Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by decepticon seeker, Feb 15, 2020.
My mistake. Thanks-agreed.
That I agree (the person whom you aimed that comment at) - almost every piece of Transformers media has positive and negative qualities. For some the latter may outweigh the former and for some vice versa; however, no one series should be deified or demonised. It's all a matter of personal taste.
Except Energon. That shit sucked both donkey dick and donkey balls... and maybe licked donkey arse for good measure.
BTW, my personal view on the OP's original question is that it shouldn't be why so many people want a sixth outing from the Bayverse, it's why did we not get a sixth outing from the Bayverse? Basically the circumstances that led to TLK bombing.
I believe I have articulated my views as to why above.
Even Energon wasn't without its merits, as fleeting as they were in the grand scheme of it.
It began strongly enough, with a lot of mature themes and ideas brought to the forefront. It was probably the first Transformers series to tackle the idea of post-war reconciliation between the Autobots and Decepticons, long before it was brought up in IDW's Robots in Disguise title. It gave strong points of view to the rehabilitated Decepticons that intelligently questioned their divided loyalties. It actually made a big deal about human/Transformer co-development. Kicker's position in the series was actually interesting from a narrative point of view, because he was a point-of-view character who actively hated the Autobots, and resented them for screwing up his life (in conjunction with his Dad's wanton disregard for his mental health). Unfortunately, the series distracted from all the meaty stuff with obnoxious voice acting and sub-par dialog writing. And then it was all for nothing, because apparently someone high-up decided that all that juicy stuff was too heady for the show's target audience, and it was summarily dropped. All of the interesting Decepticon characters got brainwashed and replaced with goofy, over-gimmicky Megatron sycophants, and Kicker became a team-player overnight. The animator's enthusiasm also dropped off, because even with how mediocre it was over all, there were at least some very dynamically-directed sequences that hinted at competence in the first half (Hot Shot's entrance onto the battlefield in the first episode, and Shockblast's prison breakout come to mind), plus a number of those gorgeous hand-animated shots. That all vanished towards the back half of the series, where it devolved into pure stock-footage firefights and generic space barrages.
Agreed! That scene was awesome!
Very well put, especially in regards to Energon's strong points.
It's almost like, and bare with me here, that a lot of the people who perpetuate that Energon is the worst thing ever didn't actually watch it in the first place and are just parroting a popular opinion from the fandom rather than thinking for themselves!
Sort of like how there are those that will try to honestly argue the Star Wars prequels are still somehow worse than the atrocious Disney films.
I'm not sure I'd go that far, Energon's great setup bits were a very fleeting part of its overall runtime. I feel like all the Decepticons got mind-wiped by around the 13 episode mark, and then any semblance of a plot whatsoever died out around the halfway point. To say it had no interesting or redeeming qualities whatsoever, yes, that's jumping on the hate-wagon. But that doesn't mean it's a particularly watchable show, either.
Unpopular Opinion: I thought the mind wipe of the ressurected Decepticons was a good idea. It makes Megatron appear unwilling to let go of his troops, by making his resurrected soldiers fully loyal to him and shadow of themselves. I'm reminded of Megatron's fantasy near the end of Armada when he was being absorbed by Unicron, with his Decepticons cheering for Megatron's victory, with a still alive Starscream.
He did appear broken up by Demolishor's "death", when he held his spark.
Megatron brainwashing his troops is perfectly in character for him, it just needed to be played for horror. He basically murdered them by doing that.
As an interesting digression, Transformers: The Last Knight is widely believed to be the reason my local ODEON makes you book tickets online now.
When me and my older sister (I was 20, my sister was 21) and I went to see TLK, she was the only woman in the room - and when we sat down, some arsehole fourteen-year-olds behind us were muttering under their breaths that my sister was an [awful slur for transsexuals] because she was a woman going to see a Transformers movie. We tried to ignore them - however, my sister was so uncomfortable with the idea of sitting by them, we had to move seats; from what they were saying, the little bastards took it as a victory, but I digress.
After the film, we snuck out to find a member of staff and make a complaint and, when we found the guy, he said, "You went to see Transformers 5, right?", before we'd even told him what movie we'd gone to see.
We found out that a lot of similar complaints had been made about behaviour like this from gangs of teenage yobs... most of the complaints had come from women (including mothers with kids). The guy we talked to was very nice about it and he offered to give us a refund; however, he sounded pretty exasperated with the situation and said they were looking at ways round it so it didn't happen again.
And, so, just time for the release of Justice League, Thor: Ragnarok and Star Wars: The Last Jedi... there's a booking system now. Yeah, it's a hassle if you've made a spur-of-the-moment decision, but, if it stops such things from happening...
Conversely, the four times I went to see Bumblebee, the screen was packed - mostly parents with kids, some as young as five.
After all of the arguments in this thread, I think the answer to the OP's question is...why does anyone care if someone else wants something they don't?
If someone doesn't want Transformers 6, and someone else does want Transformers. should they care? No! If you want a Transformers 6, that is fine. If you don't want a Transformers 6, and either want a new series of films or want to stick to the toys, cartoons, and comics, that's also fine.
What isn't fine is the douchiness in this thread where some members put themselves on a pedestal.
But you can't really separate the concept from the source material in the context of the brand. Many fans dislike huge changes to their favorite characters from the iteration of Transformers they were introduced to. It's one of the biggest complaints you see by fans of previous eras when new fiction comes along.
