User CyberstormSM shares a TV found a New Transformers The Last Knight Clip in Ellen’s show called “All they want is home” where we can see Cade, Col. Lennox, Hound and Bumblebee in a mildly tense situation. A complete new scene.
You can see the video below and then click on the bar to share your thoughts at the 2005 Boards.
Galvatross
Fair enough, although I wouldn't say "rest of the world" given how much these films have grown internationally. Honestly, even if I do have a preference for some of the films, I do think both 2007 and AOE are very commendable in their own ways. The 2007 film is commendable for bringing an 80s toy brand to live action format and to a wider, mainly non-Transformers fan audience, and AOE is commendable for actually taking some creative risks, not going the predictable route, and depicting what a post-DOTM world would be like regardless of what one thinks of either as a finished film.
jru42287
Alright, I honestly don't care anymore. We're both set in our ways, so you keep on enjoying them, and I'll keep on watching them solely for the CGI. I still would take the first movie any day over DotM or AoE (as would much of the rest of the world), and I hope that changes with TLK, but I'm not expecting much.
Megastar
Probably the best scene in the movie until Cade has to act all tough at the end with his "They can't touch us" line, I rather have Same back becusce at least he wasn't a shit talker and actually contributed to the war.
And another thing, way is a father still messing around with these alien robots inside of being with his daughter? If they needed a action guy when why not use Lennox who makes more sense and is also a father and soldier.
Galvatross
"And I base that on absolutely nothing." I think most of them in both films were meant to be funny.
Is Megatron a leader of one of the Cybertronian factions who in the past played a role in the leadership of Cybertron? Then it makes sense him wanting to "be back in charge" regardless of whether he personally was a leader of all Cybertronians or not. With Cybertron apparently gone, he wants to be in charge of the remaining Transformers. The Fallen and Sentinel are defeated at this point, so he wants to take advantage of the power vacuum, because regardless of how he exactly ranked he was still in a leadership position.
Not that we heard directly, BUT the movie clearly shows earlier on that the Creators cyberformed Earth. Optimus Prime is told by Lockdown when Prime is captured that he works for the Creators and they want him back. He clearly didn't know who Lockdown was working for before then, and he clearly didn't know who the identity of the Creators was. What is clear is that Lockdown was telling Prime lots of things about the Quintessons on the ship, some things which we hear, as before Prime was clueless about them. While Prime doesn't know everything about his makers, it's abundantly clear after being on Lockdown's ship that he becomes much more knowledgeable about his creators.
Because the Allspark didn't originally build the Transformers or their bodies. It only gave those bodies life. The Transformers are made of metal. We are shown the Creators turning Earth's life forms into Transformium via Seeds and harvesting it. We know the Creators used metal to make the Transformers, and they wanted their creations to do as ordered. Does it make any sense for the Creators to give them life and make them mentally aware beings? No! If you build the Transformers to do as they were told you wouldn't want to give them life and make them alive in the sense Cybertronians have become. They would initially be lifeless machines, just like the KSI drones were designed by the humans to be lifeless robots that they could control. That also explains why Optimus Prime did not know much about the Creators or who they were exactly, because he wouldn't remember them (minus any basic programming) if he was originally a lifeless robot like Stinger and company. The KSI Transformers being lifeless and getting "freed" by Galvatron and controlled by him is a meaningful echo of Cybertronians originally being lifeless and getting freed from their original masters. That the Transformers were initially built as a race of slaves is abundantly clear in the movie.
That's another thing, it makes zero sense for Megatron to crash in the Arctic if he indeed knew where on Earth the Cube was located. Every Transformer in all four films has arrived competently to the location on Earth where they need to be, but not Megatron. He conveniently needed to be frozen, so they had him crash in the Arctic. The Hoover Dam needed to be hiding some alien stuff, so they had Megatron transported to the dam. Not to mention he somehow remained posed in a new pose and frozen. How did he remain frozen for the duration of the trip with the technology of the time? How did the humans change his pose without letting a powerful Cybertronian dictator loose on the world? Why is a ruthless Decepticon etching the coordinates of a mcguffin he presumably doesn't want the humans to find on a pair of glasses even a thing? I think that makes less logical sense than just about anything in the sequels, however flawed they may be.
And to be fair, the Grand Canyon and Colorado River have debris and they have sediments. We don't know that the Allspark was on the very surface when it was discovered; we only know it was discovered in the area. It could have been covered with sediments from flooding or rock slides or what not before it was found by the humans. In fact, given the history of exploration in the area and date during which it was discovered it's extremely unlikely it was found on the surface.
So movies series and fictional universe can't change over time? Why should every sequel play things safe? I hate that idea. I would rather them take creative risks and try new things. Many people may like Transformers to stay in their fandom comfort zone, but that's not going to work if you want the series to grow.
I used to be that way. I used to think Transformers series should stick closer to their original status quo, but I wasn't seeing the beauty of the later things for what it is. I was being close minded. Then I took a closer look and took later episodes and comics and what not on their own terms, and in many instances I ended up enjoying them for what they were. The problem wasn't the fiction; the problem was me.
Incorporating subplots and characters from non-G1 continuities does not mean the overall timeline and story is not heavily based on G1. In AOE the factions are not at their high points and bounty hunters are hunting the Autobots for the Creators just like in Five Faces of Darkness Pt. 1 even if AOE uses an Animated bounty hunter instead of the aliens from FFOD and also has the Animated inspired plot of Megatron manipulating humans for his own revival. The progression of the timeline still matches up nicely with G1.
The Avengers gets some things right, but it's nowhere near as good as it's made out to be.
