My first worry for future of TF movies

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by NemesisPrime12, Apr 1, 2018.

  1. NemesisPrime12

    NemesisPrime12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    965
    Trophy Points:
    147
    Likes:
    +913
  2. electronic456

    electronic456 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Posts:
    3,301
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +2,307
    I thought we talked about critics during the A Quiet Place thread and settled it?

    Guess some people don't get the memo.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. IdiotBlaster

    IdiotBlaster Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2018
    Posts:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Likes:
    +141
    After The Last Jedi, critics have zero credibility to me.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
    • Like Like x 4
  4. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    25,363
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    372
    Likes:
    +2,986
    Why worry if they do? The two franchises have already existed together for a few years, and Transformers, even with the full performance of TLK, have basically made more money than Pacific Rim (to the point that getting Pacific Rim 2 was a struggle, whereas up to recently, TF films were greenlit easily).

    I mean, I'm not surprised, Pacific Rim was reasonably well received, and most of the TF films have been absolutely savaged in terms of critical analysis.

    (Full disclosure: Pacific Rim was probably precision crafted to make me and me individually love it very dearly, though that doesn't mean I'm not trying to be objective here, especially with what I'm going to say next)

    Think of it this way: A successful Pacific Rim film is GOOD for the Transformers brand. It shows that sci fi action films with giant robots can be financially successful at the box office, which shows Transformers wasn't a fluke, and can be repeated even if one or a few films in the franchise underperform. That gives confidence, and makes it easier for financiers to back production of another transformers film.

    Also, it's becoming more and more apparent that we are in a period of, if you'll excuse the pun, transformation, when it comes to the brand. Bays done with directing (or so he says, but he's said that before), executives are looking to the future, and weighing their options on how to continue (the performance of the bumblebee film will have a strong impact on their decision, I imagine). I suspect we will see a reinvention of things, maybe a soft reboot, maybe a move away from theatrical releases for a few years, maybe more of the same, who can say. I very much expect we will see another TF film before too long, though, and what a successful Pacific Rim sequel does is expand the language of cinema in ways that future TF films can draw upon, just as the films up to now have drawn from sci-fi films that came before them. Transformers showed Pacific Rim how giant robots could look onscreen and WORK, and Pacific Rim can show the TF brand a broader cinematic vocabulary that they've then built on. That helps whatever TF film comes later to up the ante even more, and build an even better product.

    Don't fear the critics. Don't necessarily dismiss the critics (though don't take what they might say as gospel, either). Read what they say, and if they're at the top of their game, they might be able to help you see the TF films, or any film, really, from a different perspective.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
    • Like Like x 10
  5. ChaosDonkey

    ChaosDonkey Lord Brain

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Posts:
    1,815
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +276
    I think learning knitting would be more amusing then watching that movie again.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  6. QLRformer

    QLRformer Seeker

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Posts:
    18,192
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    302
    Likes:
    +4,730
    I don't think that's a legitimate worry IMO.
     
  7. Cryptwire

    Cryptwire Cybertronian Engineer/Sniper

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Posts:
    1,346
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Location:
    Restored & Unified Cybertron
    Likes:
    +963
    not worried. if Pacific Rim made money and was well-received, that means the Transformers live-action franchise holds promise if the story, characters, designs improve light years than they are now.

    i keep mentioning this that in 10 years, Transformers already has 5 live action movies in its belt and it took until 2016 for its take to slide down. had the movies been great after the 2007 movie, it could've probably been the first franchise to cross over 1 trillion. maybe not but it could've continued getting decent box office returns. i may be exaggerating, but the 2007 movie i really thought was pretty good. it got some of its soul in the first half of RoTF until the Forest Fight and after that, it just went down. had they kept that momentum and had they kept the interest of the casual movie viewer, we would be talking about Transformers 6 now and not the possibility of a reboot. Earth is Earth. Cybertron is Cybertron. i agree with some of the posters here when they say that Earth just happened to be in Cybertronians' way when they waged their civil war.

    but again, with Bay's movies, you continue to get the sense, specially moreso with TLK, that it's been there, done while not really offering anything further interesting and they really jumped the shark on this "Knight" thing. i think what happened is they try to piggy-back on the popularity of Game of Thrones but Transformers is Transformers. although medieval, melee-weapons are interesting in the current iteration of Transformers (swords, shields, ax on top of firearms), it only works if it is nuanced and not connected at all with Earth's medieval history or lore because, again, connecting Cybertron with virtually every major historical even that happened on Earth is just going to be silly.

