Greg Mooradian To Lead Hasbro’s Allspark Pictures

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by AzT, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. drbeakman

    drbeakman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2017
    Posts:
    176
    Trophy Points:
    87
    Likes:
    +316
    Newsflash, no one gives a care about Transformers outside of the little online hovel that is the fandom

    Whatever money was earned from these "tens of million people", left no lasting memorable impact

    Aka a money grab on an unsuspecting public that literally has no respect for the franchise

    And clearly they arent falling for it anymore either
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Jumacas

    Jumacas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Posts:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +324
    Dude, I meant Planet of the Apes. And I'm also simply having an informed opinion based on thousands of observations on how people act. I have never met a single person in real life who doesn't consider the name Transformers synonimous with trash nowadays because of the movies. Not a single one. And it's ok I don't know everyone of course. But I'd want that to change anyway. I want better movies. Like I've said in the past, not a G1 recreation or an Armada recreation or whatever. Just well made movies with a fairly good story, some character development, etc. Proper movies. I believe in the creative potential of this franchise. It's a damn great concept! Explore it! Don't dumb it down.

    Unfortunately, I think that the Bayverse hasn't been properly thought out from the beginning to sustain a universe of films and sequels and prequels and whatnot. It doesn't serve as proper foundation, in many aspects. The world that they have envisioned doesn't fit the concept or the characters. That is why plot holes consistently appear all the time and characters behave out of character in every next scene, if they have anything to say or do at all. Why not just reboot, and take the time to do it properly, instead of hastily trying to pander to nostalgic fans with some superficial G1 visual references on top of a Bayverse indie movie that no one really asked for? Welp... :( 
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,620
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,902
    Not everyone agrees with you. The term "plot hole" gets thrown around way to much, just because you don't understand something or it's not explained doesn't make it a plot hole.
     
  4. drbeakman

    drbeakman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2017
    Posts:
    176
    Trophy Points:
    87
    Likes:
    +316
    upload_2017-10-13_8-20-45.png
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Jumacas

    Jumacas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Posts:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +324
    Oh, alright, I shouldn't talk if everyone doesn't agree with me then. This is how discussion works, right? Indeed though, for a plot hole to occur there needs to be a plot in the first place.
     
  6. Dmhead

    Dmhead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Posts:
    275
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    117
    Likes:
    +120
    Hasbro needs to get Transformers out from Paramount, Lorenzo and Bay. Especially Lorenzo. This man has been a plague since day one for the live-action franchise.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  7. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    14,775
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +1,054
    If it's a trip down nostalgia road or it's brand spanking new I think there are a fair number of people who want better. It kind of seems like we are just awash in good special effects these days so things like character and story have to step up. It's not like ye olde days when something like a special effects shot could sell a whole movie.

    New or old school they need something that will invest people in the movies if they are going to run the movies this side of forever. Marvel can sell you on another film with hey you liked that hero, well that hero is back and they are going to bring some new friends with them. Warner Brothers is putting Wonder Woman in a huge roll for the marketing of Justice League to say hey you know how you are so into Wonder Woman now well don't you want to see what happens with the character next? But Transformers lacks something to latch onto. You never know which Optimus Prime will show up. Human characters just leave with no impact on anything. And if you were into Transformers because you loved someone like Starscream or Soundwave well now there is no reason to watch any more films because only Megatron has the stack of endless back from the dead cards.

    Sure a Transformers movie is never going to win an Oscar but it would be nice to contend with other movies for things like best movie villain. It would be nice not to have to Google a movie character to find some version of that robot that had an actual personality. We need a wider range of characters so that Hound doesn't feel like Iron Hide with just a different robot and vehicle mode because the tropes the robots are based on is so narrow.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,620
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,902
    What are you talking about? When did I tell you not to talk?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,620
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,902
    Yeah and, so what? That doesn't mean the term plot hole hasn't been thrown around needlessly in regards to the movies.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Jumacas

    Jumacas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Posts:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +324
    Amen. Well, then there's Hasbro itself too, because it's not like live action is their weak point and everything else they put out nowadays is commendable, but yes, that would be a very solid step in the right direction. I'd like an apology too, but, I'd compromise for just a really well made movie.
     
