You make a movie with no profit in mind? No wonder a lot of them are tanking   even before the beerbug. And the OP said he wanted one focused on a solo character, unless this exposition is a pitch for another (fill in the blank TF) movie which was already done........

 

How does a movie that isn't designed to sell products equal a lack of profit?

Do you go to a movie because you like watching a two hour commercial? Do you refuse to watch movies that aren't advertisements? Or do you go to see them because they are entertaining works unto themselves?

 

Also true. Like, what's the actual point of filming on the locations if you can make a serviceable replica for a fraction of the cost and the end effect is worthless? These are the same people who straight up hand-waved away blatant geographical impossibilities (like the Arizona Boneyard somehow existing next to the Udvar Hazy center, when the film itself has an aerial shot of the latter showing there is no boneyard right next to it.

Of course, that also does suggest Paramount somehow would have figured out a way to do part of DOTM on the actual Chernobyl site if it wasn't, y'know, horribly radioactive.

 

How do you get the funding for a movie if it isn't meant to profit? Money doesn't grow on trees. Heck, ever noticed how a lot have so much product endorsements? Indy films? The type that get the Oscars given the current situation may now be a thing of the past. Either it earns or it remains in development hell.

Btw, a great example would have been the George Lucas Prequel and Main trilogy. Sure Lucas wanted to tell a story. But he was a wise businessman to franchise his products. The moolah he earned help bankroll his projects.

 

He hasn’t gotten a movie since 2008 and we all know it.

 

I'd be down for it. The Marvel films I think have demonstrated that this idea could work, as one compliment that I've seen Marvel movies like the Avengers receive over DC films, is something along the lines of of the characters not needing too much characterization because the said characters received films centered around them that helped establish who their characters are (I.E. the Iron Man, Thor, and Spider-Man movies to name a few), while DC tries to force everything into one film (I.E. Suicide Squad and Justice League, which a criticism I've seen them receive is over character development). Since I'm not too much in tune with Marvel or DC Films, I could be very off about what I say here. What I say here is based on what I've observed elsewhere, so I ask that you take what I say with a spoonful of salt.

 

The only other Transformer audiences would sit through 90+ minutes to watch him emote and kick ass is Optimus Prime. But, I think most would say it would be a retread of Age of Extinction.

It might be kind of fun to do a PG-13 horror movie using Ravage. A kid brings home a robot cat that he falls in love with and it starts murdering people because his parents work for a company that helps the Autobots. Things get even more intense as various Decepticons start to show up disguised as everyday objects, Nobody believes him at first and he wants to protect Ravage...but when things get to the worst moment, the Autobots arrive and turn his neighborhood into a battleground. They save the day but you end up with a Terry Gilliam style ending where the house is in smoldering ruins and the kid is pretty much the only person left standing after the Autobots leave.

 

Like it or not, this is pretty much the truth. It's easy to picture a Transformers Cinematic Universe like Marvel, where all the characters get developed separately in their own spinoffs. But the sad truth is that most audience members couldn't care less about "Ratchet's Medical Drama" or "Ironhide: The Movie". Even if those characters have name recognition, it's probably not enough to bring in a huge profit.

I do think there are a few things that could work, if done right. I could see a Jazz movie working if they paired him with a popular black actor and used the movie to deliver some relevant social commentary. Or I could see that "Operation Skyfire" movie working. Not because people care about Skyfire/Jetfire, but because the concept of Transformers in World War 2 could sell tickets. I think character spinoffs would have to focus on a unique/relevant concept rather than the characters themselves (as sad as it is to say).

 

I want to see a ratchet and wheeljack buddy film where ratchet is the neat freak medic (Basically TFP ratchet) and wheeljack is the messy and crazy scientist ( g1 with a bit of his TFP version sprinkled in) and they learn to work together against lockdown or something like that

 

That is so unbelievably evil.

I love it.

 

You mean Lucas? He sold off LUcasfilm for $4B something.

 

Man, that would be so much fun. Or a police thriller with Ironhide and Prowl.

 

You keep coming from this idea that “wanting to tell a good story means a movie cannot profit.” Movies usually profit because they tell good stories. Plenty of movies are huge successes without any sort of product line to suspend them. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

 

To answer the question if audiences would see a Transformers movie based on one specific character, I’d say yes and no but leaning towards no. Ever since the live action movies came out I’d say that the more casual movie goers only know about Bumblebee and Optimus Prime. So unless you are one of those guys no one is coming to see a Sideswipe solo movie