Discussion in 'Transformers News and Rumors' started by Liselotte, Oct 1, 2009.
GUYS!!!, for the last time the world is not ending in 2012
Good news as far as I am concerned. I was worried I'd be the only eccentric 60 year old lady in line for the first show! now I'll only be 59!
HOLY MOTHERFU**ING JESUS CHRIST ON A POGO STICK IN A CANOE WHILE IN A LAKE FULL OF BAYSPLOSIONS......
DUDE!!!for the last time they are being sarcastic!
Eh....the 2012 myth is a bit played out...and considered talk of religion.
Besides the fact, Transformers coming out sooner may just be a good idea anyways, Bay has his cast in full affect..
I'm actually wishing my lucky stars for scavenger to come back...or Demolisher which ever you prefer.... I mean he just tore apart those city streets with ease.
So... I can't really go through and read everything posted here, so whatever I say may have been said.
Personally, I've had a lot of fun seeing the movies. Now with the news of this one coming out in 2011... are most movies release dates decided before a script is made? I know Orci and Kurtzman can bang out a script in a month, which is probably what Paramount is banking on, but as we've seen the problem with this is a plot with holes and a history that comes off as incomplete and ill thought out. ROTF made a shit load of money, and not only does that mean profit, but it also means that this story is reaching out to a LOT of people. Paramount, Steven Speilberg, and whoever ends up writing this one, really should understand that a nice, complete and interesting script should be well developed before they choose a release date. I'm not even asking for a life changing kind of story, but one without holes and flows well would be all I want.
I really did enjoy the first two movies, but yes, the movie franchise itself is wearing thin, and if there is only going to be 3, I would really like it to end on a high note. Rushing the movie out just won't help.
the Burton films took themselves serious? What about all the penguin commandos, the Joker dancing to Prince, a deformed sewer mutant running for mayor? Thank god for those films.
I think Batman Forever was welcomed because it was seen as a return of the more colourful elements of the Adam West show, while retaining much of the sleek dynamism introduced by the Burton films.
It's absolutely no surprise to me that Transformers rates alongside those mega-franchises and above the more middling geek movies. It's a very simple, unique concept, and there's just nothing like it. It's very accessible, even to the uninitiated; the name tells you all you need to know.
To me it was a no-brainer, shoe-in blockbuster. And when Spielberg is attached to such a film, it's guaranteed the best possible opportunity to realise that potential.
Ironman, now there was a film that succeeded despite it's premise. I don't recall the character achieving any great popularity prior to the movie. Just seemed like a bit player in the Marvel universe. Kinda dated even. What set the movie apart from films like Daredevil and Punisher was it tapped into something. It had a charismatic central performance, and an unexpected relevance to the geopolitical situation.
i think all the "Produced by Marvel Studios" films have a much better chance at success, thanks to their care about 'doing them right' (as they did with Iron Man) and getting solid actors and directors rather than big names ~ i wouldn't hedge my bets against them until Thor comes out. Word is, starting with Iron Man 2 they will be branding the films with "Avengers Assemble" building up to The Avengers. If they can keep the momentum from Iron Man rolling, i think they have a really good shot at it.
..and hopefully with Disney's $$$ they can start reclaiming properties other studios ruined like Fantastic Four...
omfg your hillarious
Took care of that one for ya.
I don't know Ironman did have cartoon series and things like that. The music there at the end that was from one of the cartoon series. He was pretty popular with comic book fans because the issues with the drinking problems were pretty big stuff for a comic book character at the time.
Plus the premise isn't bad. High tech armor, that's just cool.
Like Transformers somethings just work because it's a cool concept that can be turned into cool toys. Really looking forward to the 4" line of Iron Man figures that are going to hit with the movie.
HA! This just means I'll have until 2012 to buy other things besides ugly Transformers with no personality. Good riddance.
Yeah, I remember seeing a few reruns of the cartoon as a kid. Kitschy theme song, but the show was just comic tracings with limited animation. It just seemed kinda lame. The way they drew the armor didn't make much sense to me.
Batman and Superman and The Hulk and Spiderman each had a bunch of hit shows that got a lot more airplay, a lot more visibility to the general public. The sixties Batman show replayed for decades. Ironman had a presence too, but you kinda had to be into that world already to really pay much attention.
Transformers brings a unique visual concept that lends itself to the kind of cinematic spectacle that's going to sell tickets whether the film is much good or not. Ironman isn't all that different from the green goblin suit of the Spiderman movie, or various futuristic suits seen in other movies. I think if it hadn't been such a good movie its success would've been more to the scale of Fantastic 4 or Daredevil. The Transformers movie had the benefit of something new that hadn't really been seen in movies before.
