patch up as many contradictions between the films and between the films and the comics/novels as possible.

Then came Age of Extinction. >:oP

LOL, I get what you mean!

Going into "fanon" territory here, but AOE doesn't necessarily have to contradict the first trilogy. The Creators could have simply designed the Allspark as a device to mass-manufacture TF's on Cybertron...basically an automated bot factory in a cube.

That's what I was thinking. Their role hasn't even been fully explained, yet.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Going into "fanon" territory here, but AOE doesn't necessarily have to contradict the first trilogy. The Creators could have simply designed the Allspark as a device to mass-manufacture TF's on Cybertron...basically an automated bot factory in a cube.

And folks who have read "Foundation" (I'm still working my way through the earlier Movieverse comics) have said that AOE doesn't quite contradict how that comic series had Sentinel discover an amnesiac Optimus hidden away by himself in the badlands of Cybertron.

Guess we'll have to wait for the next movie to fill in the blanks on the Creators, the Knights, and Optimus's relation to them, since IDW had confirmed at BotCon that there aren't any more movie comics coming from them at the moment.

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Holy crap I completely forgot Arcee already exists in the Bayverse.

SlyTF1 wrote:That's what I was thinking. Their role hasn't even been fully explained, yet.

Chances are good that Kruger might actually go this route for TF5, as it seems to be the most convenient and easily explained.

Sabrblade wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Going into "fanon" territory here, but AOE doesn't necessarily have to contradict the first trilogy. The Creators could have simply designed the Allspark as a device to mass-manufacture TF's on Cybertron...basically an automated bot factory in a cube.

And folks who have read "Foundation" (I'm still working my way through the earlier Movieverse comics) have said that AOE doesn't quite contradict how that comic series had Sentinel discover an amnesiac Optimus hidden away by himself in the badlands of Cybertron.

Guess we'll have to wait for the next movie to fill in the blanks on the Creators, the Knights, and Optimus's relation to them, since IDW had confirmed at BotCon that there aren't any more movie comics coming from them at the moment.

My mind is still wondering what knights mean in the context of AOE. Whether by coincidence or not, the thing with an amnesiac OP actually works well with what Lockdown said about him forgetting when he really is.

I just wish either OP or someone would just recount a legend or myth of Cybertronian knights, so as to let us viewers have an idea of WTF "knights" are in AOE.

If I had to guess, though, I'd say these knights are more or less enforcers of the Creators' colonies, as Lockdown seems to hint at. Something about OP forgetting his original purpose.

I've been reading thru pages and pages of posts about this movie and there are some points that I don't think anybody has hit on so only for that reason will I share. I for one was not a huge fan of this movie thinking it was just okay. What kills me is that when someone says that people come up with all sorts of defenses like "You just hate Michael Bay". I will say his success probably has a lot to do with why some people really dislike this movie. Armageddon is one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought the movie was beautifully done from story, to directed sequences, to special effects. There is no one out here that can say they didn't feel like letting loose a tear the first time they saw Harry tell his daughter goodbye before he pressed the button. Even the ending credits had feeling. Now the person responsible for that movie and Bad Boys 2 plus the first couple of Transformers Movies left us with AOE?

You can feel when someone is not passionate about a project and I felt he wasn't for this film as I remember hearing he did not technically want a TF4. It was never so blatant in any of the other films that the sole purpose of the movie was selling the toys. Again, I understand that was what the movies were meant for, but who else felt like Hasbro just had some Dinobot toys ready to go and told the movie makers "hey...we really need to get the Dinobots in there somewhere anywhere you can fit them in."? I want to see the franchise keep going but not if the movies are going to go down this road. I also am glad that some critics came out and called the movie out for not being the best of the bunch. With that hopefully the creators will raise their own level and put out the best TF movie ever to shut those same critics up next go round. Sequels should be raising the bar each time out. We all know it doesn't always end up that way. But why can't we say that on a TF board without getting flamed beyond belief?

