I actually think the last two ninja turtles movies were better written then all 5 bay films

 

There's no excuse for Mudflap and Skids.

 

You can't compare RotF to those movies. Firstly, none of them were popular or profitable in nearly the same kind of way RotF was. Only one of them barely made back even double their budget, while RotF made back FOUR TIMES its budget. And GI Joe was received so poorly that they almost didn't do a sequel at all. That alone already makes them not comparable.

Next, Salvation and Origins were part of a downward trend for their respective franchises. RotF was right smack in the middle of an upward trend for the TF movies. It wasn't the beginning of the upward trend, but neither did it slow the upward trend. Quite the opposite, we can see by the opening weekend for DotM that RotF accelerated the trend. If you can't understand what that means, then there's no point discussing it further.

Yeah, it was derided by critics, yeah it was derided by (many, but not all) fans, but no, it was not panned by general audiences. You don't get those kinds of numbers if people aren't enjoying a movie.

And no, as was already pointed out to you by someone else, the brutality and vulgar humor (gasp!) did not originate in RotF. They both existed in the first Bay movie as well. So did plot holes. As far as a "laissez-faire attitude to continuity", I have to admit I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say. I don't think you're using the term correctly. If you mean they ignored continuity, yeah so what? Big deal. So has every continuity after the first one. Even different G1 continuities ignored each other. Who cares?

 

I feel it jumped the shark starting with AOE. The dialogue and logic in the franchise was never terribly high-functioning to begin with...but they introduced a brand new low in AOE...and doubled-down in TLK...

 

Personally, I didn't think the dialogue in AoE and TLK was any worse than the dialogue in 2007/RotF/DotM. I didn't think, "My face is my warrant!" was worse than, "She's a criminal. Criminals are hot!" Or that pointless scene with the clown in the 2007 movie.

In my opinion, in 99% of cases, the same things people complain about in the sequels were present in the 2007 movie. Ditto to AoE/TLK and the first trilogy.

 

I don't disagree!

 

I was 12 when I saw both ROTF and Rise of Cobra and thought both were pretty good haha and walked out happy with both so saw that comment on Rise of Cobra funny. Although now I do not enjoy the movie as much as I did back in 2009 but I still enjoy it even though it is flawed and could have been of course better.

 

I enjoyed Rise of Cobra too.
I recall talking with my friend after RotF and saying how disappointed I was with the humor. He replied, "but it worked!" And I couldn't argue. The entire theater full of people were laughing a lot.

 

To me the beginning of the end for bayverse was AOE.... Specifically when Optimus took on that hideous Knight form and all of the transformers had human faces, beards or flappy coats.
Oh... And Stanley Tucci * shudders *

 

I do agree that the crude humor, iffy dialog, etc. were present in the first movie but ROTF really cranked it up. Parts of it felt like a parody like the supposed to be dramatic climax and then GIVE ME YOUR FACE had me falling out of my seat laughing.

 

He means the movies ignored their own continuities, not just ignoring others. TLK completely ignored the “creators” part of AoE, and both AoE and TLK ignored the allspark. Not to mention the whole “oops hehe looks like we’ve actually been here since the American revolution!!!” thing that contradicts the very prominent concept that they first arrived in 2007.

 

While I do think Transformers 5 would have been more enjoyable for me had it focused more on the Creators thread than the Earth being Unicron and what not, the latter is a lot like the G1 cartoon. Vector Sigma was introduced before the Quintesson origins in G1, just like the Allspark is introduced before the Creators in the Bay films.

And just like G1, the Allspark/Vector Sigma origins do not contradict the Creator/Quintesson origins. The former merely gives Transformers their minds and personalities, and the latter made the physical bodies of the Transformers, so their robots could be mechanical slaves.

Interestingly enough, I don't recall FFoD once mentioning Vector Sigma. Even the Rebirth doesn't show any Quintessons; once again, Vector Sigma is in the picture.

But 2007 just features some of the main Autobots and Decepticons arriving (or already present in the case of the Decepticons). RotF has the Dynasty of Primes in the late Pleistocene. AoE has not Transformers, but the Creators, coming to Cretaceous Earth and many other worlds. The Last Knight has the Guardian Knights on Earth in medieval times. These are all different groups of aliens and not the same individuals.

