Why so many people want transformers 6 from michael bay?

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by decepticon seeker, Feb 15, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Galvatross

    Galvatross Dom Dom, Yes Yes Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    7,394
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +10,825
    This is a bizarre claim to say the least, because I wasn't even talking about what kids should or shouldn't see. I don't even like it when parents bring kids to R-rated movies. I didn't like how there were kids at my Deadpool showing back in 2016.

    My point was that grown adults should not enjoy Transformers content just because it's not kiddie enough. I haven't enjoyed any of the new Transformers cartoons for many years now, but that's okay, because I'm not a kid.

    What I can say is I absolutely enjoy the Bay movies as an adult, regardless of how kid-friendly they are or aren't. I don't consider any of the Bay movies kid movies, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't enjoy them as an adult.

    Furthermore, in terms of content, that scene isn't even any worse than any of the other equivalent scenes in the other movies. The word "sex" is literally not even mentioned in that scene! If anything, it's less explicit than some other scenes, like "Sam's Happy Time" or the Talisman crawling down Cade's pants. The latter aren't better things to show kids by any stretch.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Nathanoraptor

    Nathanoraptor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2015
    Posts:
    1,016
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Likes:
    +1,564
    What I think @Autobot Burnout is trying to say is that a Transformers movie should be aimed primarily at families with children, because that's the main demographic that buys the merchandise.

    Now, any other demographic can enjoy Transformers movies, just as with anything. Being a man in my early 20s, I am not the target demographic for Frozen 2 - that didn't stop me from seeing it twice.

    In a movie aimed at families with kids, there should not be discussions about underage sex laws in Texas, no matter how it's worded.

    As the Bayverse went on, Bay gradually alienated, through violence and potty humour, the demographic he should have been aiming for.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Galvatross

    Galvatross Dom Dom, Yes Yes Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    7,394
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +10,825
    If so, he did a terrible job at saying it.

    Regardless of how popular or unpopular that is, that's an opinion, not a fact. Especially given that specific scene doesn't even mention sex; most kids wouldn't even get the idea of sex from watching that scene. The fan reaction to that scene is making mountains of mole hills.

    It's also kind of hypocritical for fans to single out that scene, given all of the other live action movies have equivalent scenes that are not any better for kids. Romeo and Juliet isn't any worse than Sam's Happy Time, or Devastator's parts, or Deep Wang, or Cade and Vivian searching the upstairs. Furthermore, many other family movies (including ones you mentioned) have plenty of sexual references. The Shrek movies are filled with sexual references for adults. The Guardians of the Galaxy movies have sexual references, and you actually mentioned the first movie as a film to bring kids to! Either both the Transformers and Guardians movies are appropriate for kids...or none of them are.

    That's also not a fact. That's a theory, but where is the evidence the humor and violence in the Bay movies drove a large percentage of general audiences away? I haven't seen any.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,102
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +40,126
    Watching you dance around the subject is quite incredible - you bring up R rated films even though those have no bearing on AoE which was PG-13. I mean, for somebody who openly likes people posting nonsense that go into conspiracy theory territory with circumstantial evidence in these films, you are taking the most literal way to try and get out of acknowledging there is literally no other way to read the Card scene than underage sexual relationship. Doubly so given Cade straight up says 'Romeo and Juliet' and that right there is pretty damning because in Shakespeare's play which pretty much everybody knows, there's this darling little line that is used between characters to describe Juliet:

    This means she's thirteen years old.

    So, no, the word sex isn't used. Just the name of possibly the most famous underage couple that had sexual relations.

    Add to that you could just remove this scene entirely and nothing changes about the plot of Age of Excrement. Meaning there is no purpose to the scene other than sexualizing a minor - and even in-universe the law does not apply since as pointed out by the TFWiki, Tessa at age 17 is the legal age of consent in Texas. The law does not even apply.

    Its a bad, tasteless scene, and you're trying to worm your way out of having to actually defend the content through whataboutism.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  5. Galvatross

    Galvatross Dom Dom, Yes Yes Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    7,394
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +10,825
    I wonder if you have serious problems with reading comprehension, or if you intentionally misrepresent what people you disagree with say to get into arguments and create strawmen.

    My point with bringing up Deadpool was that I don't think kids should just see any movie.

    And kids are going to get that from watching the scene? This is grasping for straws if I've ever seen it.

    Bullshit, but then again, look at who I am talking to. The same guy who constantly moves goalposts and spews nothing but hyperbolic nonsense and states falsehoods to support his bullshit, faux intellectual arguments.