Doesn't matter. Having the Decepticons roll out for a major battle and then completely cutting out one of them is not good editing. There's no explanation as to what happens to the Allspark Mutations. At least AOE makes it clear which of its characters die and survive. Lockdown and some of his minions and Ratchet and Leadfoot and Stinger die. Galvatron, the other Autobots, and Dinobots survive. Even Brains is seen wandering off to enjoy his newfound freedom.
By the way, I don't think there's a big difference in quality between editing in the different movies. I think that's one of several things that all of the movies are about on the same level.
Actually, I should have corrected you when you said they were controlling it with their minds, because they definitely weren't. They had control panels and joysticks and keyboards that they used to control Galvatron and Stinger and Transformium. They gave instructions via computer. I'm not sure where you got the idea they just controlled it via their minds, so this is a non-issue.
You forgot Ratchet and the Dinobots and Bumblebee in his new body.
Furthermore, AOE was the fourth film in the brand. It needed to do some new things visually, like Lockdown's ship, a dinosaur extinction scene, and KSI transformations, regardless of what one thinks of them. What were people bitching about for three movies straight? That the Transformers weren't getting enough personality and character, so we get more of that in AOE.
How the hell is any single niche website an indicator of what the general public thinks about movies. Where is this website that one can say is an accurate representation of the general public's opinion in one country or any country for that matter? IMDB? Rotten Tomatoes? TFW2005? Really?
To give you an idea of how poorly sites like IMDB represent honest opinions about movies among the general public there was a movie that came out in April called The Promise. Without getting into the politics and breaking site rules, people who were opposed to the release of the movie were down voting it for months before its release. In response, many people supporting the movie's release were giving it scores of 10 and encouraging others to do the same even though the movie was not released in theaters yet. Neither side was honestly assessing the movie based on its own merits. The score didn't represent the general public's opinion about a movie they viewed. It represented support or disdain for the movie based on its very existence. So yeah, I would never use IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes as reliable indicators of public opinion for any movie, and certainly not fan sites like these.
The only thing studios care about, whether it's Disney, Paramount, WB, Sony, etc. is money. They don't care about what some asshats on sites like Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB said about one of their movies. They care about getting butts in theater seats. I'm sorry, but any movie series that makes two back-to-back billion dollar films is not making films that people don't want to see.
And I never acted as if my opinion was fact. I don't think it is, but I can support my opinion.
I enjoy all of the movies for what they are even though none of them are perfect. 2007 is very enjoyable as a story of robots hiding in plain site and seeing live action Transformers on screen for the first time. When looking at a Transformers movie from that perspective a case can be made it's the best. However, I don't want the sequels to be the same thing, and they were never going to have that benefit or novelty of being the first live action Transformers. I want them to be different, and I want future films to be different form the current sequels somewhat, too.
As a Transformers fan for a couple of decades I enjoy the first film, but Transformers is more than just the awe of seeing cool, complex transformations for the first time and robots hiding in plain view. It's also the robots as sentient, sapient beings and their relationships with each other. It's the devious, manipulative nature of Megatron. It's how the robots respond to humans as well as humans responding to robots. It's their ongoing struggles for freedom and survival in an often cruel universe crawling with enemies who would see them destroyed or enslaved, and that's why I prefer AOE.
jru42287
The difference is that those were included to be funny or cringe inducing. The ones from AoE are unintentionally so.
Still doesn't make sense. What does he want to be "back in charge" of? He was never in charge of Optimus. At least in the case of Sentinel, it makes sense, because Sentinel pretty much took over his Decepticon forces. Carly even says to him "Your Decepticon forces finally conquering the planet…yada yada…and now you're nothing but Sentinel's bitch." Were this good writing, this wouldn't even be up for debate.
I mean, it doesn't help that he's a shitty actor either…
Except nowhere in this lecture is anything mentioned about terraforming Earth…
Really? And we're supposed to know this how? What part of the movie is this explained in, other than some passing comments about "slaves" by Lockdown? Also, according to the first movie, the All Spark is what gave Transformers life. In fact, it's shown multiple times as doing just that.
Ok, so why couldn't they use the internet to contact each other? They used it to get to know earth languages, after all. And again, why can't we spare a line or two of dialogue to clear this up?
OK, well, Megatron knew where it was, since he landed right on it, so why couldn't anyone else? I'll concede here that maybe there was no reason to, since they didn't have the key to turn it on. But let's go back to the All Spark…it is said that it gives off energy in the first movie, and that the dam was built around it in 1934 to shield that energy from being detected by any outside species. It's also said to have been carbon-dated to 10,000 BC, which was the same time the Primes were on earth and sending the Seekers out. So, you're telling me that in all this time of Transformers hiding on earth, none of them picked up on this? A giant, important cube, spewing off energy? That strains some pretty hefty credibility.
Was not using "forever" literally, but still, see above.
Yeah, and more so in the first and RotF. To a lot of people, these movies are more fun when they're not taking themselves so seriously. If they wanted them to be serious, they should've started them that way. Why change the tone halfway through? That's dumb, and makes them feel like a different series of movies altogether, which they shouldn't. Part of a sequel's job is to keep the atmosphere of the previous movies. You want to reboot them and go dark? Cool. Otherwise, no. This is what I meant when I said the movies "jumped the shark" in my previous post. That is exactly what that phrase was coined to mean.
For reference: Transformers: Dark Of The Moon <—Says pretty much exactly what I'm talking about.
But that's not what you said. you said they are "paralleling the source material."
So, you think Age of Extinction is fantastic, but you don't like The Avengers? Arguably one of the best action films to come out in recent years? Well, at least I can say your claims are starting to make sense now.
