To the extent that I can complain about a movie I haven't seen, that's my main gripe so far. The studio is trying to have it both ways, they want the rejuvenation of a full reboot without actually rocking the boat. I suppose that's not even a complaint about the film itself except to whatever extent the studio's approach impacts it.

 

And Paramount already is sabotaging themselves by it.

If they wanted a familiar and marketable Bee they should be doing the same thing TFP did. Take the design if you need and don't bother with explanations.

I'd love to know how did Megatron manage to change his body design when he was frozen in stasis, for an example.

Or why should I care about the main human lead when I know that it'll not last because in the year 2007 Bee's going with Sam anyway.

 

Writing TF like a serious story, like the original and not some lingo ridden, injecting what's "in" nonsense would go far.

 

My hope was that, since it was too late to cancel this production, they would use it to test the waters a bit, to help create a more dependable direction for when the actual reboot comes along. But then Bonaventura's interview came out and crashed any hope I had, both for Bumblebee having any noble intention and for what its success could mean for the future of the franchise. If supporting Bumblebee leads into years of aimless middling spinoffs to spinoffs (unbelievable sharkjumping!) until there's not a penny ti be made anymore... I really don't want this. And I would be fine not supporting Bumblebee out of principle.

 

I have disagreed with him, and I have questioned his arguments, but I have never called him or anyone names. I have never insulted the guy or anyone else, despite his numerous insults at me and others. Do you need me to show you some examples?​

 

Calling someone names or openly insulting them is far from the only ways to intimidate/guilt/bully/corner someone. I believe I have said and seen enough. It is not my business to give this matter any more attention.

 

Yes, you did, given I only named two books by the same dude and you used 'authors'. Plural. Implying more than one.

And it's not a staw man argument because it blows your whole 'different ways to look at any fiction' argument out of the water. Or please, do enlighten me about how there is ANY OTHER WAY to interpret Animal Farm or 1984.

But you come in here, basically trying to decry the thread about not being transformers related and get it shunted off to non-tf GD, while the OP comes in and says he's asked you multiple times to leave him alone.

And you're not really improving the problem by going on the passive-agressive attack on the OP either with posts like that.

Or maybe it's because this thread is discussing the shortcomings of the Transformers franchise's various series, mainly the later movies but not limited to them exclusively, and you for whatever reason seem obsessed with trying to shut down any and all discussion about how to improve the franchise from its current state. I mean, given we had TLK, a film so bad even you admit it wasn't another Citizen Kane masterpiece like you pretty much praise AoE as being, and the machinima series which probably takes the cake for being the worst series ever because it's just so terribly executed in every imaginable way possible and everybody is in agreement is without any redeeming qualities.

I agree. The moment I heard they were doing a writer's room, I figured it was going to turn out bad - but TLK was another level of horrible altogether.

But that's the issue with Paramount's thinking behind AoE and TLK - they didn't give a damn about the story making sense. They were too busy trying to mine that lovely new Chinese box office with those contracts and while it worked with AoE, TLK more than wrecked any good will that AoE made with the ruined HuaHua Media contract that was supposed to fund further TF films and overall brought a repeat billion dollar franchise to its knees.

Bumblebee already looks to be a step in the right direction if only because Paramount is shooting for the family demographic in the domestic market again, instead of trying to milk China for every last cent like the last two times.

And this is why I'm confused by people who think they can go anywhere after the end of TLK decided 'oh yeah UNICRON IS EARTH'. Because what exactly does that mean? He'll never transform because doing so would immediately result in the death of every living creature on the planet - namely humans, and that can never happen in any Transformers media. So essentially you have a biggest bad guy in the franchise to the point he's usually The Fallen's boss, stuck in a big water-covered rock, but he can't DO anything particularly special. Sure, he might be able to manipulate rocks or some shit, but what does that make him? Not a transformer, just some arbitrary Earth spirit. TF Prime ran into that problem when it realized the novelty of making Unicron = Earth kinda sucks because he's still trapped. Thus, the only way to make him DO anything is to get him OUT of Earth, and at that point it renders the entire logic behind making him Earth in the first place moot if the first thing that has to happen is completely undoing what is supposed to be the gimmick.