    My point is that it's hypocritical for fans to single out that scene...which doesn't even mention sex...and give a free pass to many equivalent scenes in other PG-13 movies, including the other Bay moves....and many of which are more explicit. For example, "Sam's Happy Time" is more explicit, because it describes a specific sexual act by name.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,102
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +40,126
    Projection much?

    So you're saying kids should not see a movie about Transformers?

    Riddle me this then, Batman - why in hell is there some kind of legal backdoor that gets cited? Teenagers simply dating isn't illegal and kids are smart enough to deduce there's more going on there. You said you a teacher in a previous thread a while back, IIRC, so I would expect you to know kids can be more insightful, at least more than you seem to be implying is possible.

    It is a common tactic for those who can not provide a suitable enough defense of their side with facts will instead try and instead attack their opponent's character directly. And this isn't the first time you've tried to avoid my arguments by making me look the fool instead.

    You, on the other hand, if you get backed into a corner to the point you can't talk your way out of it...well, I can't talk about what you did because of what the mods did in response and thus it invokes TFW Rule 7.

    We've already had the discussion over the "Sam's Happy Time" scene and I'm not surprised you apparently learned and remembered nothing. But since you apparently want to have it again, let's go.

    Sam's Happy Time revolves around the whole thing being a misconception because of the mom thinking Sam was 'having a date with rosy palms' and obviously the audience knows full well what was actually going on.

    Romeo and Juliet Card scene...okay, for the sake of argument, what on Earth could that entire scene be about if it wasn't involving the legality of underage sex? You have Shane pulling out a card and citing a legal statute, but as I already said earlier, teenagers simply dating isn't illegal. Thus, the question is what is the card and by extension the statute itself even for?
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
    • Like Like x 2
  7. AustinLucas

    AustinLucas Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2020
    Posts:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    72
    Likes:
    +99
    did you ever looked up Transformers: Time and Space ?
     
  8. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,102
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +40,126
    No, because what you've linked there is some kind of fan thing that ignores the fact Michael Bay and Mark Whalberg are both on record as saying they are done with the franchise. I don't understand what that has to do with the current topic since none of it is remotely official.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  9. Galvatross

    Galvatross Dom Dom, Yes Yes Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    7,394
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +10,825
    You have misrepresented the posts and arguments of some other members here who you disagreed with and not just me, and I don't know if it's intentional or not, so it makes me wonder.

    Furthermore, "projecting" would be some members of this fandom taking their own dislike of the Bayformers' designs, humor, characters, etc. and projecting their complaints onto millions of normal people who aren't hardcore fans.

    Not what I'm saying. I'm just pointing out that I think there should be some discretion as to what movies kids go to see.

    And personally speaking, would I let a six-year old watch the Transformers movies uncensored? No. But would I let a 13 year-old watch them. Sure.

    But you have to understand that if two young people date each other when they're teenagers, and one of them is older and becomes an adult as they get older, that absolutely could become an issue for such a couple. The AoE scene, whatever one thinks of it, isn't some perversion. It's a fictional scenario for which real life equivalents could potentially occur for anyone who starts dating someone slightly older or younger as teenagers.

    LoL.

    Some kids are smart enough to deduce things. Many are not. Their perception's often off. Their brains are still developing. Many kids come from families that don't care about their education, intellectual development, or critical thinking skills.

    Which never happens to me, because I ALWAYS BACK UP MY OPINIONS WITH MOUNTAINS OF FUCKING EVIDENCE AND REASONING. Every time. I don't just repeat what other fans think like some NPC; I actually think for myself and go against the groupthink that is common here. I don't care if I'm in the minority opinion; I still stand by what I said, because I don't just make stuff up or lie.

    But you see, that's exactly why there's zero difference between the two in terms of how it fits into the movie. In both cases, the parent figure assumed something fishy was going on, but in neither case was it proven, and in Sam's case it definitely didn't happen. We don't know whether Shane and Tessa are sexually active or not, and it's not really important to the story or character of the couple either way, but Cade, being an overly protective parent still confronts Shane regardless, so Shane provides a "legal defense. Furthermore, they're both issues that could pop up with parents dealing with teenage sons or daughters. If a man's daughter was dating a guy slightly older than her, I can totally see a parent acting as Cade did...and consequently I can see the boy/young man having some sort of defense. Shane isn't a creep necessarily; he's simply a law-abiding citizen who uses the law to protect himself. It's just like an innocent person hiring a defense attorney to protect their freedom and their innocence if falsely accused of a crime. A situation like what happens in AoE could absolutely happen if you have two people who start dating as teenagers, and one of them reaches adulthood before the other.