  11. Galvatross

    Galvatross Make it Mac Tonight! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,766
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +2,558
    I'll agree that there's definitely an aversion to risk-taking in Hollywood right now, but I'd also say that is largely because the public largely doesn't support riskier cinematic choices in these times. Like you said, nostalgia is a major motivator for fans and general audiences at the moment when it comes to box office success stories. Whether that's a good or bad thing is up to you and I as individuals.

    News flash to you and all fans like you: the live action movies are the iteration of the brand the general public cares most about, even if The Last Knight saw a major box office decline from its predecessors.

    And every piece of fiction in the brand's history was meant to make money, whether by media sales or by promoting characters to sell toys. The cartoons are no different. The toys lines are no different. Accept it. It's undeniable.

    How in the world do you think there's this more "mature" Transformers cartoon or comic based on kid's action figures that the general public would think is not stupid? If you adapted IDW's MTME or the 1986 movie or Rescue Bots to live action the general public would still think Transformers is dumb. Every piece of Transformers fiction ever made, even the better stuff, and I actually think some of the movies fit into the "better stuff" category, is not even close to being Shakespeare or Dostoyevsky. It's not even trying to be that. The fandom would hate a robot version of that.

    Hell, most of the fandom doesn't want something good. They don't want daring. They don't want something more serious with super realistic, compelling dialogue. They want a comfort zone where no risks are taken, because it's when Transformers fiction actually tries taking things more seriously and tries new directions and concepts that the fandom complains the loudest.

    Also, read your own posts. I was responding to this:

    Don't claim act as if you weren't also talking about Guardians and the Lego Movie, because you weren't only talking about the Apes trilogy, not that I have anything against those films or the Transformers films.

    It seems like you have a strange understanding of what Transformers is.

    One of the core concepts of Transformers is that the Autobots and Decepticons, with their respective leaders of Optimus and Megatron, find their way to Earth after a long, deadly war with countless lives lost. Their war continues on Earth. It continues to effect them as sentient beings.

    In the movies, Cybertron is a wasteland. On Earth and presumably on other planets robots continue to succumb to the war's battles. Autobots and Decepticons alike suffer a deadly attrition. Jetfire and Wheelie, tired of working with and for the Decepticons, change sides. Jetfire sacrifices himself to help his new allies. Megatron's dimension-hopping mentor perishes. The Autobot's former leader betrays them and joins forces with Megatron. Human lives are lost by the thousands. Their home planet is heavily damaged when it goes back through Sentinel's Space Bridge. Sentinel dies, and Megatron becomes an immobile head. Humanity, due to the actions of Sentinel and Decepticons alike, no longer trust either faction, and some secretly align with Lockdown, who views both factions and their wars as blights on the universe. Megatron manipulates the humans to get a new body and army, and Galvatron feigns being a non-sapient drone in an attempt to get what he wants. Lockdown briefly captures Prime, but his troops make a daring rescue. The Autobots almost abandon humanity and want to leave our planet due to mankind's deeds, but they see the good in the Yaegers and decide to defend Earth again.

    Every single one of those things sound like things that could happen if a Cybertronian war was brought to Earth. They make sense in a universe ravaged by wars, planetary destruction, mass extinctions on a cosmic scale, and genocides.

    Furthermore, beyond the war Transformers are sentient, sapient, alien robots with the ability to transform, which the Movieverse Cybertronians clearly are. Sure, not all get speaking roles or get much attention, but the main robots are clearly thinking, feeling beings who transform.

    Like CKPRIME says (and correctly, I might add), that is an overused term whose meaning has been diluted.

    What are you talking about? If anything, besides the first film with its fan wank-ish robot dialogue and a few scenes here and there the movies lack superficial resemblance to G1 but have plenty of core stories and concepts inspired by the source material.

    The 2007 movie has Autobots and Decepticons coming to Earth, with the former befriending a Witwicky..just like the pilot episode of the Sunbow cartoon.

