It was actually written to a young audience, with the intention to sell toys, and it was criticized harshly for it at the time. The writing contained very little depth to appeal to adults, and the gratuitous mass-killing of old characters was literally an on-screen analogy for the clearing of old stock from the toy shelves. It was almost universally panned by critics at the time, and for years it was the target of jokes. It's only in recent years that it has made a resurgence in popularity.

The only difference now is the influence of nostalgia. The animation was nothing revolutionary for the time. The soundtrack was actually pretty obnoxious (but very 80s, which is now cool). The writing was thin and the story pretty weak, despite some big-name voice actors. It was a multi-million dollar toy commercial. It's no better now than it was then, but it's more fun (and more acceptable) to like it now-- especially if you're a 40-something that saw it in the theatre as a kid.

This isn't like a wine that has grown finer with age. This is old fans with dull taste buds, who don't care that they're drinking vinegar.

 

We're going to have to agree to disagree with most of your analysis there. I think Toei knocked it out of the park with that animation, and Vince Dicola's score was and is still great. I also think it's fine to hate the movie, but I still will give credit where it's due. An overblown toy commercial, sure, but still the best looking and most kick butt toy commercial you'll ever see.

 

No, that would be the G.I. Joe movie.

 

I completely respect your opinion, but I was there during the first week it debuted, and was well-versed in the animation of the day. It wasn't an impressive effort, from my perspective. There were Saturday morning regulars that were far superior with regards to writing and story, and better dialogue even in some of the English-dubbed Japanese cartoons. The art itself was fine, but nothing earth-shattering.

I'm sure the internet is full of critic's remarks from back in '86, and I don't imagine they were kind to it. I was a huge TF fan back in the day, and I know both within my peer group and the media, it was almost universally panned. That doesn't mean you or anyone else can't like it, but nor does 35 years transform it into anything more than a piece of pop culture.

 

While I enjoy the '86 movie, I must agree with this. I think this is a pretty spot-on analysis. I don't see how the '86 movie is intended for adults at all. Sure it's surprisingly violent for a kids' film (at least by modern standards, a lot of kids' films were edgy in the '80s), but it's clearly made to sell toys. It essentially rips the entire plot and all the character archetypes from Star Wars (but does them with less charm and charisma). I've always said it's a fun adventure romp, but not a technically great film. I think you have to watch it through a fairly specific lens to fully enjoy it...you have to understand the larger context surrounding it. I'd consider it more of a guilty pleasure than a movie I legitimately adore. I'd actually argue at least the first Bay film is technically better (and I'd argue Bumblebee is in an entirely different league).

Although I do think the Vince DiCola soundtrack is legitimately good, I'll give it credit there. It's not a masterpiece, but I find myself humming "Escape" more than I even find myself humming Jablonsky's pieces (not saying they're technically better compositions...I don't know music well enough to make that call...just saying I personally find DiCola's work a lot more memorable). I also think The Touch and Dare are legitimately nice-sounding songs, and aren't obnoxious like some of the others (especially Instruments of Destruction...I never listen to that song outside of the context of the movie). I think there's a reason The Touch (and Dare to a lesser extent) has become one of the more iconic things in the brand.

I'm just now realizing that I essentially feel the same way about TFTM and Cars 2. I find them both to be guilty pleasures that aren't technically great, but are lots of fun and have great soundtracks that go a long way in propping them up.

 

That was a much better analysis than I gave it, not just for the details, but for making it clear that bad movies don’t have to be unenjoyable. That’s an important distinction that I didn’t clearly make, but which I believe. Conversely, just because you like a movie doesn’t mean it’s good.

 

yeah I should’ve been clearer, it’s not really abt plot specifics or whatever, I meant the animation style/character designs .... just seeing it presented in that format, but new, would cause instant drool face and I know I’m not alone ... there’s a reason ‘Geewun’ is a thing, why TT is currently obsessed with ‘toon fidelity’ ... we are legion!  

 

Ah. I’m a G1 fan, but I don’t kneel at the altar of the cartoon, which was compromised by design and inconsistent in practice. And I don’t see the point of a movie that looks good but lacks substance. To each his/her own, though. We all have different motivations for being here!

 

Ayy I dig this, I like that they're hiring story telling directors for the franchise now. Creed 2 was solid, if nothing super exceptional! Although I would have liked more Travis Knight, I think his work in claymation helped him understand the animation needed to make the CGI robots feel heavy and real.

Bumblebee I felt had more presence and impact on his environment than a lot of Optimus scenes in the Bay movies.

 

The next movie needs to have a real Unicron story in it.

 

You can't just throw in Unicron without any build-up, that's how you get shit like the 1986 movie and The Last Knight.

 

The 1986 did have build up, in a sense, which gave the deaths of the original cast some real impact. Sure, Unicron himself didn’t have any build up, but his sudden appearance worked because of how he was introduced.

The Last Knight, on the other hand, just tried to shoehorn him into a poorly structured set of stories without any regard for the established story.

 

But it didn't work, though. Unicron just shows up out of nowhere and the only character who interacts with him is Galvatron. He was just shoehorned into the narrative so Hot Rod can be the Chosen One.

 

In fairness, characters showing up out of nowhere was pretty standard G1 storytelling.

 

No it doesn't. In fact we don't need Unicron ever again.

 

Honest to god, all I want from the next movie is for the Transformers to not act like they're asleep or unable to communicate in alt. mode.

 

Yes we do. Unicron is one of the best. His story in the last TF movie was a let down. They need to complete it.

Yes they can. And need to.

 

If this movie is a continuation of what came before, I am out.

 

No, they don't. Eventually you'll get to the next stage of grief...

 

 I wish Steven Caple Jr. the best of luck but I would hate to see him succeed but I would hate to see him succeed without the director of Bumblebee but I would hate to see him succeed without the director of Bumblebee Travis Knight watching his back.