Personally, I see Bumblebee as potentially the means of getting away from the Bayverse. It's intended as a prequel, but if Paramount realizes that the differences from the Bay films are more popular than the connections, they could simply state Bumblebee is the start of new cannon, ignore the previous five films, and start fresh with all the characters who don't die in the BB film now available for use again.

Wait, hold on, am I glitching or something? Because you already did provide your examples in a previous post...

And then there was the time you kind of got on his case for using Shrek memes in a thread (where he also reaffirmed he asked you to leave him alone by PM) like you had some kind of exclusive rights to Shrek memes - I stayed out of that one suffice to say since honestly? The Shrek thing is really weird and it's kind of hypocritical to be going off on the OP for an off topic thread which isn't off topic given how everybody except you seems to be discussing narrative involving Transformers and other contemporary media, when you sometimes shove Shrek non-sequirs into conversation at random.

Early Bumblebee Concept Art from Before G1

 

What a joke. Way to read my plural grammar way too literally.​

Because this thread hasn't largely been about Transformers. It's a general "What makes a good story?" thread. I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I just think the way it has gone implies that it should be in non-Transformers. There is hardly anything passive aggressive or insulting about that.

Besides, look at who I am talking to. The guy who sounds angry any time he encounters someone who dares to have a different opinion, who seems to be yelling and screaming and legitimately angry at the existence of toy-based fiction and toy lines he doesn't like. It's Transformers; there's something for everyone. You can deal with it.​

The one who makes everything about the later movies is you, because this thread wasn't specifically about them. Notice how in my initial post I didn't mention the movies at all? Yet you bring up the recent movies every time you can, because of your own hatred, which you yourself have admitted is irrational.​

No I haven't. I myself have offered ideas on how to improve things at times. ​

I invite discussion everywhere I go. I may disagree with people strongly, but I never want people who respectfully disagree to stop posting.

Another strawman. I have never praised AoE as being comparable to Citizen Kane in any way, shape, or form. I have defended and praised it as the fourth live action movie in the Transformers franchise. Those are two very different things.​

Yeah, I don't like Machinima, but if people like it, they like it, and I think they should be free to like it. It's not my aim to change their opinions.​

Well, I intentionally deleted posts, but since you mentioned, look at the guy's post history. Members can't claim you're being "bullied" when they have trolled and insulted people in so many poorly constructed posts.

It's hypocrisy to complain about being bullied when one tells people they "lack critical thinking skills" for having different opinions. It's hypocrisy to act that way when one says that it's "Time to eat crow" and needlessly call out other members who didn't even bring them up. It's hypocritical because he has called myself and others "Hasbro lackeys," when there are actually many things I disagree with Hasbro on.​

The difference between my Shrek posts and his is that I don't use them to tell people to "Get out of my swamp" when I disagree with them. Seems kind of weird that a guy who has a history of trolling and flame-baiting certain individuals, including myself, would suddenly start using Shrek memes.

 

I like robots, y'all. What up? Love me some stories about robots, yessirree.

 

Narcissistic personality disorder - Wikipedia

Look, he got what he wanted, all the attention is on him now, and conflict has emerged out of a peaceful and fruitful discussion of both differences and agreements

I hope everyone can forgive me for even responding to his bait, because the discussion was going so well before he showed up and tried to derail it

I'm sorry for reacting emotionally and tomorrow I'll try to get back on track with better responses

 

"Authors" - implying more than one author. How exactly am I supposed to read it in any other way? Animal farm and 1984 are the most famous works of George Orwell. Those were the only books I listed. You used the plural of the word authors to imply that George Orwell was NOT the only one involved in both books being written, if you even recognized they were written by the same guy when you made that statement to begin with.​

Your exact quote also makes it very clear you are only talking about those novels:

If you'd actually been paying attention to what I wrote, as opposed to just skimming it and trying to inject yourself into this thread of which you don't really seem to be participating in, then either you were trying to give yourself an easy way out of trying to have to explain how I punched a hole in your argument that all fiction is subjective to personal interpretation, or you are not familiar with the two most famous books of George Orwell.
​

Except people do connect their arguments back to Transformers - just because you some how keep missing how people in the thread make connections to Transformers media about common themes and storytelling elements both present and not present in transformers and other contemporary forms of entertainment in modern pop culture, doesn't give you the right to backseat moderate.

