No, I don't. Hasbro did no such thing. It was stated quite literally several times by Bay himself that he and GM worked out a deal where GM essentially sponsored the movie and pumped not only vehicles, but also money into it up front for the advertising rights. Remember the huge string of Transformers based GM commercials that centered on the movie's release? This wasn't Hasbro's baby. This was Bay's and the movie company's. Hasbro worked with them, not above them.

Long term memory doesn't seem to be a strong suit in this fandom.

 

Especially when proven, documented fact contradicts people in the fandom's personal agendas.

We get this information every year at BOTCON. Can't get more official than that but yet people seem to forget and ignore it.

 

Let me make this perfectly clear. . .

Let me make the following clear:
1)I'm not bashing GM - Both my Father and I have been in awe of Camaros and Corvettes specifically for years; I just wish that there were a VARIETY of car brands in the film, as that would be more realistic;
2)I'm not bashing Bay - I just don't agree with everything he does, and I, like anyone else HAS THE RIGHT TO DISAGREE;
3)I'm not bashing concept cars - yes, they look cool, and make cool transformers, HOWEVER, let's be real. (The scene where Jazz just happens to land near the Pontiac dealer is pretty convenient writing; I like the Solstice, but, I don't know how much disbelief I can suspend in that particular scene);
4)Even though I have some issues with the films, I still went to see them and still ENJOY them.

Ok.

 

For the record, there are a number of vehicle "Brands" in the film.

Chevrolet
Hummer
Pontiac
GMC
Ford
Peterbilt

Yes, some of those brands fall under one umbrella but they are very different and distinct brands.

 

That is unrealistic because 100% of the movie-going public clearly knows those are all GM models and that the fact that everyone who saw it noticed no japanese cars made people unable to believe the movie when it presented giant transforming robots from space. It was the number one issue in every movie review and the first thing said when walking out of the movie was how the lack of variety of manufacturers made the film totally unbelievable.

 

it does actually look very similar imo. good choice for a TF.

 

i think that's just silly, that someone would let such a small detail such as automobile manufacturers ruin a movie for them. it's unrealistic? i'll tell you what's unrealistic: giant transforming robots from space. i just sorta forgot about the whole GM thing and enjoyed the totally awesome cars, just like a forgot that there are no giant transforming robots from space invading earth. i find that a lot of people give bad reviews to movies that i really enjoy because (and it's NOT because i'm ******ed and think they're "good quality" or "oscar worthy" or whatever...) i just know when to switch my brain off and just enjoy a movie. like Wanted for example.

 

I'm just going to humbly raise my hand and note that I did not know this. In fact, I'm also going to go out on a limb and assume that not everyone knows this, either.

I thought Ford and Peterbuilt were separate companies.

 

I left off my sarcasm tags. Basically no one realized or cared and the perceived lack of variety by a very tiny statistically insignificant few did not impact the believability or enjoyment for the masses.

 

pretty slick~

 

to anyone who doubts that it is possible to make a heavily merchandised movie that features multiple car brands, look no further than Pixar's Cars.

Note on this page how many of the characters are actually identified as specific brands and models of cars, rather than merely resembling them.

Identifying brands as diverse as Porshe, Fiat, Volkswagon, Chevrolet, Ford, Mazda among others.

They did it. They didn't sell out their options for some tacky promotion. All of those were produced as toys, many of which list the brand. The characters were included in books, games, all manner of merchandising. What's the problem with that?

 

Because Porshe and Volkswagon don't want their brands linked with war or violence.

And Pixar is a world know 'good thing' for car companies to be associated with, no 'role' makes you the evil character which potentially hurts your brand and you are not MODIFYING their cars like 'damaging' the hood of the corvette in alt tracks.

It is apples and oranges. If you can't understand why car companies would want to be in Pixar's Cars but have resistance to Paramounts Transformers and the significant differences and issues related to them, I don't know what to tell you.

And every car in Pixar's Cars needed to be explicitly approved by the car makers.

 

Also there was nothing physical that the companies had to provide. Just sign of on their visage. They didn't have to provide actual cars for use on set.

I do understand your point, just not sure it's comparable.

 

my answer to this is that Disney has money up the ying-yang. they probably heat all their buildings with an oven that burns $100 bills exclusively.

 

Just for the record: Barricade in the movie is not a Ford, he's a Saleen Mustang.  
Ford did not want their car to be depicted as a "bad guy". Hence Barricade is a custom-built Mustang by aleen and sports no Ford logos.

Also, Optimus Prime's vehicle mode was very genericized so toys could be made without paying licenses to Peterbilt. He also doesn't sport manufacturer logos in the movie.  

 

disney has so much money they had to buy pixar.

...lol at that

 

... only after their own animated films were loosing massive amounts of money. Around the turn of the millenium they were having massive layoffs every year.

Honestly, I don't think the whole Disney has megabucks, and Paramount is in the poorhouse argument is up to much. Paramount is part of the massive Viacom corporation, and I don't think any movie with Spielberg's name attached ever has all that much trouble attracting finance.

 

That's very interesting, I hadn't realised that about Barricade. But it does go to demonstrate that there are ways of getting around and appeasing the demands of automakers.

 

It's not totally comparable, but combine it with the other example of that Fast and the Furious movie, and I think you can make a fair case for the feasibility of having multiple brands involved. Probably never get VW and Porshe onboard, but you can still have variety.

But you're right, in a movie that involves explosion and car chases, it's clearly an advantage to have a good source for multiple cars. There's clear advantages and disadvantages either way. It depends on your point of view whether that makes it a worthwhile trade-off.

 

If you were to have been asked the question: "If the TFs ALL chose only one car brand as their ALT modes, would you find that believable?" The answer would be no. It requires you to suspend your disbelief to watch the movie. Can it be done. Sure. Can it be done easily? I would say it can depending on how much you noticed the said fact.

But I don't think anyone can argue the fact that having only one car brand is realistic as far as story telling goes.

All it does is point out the fact that some people just don't want to be bombarded with advertisements constantly. And there are people out there who don't like that and won't put up with it. I don't like to be bombarded with pop-up ads when I surf the web. I don't want Facebook to plaster ads all over their webpage. Ask people and they prefer a webpage free of cluttered ads.

Its the same with TF being one huge giant commercial. Its just taking it to an even more extreme. To some of you, it doesn't matter. To others, it does. Its just a matter of where you draw the line.