The Avengers to be bigger than DOTM?

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by Zhadow, Apr 24, 2012.

  1. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,966
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +3,232
    An interesting tid-bit from an ABC news story said that over half of the people buying tickets to see Transformers were over the age of 25.

    So if people over 25 will come out to watch movies could we please start having Transformers movies that are for more than small children and some teens. Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Black Widow, and Hulk didn't have to be radically changed so that the over 25 could like it, so why not Transformers for the people who grew up on it?
     
  2. Nightrain

    Nightrain Senior Villain

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Posts:
    11,656
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +3,287
    Because character integrity doesn't count for robots for some reason.
     
  3. unicronic

    unicronic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2006
    Posts:
    6,580
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    367
    Location:
    UK
    Likes:
    +912
    Twitter:
    The biggest issue with the movie trilogy still, for me, is sloppy plot and poor villains. I don't mind cannon fodder, that's to be expected but you never really felt that the Autobots would do anything but win.

    I find it inexplicable how the Autobots ever lost a war on Cybertron against these Deception.
     
  4. Silk Spectre

    Silk Spectre The Evil Queen

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    Posts:
    2,417
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +81
    If you're only speaking strictly of the budget/money factor in having multiple CGI characters, I would argue it.

    Sometimes the best characterization comes from the simplest, smallest of things - one line, a brief scene between two characters..... Sometimes that's all it takes for better dramatic impact, for an audience to get emotionally invested.

    There was nothing holding Bay back from adding more moments like the ones in TF1, where the Autobots have a little bit of genuine interaction with each other.

    He had plenty of money to create the driller, which sucked up a lot of the battle sequence in DOTM. I'm sure Devastator cost a ton. Both were just filler creatures. He had tons of ships, random protoforms..... All of that cut into the budget. Skids and Mudflap had plenty of time and lines in ROTF, they were just used for crude comedy.

    It's Bay's choices that's the problem. Not an inability due to budget to give other Autobots more character, or to have a brief scene or two of genuine emotion/connection between them or between them and a human ally. He could have chosen to make scenes that count in terms of storytelling and he didn't. He spent all his money on filler and in ROTF also devoted it to the comic relief.

    If Spielberg alone had made ROTF and DOTM, I would feel safe in saying we would've gotten different sequels - with better characterization for the 'bots. I think Spielberg would've made the budget he had count for storytelling, which makes all the difference in the world in film quality.

    Is it wrong to expect long and drawn out sequences of the Transformers that would be expensive to make? Maybe.

    But I do expect good choices and moments with them that make them into REAL characters and not set pieces. A little bit can go a long way. If Bay cried budget over that, I would call bullshit.
     
  5. Ironhide4

    Ironhide4 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Posts:
    2,146
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +2
    Ebay:
    Avengers blew me away with it's character driven plot, you didn't even need to see any of the previous movies to get what was going on which is a credit to the writers and the director. The fx was amazing and left me with a sense of wonder and a scale of money they must have used, it also dwarfed transformers, it gave clean visible fights, clean visible cgi in every scene used and the heroes and actual characters the original story was about is about them, not some kid or some individual that has nothing to do with the fight. Avengers is to be applauded in it's own right of Marvel creating a fantastic movie that will forever be remembered. It highlighted how bad the writing and directing of transformers was, transformers did everything it could to distract from the stars with the many human sub plots going on instead of what we paid cold hard cash to see and that was the bots and cons interacting and duking it out.
     
  6. Silk Spectre

    Silk Spectre The Evil Queen

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    Posts:
    2,417
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +81
    I personally haven't seen Captain America or The Incredible Hulk (in fact, I was NEVER a fan of the Hulk), and I cared about both characters. They contributed as much to the movie as anyone else and I was into them. Especially Cap - I didn't expect to care as much for him as I did. I felt so bad for him, being stuck out of his own time and seeing the world as it is today. That's down to the storytelling.

    Now I'm going to watch both movies.

    And then there's Black Widow and Hawkeye, who haven't had movies of their own, but still manage to stand up as characters against everyone else.
     
