Sector 7 In Bumblebee Movie

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by pie125, Sep 12, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Russian fan

    Russian fan Proud Autobot Ally TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Posts:
    1,710
    News Credits:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Location:
    Wherever Autobots are
    Likes:
    +558
    Twitter:
    Yeah, that's why TFs are unique - non-human characters have a huge role here. And audience is ok with it, don't forget about billions of money movies grossed. Every time I go to the theater I hear, how ordinary movie-goers discuss TF characters, I see it in social networks too, people aren't so deaf and blind, as you think. Also TLK has sufficiently lower attention to TFs and has box office problems. Critics obviously don't like TF characters, but it says unambiguously about their intellect and competence. I didn't see any normal review, where authors fully objectively analyze any Transformers Movie!
     
  2. Ikkstakk

    Ikkstakk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Posts:
    7,568
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    242
    Likes:
    +2,542
    Isn't that what the '07 film was?

    Are you saying you want Transformers treated the way Rocket was in GOTG? Because you know he was a supporting character in an ensemble whose main role was comic relief.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. APB

    APB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    179
    Trophy Points:
    72
    Location:
    Norway
    Likes:
    +169
    Are we going to pretend that TLK never happend and that the continuity is still mostly intact?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  4. Shizuka

    Shizuka Optimus Prime's scriptor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Posts:
    5,171
    News Credits:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Likes:
    +451
    They would have to cast a younger actor for Simmons since The first film came out 10 years ago so John Turturro is older now and this film is set 20 years before the first film.
     
  5. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,407
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,700
    It depends on how big the role is. Could be a Marvel style de-aged cameo.
     
  6. John TheDestroyer

    John TheDestroyer I rise, you fall

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2016
    Posts:
    2,817
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Location:
    Oklahoma, USA
    Likes:
    +3,063
    They deaged Kurt Russel about that much in Gotg 2 and that worked really well.
     
  7. Shizuka

    Shizuka Optimus Prime's scriptor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Posts:
    5,171
    News Credits:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Likes:
    +451
    That first occur to me to be honest. I since of they would go that route.
     
  8. Russian fan

    Russian fan Proud Autobot Ally TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Posts:
    1,710
    News Credits:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Location:
    Wherever Autobots are
    Likes:
    +558
    Twitter:
    That's my dream! Yes please:D 
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Livingdeaddan

    Livingdeaddan Gotta get to sleep somehow...

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2009
    Posts:
    4,563
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Location:
    京都市
    Likes:
    +2,361
    And yet, far deeper and more explored than any Transformer in the movies.

    All of the guardians had some kind of comic element, comedy done right, like the opposite to pissing on someone's head. Having comedy doesn't immediately make things "comic relief."
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,407
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,700
    Yeah, talking about putting turds in pillows is almost exactly the opposite.
     
  11. Livingdeaddan

    Livingdeaddan Gotta get to sleep somehow...

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2009
    Posts:
    4,563
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Location:
    京都市
    Likes:
    +2,361
    Well i guess the only move I have here is, but he didn't actually do it.
     
  12. Prime17

    Prime17 Seeker

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Posts:
    938
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    142
    Likes:
    +125
    At least people know who Rocket is and can pinpoint him from a picture. You can't say the same for bots whose names aren't Optimus and Bumblebee. Barely anyone could name or recognize Ironhide in that viral marketing video of him in a historical painting.

    That's one thing the Bumblebee movie can and should do differently from the other films. Treat the robots as actual characters and show their perspective too and not just the humans' perspective.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. snokoan

    snokoan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2017
    Posts:
    547
    Trophy Points:
    117
    Likes:
    +145
    You knows what's funny people wanted a sector seven spinoff we get a confirmation there in this movie and there pissed af
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Ikkstakk

    Ikkstakk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Posts:
    7,568
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    242
    Likes:
    +2,542
    Ha ha, wow! If a Transformer had pulled that, fans would have been livid. But a talking raccoon? Hilarious!

    Such double standards here.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. CKPRIME

    CKPRIME Lighter of Darkest Hours

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Posts:
    3,407
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +1,700
    You're damn right. "Toilet humor" is terrible, except when it's in a movie they like.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Galvatross

    Galvatross Get shrekt every day! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,631
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +2,325
    What type of straw man argument is this? I literally wasn't arguing that money = quality. You said that opinion on the Transformers films was "unanimous," but if most of the films were financial successes that means enough people in the general public were at least interested in seeing them and likely enjoyed them, otherwise most of the sequels would not have made anywhere near as much money as they made.