Maybe you should watch the scene where they escape from the farm and can't decide what time of day it is between each shot. The only reason Barricade was missing was because a scene was cut where he was killed. Other than that, it can easily be explained away as him fleeing the fight, especially since he's obviously appeared in later films.
"They probably…" is not a good answer. If they do, they should explain that. Crappy writing strikes again!
In the first movie, transformations we see, uninhibited, front and center:
-Blackout
-Bumblebee (many times)
-Barricade
-Optimus (several times, as well as with the core Autobots in the alley scene, although, I won't include them since they're not the focus)
-Bonecrusher
-Jazz
-Megatron (several times)
-Frenzy
-Ironhide
-Starscream
In AoE, traditional transformations we see front and center:
-Optimus in original body
-Optimus in new body (once)
-Bumblebee in old body (once)
-Drift, sort of, I guess into helicopter mode?
-Lockdown
Tell me again how it didn't take away anything? Without even considering seeing the bots from 2007 transform more than once, we're still at 10 transformations versus 5.
Fair enough.
Well, at least we agree on something here.
You're kind of contradicting yourself here. You're saying that these movies must be enjoyed by the general audience because they're pulling in lots of money, yet refusing to acknowledge the general audience opinions of them. In most cases, yes, in fact, the popular opinion and consensus are pretty highly regarded in how good a movie is considered to be. Just because a movie makes a lot of money does not make it good, and I can tell you first-hand that general audiences do not think much of these movies.
Also, when adjusting for inflation, RotF is the only one that even makes the list: Top 100 Films of All-Time – Adjusted For Inflation
I don't really care if you have a different opinion of the movies from me, but stop acting like your opinion is fact. Yes, I have the opinion that the first movie is better, but I also have the facts that general audiences tend to agree with me:
Pun-3X
Yes, that I totally agree to. And I think that's where some of the other frustration comes from. It's like–there, you can do it! Trust in yourselves to write that kind of thing (uniquely) for the other TFs in your movie!
They need to break this mindset that unless their Transformer character is named Optimus Prime or Bumblebee, "karikature" is far enough. I just don't know if they really want to do that.
electronic456
No I'm glad you made the point. I think all of us want to see Transformers as characters, I acknowledge at least someone like Optimus is carrying a character of sorts.
Starscream Gaga
I think you need to go back and re-watch AOE. The dialogue in AOE is shocking. It's possibly the worst in the entire frachise… the "introductory" scenes of all the human characters are painful to sit through as everything they say is jilted, inorganic character-establishing crap that doesn't actually sound like conversations human-beings would have. The characters may as well be saying "I'm an uptight daughter that runs the house and looks down on my father" or "I'm a single dad who's overprotective of my daughter and obsessed with gadgets, causing money problems" for 30 minutes straight. That's to say nothing of the robot dialogue… half of the "conversations" don't actually make sense, they're just attempts at sounding cool. A couple of my favourtie examples include Lockdown and Ratchet: "There is one way you survive. Tell me where he is. Where is Optimus Prime" says Lockdown to Ratchet. "Never." Replies Ratchet and Lockdown responds by killing him and pronouncing "Never is here." That line literally only would make sense if Ratchet HAD told Lockdown where Optimus was… it makes no sense in context! Or what about Optimus' one-liner when he kills Lockdown? "Honor to the End". Who the hell is he referring to? Surely not himself, seeing as he just literally stabbed someone in the back and so he must be referring to Lockdown… as in the shameless sellsword bounty hunter? Not exactly a high example of honor. It's just a terrible one-liner that, again, makes no sense when put into context.
And shall we even get into the infamous statutory rape scene?
soundwaverulls
Glad to hear it.
Pun-3X
I know I'm late, but wanted to make this point:
That sorta makes the point. Comparing the Transformers to Kong, Predator, etc. What we want is for the TRANSFORMERS to be the spotlight characters. Not the main focus for the human characters that only get (the Transformers) a total of 20-30 minutes of screen time in a two hour movie. Oh, and I don't mean three or four scenes you can name where they do get the spotlight. I mean, ALL of the movie–the way most "main characters" get. Michael Bay makes his Transformers movies more like a Godzilla or Alien movie, and it's not as if that doesn't work. But some of us are looking for a Transformers movie that actually stars the Transformers. Timothy R. makes perfect sense and nails the point. Clearly people are happy with the chunks of Transformer air time the movies give them. Some of us are wanting more. Some of us understand these movies could be more than another Godzilla-type, "Transformer running in the background while the camera focuses on the main actors as they scream incoherently" kind of a movie.
Now, for me, I get this will never happen, because Bay and co. don't trust in the Transformers to carry the movie as characters (though, that would be the writer's fault if anything). But I also get some people's frustration.
EDIT: Also want to say to electronic456 that this wasn't an attack on you or your opinions–but that particular point was leading exactly to where I've been with these movies.
Galvatross
And you know what, I'm glad we actually agree on a lot of things. Not everything, but that's just the way things work. However, it's good finding some common ground like the DOTM Autobots and other things. So thanks.
Yeah, let's look at the miles of difference in dialogue between the movies. "Sam's happy time." Optimus telling Bee to stop lubricating on Simmons. "She's a criminal. Criminals are hot (I actually love this line for the same reason I love "My face is my warrant." It's so over the top I can't help but admire it)!" "The boy's pheromone levels indicate he wants to mate with the female (Once again I love it, but it's not a different level of dialogue)." "Get your hands off my bush (Also hilarious)!"
Which is something an anti-Transformers jerk might say.
And I'm glad you can see that, but keep in mind that, as I pointed out, there really isn't a difference between any of the films in this regard.