Darkman20xx wrote:I've been reading thru pages and pages of posts about this movie and there are some points that I don't think anybody has hit on so only for that reason will I share. I for one was not a huge fan of this movie thinking it was just okay. What kills me is that when someone says that people come up with all sorts of defenses like "You just hate Michael Bay". I will say his success probably has a lot to do with why some people really dislike this movie. Armageddon is one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought the movie was beautifully done from story, to directed sequences, to special effects. There is no one out here that can say they didn't feel like letting loose a tear the first time they saw Harry tell his daughter goodbye before he pressed the button. Even the ending credits had feeling. Now the person responsible for that movie and Bad Boys 2 plus the first couple of Transformers Movies left us with AOE?

You can feel when someone is not passionate about a project and I felt he wasn't for this film as I remember hearing he did not technically want a TF4. It was never so blatant in any of the other films that the sole purpose of the movie was selling the toys. Again, I understand that was what the movies were meant for, but who else felt like Hasbro just had some Dinobot toys ready to go and told the movie makers "hey...we really need to get the Dinobots in there somewhere anywhere you can fit them in."? I want to see the franchise keep going but not if the movies are going to go down this road. I also am glad that some critics came out and called the movie out for not being the best of the bunch. With that hopefully the creators will raise their own level and put out the best TF movie ever to shut those same critics up next go round. Sequels should be raising the bar each time out. We all know it doesn't always end up that way. But why can't we say that on a TF board without getting flamed beyond belief?

AOE felt more "passionate," than an of the first 3.

Darkman20xx wrote:I've been reading thru pages and pages of posts about this movie and there are some points that I don't think anybody has hit on so only for that reason will I share. I for one was not a huge fan of this movie thinking it was just okay. What kills me is that when someone says that people come up with all sorts of defenses like "You just hate Michael Bay". I will say his success probably has a lot to do with why some people really dislike this movie. Armageddon is one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought the movie was beautifully done from story, to directed sequences, to special effects. There is no one out here that can say they didn't feel like letting loose a tear the first time they saw Harry tell his daughter goodbye before he pressed the button. Even the ending credits had feeling. Now the person responsible for that movie and Bad Boys 2 plus the first couple of Transformers Movies left us with AOE?

You can feel when someone is not passionate about a project and I felt he wasn't for this film as I remember hearing he did not technically want a TF4. It was never so blatant in any of the other films that the sole purpose of the movie was selling the toys. Again, I understand that was what the movies were meant for, but who else felt like Hasbro just had some Dinobot toys ready to go and told the movie makers "hey...we really need to get the Dinobots in there somewhere anywhere you can fit them in."? I want to see the franchise keep going but not if the movies are going to go down this road. I also am glad that some critics came out and called the movie out for not being the best of the bunch. With that hopefully the creators will raise their own level and put out the best TF movie ever to shut those same critics up next go round. Sequels should be raising the bar each time out. We all know it doesn't always end up that way. But why can't we say that on a TF board without getting flamed beyond belief?

There's a few people here who will actually attack you for not liking the movie. Ignore them and presto! Trouble-free interwebs for you.

RhA wrote:

Darkman20xx wrote:I've been reading thru pages and pages of posts about this movie and there are some points that I don't think anybody has hit on so only for that reason will I share. I for one was not a huge fan of this movie thinking it was just okay. What kills me is that when someone says that people come up with all sorts of defenses like "You just hate Michael Bay". I will say his success probably has a lot to do with why some people really dislike this movie. Armageddon is one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought the movie was beautifully done from story, to directed sequences, to special effects. There is no one out here that can say they didn't feel like letting loose a tear the first time they saw Harry tell his daughter goodbye before he pressed the button. Even the ending credits had feeling. Now the person responsible for that movie and Bad Boys 2 plus the first couple of Transformers Movies left us with AOE?

You can feel when someone is not passionate about a project and I felt he wasn't for this film as I remember hearing he did not technically want a TF4. It was never so blatant in any of the other films that the sole purpose of the movie was selling the toys. Again, I understand that was what the movies were meant for, but who else felt like Hasbro just had some Dinobot toys ready to go and told the movie makers "hey...we really need to get the Dinobots in there somewhere anywhere you can fit them in."? I want to see the franchise keep going but not if the movies are going to go down this road. I also am glad that some critics came out and called the movie out for not being the best of the bunch. With that hopefully the creators will raise their own level and put out the best TF movie ever to shut those same critics up next go round. Sequels should be raising the bar each time out. We all know it doesn't always end up that way. But why can't we say that on a TF board without getting flamed beyond belief?