    The one cherry-picking is you. Only TWO of the characters I even mentioned ever did anything resembling that (Bee and Jetfire) and they both did it only once each. None of the other characters I mentioned did that. Optimus? Lockdown? Megatron? Drift, Hound, and Crosshairs? Nope. They never humped anything. Lockdown never stepped in dogsh*t left by his Steeljaw minions on the Knight Ship. They never lubricated anyone. Neither did Sentinel, Laserbeak, etc. The Appliancebots farted fire, Wheelie humped Mikaela's leg, and Blenderbot and Devastator had some interesting anatomical traits, but other than that and the single instances of Bee and Jetfire the robots weren't just urinating and defecating and getting frisky all of the time.

    Also, how the hell did you become a fan of Transformers in the first place? The characters, with occasional, rare exceptions here and there, have always been simple archetypes and stereotypes and one-note robots.

    LOL. I do not think low of Transformers. I LOVE Transformers, probably as much as anyone on this site unless there is someone who literally worships it, in which case that person probably loves it more.

    However........if you love something you also have to love it for what it is and not for the imaginary thing it is not. I love Transformers because it is cheesy, goofy, over-the-top, ridiculous, campy, largely nonsensical, cartoonish fiction and characters made to sell toys, and it's fun. The Transformers films are really not any worse than any of the other Transformers fiction in this regard despite what some fans think.


    I am so, so tired of this idea that fans should be the ones making movies. I don't want a fan. I want someone good at what they do, regardless of whether they are a fan or not.

    Who cares if Bay was a fan of G1? I don't, and I love G1. He doesn't have to like what I like. On the contrary, I think Bay actually likes parts of Transformers. He at least seemed fond of some characters, like Hound and Lockdown.


    I am tired of Marvel being treated as this pinnacle of greatness. I am all for improvements in the Transformers films, but Marvel is a sea of mediocrity at best with a few islands of good films rising above the waves. Overall, I have been more satisfied with the Bay Transformer films, flaws and all, than Marvel's overrated, generic action flicks.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  17. Jumacas

    Jumacas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Posts:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +289
    What if people just liked the visuals and that's it? What if they wanted to watch a good Transformers movie like they were promised everytime? What if they are ironically entertained, similarly to the Resident Evil movies? People like the Kardashians too. There must be something of quality there if they like it, huh? Yeah, if it serves your confirmation bias.

    This is the kind of low we have fallen that we defend a movie's qualities by pointing out to characters who have not farted yet. How did you become a fan of Transformers if it's always been filled with simple archetypes, stereotypes and one-note robots? Even if it was, due to whatever limitatations, or shortcomings. Is that still an excuse for contuining and amplifying that in the movies? So, your argument is "it's always been shit, it's still shit, I love shit". Impenetrable logic there.

    I saw a gradual direction towards the more mature and sophisticated up until Beast Machines and then, suddenly a turn for kiddiefare and lowest-common-denominator-fare, with occasional scrap for sentient beings in some comic here and there, or a video game or maaaybe some parts of TF: Prime. I saw a franchise growing up with its audience, until its audience stopped growing, mentally. And the franchise has been struggling to re-claim already claimed creative ground since then. Or not even struggling or trying, because, it knows that it's audience doesn't want better. This is an exploitative relationship, by the way.

    Fan or not, when you go about adapting anything, it's best to understand what is about it that made it work. And it is also sound to understand where updates are needed and where not. Because if you don't, you end up trying to fix something that wasn't broken, lose the appreciation of its supporters (that would support you), and create a circle of mutual resentment that doesn't serve anyone, and most of all the quality of the piece of art/entertainment you are making. If all you want to keep is the title, some familiar faces and names and nothing else, from the original, then, why not make your own movie and call it something else? Oh yes. Because the intention is not adaptation, but cash grab of a familiar IP.

    What Bay saw in Transformers was "a silly toy commercial". And projected, exactly that, 10x. A good adaptation enhances the quality of the original when you look back to it. Evidently, this is not the case.