​

Yes, I do tend to bring up the latter two films often but only because they illustrate the current sad sate of the franchise when it comes to narrative. I would love nothing more than to forget AoE even existed but that is the focal point at which I can pinpoint the real downfall of the franchise as it just scrapped anything useful left over from DOTM in Paramount's raw greed trying to pull off a hard reboot without actually being a hard reboot.

And really, TLK illustrates how badly AoE screwed the pooch by doing so, since it tried oh so desperately to bring back elements not already ruined by AoE unceremoniously killing off most of the cast off screen. They very fact it did this shows that despite AoE making a billion dollars, Paramount realized too late what it had done by going nearly scorched Earth and tried to repair the damage to no avail, since aside from Lennox, almost all the stuff from the previous films is only mentioned more or less in passing and not actually tied to the plot of the film, such as Simmons and two Wreckers being in Cuba this whole time instead of, y'know, murdered in cold blood and oil like everybody else essentially.

​

So why deny people the ability to do so in this thread, just because you don't like it?

No, you just want their threads moved out of the public eye because you dictate what is and is not transformers related, ironic given the title of that thread you made on the very subject.

​

The reason I use Citizen Kane is because that film was originally considered a failure but over the years has since gained respect and fame for its innovative and forward-thinking take on story telling.

AoE is currently still panned for being a three hour assault on the eyes with a terrible plot, but you praise its narrative - hence, it is in a sense your Citizen Kane.

Except nobody likes it. I've yet to even see a post that praised any part of it unironically.

He says he's asked you to not interact with him on both private and public fronts, yet you come into his threads and speak ill of him, wanting his thread moved to non-TF GD even though you're the only one who has a problem with this thread being in TF GD.
​

And yet here you are, calling yourself a victim, when the smarter way of dealing with it would not be calling attention to how much of a victim you are but instead simply using that handy little 'report' function to deal with posts that, frankly, have a fair bit of time between them - your 'critical thinking' examples are from almost a full year ago, the hasbro lackey one and 'flamebaiting' ones are from February, and your last example has him outright stating he can't handle even interacting with you anymore as of four weeks ago.

That has nothing to do with what I said - it's hypocritical to declare stuff unrelated to transformers even within a thread context where that 'unrelated' content gets tied back to Transformers in general, yet you will sometimes just shove in Shrek related prefixes when the mood strikes you even though Shrek has absolutely nothing to do with Transformers.

But, to get things back on track, I'll bring up a subject of how narrative relies on characters, and how appearance can tell stories - or make the absense of them - more promiment.

The film Real Steel, which is basically a live action Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots in the best way possible, doesn't really have robots as characters in the usual sense. In reality, they're remote controled by various means, showing no signs of sentience or free will.

However, each robot that enters the ring is lovingly designed to convey a theme, because the robots make no illusion that they are not human. Instead, they're colorful, almost mascot like - and that ironically makes them more characterful than simply making some fatass giant robot look like a GI from WWII because making the aliens look more like humans than they do aliens somehow is a thing.

Take Atom, the main robot of the film. He's very basic and doesn't even have a face, largely because he was actually designed just as a practice sparing robot for actual big shots more than being a contender himself. But by being basic, he has one essential function and that's to take a real pounding and still get up for more - his 'shadow' function is more to give Hugh Jackman's character his big moment in the ring at the end of the film. Atom doesn't have any gimmicks or real flair like any other robot in the film, but that makes him unique because he's a simple bot in a world where simple bots don't normally get attention. However, he also works as a conduit, allowing Jackman's character to bond with his estranged son, becoming the essence of their relationship when the final fight comes around - his blank slate concept allows him to take on aspects of both father and son. By the final round in the final fight, Jackman outright is talking to Atom like an actual human and not a robot just copying his every move (something the kid lampshades).

Atom is a great example of how the appearance of the robot, even if said robot is not an active character in the typical sense, can make them feel like a character. Him, and every other robot in the film have unique, flashy appearances that tie into the feel of each individual boxer and style and make them feel more than just robot fighting proxies.