    Revenge of the Fallen has Jetfire switching sides and a device that can harvest energy by destroying the sun, just like in G1.

    Dark of the Moon has Megatron deposing Abe Lincoln at the Lincoln Memorial, the Decepticons having the Autobots exiled and seemingly destroyed, Cybertron coming into Earth's orbit, and the Decepticons working with humans...just like G1.

    The core story of Age of Extinction has bounty hunters who work for the creators of the Transformers hunting the Autobots...just like Five Faces of Darkness, Part 1. it also introduces Galvatron and a largely new robot cast and brings the films in a new direction like in the 1986 movie.

    The Last Knight has the powerful sorceress Quintessa be the deceptive enemy of a powerful dragon, just like Madman's Paradise has a powerful, deceptive, Quintesson sorcerer be the enemy of a powerful dragon in the Golden One.

    Finally, the films actually progress similar to G1, with the first trilogy being like the first two seasons and the last two movies being in 1986-1987 territory.

    The idea that the films are not heavily inspired by G1 is ludicrous.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Jumacas

    Jumacas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Posts:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +324
    I actually agree with this. There is an assumption that anyone who criticizes the movies is de facto stuck in the past. Personally, that's not what I'd like. Yes, of course, having a genuine understanding of what worked in the past is essential, but that's not all there is to making a good movie or cartoon or anything.

    Also, this. I never said that I'd want Transformers to pretend that it's Shakespeare or Dostoyevsky. But that doesn't excuse incompetence on almost every conceivable level or downright, looking down on the concept itself. Couldn't we just have fun with a great sci-fi concept, without severely dumbing it down? Is that too much to ask? Trust the audience's intelligence just a tiny bit. That's not much to ask, I think. There is some incredible potential in this concept that has yet to be creatively fulfilled, other than scattered moments throughout its history. It's just a damn shame.

    I was talking about Planet of the Apes and Guardians of the Galaxy and the Lego movie. All of them. But I mentioned the emotional attributes of especially and specifically Planet of the Apes. How they crafted a truly emotional trilogy out of talking apes, while 10 years in the Bayverse, there's still this excuse going around that "the audience would not relate to non-human characters". That's one of the fundamental problems with this iteration. One of the things that make Transformers unique among other sci-fi, robot, mecha concepts is that here the robots are the characters and focal point of the stories. It feels to me like where there used to be strength, this series of movies saw weakness. So they opted to try to fix something that wasn't broken, thus, turning the Transformers into sidekicks or sort of mechanical kaiju in their own movies. This is so alien to the concept of Transformers, that it'd be arguable that it's not Transformers anymore.

    That's the pitch. The trailer version of what Transformers may look to someone who hasn't seen anything about it yet. It certainly isn't invalid. But it's not what Transformers is about, for me. Transformers, as a concept, presents a unique opportunity for introspection, through the eyes of what in other movies is "the monster", or "the alien". Here the kaiju are characters. It is about humanity, but through a creative and fun sci-fi perspective. And a very unique take on alien life in regards to how it is perceived in fiction, in general. The stories that can take place in the world that this franchise inhabits are truly endless.

    Well, yes and no. I don't think the concept of Transformers benefits from inhabiting a very very realistic world, because, as you've said many times, it is absurd in its conception. You know... Like fairytales. That's basically what this is. This is what comic books are, what sci fi is, what fantasy is. Why does only Transformers get the short end of the stick here while Batman is taken seriously? Or Iron Man, or Harry Potter, or Star Wars, or whatever? These are taken seriously because they were treated with fondness and respect as concepts and stories by the storytellers.

    Morality is not usually black and white in the real world, politics are not an issue for a Saturday morning cartoon, etc. And yes, Transformers can explore many things, but if it stops being fun, then it will stop being interesting. It needs balance and it needs a strong vision for the world building to be solid. There is a similar problem with portraying characters like Superman in movies. Man of Steel tried to place the character in a more realistic environment and many people thought it turned the character into something almost unrecognisable. A miserable version of a character that used to bring joy and hope. And a similar argument often occurs with Optimus Prime. All this needs a solid foundation. Too much realism and it doesn't work, too much absurdism and it also doesn't work. And the movies always felt to me like they have a million different visions at once. One moment having pompous speeches by Optimus Prime, or setting up supposedly world threatening stakes, only to follow it with a fart joke or a sex joke, or something juvenille.

