I think a bit has to do with is it a film that depends on the wow factor or a film that depends on the story factor.

When you find a good third film it seems like you were there because there was really something more you had to know about the characters or about the story. So you just about have to see the third Lord of the Rings movie to tie everything up that has been set in motion. Revenge of the Sith you see because you figure at some point Vader has to stop being all emo and force choke someone.

Movies that depend really strongly on the wow factor seem to suffer from the general public going been there done that. Just really hard to re-bottle that magic that made the first film work. So the Matrix isn't going to wow you like the first film, or even getting new dinosaurs will not bring back the cool factor of seeing the dinosaurs for the first time in the first Jurassic Park.

Transformers seems to depend strongly on that wow factor so it could be hard to get that wow factor back. Really not too many reasons to go back for the story or characters since the movie are self contained so you would being going for spectral. On the bright side of being self contained at least they don't have to connect the third film to the second film too strongly.

It would be nice to get a really good third film, but I just don't know if they have the elements to pull it off.

 

How can it not be relevant if you're someone who,you know doesn't want a TINO movie and who cares about the Transformers and their mythology? And you're right,Ehren's writing track record for movies are questionable,even if him like others can from time to time write a movie that ends up being good. Some Hollywood people show way too much disrespect to certain kinds of movies by becoming too self indulgent.

 

This I want as well, hopefully this movie will be cool enough for getting on DVD.
But at least I ordered Transformers: The Movie Ultimate Edition yesterday, so at least I have one movie on DVD *g*

 

Don't know what you mean by TINO. That is not ok? Transformers in Name Only?

Anyway, a professional writer not being a "fan" doesn't mean that they won't care about the Transformers and their mythology, it just means they'll have to do their research, like how the writer and director of the upcoming Thor movie have been going through Marvel's archives reading as many issues of Thor as they can. My point relating to relevance is that a professional is going to approach a project with the proper amount of passion anyway, even if they're not a huge fan of the license. Furthermore, passion for something is not the same as ability, which is the point I was trying to make in the first place. A mediocre writer who knows a lot about a property isn't necessarily going to come up with better ideas than a fantastic writer who is new to the concept.

You know what movie I think of when I think of "fans making a movie with respect to the original mythos"? Speed Racer. And that didn't turn out so great. Having a "fan" as the writer or someone who's going to stick close to the mythology of Transformers is great, if you want to see G1: The Movie (and for a good number of people, this is exactly what they want when they say Transformers), but it doesn't mean the film will be good, and it certainly doesn't mean it'll be anything new.

 

I disagree. I think the first Transformers is completely underrated. It's a great action movie. It doesn't have a whole lot in way of depth or morales, but it's intense and entertaining.

 

Transformers III maybe good if Bay goes back to the TF I formula.
TF II was a disappointment. It was "too rude" for one fault.

 

wishful thinking is fun

... there was once a time when I thought there was a good chance ROTF was gonna be a big improvement and make up for all the issues with TF1.

 

I really can't see TF3 breaking this "threequel" curse somehow. As shoddy as RotF was, it made a metric ton of money, so in that respect there was nothing "wrong" with the movie in the eyes of some. By that logic, why should the formula be changed?

Of course, in an ideal world, Bay and whoever's written the script this time will have learned from the mistakes that earned RotF its Razzies, and we might get something that's comparable to the first movie; not great, but watchable. Bay does seem to have an attachment to his Transformers universe, so hopefully he'll put out something that appeals to fans and the general public without being a total trainwreck. That said, I don't really have any confidence in the 3rd movie being particularly good, even if it is better than RotF. I wasn't expecting much out of RotF outside of explosions and robots fighting, and it didn't even really deliver much on that, so I refuse to pin any hopes on the new movie.

 

Nanny McPhee Returns

Real magical   

 

Are you kidding about Back to the Future and Batman Forever? Batman forever is the only burton sequel I can watch and enjoy(even though he didn't direct it) Batman and Robin however completely different story. Also don't the first two have to be awesome to be in this catergory?