With Transformers, the appearance is just as key. Take Armada Hot Shot, the infamous 'why my shoulders hurt' boy. The design of his robot mode is supposed to be stocky if a bit short, a typical characteristic of the young but eager member of a team. Also very much like Bumblebee both in the original G1 cartoon and in the BB film as the door wings are on his back and thus emphasize his stockyness more. Or ROTF Sideswipe, a character who doesn't have much characterization but an excellent robot mode for his purpose - he's thin and lithe, with sword blades on his arms and wheels in his feet, emphasizing his agility and battle style by gliding into combat to go swish-swish-death on enemies.

The designs in the later films do not adhere to this and the characters are weaker for it. Optimus goes from a boxy robot mode befiting that of a guy who turns into a powerful semi cab, into some rounded schmuck with little to no truck kibble defining his body. If this was to emphasize agility, it would work...except this is supposed to be his 'knight form'. Uh, if he's supposed to be a knight, then why does he look like he's wearing LESS armor?



I mean, sure, human knight armor actually is kind of boring, but Prime looks like he's not wearing any armor around his elbows, abdomen, or inner thighs. If the whole point is to give him a knight upgrade, then get creative with the armor - screw realism (especially since the film is pulling all that bullshit with flying Transformium transformations). Give him big chunky armor panels, make him look like it's an actual UPGRADE as opposed to him pretty much stripping off clothing.

Like, even GUNDAM got that shit right and they're based more on Samurai normally!



And another for good measure - and this one is from a series where the Gundams were more human proportioned and lighter on armor than normal!


Or, compare to another sci-fi knight themed character, like Reinhardt from Overwatch. Dude's a freakin' MOUNTAIN and his armor is nice and chunky, none of that streamlined crap the films think is knight style.



Seriously, it's giant robots who wear knight based armor, have some FUN with the concept - trying to stick to being something they aren't and ever will be, which is human, takes away from their individuality and the potential to have some really wicked designs that can compliment a story tenfold.

 

TBH actual plate armor doesn't look boring if it's actually used in design, but AoE/TLK Optimus is wearing just a generic set of metal tights with some blue and red painted on it.. with more emphasis put on making it look muscular than on anything else. You could repaint it red and gold, change the head and it'd work just fine for MCU Tony Stark for all what's worth.
Knights of Iacon look armored pretty much the knight Gundam or Overwatch Reinhard style, except they have those silly chainmail parts.

The fun part is that TLK Megatron armor is more inspired by knight plate armor in shape and finish, with those fluted and ribbed plates... Which makes him look much more Medieval and knightly than Optimus ever looked in this movie. He's got parts of his look corresponding to the theme unlike Optimus who's absolutely generic. Giving the character a sword and a shield is not enough to make TLK OP look anywhere close to a knight when the same movie got robots with the right look.

 

Again, way to misunderstand everything.

For the record, I have only read Animal Farm out of those books. I have never read 1984 or any of his other works, and I've read things from a variety of authors. But you're reading too much into "authors." The point is, regardless of authorial intent, there are still a variety of possible opinions about his works.
​

​

And I never said people weren't doing that, but when the OP is asking about good fiction in general and not Transformers, to the point where it's being asked what good fiction is outside of Transformers, I feel like the thread is kind of losing its purpose and out of place in this part of the forums.

If this thread is going to be in the Transformers section, then the focus should be on what good fiction for Transformers should be, not outside of the brand. That is my point. Which is something I said respectfully in this thread before certain members got needlessly argumentative.

Except when it comes to narrative quality, the more recent films aren't really in any more of a "sad state" than the earlier films or G1, or most other parts of the brand. If anything, AoE's plot is actually more heavily based on its predecessor than, say, DotM is, and I love DotM. The quality of story-telling from one point in the brand to the other isn't that disparate. TLK has more connectivity issues, but even for TLK, the difference in quality between TLK and RotF as individual films is minimal, even if RotF is better as a sequel. Funny enough, the even-numbered films are actually better as sequels than DotM and TLK are, as both are actually much more heavily rooted in and connected to their predecessors than the third and fifth films are.

Then don't post about it in every thread?

But that's the thing, that was hardly "damage" in the big scheme of things any more than the deaths in the 1986 movie were "damage." The main dead characters still played roles post-TT:TM, and Prime, Megatron, Bee, and Ratchet all still play roles in AoE, even if the last one dies.​

I'm not denying anyone of anything. I have never told people they can't have different opinions from mine. I merely offered some constructive criticism of this thread.

​

If I wanted them out of the public eye, I wouldn't post anything in any Transformers thread.