    What about the Decepticons here? What are they about? Where are their banter and in-fighting? Where is their culture? Wasn't it a civil war? Why did all the ugly guys join their side of the war? Why is it presented like self-appointed good guys fight mechanical cockroaches? Where's Starscream, one of the most unique characters in the franchise's history? Why is Prime a Prime here? Why do they respect him? Why is he the leader? What are they fighting for? 5 (almost 3 hour) movies in... And there still not much of any of that. There are so many things to explore here too.

    Indeed, like I said. There has to be a plot for there to be plot holes.

    They are inspired by a superficial (even resentful, downright mocking at times) reading of G1. Just like the Amazing Spider-Man movies are inspired by the Amazing Spider-Man comics, for example. Yes, they have given a look at the source material. It doesn't seem like they like it very much though. Actually, more like Catwoman, the movie, with Hale Berry. "Here's a lady dressed as a cat and doing cat things. Aren't you fans satisfied? Wasn't this what Catwoman was about?". Or Dragonball Evolution. All the familiar characters are supposedly there. Sometimes doing one thing or another that kind of resembles the source material. But it's a mockery otherwise. Batman and Robin was a faithful Batman movie too, one could argue.

    G1 was of its time. But they could have paid attention, to see what worked and made it successful. As well as other iterations of the franchise. It was not the Saturday morning cartoon plots, or continuity errors, or sometimes unfortunate and awkward humor. It was some of its neat little concepts, memorable characters and, well... heart. They had an opportunity to take whatever made the original beloved and cherrished and build upon it, rather than amplifying its flaws (however justified they may have been for its time). They chose to look down upon it with resentment and ridicule. And quite often, it seems this is a mindset that has been transferred to the newer fans. Looking down on the past.

    I think that a good adaptation, however daring and different it may be from the original, should honour it and respect it nevertheless. At least in spirit. If Bayformers fans today hate what it was inspired from and antagonize it, then Bayformers did a very poor job at adapting it. That should speak volumes.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  13. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,620
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,902
    Not only do I not agree with that, I don't think you could even demonstrate it beyond your own personal opinion. Regardless, the movies aren't trying to be G1.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Galvatross

    Galvatross Make it Mac Tonight! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,766
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +2,558
    And I'm glad we agree here. Never once did I say "G1er" or anything like that, because, and I say this as both a fan of G1 and the movies, many of the movie fans are just as guilty in being close-minded to change as fans of previous continuities.

    The thing is I don't think the movies are dumbed down compared to the vast bulk of Transformers fiction. I think most Transformers fiction is actually in the same boat as far as quality. Maybe there's some stuff that really is bottom tier...Energon, Combiner Wars...and I do greatly prefer some episodes of the cartoons and movies to others, but even then the gap in quality isn't huge.

    The thing is there have always been Transformers that are basically "mechanical Kaiju" regardless of how big they were. For instance, Soundwave's cassettes besides Rumble and Frenzy in the cartoons never really talked either.

    Frankly, I think there's room for both Transformers with speaking roles and ones without speaking roles as long as we actually get some examples of the former. Plus, in the movies there are certainly characters who are silent or who have minimal dialogue, but there also characters with plenty of dialogue and interactions like Optimus, Bee, Megatron/Galvatron, Lockdown, Sentinel Prime, Hound, Drift, Crosshairs, Cogman, RotF/DotM Starscream, Jetfire, and a few others.

    As for the Transformers being sidekicks, a few things. One, Transformers are not real. We don't conveniently share our world with Cybertronians that can act as their own species in movies. Humans have that luxury. The robots do not and need to be realistic CGI when in robot mode, and in alternate mode, too, for those Transformers with Cybertronian or animalian alternate modes. Two, originally Steven Spielberg didn't want the robots to talk whatsoever. If anything, Bay was probably one of the driving forces as time went on for more focus on the robots based on interviews I have seen.