    If anything, the scene is more meant to show Cade's protectiveness and Tessa's rebelling against her father's strictness. It's not my favorite scene either way, but it is a scene that is hyperbolically blown out of proportion by the fandom, since there were similar scenes in the other movies that are no "better" in terms of being appropriate.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. AustinLucas

    AustinLucas Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2020
    Posts:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    72
    Likes:
    +99
    It didn't say Michael Bay as director
     
  11. electronic456

    electronic456 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Posts:
    5,026
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    282
    Likes:
    +5,313
    I think you can appeal to mature fans. I don't see a strict rule that Transformers should strictly be for families.

    You can either make a TMNT movie that's more adult based based on the old comic books or you can make a TMNT movie based on the kid friendly cartoons.

    You can make a G.I. Joe movie that's as silly as the Sunbow cartoon or you can make one that's in the vein of say G.I. Joe Resolute.

    Now, once again... With the R+J thing, I just see it as poor drama and nothing more, it's not like I have to worry about American law. I mean I still remember the discussion and how that led to Scott Pilgrim.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  12. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,102
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +40,126
    And that changes the fact it's basically got no bearing on any discussion whatsoever how?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. ObakaChanTachi

    ObakaChanTachi woke among sussy soyjak

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2018
    Posts:
    7,190
    News Credits:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Likes:
    +29,610
    I read the whole thing and nothing of it has any bearing to Burnout's post that you quoted. It's an interesting way to branch the Bay and the Knight-verse, though I must admit.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. 12485horto

    12485horto Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    Posts:
    168
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +86
    The Bayformers Movies are Dead extinct we don't need a 6th Film
     
    • Like Like x 4
  15. AustinLucas

    AustinLucas Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2020
    Posts:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    72
    Likes:
    +99
    Thank you
     
  16. TheDude810

    TheDude810 I have an unhealthy obsession with the RotF Game

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2019
    Posts:
    3,281
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +19,354
    Could you say it’s an... Age of Extinction?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Nathanoraptor

    Nathanoraptor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2015
    Posts:
    1,016
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Likes:
    +1,564
    There was nothing stopping AOE from making as much money as the others, both domestically and in all international markets. It had actors (Mark Whalberg, Stanley Tucci, Kelsey Grammer) who were as well-known (and possibly more well-known) as Shia and Megan Fox - also virtually nobody saw the previous films for them.

    Yes, most of the major Autobots and all the major Decepticons were deat - however, the two most popular Autobots (Optimus and Bumblebee) were still there and the fan-favourite Dinobots were thrown in the mix.

    Thirdly, general audiences don't generally tend to care what critics think, too - if they like the look of it, they will see it.

    However, that's not what happened. China aside, AOE underperformed quite substantially both domestically and in several major international markets. Whilst AOE was a success when you consider the worldwide box office, in individual markets, there was a net decrease in box office - a quite severe one too. Yes, it made almost as much as DOTM, but there was a severe downwards trend overall. Domestically, it was beaten by Guardians of the Galaxy, whilst in the major European markets, it lost out to HTTYD 2 and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.

    Conversely, both domestically and internationally, Dawn grossed significantly higher than Rise, its predecessor. Whilst it underperformed moderately in the US, it still made higher than its predecessor - and in pretty much all major international markets, Dawn did better than Rise.

    Obviously different people have different measures of success, but in my view, a film making a little over four times its budget and grossing significantly higher, both domestically and, for the most part internationally, than its predecessor, is more of an accomplishment than a film making five times its budget and being the highest grossing film of its release year, yet seeing a massive decrease in most major markets.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2020
    • Like Like x 5
  18. Galvatross

    Galvatross Dom Dom, Yes Yes Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    7,394
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +10,825
    You have no idea how any of this works at all, especially given it made almost as much as DotM and more worldwide than the first two movies.

    Not to mention DotM itself made less money domestically than RotF. What was stopping it from making as much as RotF domestically? Obviously something(s). And obviously something(s) made AoE not earn as much domestically as DotM. EVERY movie ever made by studios is going to have some sort of limiting factors that will be keep it from making as much as it potentially could. The number of show times and number of theaters showing a movie. The addition or subtraction of characters. Change. Lack of change. And probably many more factors; I'm not here to make a Shrexhaustive list of potential reasons. Either way, obviously there WERE things that kept DotM from making as much as RotF domestically, and kept AoE from making more totalthan DotM.

    :wtf:  This point is absolutely laughable.

    Where is this evidence that "nobody saw the previous films for them?" Another bullshit point made based on absolutely nothing. You literally either made that up, or you parroted other fans who project their opinions onto millions of general audience members.

    If anything, from what I have seen, it's most likely the opposite, at least among American youngsters. Many teenagers and millennials who were introduced to the franchise with the Shia movies associate Transformers with Sam Witwicky and co. Many younger people didn't like it when Fox and Shia were no longer around.