Nor am I complaining about any of the films really. To me Transformers is goofy, over-the-top, and ridiculous. I wouldn't want there to be no ridiculous one liners or questionable statements.
This line really is nowhere near as nonsensical as you're making it out to be. He's clearly talking to Prime, and it makes sense given Megatron's desire to rule. Furthermore, he was clearly being deceptive. He was basically saying "I want to rule Earth and stab you and humanity in the back when the opportunity arises."
Shane is not a good character, but the stuff he says isn't really any more ridiculous than lots of other characters in the films.
Probably because Prime was literally just a prisoner on Lockdown's ship and being lectured by the bounty hunter, and Lockdown knew about the Creators.
Because the Transformers didn't know all of their history. The Transformers were built as a race of SLAVES meant to mindlessly do as they were told. They were not built by the Quints to be these free-thinking, emotional beings. It stands to reason that they were not endowed with sentience and sapience for all of their existence. The Quintessons built them as slaves first; their physical bodies were built before they were free. Only later at some point did the Allspark give them life. Clearly Optimus didn't know anything before Lockdown captured him because he would probably not remember the times when he was not sentient or sapient.
I'm sure some of them had their duties or priorities, or were on different frequencies, or were in stasis lock or in energy saving mode. Just because some Transformers are members of the same faction or species doesn't mean they are always in active contact with others. Furthermore, his call was to Autobots who were not already on Earth. Finally, the Sun Harvester was hidden under a Pyramid at Giza.
Also, the Transformers haven't been on Earth forever. It was the Creators that visited Earth and other planets 66 million years ago to initiate the process of creating their race of slaves.
To you maybe. However, I don't find them depressing at all. The tone is a little darker, and they have more violent moments, but I don't find them depressing to watch by any stretch. All of the movies have plenty of fun moments.
And they do use things from other parts of the brand, notably AOE which has things from Animated among other things.
I didn't really like Avengers much, so I can't really say how much less I would have enjoyed it.
And I'm telling you right now 2007 really isn't better edited. It's a shorter movie, but AOE really isn't as poorly edited as people make it out to be. It has individual scenes that aren't perfectly edited, like the wire scene. But the 2007 film forgets characters exist (Barricade) and
First off, they probably have motion detector and motion capture technology. That exists today, so having it in the setting of a Transformers film isn't that unusual.
Second, it didn't take away crap. The regular Cybertronians still transform the traditional way. In fact, the cube transformations make sense since humans would probably have troubles engineering the complex transformations of the Movieverse Transformers; they weren't the Quints by any stretch and lacked the scientific and engineering know-how of the original Creators.
Third, Transformium actually addresses some of the major problems with Transformers and process of transformation that have never been explained before. In many continuities, including the films, Cybertronians scan potential alternate modes and must adapt their robot bodies to the new alternate modes. That includes their engineering, colors, and textures. A programmable metal in which molecules could realign in ways to adapt to new structures, colors, and textures explains how they could do it and do so seamlessly. A Transformer made of Iron, Tin, Copper, Aluminum, etc, scanning a car and suddenly adapting its anatomy to its new alternate mode really wouldn't any sense. However, it does make sense if a fictional, programmable metal is involved where the molecules can realign as necessary. Transformers do not conveniently have glass, rubber, leather, plastic, skin, hair, mucous membranes, rust, etc. stored in their bodies to adapt the textures of their alternate modes. Transformium solves this problem because the Transformium molecules can realign as necessary to create the needed textures and colors.
Fair enough.
Just to make it clear I actually prefer smaller core robot casts, which is one thing AOE and 2007 both do well. And even though the first two sequels do drop the ball on some characters, they have some good or underrated characters like Jetfire, Wheelie, the Twins, Laserbeak, Brains, and Sentinel Prime. Even Soundwave is underrated. I would say AOE has my favorite robot cast, and after that it's really a toss up.
How have any of the films not appeased the general audience? The first one did over $700 million, the second over $900 million, and the last two over a billion each. You don't get numbers like that if most members of the general audience hate the films.
Yeah, because popular opinion and consensus are the golden standard in movie quality. I should totally base my opinions on that and not from watching the films themselves.
And it's fine watching the films and having different opinions from me. Just make sure it's because of how you saw things when you saw it and not because it's cool/not cool/popular/contrarian to have a certain opinion.
jru42287
I don't know, maybe it's because my first real foray into Transformers was with Beast Wars which was actually well-written.
Yeah, each film has had it's groan-inducing moments, but there's a difference between "There's more than…meets…the eye with you," which I'm honestly surprised that Shia LaBeouf didn't look straight at the camera and wink his way through, and "My face is my warrant," or "What kind of a man betrays his flesh-and-blood brethren for alien metal? Get this guy out of my sight." Like, Jesus, why didn't Titus Welliver just look straight at the audience and go "In case you're unclear, I'm supposed to be a badass?"
Don't get me wrong, some of the movies have lines that are good, but they're brought down by eye-rolling moments like the above. And the first movie is sure as shit still guilty of this, so don't think I'm giving it a pass on this too.
Another example: In DotM, Megatron says "We need a truce. All I want is to be back in charge. Besides, who would you be without me, Prime?" To this day, I still don't know who he was referring to. If it was Sentinel, OK, makes sense within the context of the movie. If it was Optimus, as most of the fandom thinks, how does that even begin to make sense?
And don't even get me started on the shit that comes out of Shane's mouth most of the time.
