The only difference is one was a cheap cartoon to sell toys and the other was a multi-million production aimed at the mainstream.
Remember back in 2009 there was a lot of crap on TV because of the writers strikes going on back then (it’s why TV was flooded with terrible reality shows, they didn’t need writers). Added to the economic recession, and ROTF was always going to fighting an uphill battle. It’s never a good sign when a movie starts filming before a script is finalized.
That's an explanation, but not an excuse. I mean, you have a sequence where Jetfire walks out of a building clearly situated on the Atlantic seaboard, reinforced by a laser pointer at a map and then again in an overhead shot, and then suddenly they're in the middle of Arizona surrounded by partially dismantled jet planes with the building they just left nowhere in sight. And then you have that stupid railgun, which was able to aim at the Great Pyramids from a body of water by line-of-sight...even though the nearest body of water to the pyramids is 400 miles away. For comparison, the main guns on the Yamoto, the largest battleship ever built, had a range of 25 miles, and the ship also had a flotilla of 7 floatplanes on board dedicated to aiming the damn things because even on the relatively level surface of the ocean, you can not see past 25 miles due to the curvature of the Earth itself. And there was excellent stuff during that strike, too. Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog anybody?
From a critical and analytic perspective, there has never been a “good” Transformers movie, but TLK was the worst in the sense that it was both a) an incredibly bad film b) unlike previous incredibly bad films, massive financial loss. Every single Transformers movie has been geared towards raking in summer blockbuster money (other than Bumblebee) and, basically, selling toys. These aren’t films you go into expecting a good plot, a lack of MacGuffins, or deep characters. Sorry. It hasn’t happened yet, and it probably won’t happen soon. All of the Bay films, with the exception of TLK, were still relatively successful. The only 2 flops in the franchise’s history are ’86 and TLK. TLK killed the bayverse, costing paramount a whopping 100M in losses, and while TFTM is a cult classic, it was also a financial loss, and contemporary reviewers did not think well of it. Asking some parts of this fandom, your would think it to be a masterpiece, but it’s really just the cool robot movie from their childhood that they love. And that’s totally ok. For me, that’s 2007. Also, since someone mentioned Bumblebee: I really don’t think it’s fair to call Bumblebee a bad movie because it seemed to depart from the general trend of most Transformers media. Yes, it may have been felt different from what this fandom is used to. But I don’t think that makes it a bad movie at all, it’s just Hasbro trying to aim to expand the audience, which I think is healthy and good for the franchise. That movie happened to also be: 1) Positively Received 2) Nominated for a Razzie Redeemer 3) A box office success So even if it was a “teen girl drama”, at least it was a refreshing take on the franchise, that I can actually show to people outside this fandom without them being bored my mindless exposition, horrible comedy, and a lack of any emotional weight. 2007 is the only other Transformers film I’d ever consider showing a non-TF fan.
How much money they made with all the other movies again? TLK was paid for before it even began filming.
I’m pretty sure the budget for 86 was 6 million, but details are kind of scarce. Again, not really sure how movie accounting works. But my extremely light foray into research said every other film drew a profit, except TLK and the 86 movie.
It really wasn't if you go by the usual rule of thumb for measuring movie success vs how much it actually cost. You have to double the budget outright to account for marketing, and then all the executives take their cut, so a film like Age of Extinction would have actually returned a lot less than 1.1 Billion dollars at the end of the day. TLK roughly cost at least $210 Million...but it was confirmed to have lost $100 million despite actually having a box office of $650 million. Even doubling TLK's budget to $420 million, that still leaves $230 million difference, more than the original minimum budget estimate in the first place. Where did that money even go if TLK was, as confirmed, a massive flop that nearly bankrupted Paramount to the point they literally only finished Bumblebee instead of outright canceling it because they couldn't lose the investment already put into it.
So that's why all Transformers movie's were scrapped, Paramount almost went under, the entire Transformers movie franchise continuing has been in question, Bumblebee being reshot as to lean more as a reboot and the even larger lean to G1 since then. Didn't loss a penny. You know the money from the previous films don't just sit there right?
...but it did. Did you miss the part where I said TLK lost $100 million at the box office? In order for a film to be profitable, the rule of thumb is that it must make 2.5 times its budget, which includes the doubled up value for the marketing. TLK needed to make 1.2 billion to turn a profit. It made barely half that. We are talking in sums of money so significant I actually don't think you quite understand the numbers at play here. Had TLK done any worse and/or Bumblebee failed at the box office, Paramount would have gone bankrupt. I wouldn't call that 'mission accomplished' in so much as 'narrowly avoiding corporate dissolution'.
Like they can't produce movies anymore? This is like the kazillionth time you say this around the movie forums. They lost money; but come on man... With Disney having a lot of movies flop for them; you really think they're a company that's gone?
Wow, you couldn't even do five minutes of searching the forums to see that I'm not the one who originally said this no matter how many times you attack me for it. It was SilverOptimus. Lorenzo and Hodson Discuss Prequel or Reboot And I'm pretty certain SilverOptimus has a better handle on what went down because of TLK far more than you, so if you want to question the validity of that, then take it up with him. I'm just the messenger.
He's a great news guy for a fan site but as soon I read this.... It's only an opinion he's stating. Calm down, Paramount isn't going to be a legacy company just because a franchise movie series fell apart. I never compared myself to him and you certainly don't have a better handle on this either. You're right, you're just a messenger. Like me, we both earn news credits if we can get them.
Wait, do you think that I said Paramount was going bankrupt now? I never said anything of the sort. I said had TLK done worse and/or Bumblebee failed to be profitable, Paramount would be facing bankruptcy. As we all know, that never happened, so what I was saying was purely hypothetical. But you're insane if you could see the absolute panic state Paramount was in following TLK shitting the bed, going so far as massive executive shuffling across the board and Bumblebee being refocused and having six months of reshoots simply to nudge it away from being a 100% Bayverse prequel...and not think that Paramount was on the verge of financial disaster. Furthermore, bankruptcy does not mean the company simply ceases to exist automatically, there's two different kinds: Chapter 7 and Chapter 11. Chapter 7 is the one where upon filing, the company ceases to exist and all assets sold off to repay the debt. Chapter 11, which is far more likely to have been what Paramount would have filed, is the reorganization bankruptcy where bankruptcy is declared more as debt protection and the bankrupt party works with creditors to establish a repayment plan to avoid Chapter 7. However, given what happened even with Paramount narrowly avoiding bankruptcy anyway, the idea the same Paramount would emerge from Chapter 11 is unlikely. @SilverOptimus could you please shed some light on the subject, if you can, because I feel like you're the only one who can definitively say if Paramount nearly went bankrupt at this point.
No doubt. Unless clarity isn’t a strength of yours. Even if Bumblebee failed, that’s still not enough for bankruptcy considering there’s other films. And now what you said was hypothetical??? What a turn. What is this insanity are you talking about? Me looking at things differently despite what we both know as factual? Are Chapter 7 or Chapter 11 bankruptcy laws in America? Please educate all of us on this. EDIT: Or I could look up this law myself despite the fact I'm too lazy to do research. Show me some statistics for the last part also. Or just ask Paramount executives. I’m pretty sure it’s going to be more of an analysis.
If we’re going to argue financial stuff, keep it light here and go into detail in another thread, please. What is the worst transformers movie, that is the question.
Apologies. It's TLK for me, for sure. I just disagree with what I perceive to be a hyperbolic interpretation of the movie's loss.