    Realistically, the best possible bet is a balance between the robots and humans. I do think some of the Bay films have done a much better job of this than others.

    This is one of many reasons why I admittedly like the third and fourth films considerably more than the other three, because even though I actually don't mind the humor in the other films, I find the tones of the third and fourth films more appropriate. They still have their moments of humor, but for the most part it's toned down comparatively speaking.

    For the record, I don't like how the Decepticons in the first movie barely interact with each other, not even in Mission City when they're all together. I do think Revenge of the Fallen actually has some great banter between Starscream and Megatron, and I also like the Decepticon scenes in Dark of the Moon. Even Age of Galvatron interacts more with his troops than 2007 Megatron does...and his troops were lifeless drones! In fact, even though there isn't banter, I like how both Galvatron and Megatron order their underlings around. If fits for Galvatron's troops because they're non-sentient drones, and it fits Lockdown's henchmen because they were mysterious aliens and not Decepticons.

    I like that most of The Last Knight's Decepticons have personalities, and I love Welker's voice acting as Megatron/Galvatron in the films, or any Transformers media for that matter, but I didn't like how some Decepticons were disposed of so quickly. If Barricade, Nitro Zeus, Onslaught, and Mohawk had been presented as the Decepticon equivalents of Bee, Drift, Hound, and Crosshairs who had survived Chicago and Lockdown's hunts and shown more of their interactions I think we would have had the best group of Movie Decepticons yet. Barricade is the only one presented in such a manner whatsoever, and even he only really interacts with Megatron.

    Frankly, I think the best way given the current direction the movies are headed to get more Decepticon characterization is actually to make them the anti-heroes, which is a possibility given the introduction of Unicron. Make one last main sequel to conclude the Bayverse, and have Decepticons and Autobots alike fighting Unicron's minions, including corrupted Decepticons.

    And the films do have plots. Again, you don't have to like the plots, but they are there. I like some of the plots considerably more than others.

    But all of those are subjective. We don't all think the same concepts are neat. We don't all find the same characters memorable, and we don't all think the same fiction and characters have "heart." Not that there is anything wrong with that. We come from different backgrounds, we were introduced to the brand at different points, we're not all moved by the same things, and we don't all relate to the same characters. The history of the brand means they are dozens of competing ideas as to what the ideal Transformers fiction, or movies for that matter, would consist of. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. On the contrary, I think it actually enriches the brand.

    Even if there was never another piece of Transformers media, movies or otherwise, that I really liked made again, I would still be happy to be a Transformers fan. The fiction and toys I love are still there for me to enjoy. That they gave me enjoyment is all I really need. Future movies don't have to cater to me. If I like them, great. If not, I hope other people enjoy them.

    I am a fan of G1, and I like the movies, so I am going to have to disagree on the bolded.

    I think there are a few reasons a lot of Bayformers fans dislike G1.

    One, they see it as a half hour toy commercial, and they aren't wrong in that regard, but that's Transformers since day one.

    Two, many fans of other parts of the brand have treated Bay movie fans like garbage over the last decade. Not all or most even, but there have been instances of note. Nor am I not saying there aren't instances of the opposite being true.

    Three, some Bayformers fans don't know much about the history of other parts of the brand because they haven't watched or read much about it. Consequently, they don't realize how similar the two actually are. Furthermore, many Bay fans have turned the movies not into an ever-evolving continuity but as a sacred relic of their childhoods or teenage years. In this way, there are some Bay fans who are just like the G1 fans they claim to dislike. Neither group is really willing to admit how similar one continuity is to the other or how similar some Bay fans and G1 fans can be in their preferences, and both can be equally close-minded. That is where some of the hatred comes from, too, I suspect; they're not willing to actually admit that. It's more of the mindset of segments of the fandom than G1, the movies, or any other part of the brand in of itself. Of course, there's nothing wrong with being a respectful "1984-1985 only" or a respectful "2007 forever" fan, but I think we need to be aware that we don't all have the same preferences as fans, and we need to respect the preferences of other fans.
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page