    i mean if i could make money off of it, i would create an origins story for Transformers and a new universe and i'd make sure that it would be great and those who patronize it would keep their interest in it. if Transformers was my property, hell i'd really devote my time on it in building a world and universe. but the typical Transformers fan would not make money off of it even if they wanted the best for the franchise. it just so happened those who got paid hundreds of thousands of $, millions of $ for it didn't really take good care of it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
    • Like Like x 3
  8. NemesisPrime12

    NemesisPrime12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    965
    Trophy Points:
    147
    Likes:
    +913
    Yeah, I can only hope the wait for the reboot will be paid off with the better Transformers movies.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ChaosDonkey

    ChaosDonkey Lord Brain

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Posts:
    1,815
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +276
    They should just keep them simple.
    And use the inspiration from a wast franchise into a couple of movies, instead of trying to implement everything into one with a plot that includes subplots who includes plots that include sublots. And we end with 10 storylines in one movie and 15 in the next. As we did with bayverse
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,723
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,664
    I wouldn't worry. There is always some movie that is liked better than another movie. But this ain't Highlander so there is enough room for multiple movies to do well. For example critics really liked Black Panther but that doesn't mean the other superhero movies should be canceled just because Black Panther did so well with both the critics and the box office.

    Plus if Paramount and Hasbro decide that it's time to reboot the live action Transformers movies then what is it going to matter that people liked a new movie better than the past movies of Transformers?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. ReximusPrimal07

    ReximusPrimal07 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2017
    Posts:
    1,144
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    177
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Likes:
    +1,035
    True all they do is get paid to talk shit and here I am doing it for free
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Prime17

    Prime17 Seeker

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Posts:
    1,108
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +411
    I mean critics (well most of them) are knowledgeable of the art of film and generally do know what they are talking about. Just because a lot them find a film to be good doesn't always mean you'll find that film to be enjoyable. They are also not a monolith and can disagree on whether a film is good or not. I just used them as guideline.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. BarricadeLives

    BarricadeLives i'm you! i'm your shadow!

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Posts:
    1,945
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +1,316
    after having seen some modern films like "alien: covenant", "kong: skull island" & "wonder woman" & the new star wars films, wow...tlk doesn't seem so bad by comparison....i know covenant was panned but my god, either ive grown too old for this **** or people have lost all sense of quality. (is there a more overrated director than ridley scott? i dont think so)

    one of the things i cannot stand about modern films is there is no buildup..everything just kind of happens..like a bad old-spice commercial
     
  14. Incepticon

    Incepticon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Posts:
    14,362
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +5,114
    For sake of keeping proper perspective here, they're saying the Pacific Rim is better than MICHAEL BAY'S Transformers - not Transformers the brand as a whole. And that shouldn't be a "first worry" at this point considering everyone everywhere except HERE has been saying *anything* is better than the Bayformers for over 10 years now. They're dog shit movies; it's a given.

    All it's gonna take is for someone to make an actual GOOD movie out of this franchise and the sky's the limit. If they were able to make 5 of these abominations, with a hilariously stupid 6th solo tie-in spinoff starring no one worth mentioning right around corner, just imagine what could happen if a movie with legitimately good writing, good directing, a good plot and good designs starring actors that people actually recognize AND like/respect - critics and people that matter will absolutely give it a shot and not instantly write it off as they have been doing since 2007.
     
  15. Rumblestorm

    Rumblestorm Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Posts:
    2,649
    News Credits:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +2,096
    My worry was TLK.
     
  16. Galvatross

    Galvatross Swamp Lord Shrek-traoridinairre! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    5,093
    Trophy Points:
    257
    Likes:
    +5,234
    I read that article, and while it's definitely good to see other perspectives, it's also abundantly clear that what that person wants and what the average Transformers fan want are not compatible with each other.

    Then again, what I want and the average Transformers fan on this site, whether Bayverse, G1, or other, are not compatible, so whatever.

    Then again, I think many fans don't know what they actually want in a live action Transformers movie, and will just jump on whatever opinionated bandwagon is popular at the moment.