It's no different than the ancestors of today's Native Americans arriving to the Americas from Asia sixteen thousand years ago or more, only for Vikings to show up in "Vinland" a thousand years ago, and then for Columbus to come to the Caribbean in 1492. Okay, so Transformers have much longer lifespans than those of humans, and we're talking planets rather than continents, but it's still the same basic idea.

 

How did AOE and TLK ignore The Allspark?
The Seed creates their bodies, the Allspark creates the sparks which are still mentioned in AOE.
Their sparks make them sentient, without them their soulless, non sentinent, transforming machines like the KSI bots.

Until Megatron "hacked" them or brought them to life using energy from his hands resembling the Allspark's energy.


A bit of a tangent....

I guess The Fallen was right. The Allspark' power can never be destroyed it can only "transform" or to change from one vessel to another. Megatron had the Allspark shard plunged into in ROTF. Which might explain why he survived decapitation and is able to bring the KSI bots to life.

 

Even if it can be reconciled with loopholes and such, when in the last two movies was the Allspark even mentioned? If it wasn’t, then it just seems kind of odd that they wouldn’t say, “Oh yeah, that one cube thing from the first two movies, I bet you’re confused about that since we just said that it was actually some alien guys who made the Transformers! Well, actually, they used the cube to make them!” or something like that. The fact that the cube goes completely unmentioned seems to suggest the writers just forgot or stopped caring about the cube. Also, there is the inconsistency between the last two movies in which the “creators” are heavily said to be multiple, as well as showing them to have those gooey organic alien hands. Then the next movie, as we all know, has Quintessa be the creator, who is quite clearly robotic and only one person. Again you could reconcile this if you really tried, but the writers seem to just have forgotten about it completely. There’s also the Galvatron thing- why is he megaton again? How does he function like a normal transformer again? How did he become one of Quintessa’s goons? They don’t even acknowledge the fact that he’s different from the last movie.

Also, with the characters being on Earth before they should be, I was talking about the scene in TLK in Anthony Hopkins’s museum room that showed paintings of the 2007 characters on Earth wayyy before their arrival in 2007.

 

And I think most people who enjoy the Bay movies, myself included, did not like how TLK ignored the existence of Galvatron and multiple Creators. I think it may have been the new writers. I really like the Bayverse, but I think those two decisions to ignore things from the previous movie were the biggest creative mistakes in the movies.

I honestly wonder if that scene was intended to be more along the line of Easter eggs for viewers rather than serious evidence Ironhide and Optimus and company were on Earth centuries ago.

 

The Allspark didn't really need to be directly mentioned as it wasn't related to the main story of AOE being about their metal in which they were comprised of. KSI didn't care about making living robots, but ones who could be remote controlled.
Had AOE been about their Sparks, then the Allspark would have been more mentioned.
Although there are several nods to the Allspark in the film. In the scene of AOE when Cade mentions how a missile almost hit Prime's "power source", Optimus shares with Cade that they call it a "spark", he mentions that their spark contains their life force and memories. The Allspark has been indirectly mentioned in this scene. As we all know sparks originate from the Allspark. Later when fighting the KSI Galvatron unit, he refers to "it" as a soulless/sparkless machine.
We could infer that The Allspark granted the ability of sentience to the Transformers and originates from a source other than the "Creators". As shown through the Allspark mutations, Nokia bot showed his sentience by wanting out his cage and the larger being around him or her. That steering wheel transformer that latched onto that woman's face appeared to have been responding to her screaming, which was very loud and most likely was hurting the poor bots audio receptors. Not saying what they did was right, but the robots were just born, and were still very naive to the world and were acting defensively. As for Transformers thinking for themselves, we can assume it had not been something they were originally designed by the Creators.

As Lockdown says to Optimus regarding what The Creators are like:
"You think you were born, no you were built."
and
"The creators built you to do what you're told."

Referring to someone as being built is a little dehumanizing. Which is why the Transformers tend to consider themselves as being born, rather than built. The Creator didn't seem to like what the Creators a

In the TLK, Quintessa, claims, keyword "claims", to be the Prime of Life, but is referred by her former knights/servant as the "Great Deceiver" putting her claims in question. Alot of the characters in the bay films are composite characters, when adapting something into a movie there are some limits that movie has that a book won't, so a character may need to become a fusion of several characters in order to condense a story(Sentinel Prime/Alpha Trion/Nova Prime and Hound/Bulkhead/Kup/Roadbuster).

