|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 7:36 pm
Im just going to say it flat out "to many humans ruin transformers". i want a transformers movie not a movie for ever 1 robot theres 4 humans, just running around doing stupid human thing. that my biggest problem with the films.
look what happened to gen1, they tried making humans(and human like aliens) a bigger part of the show and then no 5th season for us in the states.
As i see it michael bays Transformers is less about Robots then some stupid kid getting a car a slutty girl friend and saving the world from.
i love transformers cuz the bot are characters and frankly there are NONE in the bay movies.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:07 pm
Mylian DevilsLight Mylian DevilsLight Personally I am and was fascinated with the Bots and that Bay was capable of bringing the bots to live action. The sequences and everything was great. What sucked was his ability to write a good story. G1 had that piece where you can see each character and development. Bay's movie doesn't have much of that. In fact the first one didn't have any. The only identifying characteristics was when they introduced themselves at the very beginning and that was it. The rest was of them doing body guard duty. Hardly useful or purposeful. So I would disagree with saying his movie sucked just because it didn't fit G1. His movie sucked because he failed to write a captivating story focused on Transformers instead of focusing on Transformers saving Earth or Transformers protecting humans. The problem with a serious story about just robots is that nobody would watch it but the hard fans, and the hard fans aren't a big enough audience to pay back a big budget effects-driven blockbuster. A movie about only CGI robots has to be a kid's movie to get any money. The movie you want would flop in the box office. I would disagree. Avatar was completely CGI of enlarged smurfs and it had a "serious" story to it with character development. Narnia and Lord of the Rings were all fantasy but serious and people loved it. The problem isn't what the characters were, the problem is the plot sucked, the focus was lost and humans typically is fascinated with plot and development. It's a narrative. For example Terminator was great and then it flopped and then it was great again. It wasn't the CGI or explosions, that made it great again. It was the story. In fact the special effects and all that crap made the movie suck because there was no story, no narrative, no voice, no purpose. That's my take on it with Bay's movie. Personally if I wasn't a fan of TF I would have ditched the 2nd movie after witnessing what the first one looked like and rented it when it came out because I don't feel $15 was worth my buck. You know how many times the aliens in Avatar had to be revised until they looked human enough for an audience to relate to? You're going in the wrong direction if you want to make a comparison here. If you want to make a comparison to a modern well-told CGI story about just robots, the only comparison there really is to be made is WALL-E, and they had to make the robots cute enough for an audience to connect to. What about movies that contain no humans? Dancing Feet or Nemo or the newest one about owls (Guardian or something)... I think people relate to story and plot just like reading a book and what people don't relate with is just scenes of cool stuff. It's cool and flashy but attention keeping is nill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:21 am
DevilsLight What about movies that contain no humans? Dancing Feet or Nemo or the newest one about owls (Guardian or something)... I think people relate to story and plot just like reading a book and what people don't relate with is just scenes of cool stuff. It's cool and flashy but attention keeping is nill. Those are all movies marketed to families with kids. Which is exactly what I'm saying. The "Transformers" all the fans want would have to be a family movie to have a market draw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:39 am
Mylian DevilsLight What about movies that contain no humans? Dancing Feet or Nemo or the newest one about owls (Guardian or something)... I think people relate to story and plot just like reading a book and what people don't relate with is just scenes of cool stuff. It's cool and flashy but attention keeping is nill. Those are all movies marketed to families with kids. Which is exactly what I'm saying. The "Transformers" all the fans want would have to be a family movie to have a market draw. Ill take a family friendly movie over leg humping toy cars and ball gags any day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:19 pm
Mylian DevilsLight What about movies that contain no humans? Dancing Feet or Nemo or the newest one about owls (Guardian or something)... I think people relate to story and plot just like reading a book and what people don't relate with is just scenes of cool stuff. It's cool and flashy but attention keeping is nill. Those are all movies marketed to families with kids. Which is exactly what I'm saying. The "Transformers" all the fans want would have to be a family movie to have a market draw. That draw would have been a better draw than what they have now. Honestly if the first movie would have raked it in for them if it was done well with a strong story that they can continue for the 2nd and 3rd movie. But instead they sucked so not only did it not attract family or kids, it attracted no one except for the fans who will see it anyway and those interested in Megan's body =p
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:33 pm
The first movie did rake it in. If it hadn't, we wouldn't have seen a sequel and we wouldn't have the current upswing in toy quality we are enjoying now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:50 am
Mylian The first movie did rake it in. If it hadn't, we wouldn't have seen a sequel and we wouldn't have the current upswing in toy quality we are enjoying now. i Wouldint really call it a upswing in quality more like quantity, granted some are really good, but most of the movie toys are not all that great, and lets face it just ugly fugly. the market is flooded with bayformers leaving vary little room for the good toys id like to buy. i want Kup scream and Sledge to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2011 2:21 pm
BogiePop Mylian The first movie did rake it in. If it hadn't, we wouldn't have seen a sequel and we wouldn't have the current upswing in toy quality we are enjoying now. i Wouldint really call it a upswing in quality more like quantity, granted some are really good, but most of the movie toys are not all that great, and lets face it just ugly fugly. the market is flooded with bayformers leaving vary little room for the good toys id like to buy. i want Kup scream and Sledge to. That I will agree with. The quality for the most part is not in the featured characters of the Movie line. (Except for notable prizes like Leader Starscream. It took them a while to really get the hang of translating the Movie aesthetic into toy form, but they are definitely starting to make it work.) But Generations is totally being paid for with movie profits, and most of it is golden. I mean, we're FINALLY getting Junkions that can actually ride each other. And THREE figures, two of them Deluxes, that can hold melee weapons with both hands in front of them? (Bludgeon might as well be Generations, really.) Taken as a whole, what's coming out just keeps getting better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2011 4:22 pm
Mylian BogiePop Mylian The first movie did rake it in. If it hadn't, we wouldn't have seen a sequel and we wouldn't have the current upswing in toy quality we are enjoying now. i Wouldint really call it a upswing in quality more like quantity, granted some are really good, but most of the movie toys are not all that great, and lets face it just ugly fugly. the market is flooded with bayformers leaving vary little room for the good toys id like to buy. i want Kup scream and Sledge to. That I will agree with. The quality for the most part is not in the featured characters of the Movie line. (Except for notable prizes like Leader Starscream. It took them a while to really get the hang of translating the Movie aesthetic into toy form, but they are definitely starting to make it work.) But Generations is totally being paid for with movie profits, and most of it is golden. I mean, we're FINALLY getting Junkions that can actually ride each other. And THREE figures, two of them Deluxes, that can hold melee weapons with both hands in front of them? (Bludgeon might as well be Generations, really.) Taken as a whole, what's coming out just keeps getting better. whole heartedly i agree with you on Bludgeon being amazing(and movie lockdown), as for Junkions and generation line i strongly beleave they would excel bay movies or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:13 pm
Without the money coming from the movies, half of that stuff would still be on the drawing board.
Not to mention: more PAINT APPS. Hailstorm, for instance. Paint apps EVERYWHERE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
