John Rogers - The missing element?

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by Ceasar121, Oct 8, 2011.

  1. Ceasar121

    Ceasar121 Wants a Toxitron repaint!

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Posts:
    2,887
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +1
    As much as I liked ROTF and DOTM, they seemed to lack the heart and character of the first film. As I look back, John Rogers (comic book writer) wrote the first draft that the movie was largely based on.

    So my question is do you believe that the simple lack of involvement of Rogers caused the lack of Transformer characterization and the basic heart of the story? Its said he did the characterization of the Bots in the first and that he came up with most of the stuff non action related.

    To me, it looks like sequels or reboots need writers more familar with comic book writing.
     
  2. Auto Morph

    Auto Morph Gimmick Bot

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Posts:
    8,444
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +5
    Absolutely not. The first movie had the least robot characterisation out of the three films, so I would say keep Rogers well away. Besides, I don't have a problem with what Kurtzman and Orci turned in and I really liked Ehren Kruger's work on DotM. Besides, you say you would like someone more familiar with comic book writing, but surely that would be a horrible mistake as comics and movies are two radically different genres?
     
  3. Nachtsider

    Nachtsider Banned

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Posts:
    12,543
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Likes:
    +11
    Not necessarily.

    Many comic book panels have a very cinematic quality to them. If a comic book writer can describe those sorts of scenes to an artist to draw, then I don't see why they can't outline similar scenes to a movie director to film. And as for characterization and dialog, more than a few comic book writers are capable of such stuff to a level equaling that of the best playwrights and novelists.

    That being said, wasn't John Rogers responsible for that stinker of a Catwoman film? I'd keep him far away.
     
  4. Nevermore

    Nevermore It's self-perpetuating a parahumanoidarianised!

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Posts:
    15,868
    News Credits:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Location:
    Germany
    Likes:
    +2,584
    If by "responsible" you mean "one of 28 writers, six of whom are credited", then yes.
     
  5. soundwaverulls

    soundwaverulls Taking a break

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Posts:
    10,000
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Likes:
    +1,418
    I have to disagree. even though the film wasn't centered on the Transformers, it still gut a lot of characterization. It showed the personalities off all the Autobots. There was too many Characters in the next few to give sufficient development.
     
  6. Auto Morph

    Auto Morph Gimmick Bot

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Posts:
    8,444
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +5
    I guess that part of my post was semi-rhetorical. I can certainly see the similarities in the artistic style, as you rightly point out, but to me, the stream of dialogue vs monologue between movies and comic books just doesn't seem to blend IMO.
    Movies don't really have the opportunity to show what the characters are thinking without the exposition getting rather clunky, but comics can spend many pages with just 'thought bubbles' or internal speech/narration to carry the plot forward.
    I'm not saying a good writer wouldn't be capable of adapting themselves to either style, but the seperate genres are just that in my eyes - seperate.
    Although one can be translated into another, such as with Watchmen, for example, where I found the comic to have a very cinematic element. The film likewise, continued a lot of the internal characterisation. I just think that is the exception rather than the rule.
     
  7. TylerMirage

    TylerMirage I vawnt my berdt.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Posts:
    7,355
    News Credits:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +14
    :lol 
     
  8. Rusty24

    Rusty24 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Posts:
    13,185
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Likes:
    +741
    I still like how magical the first movie seems. Who didn't get goosebumps during the Arrival scene? I thought that the movie made a great introduction to the Transformers universe. The robots had lots of personality in the scenes they had. Optimus was a war hero haunted by his past and was the perfect leader. Bumblebee was a young Autobot who communicated his feelings very well without words. Ratchet was the genius medic. Jazz was the second in command who was small but brave and he wanted to help Bumblebee. Ironhide was the blow s**t up dude who sometimes questioned why they were fighting for the humans.
     
  9. Krueger

    Krueger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2008
    Posts:
    679
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Likes:
    +2
    That’s a generalised miss-conception. True, I would say that by and large DOTM had the most robot characterisation and definitely felt the most “Transformery”. However, ROTF is the one that’s guilty of having the least robot characterisation. In TF1, even though the robots on the whole had the least screen-time out of all three films, the Autobots were handled very well. You got a sense of who each and every one of them was. ROTF failed to do that in favour of asses, pot brownie jokes, boobs and explosions. Glad that DOTM made up for it.
     
  10. Autovolt 127

    Autovolt 127 Get In The Titan, Prime!

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    82,270
    News Credits:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    412
    Likes:
    +689
    The missing Element is the fact that it isn't well written at all.
     

Share This Page