The Energon Pub

shamone wrote:
people really fail to understand things dont they. Because you read it out of order and your ironometer is kaputt, im being hypocritical

I don't think reading it the way I did was out of order, since English reads left to right, top to bottom. Which is the way my quote, with the bold and italics reads...

shamone wrote:I didnt say americans were this way, i said that a simple broad view of US citizens, which has been propagated in media is the one i mentioned, and most likely the view Bay would take. It was an attempt (poor if you think it was) attempt at humour !

Next time, re-read what you post. Because you weren't explicitly referring to "a simple broad view of US citizens". You said "Seems to have a typical American, never travelled or studied other cultures attitude, so relies on the little snippets of stereotypes he has seen in the broadest of broadest comedies as an accurate reflection of race and nationality". I took issue with who I perceived to be the subject. Who "seems" and who has "never travelled, etc."? Because as written, it looks to refer to Bay, not some broad view propagated by the media. Then again, humor is one of those things that's difficult to get across in written form without being a little more explicit, so no real big deal if that's what you intended. Just try to make it a little more clear next time...

SEXFIGHTER wrote:The cat is already out bag, no one is judging his on screen performance because we aint seen it yet, all we have are toy images, but they should give him a new name lookin like that.
I think the film may be quite good on this one, just lookin forward to the inevitable reboot and gettin some real talent behind it...Bays rubbish.

Your opinion aside, I prefer to actually see him on-screen, coupled with a voice, lines, etc before I go one way or another on it. One image in a comic book (that makes the crown of his head look larger somewhat larger than the one still image from a trailer we have) isn't a whole lot to go on for me. Until the film comes out, I'm not declaring anything to be "RUINED FOREVER". Then again, I won't be doing that regardless of Wheeljack's appearance in DOTM...

As for the "inevitable" reboot, I'm not so sure it's as forthcoming as I you might think. The films aren't unpopular with the masses, and since Hasbro's primary interest is making money and growing it's consumer base, I wouldn't be surprised if the continue this continuity either with Bay, or with a new director using the same aesthetics. To his credit, Bay has helped achieve something worth appreciating: A financially successful Transformers film series. Personal opinions on him as a director aside, I respect him for that.

Joker'sRequiem wrote:To his credit, Bay has helped achieve something worth appreciating: A financially successful Transformers film series. Personal opinions on him as a director aside, I respect him for that.

Hah, thats not to his credit, thats to the marketing of trailers, a huge already estabalished fanbase and toon shows, and people who like summer blockbuster movies that are mindless action. Its to his DISCREDIT that he has made Transformers so popular with a lot of people who probably don't have any good taste in real sci fi, which at its heart, Transformers is, or should be. A good sci fi. I bet if Ridley Scott did Transformers, it'd be so much better with much less popularity and a lower budget that doesn't need billion poly models hogging it all up.

Its pretty clear that Hasbro didn't really think their IP was mature enough to deserve any serious take on the live action movie, therefore they went with someone who might make it the most fun... too bad they bet on the wrong horse in that department, I can honestly say the scenes in both movies that I liked were only half liked coz I had to force my brain not to ask...WHERE THE **** ARE THE OTHER AUTOBOTS? ... and other such questions.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Hah, thats not to his credit,

No, it is to his credit. He directed the film, so give credit where credit is due. As director he had one of the more significant roles in the development and subsequent success of the films. Regardless of how you feel about the films personally, he was responsible for much of the films success, as were numerous others (marketing including.

MINDVVIPE wrote:a huge already estabalished fanbase and toon shows

That is so quick to declare him the Antichrist, and in terms of numbers pails in comparison to the number of people outside of the fandom he has helped to bring into the franchise.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Its to his DISCREDIT that he has made Transformers so popular with a lot of people who probably don't have any good taste in real sci fi, which at its heart, Transformers is, or should be.

Just stop right here. This is one of the most idiotic statements in this thread. Good taste? What exactly is good taste, and who gets to decide what real taste is? It's this type of childish thinking that makes the fandom look like nothing by whining self-entitled brats. It's all subjective. If people like a film, it's their opinion, just like if they don't like it, it's their opinion. There is no such thing as "good taste" when it comes to this. Try it this way, prove anything by Ridley Scott is a good Sci-Fi film, or prove something like "A New Hope" is a good Sci-Fi film, without using any opinions to back up the argument. You won't be able to, and neither would I. So how about you try to get over the notion that good taste is lacking in the viewership of the films, since that's about as subjective as you can get.

I think it was Spielberg who asked Bay to direct the TF movie.

Joker'sRequiem wrote:Just stop right here. This is one of the most idiotic statements in this thread. Good taste? What exactly is good taste, and who gets to decide what real taste is? It's this type of childish thinking that makes the fandom look like nothing by whining self-entitled brats. It's all subjective. If people like a film, it's their opinion, just like if they don't like it, it's their opinion. There is no such thing as "good taste" when it comes to this. Try it this way, prove anything by Ridley Scott is a good Sci-Fi film, or prove something like "A New Hope" is a good Sci-Fi film, without using any opinions to back up the argument. You won't be able to, and neither would I. So how about you try to get over the notion that good taste is lacking in the viewership of the films, since that's about as subjective as you can get.

Well, film is more than just a buncha stuff happening, it can be appreciated for the artistic use of cinematography, writing, directing etc. Those aren't just opinion, even if they are at its core subjective (someone who thinks 'House of the dead' is a good movie from an artistic standpoint is clearly oblivious to a widely accepted notion of good film making). Your misunderstanding my critical view of the film, but I am not blaming you since I do have a fair bit more knowledge on film making than the average person. No offense.
My point (sorry if I confused the issue of who handed Bay the directing seat) but in either case, whoever did, didn't see Transformers as anything mature in the world of sci fi. I can actually use examples to show why A new Hope is a good movie from an artistic standpoint; whether someone likes the idea of spaceships shooting at each other is obviously its own case. I never said he was the antichrist, I simply meant that he definitely doesn't deserve the credit of bringing Transformers into a new age of popularity, and the reason why I say this is because he didn't do anything special with the subject material other than use typical scenarios of government classified agencies, Alien robots, and a kid hitting puberty. All pretty well covered topics already in the world of cinema, and all pretty badly executed at that.
I would rather TF be more obscure than so extremely popular that it loses its core unique atmosphere and excitement that spawned from its origin and occasional gleaming moments in toon and cg toon history. I'd take the comics over the movie any day.