    And this imaginary fan-created Transformers film would not be great. It would probably be much worse than anything Bay has put to film. Bay, like him as a film maker or not, has plenty of experience making movies that appeal to the general public. Transformers fans? Not so much.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    25,363
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    372
    Likes:
    +2,986
    I'm not convinced that 'fan' interests and the general audience are not compatible with eachother. Or maybe more specifically, I do not believe that they are fully incompatible.

    I definitely don't want a TF film that alienates the general audience, one that just wallows in fan-service or delivers nothing but deep-cut lore references that require hundreds of hours of investment in the franchise to understand WHY characters or events matter (even if it would be SO COOL TO GET THAT PAYOFF ONSCREEN GUYS), or that is slavishly devoted to a previous narrative, characterization, or aesthetic. If anything, I feel like when the movies have been at their best, they've been blazing new ground and taking the core of the Transformers concept in ways that make it more palatable to a general cinematic audience, rather than when they've been shoehorning in stuff from G1.

    That being said, however, I disagree with you that many fans don't know what we actually want in a live action TF film, or that the majority are just hatewagoners. There's been a very vocal, very clear, sizable chorus on this board since the first film came out that pointed to wanting the cybertronians to be more central characters to the film, and to have their characterizations be more fleshed-out. These fans have wanted tighter storylines (with less reliance on running from one story-hook device to another, less tangential human sideplots, and overall, better pacing (in terms of length, use of comedy/catharsis, editing, etc.). It's no coincidence to me that Beast Wars and Animated brought a bunch more people into the fandom and have strengths in some of those same areas, and are well regarded in the fandom, despite being pretty radical takes on the franchise. I think theyre both examples of how to do a Transformers reimagining right on a conceptual level (which can also be applied to a film). Concepts can be reused AND/OR reinterpreted and presented to both a new audience and diehards. A good film (or television show or whatever media) will survive on merits of being "good" media, and I think that will be enough to appeal to a large segment of the fandom, along with a general audience. There is a certain overestimated but vocal part of the fandom who probably will not accept anything short of their own vision of exactly what they received before, true, but I don't think that goes for many.

    I'm of no delusions that a professional filmmaker would have a better chance of making a 'good' Transformers film (whether you classify that as one that's financially successful, or one that's enjoyable to general audiences and fans alike) than some fan with a fic and dreams of directing, though I think a good director is one who approaches a project with a history by delving into it and learning about what worked in the past (as many do). A lot of the most common criticisms of the TF films over the last decade have been a question of craft, not connections.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Galvatross

    Galvatross Swamp Lord Shrek-traoridinairre! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    5,093
    Trophy Points:
    257
    Likes:
    +5,234
    While maybe not fully incompatible in every single instance, yeah, I think fan interests and general audience interests are often not compatible.

    I like more focus on the characterization of the robots myself, but most non-fans I talk to want more importance placed on the human characters. Anyone clamoring for humans not being characters or for them being secondary characters is not being realistic.

    I'm not saying there can't be a balance. Frankly, I think there should be a balance between fan wants and general audience needs, but that also means fan wants need to be realistic and not idealistic. Sometimes we need to meet general audience members half way. I'd rather get a reasonable portion of what I want than none of what I want.

    And I would personally agree with everything you say here, although those are often the instances in the films when many fans complained loudest. The more the movies have tried executing the core concepts of the brand and their effects a little differently and in more novel ways - the war, transformation, etc. - the louder many fans have complained. I can't speak for those fans because I'm not one of them. Frankly, the riskier parts of the films were my favorite parts.

    Overestimated or not, and frankly I don't think there is a way to realistically, statistically estimate how fandom opinions are accurately broken down, most complaints I see (not just on this site, but around the internet) are that A-character is not like in G1, other continuities, or even the earlier movies in some cases, or that a fan-favorite character was killed off, or that a dead character or character who no longer plays a role in the films needs to return, or that the movies have not introduced characters X, Y, and Z.

    The thing is, regardless of one's opinion of Bay's interpretation and execution, the source material itself doesn't lend itself to these unironically great characters and narratives. Every single piece of Transformers fiction ever made is ridiculous, over-the-top fiction meant to sell toys. I'm perfectly fine with that by the way. I love the cheese and the ridiculousness from many parts of the brand: Beast Era, G1, the Bay movies, etc. Consequently, I don't expect any future version of Transformers to not be absurd to some degree.