  7. Ephland

    Ephland Let's Go Rangers

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Posts:
    12,862
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +7,401
    You're having a different discussion that I was. I'm not saying that the budget for DOTM wasn't there, or that the budget was spent wisely. I'm also not saying that CGI characters can't be given characterization, or that there's not a lot of things that could have been done differently with DOTM to give the characters more.

    I'm not talking about Bay's choices versus Whedon's choices, I'm specifically talking about the differences in the properties that exist, and would continue to do so no matter who was behind the camera.

    I'm saying that human actors, such as the ones used in "The Avengers," generally are more cost-effective than CGI characters, for numerous reasons.

    I'm also saying that "The Avengers" has a longer and more well-formed history than "Transformers," so when people make the argument that "The Avengers" was more faithful to the source material, it's a flimsy argument. Because there is a significant difference between the two source materials, and quite honestly, I'm having a hard time finding an example of how Bay's three films weren't faithful to the source material they draw from.
     
  8. FanimusMaximus

    FanimusMaximus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Posts:
    16,788
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Location:
    Florida
    Likes:
    +1,009
    Is it me, or is this thread just one big hating DOTM thread?
     
  9. knightmare6

    knightmare6 Reflector In Disguise

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Posts:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    NYC
    Likes:
    +1,545
    Ebay:
    There is a difference here though, in "Iron Man" they did do CGI overlays over existing props, so it's less time and resources spent on the CGI, since there's a base to work with and not all is from scratch, while "Transformers" required from-scratch CGI. Granted templates could be used, but time and resources would still be spent on creating the characters on-screen fully, whereas for "Iron Man" you could do piecemeal renders on the portions that only needed it, while the remaining footage can either be untouched or just some simple effects overlaid, pending what passes QC.

    I know for "Iron Man 2" and "The Avengers," Downey was in the armor for the shoots as there's been extensive set pics, as well as interviews about 3D printing that was used to make most of the armor props out of plastic, while the first movie was more expensive using actual cast pieces. ("The Avengers," used both, but "IM2" was mostly the plastic).
     
  10. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,966
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +3,232
    I agree it doesn't take hours and hours to inject personality into a character and little scenes can say volumes. The scene with Hulk and Thor after they have defeated the space dragon thing tells you a great deal about the Hulk. A scene so quick you could almost blink and miss it but it says so much.

    With too many of the Autobots killing Decepticons is all we get. For too many Decepticons all we get is dieing. Even when robots did get lines too many times it was all about war.
     
  11. knightmare6

    knightmare6 Reflector In Disguise

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Posts:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    NYC
    Likes:
    +1,545
    Ebay:
    Yeah, I never felt the Autobots were in danger, except Prime's battle in the forest (TF:RotF) and the beginning of the Mission City battle (TF).
     
  12. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,966
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +3,232
    Just no tensions to the fights any more. When Prime fought Bonecrusher you could kind of feel like well Prime got lucky to find an opening so he could win. Then with Megatron the fight was so even they could fight from one end of the city to the other.

    But after that first movie it just got way too easy for the Autobots to win. Now when you see Prime go into battle you know the bad guy has no chance at all.

    Fights just seem more exciting when there is at least some feeling that it's not an automatic win for the good guys.
     
  13. Ironhide4

    Ironhide4 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Posts:
    2,146
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +2
    Ebay:
    Totally right man, cap has more or less just woken up and his memory flashes provide an adequate montage for those who may not see it. The hulk is the hulk, he's been depicted in recent imaginations as a wandering nomad like the bixby show so most people need no introduction.

    Cap for me after watching the film I thought his comments were funny, the whole "I get that" joke was quite funny but I do see your point of it being sad, it is sad, everyone he knows is dead.

    The hulk though I was a bit distracted by the change of actor, I expected someone to say you look different to him or him mention he's had cosmetic surgery to gain a look to evade people which I think would figure for a great Hulk and his changing looks.