    Better to have a steady flow of kinda mediocre but still respectable and enjoyable movies, with some moments of greatness, than to start at the bottom and ride a flaming turd all the way to hell. If the answer to "generic" (which they aren't, since they are being imitated by everyone else), is to do everything wrong (and I mean fundamental, fucking basics of filmmaking and storytelling, first day in class kinda wrong), then everything is pointless. Personally and honestly, I believe the concept, characters and mythology of Transformers lends itself, easily, to far far bigger greatness (at the very least, from a creative standpoint) than what the MCU is doing. If only Transformers fans weren't settling for crappy entertainment, just to support the production of more toys to spend their money on (see: relationship of exploitation).
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2017
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Night Flame

    Night Flame TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Posts:
    4,951
    Trophy Points:
    307
    Likes:
    +88
    Part of the problem with the way the movies have been handled up to this point is that they could have used the humans in the first film as a lead-in to giving the robots their more human-like traits and personalities, leading even casual movie-goers to be intrigued by them as beings themselves. It's what worked to draw most of us hard-core fans in in the beginning, and it could work to keep a general movie-going audience hooked on Transformers as a concept.

    Instead, they took the track of making the Transformers background for human drama, with the occasional break-out moment of battle, which leads to the casual movie-goer wishing there were more human focus instead of more personality/interaction among the Transformers themselves.

    Which again leads to old-school Transformers fans wanting more focus on the robots and casual movie-goers giving us the stink-eye for even thinking it.

    In general, the story-telling and personality building have been lack-luster in the films up to this point, in all honesty even among the human cast. BUT, most movie-goers can relate to the humans because that's what we're used to relating to.

    That said, I really hope Knight is allowed free reign on this film. He knows how to tell a story and how to build characters. If he's not fully gutted by the studio/execs/Hasbro, we may get a really good film that happens to have Transformers in it. Rather than a collection of odd scenes with a loose connection showing battles, explosions, bad jokes and story-telling-ineptitude. Fingers crossed.

    There's a mighty big if to cross before we get there. I hope Sector 7 isn't being forced in and is used to build and expand on the story.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  19. Galvatross

    Galvatross Get shrekt every day! Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,631
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +2,325
    Again, what the heck are you trying to say? Stop with these straw man arguments about "quantity=quality" and "confirmation bias." Those aren't points I was ever trying to make.


    You wrongly claimed that the only thing those characters did was fart and pee. I countered (and correctly so, I might add) your questionable post with aspects of those robot characters that indicated they were sapient, sentient beings.

    It's like you literally don't read people's posts. In the post you just responded to I just said this:

    Here's the thing: I literally never said that any of those things were bad things. On the contrary, I think some of the time goofy cartoon characters and cartoon-like characters and over-the-top action scenes and humor and ridiculous plots can be a lot more fun and more relevant and even meaningful to us as individuals than self righteous and pretentious Oscar bait-type fiction.

    Yeah, no Transformers story is "high art." However, camp and cheese are not bad things in my book when dealing with talking robots. Neither is ridiculous humor. Neither is physics-defying action. I love Transformers because it is cheesy and goofy. I love Transformers because it is fun. I love Transformers because it can be wonderfully bizarre and out there. I love Transformers because it captures my imagination in a way few, if any, other fiction brands do. Those things are far more important to me than whether Transformers is considered "good" or "bad" by other individuals.


    Bay and many others who made the movies understand what Transformers is much better than decent portions of this fandom. Of the writers, Ehren Kruger definitely understands Transformers better than many fans.

    Of all of the Transformers fiction since G1, the movies are the most like the original cartoon and comics. The storyline even parallels G1's in many, many ways.

    When the hell has Transformers fiction not been a cash grab? Transformers has always existed to make money from toys. Period.

    Bay is right. Transformers is a silly toy commercial. A fun, captivating, over-the-top toy commercial. I'm not saying that's a bad thing either. That's not to say there aren't individual pieces of Transformers fiction that may be more meaningful to me, but those are the rare exception and not the rule.

    Humans are real. Transformers are not. They are expensive, complex, CGI creations. I am all for there being a good balance between the two, and for the record I think a couple of the sequels do this well and do it better than they are given credit for. However, in live action humans will always play a major role.

    I am convinced what many Transformers fans want isn't more robot focus. What they want is their preferred robot characters executed the way they want them to be executed.

    Furthermore, many fans don't know what they actually want. People complain about how Transformers uses the same characters too much, but when the movies move away from the classic characters somewhat people complain that it needs to be rebooted because the same old, overrated, overused 1984 Autobots and Decepticons are dead. Which is lame anyway, because I actually think the movies have done a better job with the likes of Lockdown, Sentinel Prime, Crosshairs, Drift, Hound, etc. than many of the 1984 robots that are more commonly used, although there are a handful of more used robots that the movies did a good and underrated job with, too.