Quintessa appears to be a composite character, based on Quintus Prime, the creator of the Quintesson Race, Solus Prime, the female prime, perhaps Leige Maximo as well as he is known for being a great deceiver, overall trickster, and ultimate evil. The Tailsman in TLK appears to be based on the Tailsman from the IDW continuity.

As for Megatron in TLK, there were numerous visual and story clues that showed his origins that didn't need to be spelled out. Although this does say she might have some power to create, as she heals Optimus Prime's wounds, as his wounds from AOE disappear as he's being electrocuted while chained during his transformation into Nemesis Prime. Back to Megatron/Galvatron. Mostly likely didn't like the name because humans gave him that. He does say at the end of AOE he is reborn, perhaps he was referring to Megatron.

• In his first appearance, he has the same mark on his face as Optimus, whom receives it a few scenes later from Quintessa
• Megatron is already looking for the staff since before the events of this film.
• Megatron was spotted near Unicron's horns meaning he knows what they are. Nitro Zeus mentions Unicron by name in this scene, meaning Megatron informed him sometime offscreen, in between his release from prison and him and Megatron ambushing Prime and Bumblebee. If he was communicating with Unicron when he was near his horns is unknown.
• As soon Nemesis Prime fails and Optimus is brought back, Megatron knew Optimus couldn't go through with it, says that Optimus turned his back on Cybertron, so he knows what the staff can do for Cybertron, retrieves the staff, brings it back to Quintessa.
  
• During the final battle, he also refers to Infernocus, Quintessa's servant by name.

I've read the audience don't like exposition so in this case its showing hints for the Audience to pierce for themselves.

As for the Autobots of 2007 appearing in Sir Edmund Burton's painting are we sure they are the same characters and not simply random Transformers that have the same body type? We've seen that Transformers throughout the movies and the entire franchise having the same designs as the main cast before.

Bumblebee Movie Bumblebee/Cliffjumper/Brawn
Movie Long Haul/Onslaught
Bumblebee Movie Starscream/Blitzwing/Seekers/G1 Seekers
Movie Blackout/Grindor
Bumblebee Movie and G1 Ironhide/Ratchet

Maybe the Bumblebee/ZB-7 from WW2 was going to be revealed to be a live-action Centurion, a maximal who looks like Bumblebee, fought in WW2, and had a War Hammer.


Centurion is lost in more than one sense of the word. His memories gone in the crash that stranded him on an alien planet, Centurion and his Maximal shipmates found themselves pressganged into a battle that was not theirs—a battle that would stretch into the 19th century and beyond. His original identity lost to history, Centurion became "Bumblebee" for a time, convinced that he was the yellow Autobot until a moment of self-realization broke the mask and revealed the 'bot beneath the conditioning.

Nowadays, whatever remains of Centurion's chipper "Bumblebee" persona have been lost beneath Centurion's grim, world-weary attitude. Having seen—and shaped—so much of human history, Centurion's sense of purposelessness grew into a distaste for his own kind, considering Transformers to be nothing more than destructive abominations to be hunted down and dispatched by his own hand. It's this pragmatism that caught the attention of Garrison Kreiger, and in spite of his implanted Autobot sensibilities Centurion found a kindred spirit in the ruthless villain.

Hell, there are even maximals in the IDW Comics that share the same designs as the main cast.
Maximal Domitius Prime, Centurion's commander has the same design as Optimus Prime as well as having several maximals under his command that has the same designs as Prowl, Hound, and Ironhide except as beasts.

Hearts of Steel Maximal "Ironhide"

Hearts of Steel Maximal "Hound"


According to the book, Visual History for Transformers, a Live-Action Cheetor was designed as well as Beast Wars Optimus Primal. Maybe Lorenzo wants to adapt this version of the Maximals in the Beast Wars Movie. With a Mix of IDW and original Beast Wars.

And Bumblebee had no idea what Sir Edmund was talking about when he said they met before. And due to Burton's age and having a family history of mental illness, if his stories of his relatives are to be believed, he might be considered an unreliable narrator.