    And maybe "many parts of the brand," while undoubtedly a strength in my mind of Transformers, is part of the problem with making live action movies designed to appeal to general audience members and a large portion of fans. We didn't all grow up on the same things. We don't all like the same shows, comics, toy-lines, and individual Bay films. Transformers is quite diverse, and we don't all have the same preferences. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I just think fans need to be okay with the new films or new shows or new comics not being their cup of tea. I didn't even like the fifth film anywhere near as much as the few films that preceded it, but I'm fine with that. I have criticisms, but I'm not angry. I'm glad that anyone who did like it did enjoy the film.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2018
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout Anthony Hopkins with a submachine gun. 'Nuff said!

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    31,614
    Trophy Points:
    392
    Location:
    Moxxi's Bar
    Likes:
    +7,233
    I'm sorry, but why would anybody go see a film about giant alien robots and want less of them, in favor of pretty generic human plots that don't really tie into the aforementioned giant alien robots?

    It isn't so much what people want as it is having a film that is actually good on its own merits as a film, let alone a series that keeps its own universe in line. Transformers hasn't really been able to do either, because the people in charge simply don't have a goddamn clue what they're doing. I'm not going to go into my usual rant about how AoE is garbage, but if you're going to make a cinematic universe from an existing franchise, don't try to start the story where the last one stopped by pretty much burning it all to the ground first and then pander to China with a mosty-standalone story like that's somehow going to fix things. And as evidenced by how hard TLK tried to roll things back with Megatron just showing up with no in-movie explanation, Lennox appearing out of the blue, Simmons and the surviving Wreckers having a bit in Cuba, and even going so far as to reference Witwicky and that "No sacrifice" mantra, combined with shoving in Anthony Hopkins for added star power, even Paramount thought AoE literally killing off most of the connections to the rest of the series was extreme and wanted to undo the damage well past the point of no return - while ironically completely ignoring virtually everything AoE had set up at the same time.

    Fans are a fickle bunch, so I honestly wouldn't put too much stock into that since they can change their opinions like the wind. Case in point: Animated. People hated that series when it was first announced (as Transformers: Heroes initially I believe), especially when the animation was revealed to be the most stylized departure from Transformers yet and the idea of Prime not being a leader remains to this day unique onto that series. But people quickly came to love it even after the first episode because it was an incredibly well done cartoon that told its surprisingly mature story through the eyes of a bunch of Autobot flunkies and a cranky old guy from the war. It is a good cartoon before anything else, but the next level is that Derrick J Wyatt himself loves Transformers, so he and his hand picked team knew what they could change from the norm and when to pay respect - and when Animated got cut short, he and his team worked super hard to get the AllSpark Almanacs out which were loaded with content and behind the scenes stuff, the majority of it all written in-universe, which only served to expand the continuity even more than to finish it out. Such gems like Nova Prime being a false prophet and his religion of Primus was a total sham because Animated Primus doesn't exist, Lugnut and Strika were basically married, and unproduced toys like Marauder Megatron which would have expanded somewhat on how becoming a Triple Changer made people insane (Blitzwing basically) but Megatron was so hardcore he managed to remain sane through the whole thing.

    We don't get that kind of thing with the films. We're lucky if the character designs are little more than name slaps bearing no resemblance - there are several instances where Hasbro's toy department and the movie makers inexplicably didn't share memos, even from the first film where the tank is identified as "Devestator" only in post-production added screen text while the character in every other form of associated media was "Brawl", and the production crew refused to acknowledge they screwed up, even after ROTF where an actual proper Devestator (who is addressed by name by Megatron) shows up. I will not that this in of itself is not a bad thing, goodness knows some of the most popular characters across the franchise are not the first to use their names, but when you have a Lamborghini Autobot and you name it Hot Rod (which a Lamborghini most certainly is not) instead of, say, Sunstreaker, then people aren't really even trying at that point. The films throw around terms and phrases without the weight that should be associated with them - a Spacebridge is two different things between ROTF (instant teleportation) and DOTM (opening a wormhole). The Matrix of Leadership is, inexplicably, the key to activating the solar harvester and the only time its namesake's importance is ever referenced is when Prime tries to give it to the revived Sentinel. Transformium is a cheap cop-out cheat to get around having to actually animate full transformations with a completely stupid name, because using actual terms for metals the Transformers are made of like "Destronium" or "Refinium" or something that doesn't sound like a five year old came up with it is too far a stretch for these writers apparently.