Ok, great, how about why does Optimus suddenly know about earth being terraformed by the Creators in AoE? Why was that not mentioned during any of the three previous movies? If the Transformers were built instead of born, where did The Fallen come from? How'd he gain powers like telekinesis? If the Transformers have been on earth since forever, why did none of them come across the All Spark (or even start searching for it before 2007? What about the sun harvester? Why did none of the Autobots come to the aid of the other bots during the last four movies? Did they not know they were there? Optimus sent a message into space at the end of the first movie, which some bots answered. Are you telling me ones on the same fucking planet didn't hear it?
I never watched G1 in its entirety, so fair enough, but the movies have a different feel to them now, which you are correct, I don't enjoy. They went from an enjoyable escape from reality to fucking depressing to watch.
Also, why do the movies need to follow the arcs or G1 anyway? There's other source material to choose from to come up with stories.
I don't know, Marvel seems to be able to make it work without showing people reduced to piles of skeletons…
There's a difference between showing the results of war and just showing it for the shock value. Tons of people surely died in the the end of The Avengers, but the movie maintained its light-heartedness throughout. Can you imagine how much less enjoyable the movie would've been if you saw body parts strewn about on the ground during the finale, just to show the "consequences to war?"
Great, now go back and watch them both in regards to editing, and the frequency of when and how shots are spliced together.
Transformium was a good idea, until it didn't make fucking sense. How does a person control it with their bare hands in the air? How does it know what you're thinking that you want to turn it into? Those two ideas are more of a scientific feat than the idea of programable matter. And, it took away one of the best parts of the movies IMO: watching the bots transform. I can't tell you how disappointed I became when I first saw how Stinger transformed in a TV spot.
Fair point on this subject, and you're right. I'll concede.
It's not a pedestal. The first TF movie is still not a perfectly-made movie, and I know this. I've often referred to it as my guilty pleasure. I love the designs, I love the score, and it excites me. I like that the cast was small and easy to get to know. I can overlook its flaws because it was fun to watch. The new ones don't have that luxury. They do not have the same replay value as the first movie does. Fans might love them because they're packed with characters, but in reality, unless you're on this site every day like the rest of us, you're not going to know one bot from another, because they hardly get screen time and barely have personalities. Thinking back on it, do they ever actually even say Drift's name in AoE?
There's a good way to handle these things, (see, again, the Marvel films, who have a plethora of side characters, each whose name you'd actually remember afterwards), and then there's whatever Bay is doing. A movie can do fan service and appease general audiences at the same time, and the last few have not. You can look up the Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb, or whatever other scores/reviews your heart desires, and you'll see that the movies peaked with the first one. You can claim its because general audiences "don't understand because they're not fans," or whatever, but guess what? They weren't fans of Guardians of the Galaxy either, and they became them. So why does TF have to be different? Answer me that.
soundwaverulls
I still have no idea why vaporizing humans, especially civilians, is considered an accomplishment. That should be like exterminating insects, for Decepticons. Nor is helping to execute a prisoner an accomplishment. I guess it does mean they get something to do, but it's still all utterly pathetic.
I don't think a film should have a character who only exists as a joke. Adding in humor is necessary but writing an entire character, much less half of the cast, around making jokes is just going to make the people who dislike the jokes dislike the character.
And what exactly did Screamer do in the sequels? He jammed transmissions in Egypt, which should've been done by Soundwave and he destroyed some slow moving O-sprays, that could've been done by the Assault Carriers. That's one, single action per movie that's not based around comedy or exposition and neither of them required him specifically.
Which is what I'm leaning towards, right now.
True, which is why I think he's Quintessa's backup plan. Of course, that is just my theory.
How does any of that separate his personality from that of any other Decepticon?
I've acknowledged that the first movie 'Cons don't have personality but they do have unique designs and specific sequences dedicated to them. Crankcase and Crowbar are barely distinguishable from the majority of Decepticons and the Constructicons were background characters. Even when searching for Sam, they played second fiddle to Screamer and the Insecticon.
]
It's not really a matter of whether there's a small few who can recognize them, though. It's a matter of whether the majority will and want to buy their toys.
Now that's just taking the piss. Wait, he didn't have that specific asset.
I know, that's why I compared the two. The Hackers at least offer a different perspective on events, as a lot of the film was about showing how the world reacts to the arrival of the TF. Leo did show the conspiracy theorist response to the events of the first film, early on, but could've easily been discarded once Sam left the college.
We know Megatron had been chasing the Allspark, under his own power, ever since it left Cybertron, so would've arrived shortly after. The problem this creates is that it shows how long the lifespans of his unfrozen contemporaries are and that indicates there's probably been very few generations of TF, considering when ROTF establishes the first generation was active.
True, but it wasn't really that necessary. Sentinel would've revealed himself sooner or later.
Yeah, the Wreckers were OK, but didn't really have any unique personalities between them. Que was surprisingly good for what little screen time he had but, as you say, should've had more.
The fact that legends of the Creators exists, combined with Optimus and Hounds lack of surprise when they find out those legends were true, indicates that the Creators were already widely considered as being real, which makes Optimus line about knowing not where the Allspark comes from seem odd. He sounded like he truly believed that Cybertronians don't know where the Allspark comes from, yet in AOE, he's so unfazed to learn the Creators are real.
I absolutely appreciate that each of the Pathetic Dirty Foursome has unique characterization. They're one of the main reasons that I've come to really like AOE, despite it's flaws. Still, none of them ever seem to do anything besides threaten to kill things. Heck, both Drift and Hound do kill random creatures. It may make sense, but it works against the film's attempts to get the audience to sympathize with them. What's worse is that it could've easily been used to the film's advantage, showing hypocrisy in the humans, accusing the Autobots as being unnecessarily violent, while encouraging that behaviour. Unfortunately, the film doesn't really have time for that, as it's too busy with a Creator plot line that's completely superfluous to the main story of the Autobots VS KSI and CW.