​

Let's not get sidetracked by even more of your misunderstandings.

This is a Transformers website, so naturally people are going to discuss Transformers. On a Movie forum, we're going to discuss the movies.

My very favorite movies would be some of Sergio Leonne's spaghetti westerns. There are other classics here and there I love.

Now, if you want something that would be of an exceptionally artistic quality, that is truly creative and bizarre, I suggest Sergei Parajanov's "The Color of Pomegranates," which was banned in the Soviet Union. It makes little sense from shot to shot at times, it has little dialogue beyond background vocals and narrations, and it could easily weird one out. It shows sheep getting butchered and fish flopping around. But holy crap, it's so unique and, for its time, colorful, that I can't help but be enamored with it. One can even argue it's a horrible movie narratively speaking, but in terms of pure visual creativity, wow!

Now having said that, I think analyzing big, over-the-top summer blockbusters can be just as valuable, and in some ways even more so in terms of human culture at large, than analyzing artsy Oscar-bait films, whether it's Transformers, MCU, X-Men, Jurassic World, etc. So yeah, I will praise Age of Extinction and other films in the big franchises for the films they are trying to be. And yes, I think it's much, much better executed than given credit by Transformers fans and critics alike. That doesn't mean I think it's Citizen Kane.

And I'm letting you know I have seen posts on this site and others that defended it.

​

I never initiated direct interaction. I merely suggested that this thread is more along the lines of something in non-Transformers. It's called constructive commentary. I said things politely and fairly. It wasn't until he quoted me and erroneously accused me of bullying that things got argumentative. If other members can't handle constructive criticism, that is on them. It's a public forum. Let's not get easily offended just because someone that a member doesn't like posts in someone's thread.

I am hardly playing the victim card so much as pointing out the hypocrisy of acting like one is being bullied when trying to flame-bait and insult several others. I don't bully people. I've disagreed with people and dissected their arguments and occasionally their posting behavior, but I've never insulted people or anything of that nature. Nor have I ever insisted that people I disagree with shouldn't have a voice.

But Transformers is FUN, and Shrek is FUN, so why not have fun? What's the point of being a Transformers fan if you're not having fun? Why focus so much on the parts of the brand you hate, when even if you don't like a lot of current stuff there's still so much to like?

So yeah, it's time we Shrekognize the Ogre-the-top nature of the Transformers brand and embrace it. Let it swamp us with its ridiculous, Far, Far Away concepts and scenarios! Transformers has more (layers) than meets the eye.

 

And I've seen an extremely promising series utterly destroyed by marketing f-ups and attempting to push for a hard reset in the midst of falling popularity. I'd rather see transformers weather the current political and economic climate, which is not at all forgiving to the current toy market, than to loose the franchise completely by pushing too far too fast.

It might be better for Hasbro to stay with lower budget formula based kids shows, and use the shows as an infinite variety of testing lore and story development while building up talent in the background, than take another major risk with a direct movieverse reboot to the current story bible.

 

As far as I'm concerned with the thread's question. It would be the first response.

 

Yes, that makes sense. Hopefully that's the case. Lay low until they can get it right, but no so low that the brand goes on hiatus. An extended transitional period? Is that what you have in mind?

 

Have you SEEN G1?

No what brings it together is the script, voice acting and sound design. If it's a pleasure and entertaining to listen to with your eyes closed. You can get away with quite a bit visually.

Except with shallow viewers, the kind of complain about continuity errors in classic movies.

For example, Energon has terrible animation, but on the other hand it has even more terrible script and voice acting/direction.

Archer has servicable animation but you can tell it's just a few steps above flash puppets. But the audio is what you are following, the pictures are illustration.

If it's a movie really you need both. But TV shows should be mainly audio driven.
Like was said was a problem with Police Squad, viewers were expected to WATCH IT as well as listen.

 

Mostly, I've also been trying to dig through the terrible direction to isolate the glimmers of interesting storytelling and world building that presents itself in the movieverse script writing. There is something there under all the explosions, it's just been chopped to hell.

 

The level of projection in this thread is astounding. People want everyone to agree with their uninformed opinions on everything on their own volition, and when they disagree (again on their own volition) they call them pretentious or God knows what and call for uniformity of opinion just because.  

 

There's some palpable irony going on in here.