    I will admit that one of the most annoying things that people will do is they will ask for certain characters to be introduced. Because if Prowl gets introduced, somehow they believe he's going to be a Police Car Autobot who is a total Prick. But there could be a Prowl who is introduced who is a safari truck whose skill set revolves around being a wild game hunter ('wild game' of course in this context being 'Decepticons in the jungle'). Or to use an actual from-the-films example; Hound. People asking for him want the Earth fanboy, not what amounts to a combination of Bulkhead's body with the personality of Kup, especially given how Bulkhead is more or less just a replacement Ironhide through and through.

    Hell, even Starscream isn't really a Starscream - ignoring his radical movie design, he doesn't really do a lot that makes him stand out as one of the big three Decepticons. He gets slapped around by Megatron like his bitch (but EVERYBODY pretty much is Megatron's bitch if they aren't Fallen or Sentinel, because he's their bitch) and he's got a high pitched voice, but that's about it. He's never given a chance to show his total insubordination to Megatron beyond an implied lack of effort to try and find the missing leader - only to then take out Hoover Dam's power grid which directly releases Megatron - and he never does the most Starscream thing ever; take even the slightest hint of opportunity to kill Megatron and proclaim himself leader, only to get beaten down by Megatron and put back in line like a misbehaving child (his cowardace and the 'sometimes, Cowards live' line was totally Starscream though, I'll admit). I'm all for deviation from expected behaviors, but Starscream being an impulsive power-hungry syncophant who also happens to be Megatron's second-in-command despite that is in of itself an entertainment staple character archtype. He becomes boring if Starscream doesn't rebel against Megatron in some form or another in openly stupid ways.

    At the same time, Transformers films don't really push the envelope as you say. Oh, sure, the bad guys have some plot device derived from something related to Cybertron on Earth, that will threaten the Earth and spell doom for humanity, again, but that's honestly about it. There's very little variety in alt.modes as time goes on for the good guys because they're all high performance cars more or less (excluding Prime and Bulkhead, but Prime is far more streamlined than he used to be and is more like a car than the old Peterbuilt). The stuff about knights and the knight aesthetic doesn't really make sense (like, were human knight armor designs based on the transformers, or were the transformers trying to intentionally look like human knights?) and comes off as extremely forced in light of how they contrast with previous film design aesthetics. And Megatron hasn't even been the main bad guy since the first film yet they keep bringing him back even if he's dead, because they need a reoccurring villain character and all the actual new bad guys will never survive a film.

    Pushing the envelope in the manner you are talking about means completely dropping the pretense of trying to be super serious about the subject matter (which Transformers films really shouldn't do since at a basic level, trying to sell alien shapeshifting robots who turn into human made machinery is ridiculous). DOTM sort of had the right idea with a transforming laptop and the Wreckers being heavily armed Mad Max style NASCAR vehicles just because, and ROTF even more so with completely unique alt. modes like the Ice Cream Truck, the Blackbird, and of course the whole combining gimmicks, but from AoE on that kind of spirit was lost. Additionally, the characters are shoved into alt. modes apparently based more on what the studio can get as opposed to what actually fits the character, which isn't what you're supposed to do with Transformers at all. The alt. mode should be an expression, an extension of the personality of the robot, because it is still their body (something the movies consistently forget when they treat the vehicles as merely car props instead of stand-ins for sentient alien robots reconfigured to resemble cars). This will lead to some strange choices for alt. modes but Earth is so alien to the Cybertronians that they wouldn't necessarily understand certain vehicles don't belong everywhere (I.E. NASCAR vehicles driving through city streets). And the idea that they would ALL choose high performance sports cars is extremely unlikely, given they aren't all obsessed with appearance. Some would go for more utility, I.E. Firetrucks.