There's a few people here who will actually attack you for not liking the movie. Ignore them and presto! Trouble-free interwebs for you.

Don't get me wrong. The attacks don't get to me at all. I just find it irritating that so many people think that the only opinion that's right is their own.

SlyTF1 wrote:

Darkman20xx wrote:I've been reading thru pages and pages of posts about this movie and there are some points that I don't think anybody has hit on so only for that reason will I share. I for one was not a huge fan of this movie thinking it was just okay. What kills me is that when someone says that people come up with all sorts of defenses like "You just hate Michael Bay". I will say his success probably has a lot to do with why some people really dislike this movie. Armageddon is one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought the movie was beautifully done from story, to directed sequences, to special effects. There is no one out here that can say they didn't feel like letting loose a tear the first time they saw Harry tell his daughter goodbye before he pressed the button. Even the ending credits had feeling. Now the person responsible for that movie and Bad Boys 2 plus the first couple of Transformers Movies left us with AOE?

You can feel when someone is not passionate about a project and I felt he wasn't for this film as I remember hearing he did not technically want a TF4. It was never so blatant in any of the other films that the sole purpose of the movie was selling the toys. Again, I understand that was what the movies were meant for, but who else felt like Hasbro just had some Dinobot toys ready to go and told the movie makers "hey...we really need to get the Dinobots in there somewhere anywhere you can fit them in."? I want to see the franchise keep going but not if the movies are going to go down this road. I also am glad that some critics came out and called the movie out for not being the best of the bunch. With that hopefully the creators will raise their own level and put out the best TF movie ever to shut those same critics up next go round. Sequels should be raising the bar each time out. We all know it doesn't always end up that way. But why can't we say that on a TF board without getting flamed beyond belief?

AOE felt more "passionate," than an of the first 3.

Granted your opinion. To me it felt like something that was rushed out to make sure we get a toyline out by Memorial Day and make sure the car makers got their vehicles some light in the film.

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

There's already a triple changer, Swift transformed into a helicopter and a Bugatti Veyron.

Darkman20xx wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Darkman20xx wrote:I've been reading thru pages and pages of posts about this movie and there are some points that I don't think anybody has hit on so only for that reason will I share. I for one was not a huge fan of this movie thinking it was just okay. What kills me is that when someone says that people come up with all sorts of defenses like "You just hate Michael Bay". I will say his success probably has a lot to do with why some people really dislike this movie. Armageddon is one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought the movie was beautifully done from story, to directed sequences, to special effects. There is no one out here that can say they didn't feel like letting loose a tear the first time they saw Harry tell his daughter goodbye before he pressed the button. Even the ending credits had feeling. Now the person responsible for that movie and Bad Boys 2 plus the first couple of Transformers Movies left us with AOE?

You can feel when someone is not passionate about a project and I felt he wasn't for this film as I remember hearing he did not technically want a TF4. It was never so blatant in any of the other films that the sole purpose of the movie was selling the toys. Again, I understand that was what the movies were meant for, but who else felt like Hasbro just had some Dinobot toys ready to go and told the movie makers "hey...we really need to get the Dinobots in there somewhere anywhere you can fit them in."? I want to see the franchise keep going but not if the movies are going to go down this road. I also am glad that some critics came out and called the movie out for not being the best of the bunch. With that hopefully the creators will raise their own level and put out the best TF movie ever to shut those same critics up next go round. Sequels should be raising the bar each time out. We all know it doesn't always end up that way. But why can't we say that on a TF board without getting flamed beyond belief?

AOE felt more "passionate," than an of the first 3.

Granted your opinion. To me it felt like something that was rushed out to make sure we get a toyline out by Memorial Day and make sure the car makers got their vehicles some light in the film.

Frankly, I don't think Bay will ever be as passionate as TF fans would like him to be. He was never a fan of the franchise, and he hwas more or less "strong-armed" into directing TF1 because Spielberg asked him to. And you don't say no to Steven Speilberg.

He might have grown fond of the TF movies, since they made him a mountain of money and are his most successful movies to date...but passionate?