The Bay movies tend to take elements from different parts of the franchise, and as I got deeper into the franchise I'm discovering some familiar aspects the bay movies have to other parts of the franchise prior to their conception and during the movies run. Maybe even some stuff we have yet to discover due to the Franchises's long history of different concepts, still locked away in Hasbro's vault, we do not have access to what exactly Hasbro showed to Bay and Co., as they were being created.
Some quotes from the behind the scenes featurette on the DVDs of the bay movies, some creatives said that Hasbro would show them different concepts from the franchise, "look at this", "I bet you haven't thought about this", "what about this", are some of the quotes the Bay Movies creators said while quoting the Hasbro's representatives they worked with.

Rather or not they really did ignore what the Hasbro's representatives showed them in unknown because of the long history of the franchise some of the Bay characters. For example, I hear Ironhide diaclone colors were black like Bay Ironhide's colors are, RID 2001 Ironhide is a pickup truck as well. Bay Optimus has lips that look just like Orion Pax's lips in G1's War Dawn episode, Bay Optimus also isn't the first Optimus that was a long nose truck, G2 was.

Unless someone can look at everything from the franchise throughout comics, cartoons, unreleased toys, different continuities, artwork, toys, concept arts. Transformers Franchise has a wide variety of concepts. I'm still trying to explore everything in the franchise. It seems too coincidental that Bay and Co. took nothing from the source material, the question should be what concepts of the franchise did they take from?

 

Whether or not it is possible for the cube and the creators to have coexisted, it still would be important for characters to mention the cube. Even if it was the creators who made the bodies of the transformers and the cube gave them life, that is not common knowledge. In the beginning of the first movie, Optimus Prime says the cube “holds the power to create worlds and fill them with life.” Since the transformers attribute their creation to the cube, wouldn’t someone speak up and say “wait a minute..!” when the creators are mentioned? Again, it’s not totally impossible that both could be the case, but either the writers forgot/didn’t care or it was very poor delivery of an attempt at a shocking new development.
Also, I wouldn’t exactly call the mention of a spark a nod to the Allspark. Sparks are their own concept which we’re conceived before the Allspark.

Again, if this is possible, it still makes no sense that Optimus Prime wasn’t confused about there only being one creator when Lockdown mentioned multiple. Optimus also didn't seem to care about asking her what was up with the cube or Lockdown. He just showed up there. Also, when I rewatched that scene, I noticed Optimus’s silly line of “My world! What has happened to my world!?” But back in Dark of the Moon, Cybertron’s obliteration was kinda hard to miss as it swirled around and crumbled over Chicago. Quintessa also said “Your world is dying” which she blamed on the civil war, not seeming to have noticed the big swirly whirlpool that happened to it back in 2011. But whatever, maybe she lumped that part in with the war.
Also, I have to say, at the end of The Last Knight, there seems to be no intent of hinting that there are still the real creators somewhere out there. The focus just switches to Unicron.

I was able to piece that all together myself, but all of the information was just barely noticeable. The red marking on his face and his familiarity with Quintessa’s minions shows he was allied with her, but that doesn’t explain how he met her and why nobody is even saying, “Hey, you look different.” Blatant exposition is obviously lame, but there was no exposition at all. It just jumped into “lol he’s Megatron again!”

I can understand that they would reuse models for less popular characters, but these are the main Autobots from the first three movies. They could have used some other character designs. Of course, the only reason that models were reused was because they were fully rendered 3D models! These were just paintings! There is a ton of unused concept art that they could have just put in the paintings; why use the likenesses of the big characters if it’s not meant to be them?
Also, I doubt they had any intent of working Hearts of Steel into this. WWII Bee was definitely meant to be the real Bumblebee. When the Bumblebee movie was still meant to be in continuity with the Bay films, it was going to build off of Bumblebee having been here since at least WWII. The scene of him having just arrived from Cybertron was not originally included. It was instead just going to be him on the run from humans, and you can see Bumblebee in his TLK mode running through some Vietnamese rice fields in some of the early Bumblebee concept art.

 

Yeah I agree. DotM was meh, but AoE was bad and don't get me started on that garbage.