It'd be cool if they tied in a Gi-joe cameo or made a section of the movie WWII based with an evil Decepticon pulling Hitler's strings ( a robot Red Skull basically) Could use more of the US studying Megatron's parts to explain their sudden proficiency with the Atomic Bomb system. Decepticons could be the next group of terrorists, working for people who want to do the US government damage by stealing or taking over our resources ( G1 anyone?) If its grounded in history or reality its more believable..even though covering a star killing weapon in a pyramid is clever they can do better.
Do not really care about the new movie. I have watched the two first ones, and both of the them were huge disappointments. To much human stories. To little transformers stories. And barely any planet Cybertron. ROTF gave me the impression of watching a big expencive cheap cartoon. So for the story of the third movie, i do not think i really care.
What i do care about or have interest in, is what known transformers characters will get the movie treatment this time. I am curious to see what Shockwave, Laserbeak and Ultra Magnus would look like in the movie-universe, and maybe Unicron. Time will tell who i going to be included this time and what they will look like. I may not like what i will see, but maybe something interesting will appear. Who Knows?
Good thing to know if 2012 is really the end world, TF3 had nothing to do with it.
but seriously I hope Unicron isn't forced into it.I want a second trilogy to have unicron in it.
(no really i'm serious.)
Ummm.... Most of those movies made tons of money. GI Joe has doubled it's money (And was FAR better than the TF movies.) Fantastic Four 1 & 2 both made money, Daredevil: Director's Cut made tons on DVD, Batman Forever is considered the best of the 90's Batman movies, and if it weren't for Blade making TONS for New Line, Fox wouldn't have ever risked making X-Men. Sure Catwoman, Ghostrider, Electra, and Watchmen sucked, but far more succeed than fail. Also remember that a movie's box office generally accounts for only 1/3 of a movie's gross profit. retail sales and broadcast continually make money for the studio LONG after the film leaves theaters. Even the American "Godzilla," Superman III, and Ang Lee's Hulk have made TONS of money thanks to broadcast and DVD sales.
So sorry, geek movies make TONS of money, with VERY few exceptions.
I just remember the reviews, way back then, of people praising it for not being so serious, after all, it is based on a "silly comic book"...
Nah, Nazis in comicbook films just cause trouble. Remember the pissed off Jewish groups claiming X-Men was offensive because Magneto was taken to a concentration camp (Nevermind the fact that more Christians, eastern europeans, gays, and the handicapped were killed in the camps than jews).
If anything, Transformers needs to drop the stupid "Look at me, I'm cool" crap and be an entertaining movie. Hasbro needs to get the team that made GI Joe to talk with the dough-head Michael Bay and show him how REAL summer action flicks are made.
This news will be the end of this forum...
Sorry, but those "facts" are dreadfully skewed. Big budget movies breaking even or eventually making profit after factoring in associated toy & DVD sales are not considered 'successes' in the same way, and it's the box office totals that ultimately make or break a movie with VERY few exceptions. Blade did well enough (for an R rated movie) to justify sequels, but they were barely blips on the public radar. Daredevil supposedly selling well as a DVD? Fair enough, but it didn't change the fact that you couldn't pay people to go see it in a theater. The first Hulk movie might have made it's money back, but by all accounts, it was considered a MASSIVE flop... which is exactly why they tried to relaunch it a year or two ago. And I'm not sure what website you're getting your info from, but Batman Forever was one of the most ripped apart & panned movies of the entire original franchise... until Batman & Robin showed up to officially kill it off. G.I. Joe might have made its money back and even grabbed some profit, but it's already forgotten and I will guarantee that if they make another one, it will be drastically different (ie: another relaunch attempt).
So, sorry, even if some 'geek' movies manage to break even, hit 'cult' status on DVD a year or two later, or generate profit after adding up the combined totals of box office, DVD sales & merch, it's VERY rare that they ever hit the success levels out of the starting gate of TF, Iron Man, X-Men and all the other ones that people actually DO remember did. Contrary to Comic Cons where everyone is living in their own "my fandom is the best!" bubbles, and despite Hollywood continuing to make these movies, it's not a sign of capitalizing on previous successes - it's basic movie production 101 of throwing enough shit at the wall to see what sticks.
To be fair, obviously there IS a market for these movies... which is why they keep making & remaking them. Understood. And it's not to say that the movies that don't make tons of money aren't any good (I happened to love X3, the Blade trilogy, the two Hellboy movies and several others that got slammed). But back to the original point of my post which seemed to ruffle a few feathers, there's also the stark reality of what is & isn't competition for the big boys. TF3 vs. Thor or Captain America potentially opening in the same month of 2011? It's not even going to be a contest, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if those "other" movies get pushed to alternate release dates since they know they'll get killed. No different than how no one tried to compete with the LOTR, Pirates, Spider-Man, etc etc etc. sequels. But trust me, if the world flips upside down and, of all things, the Thor and/or Captain America movies somehow end up being undeniable massive blockbuster successes, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong.
Separate names with a comma.