Yay! The "If you don't like the movie do it better yourself or stop complaining" argument! Haven't seen that one in quite some time.
No, that argument is baseless. I prefer to think of my stance as the "stop creating the movie in your head" argument. Every little detail has been recreated (or pre-created) down to certain characters' design resources being "wasted". "There shouldn't have been protoforms there should have been..." I think that anyone who has an issue down to this granularity would never be satisfied with any Transformers movie made. So, every Decepticon should have been introduced? The fact that we have already seen Scorponok ejected from Blackout, Ravage ejected from Soundwave, and Frenzy ejected from Barricade is not enough of a set up to imagine another Decepticon, previously seen or perhaps unseen, having the ability to deploy tiny wasps? The fact that we have seen Decepticons as small as Scalpel and as large as Demolisher means that they have to explain the tiny Insecticon? In Star Wars when Vader is first seen with the Imperial pilots should he have stopped and had some exposition for the audience's benefit along the lines of "I see you are wearing a black set of armor, so clearly you are pilots because pilots wear black armor. Let's go pilot something."? I kinda figured they were alerted before he killed it and were coming to the location. It did have a "radar dish" on its body.
Are you really asking if a movie should introduce characters? You seam to be thinking I want every character's life story explained to me in the first scene. That is not the case. The Star Wars scene you were referring to is a perfect example of good story telling. During the chaos of the final battle the movie takes time to have Vader got get the two pilots and say come with me. Personally that makes those two random pilots cooler. Your brain starts asking questions about them, are they elite? Vaders wing men? How cool is that? Those type of little moments allow for smoother story telling in a movie. In a Bay version of Star wars he would have just cut to Vader and the pilots shooting at the falcon. You would not have known those characters existed until they died and they wouldnt have mattered. Yes, somebody with half a brain can "figure out" where they came from and you can assume that somebody ejected the insecticon but are you just to quote you "creating the movie in your head". I want to see their story, I am paying to see their story and I have a right to point out the things that would have made me enjoy it more. It something does not add to the story or accomplish some other element I feel it is wasteful and will point it out. Sorry my brain doesn't turn off like alot of people here like to do with theres
Fair enough lol. Though I do think discussion about the actual use of CGI is valid. Sometimes less is more and a finished product does reveal itself to be useless or "wasted" after a movie is finished. Like all pieces of art, we create things that we think are necessary, but it is only after refelection and self-editing do we sometimes realize that it isn't necessary. Some things are nitpicking. Some things are personal taste. Some things are fact. We just have to weed through all that to find the valid points to discuss. An argument can be made that the insecticon was necessary. An argument can also be made that MB came up with an interesting idea for a scene with some neat camera work. The insecticons wraps up that scene so it does serve a purpose. I still think its rather hard to prove that Alice was necessary in any capacity.
I could have done without all the flying bugs, the Kitchencons even (or maybe just less & less complicated ones), and Devastator certainly.
Absolutely. Let's all stop wasting precious dicking-around-on-the-internet-in-relation-to-a-personal-hobby time on saying or discussing how we think individually something existing in Transformers could have been made better to us. Enough of this damn sharing. And on a TRANSFORMERS DISCUSSION BOARD FFS! Shut the hell up, all of you.
Makes sense but there was a noise outside once Sam removed the head and his eye looked around so it just seemed like "killing" it was what alerted them. Unless it was all just timed that way and by the time they got the message, Sam had already killed it. *shrug*
I look at Alice (and wheelie) as the deceptions attempt to get what they want from Sam without causing a major event. It's an attempt to stay under the radar of the military/autobots...which megatron/fallen eventually abandon when it's unsuccessful (when Alice is discovered to be a con). Once Alice is discovered, the rest of the cons promptly show up and take him by force. He's rescued though, and they make the decision to stop hiding which leads to the TV transmission.
In fairness, the time between when Sam and the insect see each other is probably only 7 seconds prior to Sam killing it. I'm not sure we could ever decide which event lead to their capture, only make reasonable assumptions. I assumed once the insect saw him, the cat was out of the bag.
Yeah, I figured once Sam grabbed the Insecticon and decided to stare at it as it squirmed in between his fingers, the thing was either in the middle of transmitting his location to whomever it was partnered with (Starscream perhaps?), or killing it was what tipped the Decepticons off to Sam and Mikaela's hiding place in the shack. Bingo. The Decepticon's last chance at obtaining Sam without incident was Alice. Especially since there's a good chance that they all knew (or at least Soundwave did) that Wheelie had been detained/captured by Mikaela and thrown into in a box. As soon as Mikaela announced she was coming to Sam with her piece of the AllSpark shard, Alice was given the order to move in on Sam before she arrived.
Really? I was satisfied with the first movie, and I believe that a lot of resources were wasted in this movie. But you're right, I only find these flaws because I'm a jerk. And you know what? That little Insecticon was a waste of time and a plot hole. It was something we were forced to accept; "There were other bots like this, so deal with it!", and it had no precedent set for it, and served no plot purpose. Gah.
I guess I'm not sure what you mean by setting a precedent. There's always a first time you see any character. A whole bunch of deceptions just came in from space of different forms. Doesn't that explain where pretty much all the new decepticons came from? Is it the fact that its so small that makes it unprecedented? Is it required to see a transformer in non-combat before seeing it combat for the first time? I just don't get it.
You know what? I think you have explained your point well. You think that there wasn't enough set up -I think that perhaps there was. We don't have to agree on it any more than that. I may have over generalized when I said that people were creating the movie in their head before they see it, but I think that to a certain extent that is true. Look at the Star Trek thread -months of agonizing over every detail, lamenting what is wrong with this or that, declaring how things had better be in the final script. There is a thread with on the GI Joe movie in much the same vein; right down to how certain action scenes should be done in the style of certain directors. Like I said, I may have over generalized when I made that comment, but I think that any movie will fall short of such expectations. You're allowed to be a jerk cause you're so sexy. **giggle**
Oh, so now we're complaining about how some CGI stuff was "wasted". Ah TFW2005, what will you bring next?
