A period movie would be good, and they don't seem to care for continuity that much now so, yeah, yeah just make 'em driving about in the 80's with some other Mini bots, throw in Glyph, we need more Glyph.

 

Wasn't interested in a stand alone BB movie. Add Nic Cage. GOLD

 

Say scribe again.

 

Toys will be:
Bumblebee, Yellow Bumblebee, Slightly Darker Bumblebee, Slightly Lighter Bumblebee, Black Bumblebee, Snow Bumblebee, Throwback Bumblebee, Bumblebee with lights and sounds, Walgreens exlusive Bumblebee, Bumblebee Prime, Power up Bumblebee, Derbt looking Bumblebee.... This list will go on and on. And thats just one size class...

 

I like it kid, start that draft!  

 

I wish they would make this in the same fashion as Deadpool. Because that would actually be worth a watch.

 

I'd LOVE to see an R-rated Transformers movie someday...but the Bumblebee spin-off PROBABLY isn't the right time for it, lol.

 

A transformers movie withou michael bay?
You have my attention.
-Bumblebee solo film-
Aaaaannnd you've lost it.

That said i'd love to see Robert Rodriguez direct it. But with our luck we'll get Uwe Boll

 

Wait a minute....

ROM the Spaceknight is in Transformers 5???

 

We don't know that yet.

But he very well MIGHT be!

 

True-with the blatant sole objective of increasing the bottom line. . .at the (likely) expense of quality. . .

 

I mean...shouldn't EVERY movie be a "stepping stone" along your way to the next sequel?

Sure, they should be self-contained stories, too. Every single live action TF movie has been pretty good about that so far. Even TF:AoE, which is simultaneously a "stepping stone" AND a self-contained story.

And, HEY, cheat yourself all you like...but you're missing some AWESOME movies from the MCU if that's the way you roll for whatever reason. I'm just saying that if you're REALLY a fan of Transformers, then MAYBE you should have realized by now that even the cartoons and comics reward those with attention spans gracious enough to allow for long-format storytelling beyond simple, short-term installments. Same goes for the movies and that's not a bad thing.

As opposed to...WHAT other business, exactly?

Sorry, but these movies cost MASSIVE amounts of money, especially for the titular characters. Yeah, they're obviously aiming for a profit, people don't generally invest several hundred MILLIONS of dollars in ANYTHING otherwise.

And they're fun movies people at large tend to enjoy so we keep getting more! It's a beautiful thing, really.

And the more money we pay the more robot-time we get and the better they're able to afford Oscar-winning screenwriters for MORE MOVIES, etc.

Not really seeing the problem here.

o_O

 

Part of me wishes I could direct it, but I'm still a long way off being able to handle anything that size.

Still not sure why we need a Bumblebee movie though. Other than the kids like him. But I never understood why the kids liked movie Bumblebee so much. He's ugly and stupid.

 

Except it's written by the same woman who gave us "Shut In" - one of the worst screenplays of the year. And she's writing the new Harley Quinn spin-off too. This does not bode well...

 

As opposed to...WHAT other business, exactly?

Sorry, but these movies cost MASSIVE amounts of money, especially for the titular characters. Yeah, they're obviously aiming for a profit, people don't generally invest several hundred MILLIONS of dollars in ANYTHING otherwise.

And they're fun movies people at large tend to enjoy so we keep getting more! It's a beautiful thing, really.

And the more money we pay the more robot-time we get and the better they're able to afford Oscar-winning screenwriters for MORE MOVIES, etc.

Not really seeing the problem here.

 [/QUOTE]
I get it-you don't see the problem. Let me re-state and attempt to clarify what I made pretty obvious before: when money is being made without much regard to the quality of the end product being produced, that is exactly the problem. I don't care about the Oscars (or any other awards shows) and quite frankly, stopped watching them 30 years ago. Money and awards (while useful to a point) and the often-used "shakespearean quality" strawman are not some magical cure-all to all the problematic storytelling, questionable characterizations, bandwagon-jumping, and other keeping-up-with-the-benjamins mentality that bean counters, Execs, and their subordinates decide to engage in.

In fairness, while there are SOME things I like about the movies, and while I have no issues with fresh blood, that does not negate the systematic issues I have with the collective product being produced, as well as the mindset that created and sustains said issues in the first place. You can't have a seed without the plant it came from, and the planters who cultivated it. If the writers room (which is not a new thing, by the way) can actually improve upon past issues, that's a good thing-we'll see come this Summer. The verdict is still out on what they were able to create. . .

If a bunch of people decided to start investing in feces, and kept throwing more and more $ at them, no matter how much is thrown, there are still some irrefutable facts: A)Feces will still stink; B)They will still stain; C)They are still riddled with noxious substances, and last but not least, D)they will still be Feces.
Now, will the TCU suffer from that? Given previous redundant characteristics, it's possible -and those of us who disagree and dissent with the prevailing dominant mindset have the prerogative and right to do so.

At the end of the day, the movies will be what they will be, and I will continue to create my own stuff, and seek out and support what I feel counters the problems in the movies-and I don't need boatloads of $ and awards to do so. Good day.

 

No they absolutely should not be.

Movies should be good movies first and foremost, not everything needs to start a franchise. If a sequel happens after the fact, goody, but it shouldn't be the goal of the previous film. They shouldn't be planning film after film ten years in advance. It trivializes the whole thing.

Sequels used to be the mark of a movie's success. Something that was earned for being good. Now they're a given.

 

Might as well get Peter Berg someone who has already tried to do Bay-ham without being Bay on Battleship so he's used to people being bitterly disappointed at someone attempting to be a Bay clone.

My bad feeling is that whoever they get to work on the movie it's still the same producers and the same Paramount corporate suits. People who aren't going to push for anything different but people who are going to push for it to be exactly like the other Transformers movies. They had a chance for a real reboot after Dark of the Moon and they ran away screaming in fear from a reboot so these aren't the type of people to let the Bumblebee movie be anything different.

But even if they could put together one of the most talented teams in decades the concept isn't very appealing. Hasbro properties like Transformers and GI Joe work as a team concept but going solo is just not appealing. It's like with sports you might have a favorite star on the team you like, but watching that player do their drills by themselves for the length of a game isn't all that appealing. I like Cam Newton but I wouldn't want to watch him throw a football at nothing for 2 hours or run for the end zone if it was just him vs just one defensive player.

 

What would BB be doing for an hour and a half to 2 hrs would be my question.  If they transport him to Cybertron @ the end of the Last Knight and trying to find a way back would make an interesting movie.  

 

Apparently it's a prequel of sorts.

 

Why would they want a "real" reboot? Dark of the Moon was a billion dollar movie, what sense does that make from a business stand point to throw away everything and start over? Especially with so many "real" reboots failing these days.