    I'm not saying Sam and Megan are the ONLY reasons people went to the movies. Otherwise, AoE wouldn't have been as successful as it was, but I do think that a large number of younger people who came on during the 2007 movie and RotF latched on to the Sam Witwicky character and perhaps Megan Fox as well, and it's possible that the lack of Fox in DotM lead to its decline domestically compared to RotF, and that the lack of both in AoE lead to its domestic decline as well

    I happen to not care either way (I actually enjoy his absence in AoE), but at least I'm capable of looking past my own preferences and don't project my own opinions onto millions of others.

    You said "fan favorites." You know what most people who go to see the movie are not? Transformers fans who care as much as much about what robots appear as we do.

    I'm not saying they don't want to see cool robots or don't want to see Prime and Bee. I'm just saying that to normal people, the human aspect of a Transformers movie is important

    Again, you state the same damn thing in every post, word-for-word. Please at least paraphrase or something.

    I also love how very few people note how DotM was the film that began the domestic decline.

    Holy crap, you are a broken record with the Apes movies. Did I ever say that wasn't the case?


    The measure of financial success for a movie made by a studio are whether it made a profit and how much of a profit it made. And Age of Extinction making a bigger profit is a bigger financial success than whatever Apes did compared to its predecessor. If you want to keep living in a fantasy world where everything is twisted to fit your feelings, that's fine. But your feelings don't make you "right." Quite the opposite in fact.

    Was Age of Ultron less financially successful than Dawn of Apes, because it made less than the first Avengers? Was Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom less financially successful than Dawn, because it made less than its predecessor? The Last Jedi? No, because all of these movies and the first three Transformers sequels made more money than any of the Apes movies. They were all more financially successful than any of the Apes movies, because they made more money than the Apes movies. Period. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either in denial, is dishonest, or is delusional.

    I'm not saying Apes wasn't a bigger personal success for you, but one's personal enjoyment of a film doesn't translate to it being a bigger financial success when it clearly is not.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  19. 12485horto

    12485horto Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    Posts:
    168
    Trophy Points:
    122
    Likes:
    +86
    Okay? Sorry about that. Didn't mean to refer the Title of the Movie. It's just that i love the Reboot of the Transformers movie ever since the Michael Bay Series ended with the Cliffhanger
     
  20. Nathanoraptor

    Nathanoraptor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2015
    Posts:
    1,016
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Likes:
    +1,564
    Now, this was partly hyperbolic - I do regret putting that down. And, yes, I will admit the absence of returning cast members from the previous films probably did affect the box office for AOE.

    Having said that, however, Mark Whalberg, Stanley Tucci and Kelsey Grammer aren't exactly unknown - pretty much everyone who grew up watching The Simpsons knows who Kelsey Grammer is and Whalberg had been gaining a significant degree of popularity, what with Ted and The Other Guys. In fact, I would say they were bigger draws than Shia and Megan Fox. Yes, people were associating them with the franchise, but

    And perhaps more to the point, the popularity of the franchise should have overruled the change in leads. Was there any negative effect on the box office of Jurassic World simply because Sam Neill, Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern weren't in it? No.

    With TF: Animated and Fall Of Cybertron, the Dinobots (especially Grimlock) had been enjoying a massive popularity increase. It's not like they were totally obscure characters that fans love, but everybody else is unfamiliar with - I would say that the Dinobots would have been a market draw for casual audiences just as much as fans, given that they'd been prominently featured in recent TF media. Also... giant, fire-breathing robot dinosaurs.

    Of course, the human aspect is important, but I do think general audiences attach themselves to the CGI characters more than you would expect - look at the audience response to Caesar, Groot, Rocket Raccoon and Iorek Byrinson (in the BBC/HBO series only).

    To say that general audiences don't care about CGI characters is disingenuous at best.

    The domestic decline between ROTF and DOTM was comparatively tiny (only $40 million less - by contrast, The Dark Knight Rises grossed $90 million less than The Dark Knight) and internationally it did as good as or better than ROTF.

    Did I say (or even imply) that Dawn was a bigger success? No; AOE made more money overall and made a bigger profit. It was the highest grossing film that year and the only billion-dollar grosser that year. I have never denied that AOE was a massive financial success.

    Did I say that, in my view, what Dawn did was more of an accomplishment than AOE? Yes.

    Did Age of Ultron and Fallen Kingdom make less money than their immediate predecessors? Yes. However, Fallen Kingdom is still the second-highest grossing film in the JP franchise. At the time of its release, Age of Ultron was the second-highest grossing MCU film.
     
    • Like Like x 2
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.