Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by coxy, Oct 20, 2010.
It is for the casual fans is my point. That's the majority of the moviegoers to the TF films.
Meh. I understand the need for comedy in summy action movies, but Bay's idea of comedy isn't just insulting to the franchise, it's insulting to the audiences. My kids still aren't allowed to see ROTF.
Yeah. More robots farting and pissing. Sounds wonderful.
On the other hand, Mr. Bay, maybe these movies could have been taken a bit more seriously.
PLEASE be GOOD comedy and not immature.......
I don't usually get into movie hype, but this is disturbing. I thought TF1 was sub par but not "blow my brains out ******ed" like TF 2 was. The "humor" in TF 2 was more groan inducing than laugh inducing. I'm not some humor snob either, I grew up watching Ren & Stimpy, and Beavis & Butt-Head, some of my favorite movies are Airplane and Kentucky Fried Movie. I know this is a kids movie, but so was Shrek and Shrek was funny for both kids and adults. As for G1 being corny and stuff, sure it was, but it was a low budget kids cartoon, not a multi-million dollar blockbuster, and to top it all off, the corny aspects were very limited. TF 2 seemed to want to be a bad comedy first that just happened to have robots thrown in later. Also, as someone else mentioned, these movies are nothing like G1.
The other thing I worry about is TF3 being in 3D. A lot of times movies that say they are 3D just means they are shown in 3D not shot in 3D. I know the article mentions how the new cameras are heaver and all that, but it wouldn't be the first time Bay and CO. have lied about something.The problem with converting regular film to 3D is that the process darkens the movie, and in the case of movies that are dark already, they become unwatchable. Good examples of this is The Last Airbender and Clash of the Titans.
I honestly don't think I'll be seeing TF 3, I just have the feeling that it's gonna be horrible.
I'm gonna have to agree to some extent. But, more-so in regards to the first movie. I thought TF1 was pitch-perfect. I couldn't have asked for a better origin-story movie. The comedy was mostly funny and well-balanced, the story was well-written and solid and brought new things to the table as far as TF mythos was concerned, the CGI was amazing, and the action was breathtaking. The stakes were pretty high.
But ROTF, while I was able to enjoy certain aspects of it, dropped the ball in several areas, and it was very noticable. I don't think it was god-awful or a disgrace to the Transformers franchise, but it was a pretty big letdown (especially after having read the treatment that Ehren Kruger had written). Sure, it made a lot of money, but so does Li'l Wayne, Twilight, and a lot of other mediocre bull-crap. So, that's not really a very sound arguement.
Transformers does have the capacity to have an intricate plot and be somewhat intelligent. The comics have proved that. Just because it's based off of an '80s cartoon that's meant to advertise toys to little kids doesn't mean it has to be simple and brainless. All of the components for a captivating story are present. They just have to be utilized properly. Again, I believe TF1 is a testament to that.
But, anyhoo, I have no problem with humor being in TF3, as long as it's not crude or idiotic this time. *glares harshly at ROTF*
How do ya figure, sports-fan?
Wait a minute. I thought that TF3 was suppose to be more darker than the first two. If TF3 is going to be silly, then Michael Bay and the producers of this film have FAILED!
I agree, public opinion is important to a box office. But do you remmber the DVD sales? 7.5 million units sold, beating out everyone. Blu-Ray had the best first week out of all the Blu Ray copies of 2009, selling 1.2 million units.
Apparently several people liked the film.
Also, to refute that arguement:
Star Wars: Episode II was considered mediocre by a lot of people and grossed $310 million domestically.
Star Wars: Episode III grossed $380 million three years later...
What does the money it made have to do with my point? Weak argument for "quality" anyway. I bet we could find a huge list of money making movies you aren't happy with. Or...do you actually feel every film that's turned a profit is without flaw?