Galvatross
Like the ways the others die is so over the top, and they die in even greater numbers and more easily. Also, at least the protoforms actually vaporize humans, damage Q, kidnap Sam's parents, help destroy the aircraft carrier, etc. The Persians in 300 barely scratch the Spartans for most of that movie. Jackson's Middle Earth action had gotten so ridiculous it was laughable, more so than in any Bay TF film. The Chitauri die easier than just about anything I think.
So no film should ever make a comic relief character because someone in the audience might not laugh? Ever? Why make any joke then? Characters should only exist if they are going to be universally appreciated? There is no such a thing. Even the best, funniest lines in some movies will have that one audience member who is no fun not laugh because they have little sense of humor.
Also, how is Starscream only comic relief? He is sniveling for sure, but I wouldn't describe him as simply being comic relief.
Then don't see the movie?
Maybe, but keep in mind that even when he has the red paint he lacks the purple eyes.
The Fallen may not have gotten much screen time, but he definitely had a personality. He hated his brothers, he hated humans and Earth, and he wanted to destroy Earth's sun to harvest its power and create Energon to revitalize his race. That is something.
And also, truth be told there really isn't much of a difference between most of the Decepticons we mentioned in 2007, ROTF, and DOTM. Bonecrusher has his one cool highway fight where he dies just like the Dreads have their one cool highway scene where they die. None of them talk, not counting Cybertronian. The Constructicons search for Sam in Egypt while other Constructicons combine to form Devastator.
Also, I never said they were all memorable. My point is that memorable is subjective, and that people may find characters memorable for specific reasons you and I wouldn't have.
Devastator should have used his assets as a medieval mace and wrecked some Autbots with them. That would have been epic!
Frankly, I think the whole hacker subplot is kind of pointless, too.
Was the exact date Megatron crashed ever indicated from the film itself? I remember they dated the Allspark, but I think that date was when the Allspark crashed on Earth since it was Carbon dating and not necessarily the absolute age of the Allspark itself.
To be fair, Sentinel uses the occasion/Sam's revelations as a catalyst to reveal his true colors
I do think DOTM should have treated its supporting Autobot cast better. However, I do like the Wreckers for the time they appear on screen. Q is underused I think. Dino isn't that great; I don't know why some people want him back so much.
The Autobots did not fully know their history. That's why Lockdown told Prime, "You think you were born? You were built, and your Creators want you back." The Creators were mysterious to the Autobots. Furthermore, nothing of the Creator origins contradicts anything in previous films. Transformium is simply the material Cybertronians were made out of; the Allspark is what gave them life. The Creators were meant to be mysterious.
What is so horrible about the AOE Autobots? They're easily the best group of movie Autobots to date. Assumption? Hound quite clearly says he views humans as "backstabbing weasels," and that not killing humans was, "a big mistake." Yeah, I would safely say the reason Hound is pissed is because of Cemetery Wind and KSI. Yet, despite his distrust of humanity he starts to see the good in the Yaegers to the point that he stands up for them against Crosshairs in Lockdown's ship and cheers Cade in Hong Kong. He goes from hating all humans to at least respecting and liking the Yaegers. Additionally, he respects his leader so much that he doesn't kill one of the conspirators when Prime indicates that they hold fire. That is one of the dozens of things that goes unappreciated about AOE.
Drift quite clearly is not happy about Bumblebee's leadership due to Bee's lack of discipline. Crosshairs is clearly motivated by how he benefits from situations and would like to become the leader if he could, although not by harming his allies himself. Motivations don't have to be related to specific events.
The AOE Autobots are great because they are fun, they make sense in the film's context, and they are all very distinctive from each other in character and appearance, and they all get plenty of non-action moments. And they're far from just being jerks; there is much more to them than meets the eye. I also find them personally relatable. They are understandably not happy about their situation. It shows how human-like the Transformers can be. I have family members (now deceased) who were in genocides and had to fight to stay alive. They weren't really happy with their situation either, and they had personality traits that were a little rough around the edges in some ways, kind of like the AOE Autobots.
In truth, you're lucky Autobots like Hound and Crosshairs are still as nice as they are given millennia of wars and skirmishes and genocides. Do you think that most Cybertronians who still surviving everything the universe throws at them would be the nicer ones, including the Autobots? I don't. I think Cybertronians have been at war so long that the more friendly ones still alive are the exceptions and not the rules, and that includes Autobots.
soundwaverulls
In what way? Seriously, is there a single action scene in which the protoforms do anything other than die en mass? How are they better than any of those other armies you mentioned?
And that's why you shouldn't make comic relief characters.
Fair enough.
If I don't judge the movie from the trailers than what on Earth is the point of the trailers existing? The trailers exist to give audiences a taste of the movie, so they can make a decision on if they want to see it. Right now, I'm leaning towards not seeing it because I don't want to waste my time and my money on yet another rubbish TF movie.
Well him having the same red on his face as Quintessa puts on Optimus has to be there for a reason.
Yes, when looking at the perspective of fans who break down everything, it's possible to say they're all memorable. But what if you don't want to break down everything and just want to turn your brain off, either because, like me, breaking down a movie is secondary to you or like the majority of moviegoers, you view it as pointless? The dreads don't have any dialogue and are barely distinguishable from a protoform. The Constructicons only appear in the background. The Fallen had no personality and was just that dude one of the films was named after. Ravage is just that dog-like one…. Or was it a cat (again, from a casual viewer's perspective)? What would make any of the Decepticons stick in the head of an average kid who will potentially buy/get their parent to buy a toy?