Any attempt at making Transformers a serious, grounded concept would be very different from any version of Transformers on the big screen, little screen, or comic pages. It would be so different, that the majority of the fandom would not accept it. Any attempt at depicting Transformers that's realistically going to see the light of day is going to be ridiculous. We're probably never going to see fiction that doesn't have goofy moments and characters, physics-defying action, and unrealistic scenarios. And that's okay.
So at least you're consistent then. That's fine. It means you're a reasonable and fair-minded person.
I don't care if fans prefer one cartoon to another, or one of the films to another, or prefer the cartoons to the films or films to the cartoons, or comics over cartoons, or whatever. What gets annoying is when fans take two different parts of the brand with plenty of the same flaws and equivalent things in them and apply completely different standards to the different pieces of fiction.
And that never bothered me. It doesn't bother me when a brand of fiction meant to sell toys features advertisements for other things, especially when many of said things turn into robots!
How was I wrong? I wasn't.
If I have an opinion, and I support that opinion with facts, then it's not "wrong." It's merely an opinion. It's like when you said another member was "right" regarding their opinion on the Bayformer designs, when in reality they're neither "wrong" nor "right," because it's just an opinion. It only becomes "wrong" when fans confuse opinions for facts, or they base their opinions on things that aren't true.
People aren't "right" or "wrong" for liking the depiction of fictional CGI characters meant to sell toys. I just think expectations need to be realistic, because many fan expectations...I'd say the vast, vast majority...are completely unrealistic. Fans, in hindsight, tend to think they would have made films and characters "better," but I don't think their "better" ideas would every realistically made, nor would they necessarily result in greater audience satisfaction.
Some of those examples aren't even characters!
And you know what none of those movies were? Movies ONLY featuring CGI characters with no humans in them.
I like the "Apes" movies, but the third "Apes" movie was not some gold standard of audience satisfaction and monetary success. It made hundreds of millions of dollars less in box office than its immediate predecessor! Its CinemaScore was "A-," which was greater than TLK and RotF (the latter much more financially successful), but not greater than AoE, and it was less than DotM and the 2007 movie.
If people on this site and critics like a movie with CGI characters, that's great. It doesn't mean it was this huge success with general audiences. I can only speak for myself. Every member on this site can only speak for themselves.[/QUOTE]
Maybe, but getting down to brass tacks: Energon isn't even all that relevant to this thread either way. It's just a very obvious method to try and make the movies look not so bad by comparison. It's amusing how in an effort to defend a bad piece of media people will just say "well this other thing exists that's also bad." 'Kay, and? We're talking about the Bay films specifically here. Maybe they're both super awful pieces of media, but you have some personal attachment to one of them and not the other.
Besides if you're willing to passionately argue for pages about how the movies are good or 'not so bad', how can anyone take your critique seriously regarding other fiction or media? All they have to say is "well you defend those shitty Transformers movies" and that'd be the end of it.
And no, the issue here isn't just enjoying these films, people can enjoy all the bad content they want, I know I do. I have to clarify this because I know people are going to be dishonest and misconstrue what I say unless I specify 10000%: You can like these movies, but when you call them good, defend them to this extent and etc. that's when we run into issues.
If we were talking about personal enjoyment I wouldn't have made so many posts to this discussion, my point is that the 5 Transformers films are not only bad films, but bad representations of Transformers as a whole. There are some who disagree with that statement, they're wrong. Being wrong about stuff isn't a bad thing either, though when you continue to argue after the fact...
This is usually when we get into the post modernist claptrap consisting of "All film is art and all art is valid." "There is no such thing as objectively bad content as long as one person enjoys it." "Being faithful to the source material isn't a good thing in and of itself." etc. etc. Basically rendering all form of criticism and critique moot while muddying the waters and paving the way for a cavalcade of horrible adaptions of other fiction.
All for the sake of these trash-tier films.
All I'm gonna say is that you may be a fairweather Transformers fan who doesn't care too much about the fidelity and identity of the fiction as long as it gives you short-term enjoyment, but perhaps sometime in the future you'll see something you care a lot more about being messed with in this way, and I really hope someone regurgitates the arguments you propagate back at you.
Didn't some film actually gain cult following because it's so bad?
I damn well am still waiting for somebody to come up with a rational excuse for how something like "Mac and Me" could be considered anything but a bad film.
Absolutely! There are plenty of films that are loved ironically because of how flawed they are, there's quite a few I enjoy myself. They're both entertaining and also serve as a valuable source on what not to do when making a film, and talking about why they're bad and what they do wrong should be a great learning experience for all involved.
Bad films can be educational in the sense that they can serve as examples of what to avoid when constructing a story, or adapting something.
The difference I think is that with these TF movies there are people arguing that they aren't bad content objectively, but I wouldn't be surprised when they lose enough arguments that they'll resort to saying "well we were just talking about liking these movies ironically" even though that's clearly not the case. For some reason I doubt if this was about ironic love of a bad series of movies they'd go to these lengths.
Although it's definitely a bad film, the scene of the kid rolling off the cliff will always be an amazing scene.
That is literally the only redeeming part of the film...and only because it gets exponentially funnier if you take it out of context.
I think The Room is the one that everyone thinks of when they hear “bad movie with a cult following.”
I still have yet to see it for myself though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For simplicity's sake, we'll just call them Beast Wars Fans.
Do yourself a favor and watch it.
Anyway how's your sex life?
Separate names with a comma.