    And I'm glad you can recognize the importance of familiarity, but here's the flip side: most Transformers fans also want familiarity. Every time fans complain about how the latest movie sucks and how things used to be much better in G1 or whatever. Then when the next movie comes out fans will praise the previous movies they once hated or pretended to hate and talk about how the new movie sucks because it changed from this direction to a new one or got rid of bland character Y and replaced bland character Y with new character Z (even if the new character ends up being much better executed than the old one).

    Most of the complainers at this point don't want change from what Bayformers is, or at least from what it was; the opposite in fact. They want their 1984 or 2007 nostalgia repeated ad nauseum. They want a status quo with their favorite characters with no real risks taken.


    And on this I'd agree fully. I definitely do not want a CGI-faced younger Simmons though. If he does appear I'd hope for a younger actor playing a younger version.

    Although the Bee movie is another great example of fans not knowing what they want. Here we have a movie that takes place in the 80s in which Bee is disguised as a yellow Volkswagen that isn't made by Bay, yet some fans, many who bitched about the movies "not being G1 enough," claim that it's "pandering." So whatever.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Night Flame

    Night Flame TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Posts:
    4,951
    Trophy Points:
    307
    Likes:
    +88
    When you quote someone and then attempt to negate their points, it may be prudent to actually pay attention to what the person said instead of making up arguments not presented in the text you quoted and then attempting to throw yourself into combat against those points. I think one of the reasons you're so frustrated is you are attempting to pile all complaints into the same box and then you assume that any complainer has all the same arguments as all other complainers. Case in point:

    Again, not anything to do with what I said. Try to recognize that some of us complaining aren't doing it from the same soapbox that the G1 OR DIE crowd are standing on.

    I guess I'll break it down for you, since you insist on putting words in my mouth rather than addressing my actual statement.

    My argument, and mine alone, I'm not attempting to paint anyone else with this brush, is that I want a coherent story. The first three movies, all of which I saw multiple times in the theater, the first one a few more times at home, had a horrible time with coherence and maintaining consistency. I still remember the first time through the first Bay film getting jerked out of the story by simple things like the full again, empty again, full again plate of donuts. And sure, that one instance isn't important in the big picture, but the problem is those little errors are EVERYWHERE. I wouldn't care if it was all new characters, all new names, completely different settings, just give me a compelling story that maintains consistency, driven by characters that actually mean something. Instead we've gotten inconsistent characters that jump from plot point to plot point that, in the end, don't really connect well together, and oftentimes flat out negate each other. Film by film instead of building an overall lore, the lore is an inconsistent and almost always conflicting series of events that, individually might seem cool on the surface until you realize there's zero chance that cool thing could have happened if that other cool thing was supposed to have happened.

    After three films, I felt like I was being insulted for attempting to make sense of it, so I stopped. I'm hoping this movie is different because we've finally got a director that's good at building an overall story and remaining consistent not just within scenes, but scene-by-scene through the entire film. The major problem is attempting to make this film a part of something that's already a jig-saw puzzle of failure and inconsistency. Hopefully it's allowed to breathe a bit and not forced to adhere to the Bayverse so completely that it has no choice but to be a mishmash of conflicting plot-points driven by character development that amounts to scene-by-scene completely different characters played by the same actors, whether human or CGI.

    And before you say it, I'm all for big, cheesy, goofy, silly fun when it comes to Transformers or any film I enjoy. Nobody can say Guardians of the Galaxy isn't all of those things, yet both of those films have been so much more enjoyable than the Transformers films I've seen thus far. Good characters that you can actually care about, plots that remain consistent and coherent enough you don't have to do wild brain gymnastics to make sense of them, and follow-through to resolutions that, if not what you hoped for, at least give you a feeling that you got your money's worth. When I left the theater after a Transformers film I felt like I'd wasted my time. Some people's reaction to that feeling is anger. My reaction has always been a slight feeling of wishing for what could have been. My sincere hope is that Knight is allowed to make the movie he wants to make. If Bay & Co. feel the need to shoe-horn in all the crap they've dragged through the previous films, it'll be just one more disappointment.
     
    • Like Like x 4
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page