There are people that agree with my viewpoints as well. That's all beside the point. Of course people will disagree, it's largely up to personal opinion (and thus the only thing that matters is how I feel, and for you, how you feel, so why are we bitching about it on the internet anyway?), but of course the stakes are higher to keep a consistent and focused tone in a major motion picture vs. a low budget 80s cartoon. Lulzy-comedy bullshit thrown in for no reason than cheap laughs that make the overall vibe of the movie a mess is hardly a necessity. Try harder. Strive for more. Don't try to cover your thin, convoluted plot with gags. The goofy crap may have worked for some people, but eh, does that mean the movie couldn't have been more effective with less of it? Of course not. Also, just because you or several other million people liked it doesn't mean I'm wrong (or anyone that agrees with me, and there are plenty of those too - who cares) to feel that less focus on cheap laughs could've left more time for a more honed story, perhaps more easily allowing many of us to enjoy it as an actual story than having to accept it as a throw-away, goofy ass ride. It's not too much to ask. Forgive me for loving the Transformers franchise enough to see it taken a little seriously.
Something I forgot to bring up is that before the first film came out - Bay trashed the original cartoon and mentioned how much more mature (he meant "better") his version of Transformers is. Look how that turned out. I followed all the news and after talk like that...of course I was turned off by how off-base that was.
And I KNOW you weren't talking about plot holes but I was just pointing out that people say AHAHA G1 SUCKED SO YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE MOVIES all the time for various reasons and it's a ridiculously unfair comparison. Thaaat was my primary point.
More like a total pain in the ass! lol
Now I know why the title is dark of the moon. We will all howl in agony at the racist dumb butt "comedy."
why more comedy if bay wants a comedy then do a comedy don't put it in a serious sci-fi film it takes away from the emotion of a dark film. this is horrible news. a little is ok but even rotf had too much.
Cash cow =/= quality offering
I firmly believe the movies would have picked up just as much money had they been as intelligently written as, say, Last Stand of the Wreckers. They'd probably have ended up being praised by the critics, too. Icing on the cake.
Hopefully less to no humping scenes... blleeeegghh...
I'm not saying profit = great movies all of the time. What it does mean is that a lot of people see it, probably multiple times. So people like it, but it doesn't mean it's earth shattering or ground breaking material.
Either way I'm still struggling to understand your original point that there were high stakes involved? The only high stake for the studio is turning a profit and both of the first two films did that admirably.
Yeah even though they said they were going to take things more seriously, I believe that to a point, but I had a feeling that this was going to happen, mainly because the two head writers from the first two werent coming back, I sure as hell dont mind more comedy just as long as its not trashy adult comedy, and if it is here we go again with the whole "oh dont take your kids to see this"...."but wait its supposed to be a serious movie"...."but those racist robots really offended me.."......."but yeah due to this this is why the story suffered.." and it will pretty much spiral down from there. But I could be wrong because the things I have been seeing have been pretty cool
Maybe you're caught up in how I'm expressing it - all I mean is that I'd think the expectations for a movie with tons of money behind it would be higher than those for a cheap old cartoon. I don't feel like a horrible person because I feel that way. Sure, there are many people like the films the way they are, but eh, that doesn't mean it's the only way they could've been done.
I just feel anything that forgives common issues with the films just because the old cartoon wasn't perfect either is a little warped as they're very different things (and by now the franchise has proven able to cater to story over silliness, even if it still isn't the utmost in enthralling fiction) and it feels obvious one should give higher expectations and be held to a higher standard than the other.
I have no issue with you or anyone liking the films, but there are certain arguments "for them" that feel off enough to make me want to bitch about it. This is one.
the reality of the world is greatness is often not appreciated in its own life time.
Basically Transformers could be a way WAY better film franchise if it had depth but because it was bays name on TF1 they are afraid to upset the apple cart even though TF2 was a critical bomb. People who liked the last film lined up en masse to see part 2 so after the garbage that was tf2 story wise lets see if the visual feast will be enough to carry tf3.
Hell if it actually has a good story and no stupid potty humor that makes no sense then maybe ill even like it
Separate names with a comma.