 

Uh Batman Forever was directed by Joel Schmaucher (hence the neon colors and homosexual overtones).

 

Two other fan-movies that come to mind are Superman Returns and King Kong. Both fairly good films, but usually drawn back by their directors' obsessions with nostalgia. More obvious in Superman Returns, where Brandon Routh had to look and act like Christopher Reeve instead of coming up with his own thing.

One threequel I would like to toss out as good is Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Azkaban helped the movie series mature and grow legs and has since then become a more serious series. Of course fans and viewers would differ on whether this was a good thing.

 

If it does become better than the first sequel im gonna shove the ridicule down the thoat of the haters

 

What if people still don't like it, what will you do then?

 

^Shrug thee shoulders man,shrug thee shoulders. And probably have more forest battle moments in Transformers 3 movie threads than before.

 

Here's how I see it: either it'll be just as bad as ROTF, or it'll be good enough that most critics will say it's mediocre.
I'd like to say it could be as good as the first one, but a lot of what made the first movie good was that it was doing something new for the first time. The "wow" factor is gone now. It's not going to work again.

After all the rage and hate directed at Bay alone for ROTF, there's no way the third film will be seen by critics as anything other then another crappy Bay movie. We can only hope that it wont be as dramatic as it was with ROTF.


Oh yeah, and I liked Back to the Future 3, too.

 

What so called professional critics say it's not the problem, they got paid by the competition to bash Transformers movies..
.. BUT with the mess that Michael Bay did by firing Megan Fox and ordering a sudden rushed script rewriting and that Steven Spielberg approved such a mess.. that is what is going to kill the franchise and Transformers3 from the start, it has no chance to not be a failure now that characters and plot continuity are just going to be deadly broken.

Bay, Spielberg and Paramount should be afraid of having lost a large percentage of the general public that made the first two movies a huge success and didn't care about what critics wrote and said to bash it.
With Transformers3 without Megan Fox and so Mikaela Banes (and a replacement on the same role would be even worse) and Sam Witwicky falling in love with a new female character played by the chosen topmodel it's highly likely that a lot of people this time will have to agree with all the bashing that critics will write against the movie as usual.
And in the rare case that critics might tell that the movie is worth watching it will just happen that a large percentage of the general public won't agree with critics as usual but this time causing a huge damage to the franchise and Transformers3 will either flop or bomb at boxoffice.

 

Wait you can't be serous about some conspiracy to buy off critics so that Transformers would get bad reviews. For the first film 121 critics liked the film, 68% of the top critics said it was a good movie that people should see. I don't know why people cling to this crazy idea that critics are out to get the Transformers films.

Yes Revenge of the Fallen got bad reviews, but that's because it was a bad movie for the budget and talent that it had. Not so much bashing Micheal Bay for being Micheal Bay but saying even by the standards of his films it just didn't live up to what he can do.

I do agree though that the critics will not put a dent either way in box office. It's all going to come down to does the general public want to go back a third time for Transformers film or will their interest have moved on to something else. With so many superhero films next year it's possible the general public may move on to other things.

 

Yup.
Michael Bay is not the worst director ever, but transformers 2007 and ROTF are both a testament to what happens when the studios give a director freedom todo whatever he wants and don't question or challenge his desicions. ROTF took everything that 2007 did wrong and put that wrong stuff on roids and multiplied it. What part 3 needs is someone, a producer or something, to keep Bay focused and in check. His focus on having scenes with a bunch of explosions and cg $hit flyind around seems to discract him from the other important parts of making a movie.
Otherwise, what incentive does Bay have to do anything different? He is just going to make part 3 just like rotf, only bigger and louder, and with more $hit flying around on screen. You know, rotf was like part 1, only bigger and louder, and with more $hit flying around on screen.

Alien 3 was good, BTW.

 

It's probably going to be the last one for awhile. I'd rather it bomb at the box office and actually have a decent story than become more mass market bullcrap.