Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by arun09345, May 16, 2017.
I don't really care what your philosophy teacher says. That's an argument from authority. The "googmaking" properties of something can themselves be subjective.
Based on your criteria, Age of Extinction is objectively good then. I completely understand the plot, Optimus Prime has a clear character arc, they set up events that will be paid off in TLK. Optimus going off to find his creators. And I could easily follow the action. Take Rogue One on the other hand, no one has a character arc. They are all exactly the same when the show up in the movie as they do in the end. So that makes it an objectively bad move.
That's completely ridiculous and wholly nonobjective because critics don't even agree with one another.
Megatron: Welp it's always good to have some extra spare parts lying around just in case.
Alright, if you want to unironically and in all seriouseness argue that these are good, easily understandable movies, walk up to anyone on the street that's seen more than one and ask them if they're good movies.
And no, the "googmaking" (your word not mine) properties of something are not subjective. What makes a good refrigerator? It keeps food cold right? What if it doesn't, I can say all day that the rock in my back yard is a good refrigerator, that doesn't make it true.
So what? What if you went around asking people if the moon was made out of green cheese and they said yes? Would that mean the moon is actually made out of green cheese? That's another logical fallacy called the argument from popularity.
Ok I will give you that machines specifically designed for a purpose can have "goodmaking" properties, but you are trying to compare machines to art? Do you not see that's a false equivalency?
Depends on you definition of art. A refrigerator maker who's been making refrigerators his entire life would probably argue that his work is art. The difference isn't nearly as clear cut as you'd think. Which begs the question, if one has goodmaking properties why not the other?
I will agree that social relativism is a logical fallacy, but to counter your particular argument, how many people above the age of 12 do you know that would say the moon is made of cheese with a straight face?
Has anyone ever even mentioned or noticed the fact that someone/something is controlling Cybertron? Maybe it's Quintessa or the other creators (if there are any others), or it's Primus himself?
My bets on primus. I still think the timeline on the app is meant to be at least semi official.
Because there exist such things as objective measurements. If the refrigerator is designed to maintain a temperature of 40 degrees it and it can't maintain that temperature it is objectively worse at being a refrigerator than one that can. I can objectively measure the temperature with thermometer, I can give it to you and you can get the same measurement. You can give it to someone else and they can get the same measurement still. It doesn't rely on feelings or opinion.
That's not the point. The point is the majority does not get to define reality.
To your second point, I know, I'm agreeing with, I was just kidding. Come on, we're two presumably adults arguing on the internet about whether a movie that most people don't give two sticks about is good or not, you've got to at least have a littl fun with it.
To your first, to say a movie has no objective good making properties, is to admit that there is a distinction between measurable pheomina (e.g. Science) and art. This is something that my instinct, my personal beliefs, and my entire outlook on life disagree with. Everything in the visible (note I specifically said visible) universe can be reduced to the movement of subatomic particles. Nothing more than the simple interaction of forces and exchange of energy. Now, wether you believe there is something more to existence and specifically to human nature is your business. Just because you don't know what the good making properties of something are, doesn't mean they don't exist. For the time being the best we can do is approximate (is not the best science at its core only a series of aproximations? E.g. You can't actually calculate infinity, or measure the velocity of an electron), and the method by which we approximate is by the current concensus on what makes a movie good. That criteria may change in the future, it certainly has in the past, but for now, by today's criteria, without being able to see an instance of a "perfect movie", transformers is at best passable, at worst terrible.
And as I've said many times, that doesn't mean you're in any way wrong if you like these movies. I LIKE THESE MOVIES! I've defended everything from the design of the characters to the convoluted storyline. But even I'll admit, at the end of the day, they're probably, if we were able to see the universal definition of what makes a "perfect movie", bad movies.
How to Calculate the Speed of an Electron
Once again, that's an argument from popularity logical fallacy. Also the consensus on the Transformers movies varies wildly when you compare critics to general audience.
By your criteria, I've already proved that Age of Extinction is objectively good.
I said measure, not calculate. A calculation is at the end of the day an extremely close approximation.
Look, I'm tired, I've got to get up and leave for a convention in 7 hours, this has been fun (entirely seriousely here) and you've earned my respect, we still don't agree, can we just agree to disagree and move on?
So I freely admit I skipped about 20 pages in the thread because I'm late to the party but--did anyone mention the Forge of Solus Prime as a reason for Bee's seeming immortality? I could see the Forge somehow imbuing him with the ability to "reconstruct" himself, or at least in this canon granting that ability.
I think one or two people have said it, but I personally doubt that it's the Forge. Other than being a two headed war hammer, it really shares barely any similarities with the Forge in TF Prime.
The trailer stuff makes me think that Cade and Decepticons aren't amicable neighbors
I wish jazz would have that ability to reattached from limb to limb like bee when he was "ripped apart" by meg in the first movie... he would have survive!!!
Tell that to poor ol jazz....
I had a theory back in March that it wasn't Cybertron, and could be controlled by someone as another kind of harvester.
When we were all discussing Unicron, I said that it COULD be unicron, but Unicron doesn't HAVE to be the unicron we know. It could just be the name for a machine created to harvest transformium. That would be a way of getting unicron in the universe without having to deal with a robot bigger than a planet. It's doubtful - just saying.
I've since stopped speculating about that and am just waiting for the movie.
This is my screen shot of Hot Rod and Vivian from a 4K HD version:
Nah Megatron is their landlord and he just wants his rent money. 14 months behind I think it's a new record for Cade.
Separate names with a comma.