The good news is, Ehren Kruger is a TF fan, unlike O&K.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote: The good news is, Ehren Kruger is a TF fan, unlike O&K.

I wish his writing would show it a little more. I admit he is an improvement over Orci and Kurtzman by a LOT, but he still needs to tighten up his story some. Also, whatever happened to John Rogers, the guy who helped write the first film? Was he there to just get Orci and Kurtzman started? He wasn't involved in RoTF at all, and the difference is obvious. Yeah, the writers' strike also had something to do with that, but still, Orci and Kurtzman were a detriment to Bayverse.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote: The good news is, Ehren Kruger is a TF fan, unlike O&K.

I wish his writing would show it a little more. I admit he is an improvement over Orci and Kurtzman by a LOT, but he still needs to tighten up his story some. Also, whatever happened to John Rogers, the guy who helped write the first film? Was he there to just get Orci and Kurtzman started? He wasn't involved in RoTF at all, and the difference is obvious. Yeah, the writers' strike also had something to do with that, but still, Orci and Kurtzman were a detriment to Bayverse.

There was a John Rogers co-writing the TF1 script? Didn't know that. I really don't know how much Rogers could have saved ROTF. As I remember it, the damage was already done by Bay's attempt at writing the rest of the script, and there's only so much you can do with what hasn't already been filmed.

I agree about Kruger. He comes up with some really cool ideas, but seems to forget to follow up on them.

Skywarp64 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Holy crap I completely forgot Arcee already exists in the Bayverse.

Easily done, I think they're only named once on screen.

ZeroWolf wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:

OptimalOptimus2 wrote:

Skywarp64 wrote:So not Springer and Arcee?

Well Arcee died in ROTF and I didn't include Springer because the Autobots would have too many characters. Nine Autobots, Dinobots, and a triple changer would be too overpowering in the eyes of Hollywood directors.

Holy crap I completely forgot Arcee already exists in the Bayverse.

Easily done, I think they're only named once on screen.

Just have her get another new body. She's already had two (hr Movie 1 toy body and her ROTF triplets body).

Autobot032 wrote: It's made them mad enough that the film series has borrowed from past storylines as it already has, but something like that? A straight up ripoff? Oh, I think that'd get people upset.
.

Well, lets see.
First one, a Cybertronian artifact is hidden in the Earth's past, there's a government conspiracy, and in the final act it becomes a key factor in a drawn out action scene. Also, Optimus laments Megatron dying.
Second one, a Cybertronian artifact is hidden in Earth's past, there's a government conspiracy, and in the final act it becomes a key factor in a drawn out action scene. Also, Optimus ruthlessly kills a Decepticon that poses no threat to anyone.
Third one, a Cybertronian artifact is hidden on the moon, there's a government conspiracy, and in the the final act it becomes a key factor in a drawn out action scene. Also, Optimus ruthlessly kills a Megatron after he poses no threat to anyone.

cruizerdave wrote:

Autobot032 wrote: It's made them mad enough that the film series has borrowed from past storylines as it already has, but something like that? A straight up ripoff? Oh, I think that'd get people upset.
.

Well, lets see.
First one, a Cybertronian artifact is hidden in the Earth's past, there's a government conspiracy, and in the final act it becomes a key factor in a drawn out action scene. Also, Optimus laments Megatron dying.
Second one, a Cybertronian artifact is hidden in Earth's past, there's a government conspiracy, and in the final act it becomes a key factor in a drawn out action scene. Also, Optimus ruthlessly kills a Decepticon that poses no threat to anyone.
Third one, a Cybertronian artifact is hidden on the moon, there's a government conspiracy, and in the the final act it becomes a key factor in a drawn out action scene. Also, Optimus ruthlessly kills a Megatron after he poses no threat to anyone.

Cleary, Bayverse Optimus is no saint. But Megatron is very much harmfull to humans, just not at the moment he got his spine removed. We was plotting to be a threat again at that time.

RhA wrote:
Cleary, Bayverse Optimus is no saint. But Megatron is very much harmfull to humans, just not at the moment he got his spine removed. We was plotting to be a threat again at that time.

It certainly would have played better if Op was trying to take him prisoner and Megs forced him to do it by threatening to kill innocents.