ROTF splits the Autobots between lifeless war machines and pointless comic relief. The majority of Decepticons are reduced to cannon fodder. There are too many big villains, leading to the Fallen just sitting around, Meg not doing anything on his own, Screamer being comic relief and Devastator being wasted. While Maggie and Glen added another perspective to the initial invasion, there was no reason for Leo to be kept as a part of ROTF. He just leads them to Simmons who, as much as I like him, is pointless. Mikeala could've asked Wheelie about the symbols from the start. NEST getting shut down is ultimately pointless. It doesn't even bring the characters together, like the Glasses did. Also, the events with the Dynasty of Primes is too recent, especially when the time at which Megatron crashes on Earth is taken into account. It make Cybertronian history ridiculously short. Optimus' change towards a more savage attitude is unmotivated. It can't be because of Jazz as he seemed to handle his death well, at the end of TF1.
DOTM gives Sam, the main character, a story line that's superfluous to the main plot of the film.In TF1, where he's able to convince the soldiers to force S7 to free Bee, his grandfather's glasses send the Autobots on the route to meet up with Bee and the soldiers and he personally keeps the Allspark away from Megatron. In DOTM, everything would've play out the same without him. His uncovering the moon conspiracy was ultimately pointless, as Sentinel still gets away with the pillars. He rescues Carly but she's only important because of him, otherwise she would've been no different from the hundreds of nobodies the 'Cons did kill. He beats Dylan but that doesn't really accomplish anything. Oh, also the Autobots are extremely bland and the majority of Decepticons are cannon fodder. The driller especially is a waste of CGI
AOE takes itself too seriously for such flawed film. It completely rewrites TF history without explaining how any of it fits in with what we already knew. It tries to get you to sympathize with Autobots who act quite horrible and the idea that its the result of what they've been through is only an assumption. We've never seen most of them before and Optimus is acting less vicious than usual. As far as we know, this is just how these new Autobots behave.
Do you want to end the conversation or do you want to counter my arguments? You can't do both. Walk away (metaphorically speaking) or keep going, don't expect me to give up the debate.
Galvatross
Excuse me, but how the heck did you become a fan of Transformers to begin with? What is so superior about the dialogue of the first movie? Answer: it isn't. I don't really blast any of the films in this department because Transformers has always had corny dialogue, so it comes with the territory, but fans claiming one of the films has superior dialogue to the others is imagination because they all have cheesy lines in them. There really isn't any difference in between the films in that regard.
How have the sequels "de-legitimized" the previous movies, whatever one may think of them? They're the same basic kind of movies.
Also, not every "change" ruins what came before it. For instance, the Allspark gave Cybertronians life; Transformium is simply the programmable metal their bodies were made of. And remember, the Transformers know not where the Allspark came from. There's no problem there.
I think what's really going on is fans of the earliest movies don't like the direction the later films have gone. Which is understandable, because if 2007 was someone's introduction to Transformers that's what they'll probably think Transformers should be, but in actuality the films are simply paralleling the source material. They have gone from the pilot episodes in 2007 to Season 2 episodes in ROTF and DOTM to FFOD Part 1 in AOE to Dark Awakening in TLK. The progression of the movies lines up with the source material quite well actually, which is something many fans don't realize or appreciate because many fans don't know jack about the brand's history. And it's perfectly okay to prefer the Season 1 inspired films to the Season 3 inspired films, but the presence of films more based on later seasons certainly doesn't ruin the films based on earlier seasons that came before them. Just like Season 3 doesn't ruin the first two seasons of Sunbow.
Transformers is a brand about warring factions of robots. Yeah, it may often target kids, but why should a PG-13 film not have consequences to wars? You want every film to be brawls between robots? Guess what? Wars have deaths. They have massacres. People (and robots in the case of Transformers) die in awful ways. The films may be based on cartoons, but they aren't cartoons, nor should they be restricted to being Saturday morning violence-level conflicts.
Which I have done. AOE in my informed opinion is better than the 2007 after seeing them back to back. It's not perfect, but it's a much better summer action film than it gets credit for being (Ditto to ROTF). The story fits logically into the movie timeline and logically follows DOTM. The subplots are connected narratively and thematically. The robots are much more interesting characters and make sense in the context of the film. It has some nice human characters like Cade, who is an improvement over Sam in my opinion, Joshua, Harold Attinger, and even the underrated Tessa. The action is clearer. The voice acting is great. It has some great sets and set pieces. It meaningfully expands the fictional universe, and Transformium is an extremely underrated idea. Not the most popular opinion, but I have plenty of good reasoning behind it.
Yeah, which the sequels also did with Welker voicing Soundwave and Galvatron. Granted the latter wasn't the very original voice for Galvy, but he was the voice in the original cartoon.
It's perfectly fine to think one of the Bay TF films is better than the others for reasons, but I can tell you right now there isn't a huge gap in quality between the different Transformers films. They are all heavily inspired by G1 episodes with some inspiration from other parts of the brand here and there and some original ideas sprinkled in, too. They are all meant to be over-the-top summer blockbusters. Preferences are fine; pedestals are not.
jru42287
My post may have been based on opinion, but the movies have been getting debate-ably worse. RotF at least had the excuse that it suffered from the Writers' Strike in 2009, but the rest have no reason to be as bad as they are. And being well-made movies and expanding the live action lore do not have to be mutually exclusive. While the two newest movies may have the benefit of better stories, they have the problem of both having terrible scripts (there are so many lines in AoE that literally make me cringe to hear), and retconning and de-legitimizing the movies that came before them.