    Widow and hawkeye as you've noted have no solo movies yet but they were established well and the bond they showed and commitment to the agency of s.h.i.e.l.d. was very apparent.
     
  14. -Superion-

    -Superion- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Posts:
    1,186
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Likes:
    +6
    I've seen all the movies, but the way Whedon characterized each hero makes it easy for anyone to understand them without having to watch all the previous movies. And I had some reservation about BW and Hawkeye and whether they will be drowned out as supporting characters, much like what Jazz, Ratchet, and Ironhide did in TF1, but Whedon not only flesh them out with what little screentime they had, but he made me excited about seeing them in their own solo movies (or at least entertained with the notion of it). It's not about how many scenes they were in the movie, but what to do with those scenes that are the most important.
     
  15. TylerMirage

    TylerMirage I vawnt my berdt.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Posts:
    7,355
    News Credits:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +49
    It's this that I have to agree with. Many scenes just weren't written under the mindset of "how can we get the Transformers in here/involved?". 50% of the time they seem to be thrown in as an afterthought. All it takes is a little Jimminy Cricket-tron to sit on Bay's/Ehren's/whoever's shoulder and say "Hey, see these five shots of the human soldiers mobilizing and getting their weapons? Why not make three or four of those shots of the Autobots preparing, hmm?" or "Why not have Ratchet pipe in on the topic on this sequence? Just one line is all."

    It appears that way; or at least, pointing out the many reasons why Avengers is better than DotM, rather than whether or not it's "going to be bigger than DotM". :lol  And remember, FM, in the fandom, you can't like two different things. You must either love one and hate the other, or vice-versa. ;) 
     
  16. G1DeadEnd

    G1DeadEnd Bring on 5, 6, 7 & 8!

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    Posts:
    1,630
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +757
    DOTM>>>Avengers
     
  17. Prime Jetscream

    Prime Jetscream HE PULLS THE STRINGS AND HE MAKES THEM RING

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Posts:
    10,464
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    267
    Likes:
    +43
    Without reading any replies, I am going to say it's equal.
    It took a lot from DOTM. (giant flying driller, flying ships, big energy beam shooting a portal into the sky)
     
  18. Overlord Balder

    Overlord Balder Voices Slugslinger!

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,306
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +30
    I think, however, that for all DOTM's flaws, it has one victory over the Avengers: A stronger climax. I think it is due the Chicago genocide scene and the "Autobot's death" scene, really drove home the Darkest Hour of the movie. Avengers' climax was just a big badass battle, which was awesome, but I think DOTM's was slightly more well-done.
     
  19. payton34

    payton34 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Posts:
    4,094
    News Credits:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Likes:
    +77
    Except that in Avengers, it wasn't a flying driller, and DOTM didn't exactly invent the notion of flying ships or energy beams.

    It's a good thing it didn't take other things from DOTM...like the level of acting or writing.
     
  20. Ceasar121

    Ceasar121 Wants a Toxitron repaint!

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Posts:
    3,287
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +669
    ^ I dont think its DOTM hating... I think it comes down to "How did Joss Whedon, Chris Nolan and Jon Fauvreau ALL make better big budget action/CGI films on THEIR FIRST TRY?"

    Bay was making big budget action before them, was given a franchise with as much or more potential, and managed to do a sloppy job where the only saving grace IS the CGI. Hell take Sentinel Prime out of DOTM and its absolute shit story wise. If one character well done, takes a story from shit to decent, imagine what happens when you give most of the characters that treatment.

    Bay doesnt know how to give character, or at least has difficulty with it. Not to mention all his heros are the same badass anti hero wolverine/spawn stereotype. When your heros are bland, villians are pansies, AND you change a established franchise in totally unnecessary ways, it makes for failure. Yet when he adds things Transformers is SUPPOSED to have, we're supposes to be grateful. Thats like thanking a car dealer for giving me rims and tires on the car Ive bought.

    Avengers gave fans enough to be satisfied, and was done well enough to make new fans. Thats all TF movies needed, but Bay only delivered on one of those.