    It's like I said before: the films need to concentrate on being good films first and foremost. Every single thing that ties it to the franchise at large either should be core to the film (and thus explained sufficently enough as part of the plot), or setting dressing as nods to the franchise that add to the setting but don't need to be understood to enjoy the film (like the name of the spaceship in DOTM - the Xantium is the traditional name of the Wrecker's ship which was a nice touch, but general audiences don't need to know that to understand it's an alien spaceship).
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Galvatross

    Galvatross Swamp Lord Shrek-traoridinairre! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    5,093
    Trophy Points:
    257
    Likes:
    +5,234
    Because we're not normal (preference-wise)?

    I don't hate the say it, but the average person does not have the same preferences that we have. Keep in mind I'm not saying that the general audience does not want to see Transformers in a Transformers film. I'm just saying they want to see human characters that receive some sort of focus.

    I prefer the human groups connected more with the alien robots, like Sector 7, Cemetery Wind, and KSI, but one has to remember that it was Sam who connected with Bee in the first film and Cade who connected with Optimus in the fourth film. For better or for worse, the general public from 2007-2011 came to associate the franchise with Sam Witwicky and, to a lesser extent, Megan Fox. Granted, I think that's because many audience members were teenagers and young adults, so they related to those types of characters, but that's who many people associate the movies with.

    And that is why you don't shoehorn a bunch of things that don't need to be in a film. Shoehorning in Topspin, Wheelie, Witwiccans, etc., ignoring Galvatron and the Creators and Transformium, and minimizing Hound, Drift, Crosshairs, and the Dinobots did not do jack squat at making a better movie. TLK shows that when financially successful movie series go in new directions, like AoE did, they need to stick to their guns and not half-ass or ignore it.

    One problem was criticism of most of the previous movies was too negative without listing the positives. If critics and fans had listed more positives of 2007, RotF, DotM, and AoE in their critiques alongside negatives, then maybe TLK wouldn't have ditched many of the things people liked about the previous four movies. They tried appeasing fans too much with many Easter eggs and returning characters that didn't need to return and didn't focus enough on making something that continued the other four movies while building on their strengths.

    I mean I love Animated. I think its cast is among the best in Transformers media, but if we're being honest many of the characters in Animated are radically changed from previous iterations.

    Not that I have a problem with that. I enjoy the changes.

    And on that, I'll totally agree.

    Furthermore, fans often want a large amount of their favorite characters, but having a large amount of favorite characters doesn't result in a good Transformers movie. Usually the opposite. What happens is a lot of characters don't get as much screen-time as desired. The two films that have the smallest core robot casts, 2007 and AoE, are films that also give each of the core robots a chance to shine, whether it's as characters, action scenes participants, role players in the plot, or some combination of the former.

    I love Starscream, but he's rarely NOT Megatron's bitch or jobber in some way in the cartoons.

    It depends on what aspects one is talking about.

    In basic formula and core stories, yeah, they are heavily inspired by pre-existing fiction.

    In terms of visual aesthetic, whether one likes them or not, all of the movies have tried new designs that their namesake characters had never witnessed before, as well as entirely new robots and aliens. So visually, the movies actually were quite risky, and each one tried new designs for new characters and some times returning ones.

    And I do like how the movies take lesser known robots, like Sentinel Prime, Lockdown, and Crosshairs, and give them prominent roles, even at the expense of more popular robots. Ditto to the stories Sentinel and Lockdown played a part in, which I thought were quite interesting. They're not afraid to introduce new robots either, like Brains and Cogman. That is something I can respect.

    I'd say every one of the films did embrace the cheese of the brand in its own way. The first film revolved around a pair of glasses with some coordinates imprinted on it and a cube-shaped Allspark that was as big as a large house, but able to shrink to the size of a box that can be carried by a human, and apparently its mass dropped tremendously, too. RotF had a certain Blender Transformer, Reedman, Robot Heaven, etc. DotM had Nascar Wreckers and Laserbeak disguised as Bumblebee. AoE had cartoon-eyed Stupid Drones on Lockdown's ship like something out of Webworld and an Oreo Bot. TLK had Cogman singing "Move, b*tch, get out the way." They all had serious moments and scenarios, but they also had light-hearted moments and action scenes, and the tones of the films are not something I can complain about. None of them could truly be considered "grimdark." DotM and AoE came closer than the others with humans being vaporized and Ratchet's death, but even then they weren't as dark as people make them out to be. None were anywhere near as dreary as Batman vs. Superman or as serious as any Nolan film.
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page