I honestly think the series jumped the shark with DotM. The first movie and, to some extent, RotF have the benefit of actually being fun. While RotF was not a great movie, and had some crude and immature moments, it at least kept the original playfulness and lightheartedness of the first movie. The second two are unnecessarily dark and depressing. Do I want to see robots beating each other's asses and wrecking a city? You betcha! Do I need to see them explicitly vaporizing a city's worth of humans or watch a beloved character being decapitated and melted? No thanks.
And if you haven't noticed a difference in the actual film making quality, then I highly suggest you go back and rewatch TF '07 and AoE back-to-back.
And for the record, when I said "nostalgia and freshness," I meant because they did stuff like update the look of the characters, or bring back the original voice actors for parts.
Agreed 100%
Galvatross
And I think there are possibilities for stories without armies, too, but once again these are war stories, so armies are going to exist in some instances. Still, at least in the Bay films the armies are treated much better than the Orcs in The Hobbit, or Persians in 300, or Chitauri in Avengers.
But there's no such thing as comedy that's going to be funny to everyone. We don't all laugh at the same things.
I am not sure we can tell who is working for who yet. Let's watch the movie and find out. I have little doubt there is treachery and deception going on among the villains though.
I mean do you judge the movie from the trailers or the movie? I judge movies by the movies and what's in them. And like I said, the marketing this time is selling the film from a different angle.
Well regardless of what is going on, he can be seen taking on Hot Rod and Hound on one hand and a corrupted Optimus. I have yet to see him with the purple eyes, so if Megatron does get corrupted there's no evidence of it yet.
Robots can be memorable for a variety of reasons: a particular scene, how their characters were portrayed, or their design. For instance, the Dreads didn't get any lines, and they all get killed, but they're part of a neat action scene on a highway and arguably have cool designs, so maybe some people found them memorable. Some people liked the Constructicon designs. The Fallen was underused, but he had a unique design, and he had an awesome voice actor. Ravage had a cool design and helped steal an Allspark shard. "Memorable" varies from person to person.
I don't have nostalgia for either of them, but as a fan of Transformers for a few decades and someone who loves fiction, both serious and of the over-the-top campy variety, in my opinion there isn't a huge gap. I have never seen ONE compelling argument as to some films being vastly superior to others. I've seen compelling cases made for each of the films being best out of the four, but there being a huge gap in quality? Not even close. Despite its shorter run time the 2007 is just as narratively bloated as any of the sequels. Most everything that fans complain about in ROTF or any of the sequels has equivalents that aren't better in the 2007 film and are sometimes worse. Devastator's anatomy and robot heaven and Simmons in his underwear and Blenderbots aren't any dumber than "Sam's happy time" or Bee's lubricating of Simmons or the Allspark shrinking to the size and mass of a box that can be held by Sam or Frenzy's getting his head ripped off and somehow regaining his body by the Allspark.
The Allspark energy being transferred to Sam's mind and trying to find the Matrix, which turns to dust only to reorganize itself again isn't any less logical than Megatron imprinting the coordinates to the Allspark on a pair of glasses and the Autobots somehow knowing Megatron imprinted the coordinates on the glasses. If anything it actually makes less sense, as fanciful as the former may be. Sounds like just another day in Transformers to me with ridiculous plots and cheesy dialogue, and that's not entirely a bad thing in either case.
Like I said, if people think one of the films is somewhat better than the others for certain reasons that's okay (I myself have opinions about that), but there certainly isn't one that's on a giant pedestal next to the rest.
Anyway, I think this conversation is getting a little off topic. Let's get back to talking about the clip, in which case it's cool enough I guess. I kind of think I have seen enough from the movie before it comes out, so I think this is when I check out from the forums.
FanimusMaximus
"Directed by Michael Bay"
soundwaverulls
That's the fault of the writing, more than anything. They could've simply written a story that didn't require an army. So far, DOTM is the only movie in which the Decepticon army was actually necessary, so that kinda proves that it is possible to write a TF story without one.
I guess that comes down to personal opinion on what's fun, but that's the problem with comic relief characters. They add nothing but comedy that's not going to be funny to everyone. That's why I think adding purely comic relief characters is a bad idea.
As if plenty of money is ever enough money.
Yet they manage to show the Decepticons getting their ass kicked plenty of times. There is no reason why they couldn't show the reverse, if it's actually present.
True, although it's looking more and more like those we thought worked for Quintessa actually work for Megatron. Look at the latest teaser. Infernicus is definitely on his side and he's surrounded by generics that I think are Lockdown's old crew, making it even more likely those Assault Carriers were launched from the Knight Ship and serve Megatron.
Again, these don't need to be the big money shots. It's no different from Grimlock whipping Barricade or Bee blasting Barricade. Just a couple of tiny moments of action, but that actually show the 'Cons getting hits in. You can't pretend there's a place for the 'Bots being bad ass but not the 'Cons.
Or he works with TRF until he tries to betray them but ends up being taken over by Quintessa as a backup for after Optimus is freed, making him a pawn. Just speculation but again, with movie Megatron's track record, chances are he'll end up being someone's bitch.
Pulling a TFTM needs to be earned and Megatron has been someone's bitch for every movie but AOE. If he does end up gaining the upper hand on the other villains, that will be fantastic but I'm not holding my breath.
So I once again present you with this question; What made the main Decepticons of DOTM memorable? In addition, what made the main 'Cons of ROTF memorable?
There really, really is a big gap, both between the different films and between Bayformers and most the rest of the franchise.
I didn't go into the first movie with any nostalgia for any part of the franchise and I'm just as nostalgic for ROTF as I am TF1 but that doesn't make me think it's as good as TF1.