You see Bay doesn't really have balls when it comes to filmakeing. He could have had the concept artists take visual clues from dozens of other places to make the robots seem alien. So instead of Scotty Pippen, Charles Barkley, Magic Johnson, even Wilt Chamberlain...when Bay says "Alien Robots" he means "Alien" as in the movie...and that means take visual cues from H.R. Giger...(the Michael Jordan of alien design).

Concept atrist everywhere collectively facepalmed when news of Bays wishes for how the transformers were to look hit the web.

Instead of setting a new trend, we just got more of the same. Yet more "Michael Jordan-ish" alien robots. Boreing, safe and predictable indeed.

 

What's up with the recent Gundam threads in this forum? GTFO.

 

You call these claws some form of human hand? That's a pretty broad definition of "human".

And the Sisters are in the movie.

Nice try  

 

Alright tough guy, If your such a great art director, why don't you show me you giant transforming ALIEN ROBOTS?! Were did you get the idea that Demolisher looks even remotely like the Alien from the ALien movies? I know lots more people who would be MAD if the movie robots look liked G1.

Tell me, are yoiu seriously telling me that the movie sucks because of how it looks? Next, your going to say Transformers ANimated sucks because the robots have "chins", or Beast Wars sucks because "trukk not munky!"

Grow up and learn variety is the spice of life. I don't see any similarity between the Aliens of the Alien movies and Micheal Bay's Transformer movies.

MTL

 

Gundam stays Gundam, TFs Stays TFs !! So no

BUT DAMN I WISH I COULD FLY TO TOKYO AND SEE IT !! LOOKS AWESOME !!!

 

QFT!

Applys to opinions too  

 

Question was something "like" the gundam pictured. Which suggests an area of grey.

I'm actually pretty cool with the movie designs, except they are too buisy...too much going on with the detail. "guts on the outside" and all that.

I think if they tone it down a bit. Let some of the shapes exist on thier own strength (like the Gundam does) I'd like them better.

Besides I'm a car and motorcycle nut with some engineering background. I can apprechiate all the detail on the movie designs, but most of it is there for looks only...makes little practical sense engineering wise  

 

I love some of the Gundam designs and they are indeed very G1 in nature. And I LOVE G1, it's my favorite series. But they are not Transformers. Ever wonder why Robotech/Macross sticks to the same basic design year after year? It isn't easy coming up with a transforming robot that turns into an existing vehicle. And I love reading that Bay designed the movie Transformers himself. He and he alone designed ALL of the movie bots.   I bet there are a few dozen people in Rhode Island that would like to have a word with you.

 

swiftly kicks everyone who confused this gundam with power rangers( seriously, not sarcastically) in the nuts.

 

A middle-ground between this and the movie look would have been more suitable I think.

 

No. It's just... bland. Transformers, being a heavily visually driven property, really needs to look as cool as possible. The more impressive the CGI, the more likely the general public would be willing to go see the movie for its cool visuals, especially if they had negative associations (or no associations) of Transformers beforehand. This design wouldn't lead to the kind of truly impressive, ground-breaking CGI ILM pulled off, just a more polished version of what was already done in the '90's with Robot Jox.

The G1 designs are just as boringly safe and predictable, a bit more so since the same "boxy robot" template was often reused with minimal alterations for different characters. Put some wheels or wings on this Gundam and he could just as easily be a G1 Transformer. This basic design motif is also heavily used in Japanese mecha with some relatively minor stylistic changes from series to series (but to the untrained eye there's really no difference. The combined Dino Megazord from the original Power Rangers, for example, has a head design that is reminiscent of both Optimus Prime and Mazinger Z/Shogun warrior mechas - though accented in different ways).

While you're right about Hollywood's reuse of Giger design styles for alien monsters, very few of the Transformers movie robots actually copy that look (Ravage, Megatron, and the Fallen are the only three with true Giger influences and even Megatron is debatable since he kind of looked more like a walking scrapheap than anything else). Overall, however, the designs are hardly predictable. Head designs like the twins, wheeled feet robots like Sideswipe, Wheelie, or the Arcee bots (unicycles, essentially), or character designs like Starscream would NEVER be possible in the old school G1 look (they'd be too heavily downplayed and simplified to the point of losing the charm/characteristics that make them unique). I'd hardly call that playing it boringly safe and predictable.

Whew. Long post.

 

No, they would look like Gundams then. I like Gundams, but the look wouldn't fit a live action TF movie.

 

Who are these concept artists from everywhere? Is it a big trade group of artists? Can you back up this claim?

Not sure where you're going with ripping the movie designs as "boreingly safe and predictable" only to clarify you find them "pretty cool" just the same. You make two posts that seem to be mutually exclusive.

 

A character's outward appearance has a lot to do with whether you like them or fear them. The movie designs have supplemented the robots' characterizations, in my opinion. The movie Megatron looks 50x more menacing than the human-faced, Nazi helmet wearing cartoon design. The same goes for Starscream.

Tell me honestly. Which of the following strikes more fear into your heart?


OR

 

Oh I completely agree, these were designed by artists (like me), not engineers. I don't get an H.R. Giger sense from them per se as there is less overt sexual overtones in the designs. I mean, the alien had a great big penis on the back of its head, to emphasize the sense of the male rape.

There IS that similar sense of the biomechanical that crosses over, though the exact aesthetic is not the same. Biomechanical does seem to be a constant design element in science fiction movies. So this raises the question if this only goes back to Alien?

Something I notice about all the kibble bits is that, in the movies, I don't notice them as much. Actually, I really only notice how busy these are in concept art and those promotional stills where they light the CGI to show all the details. So all the little details in the design don't bother me too much.

It's nice when people can have different opinions and not be "wrong".  

 

I... don't really think too many of the Transformers smack of Giger influences. As said before, it's pretty much just the Fallen, Ravage and possibly Megatron, but even then it's a little strained. So they're bio-mechanical looking, so what? We're supposed to think Transformers are essentially mechanical people, so it works! The bio-organic look suits them and fits them well.

Do you know this for a fact or are you just assuming? I mean, from what I've heard, concept artists like the Bayformers looks, they're new, they're fresh, they look realistic, plausible, and some of them are just downright eye candy. I mean, they're way more innovative than the boxy look, I don't care what you say.

Predictable? Oh come on, now you're just trying to sound artsy. Predictable? No. No they're not predictable. They're different, they're new, they take influences from Giger in certain cases, sure, but on the whole, they're a whole new thing. And boring? No. Boxes are boring. The same basic design for every character with minor alterations is boring. Bayformers - for all of it's faults - has variations, differences, even if you hate the designs, you have to admit, they do a good job of staying distinct from one another.

I honestly don't know how you can consider designs that are constantly called "too busy" to be boring, but then again, I honestly don't think you're levelling much serious, grounded, legitimate criticism here. Seriously. Make a point worth talking about or just stop trying to sound so... snooty.

 

Fingers and an opposable thumb. Hmmm, how is that not human? Compared to claws or what not, those are.

Ah, yes, that is a favorite tactic too. To use the best sample from one side and the worst sample from the other. But I'll try one too:

Which do you think would protect you better:




or

 

What's the point of them being robots if they look like men in cardboard suits from a low-budget Saturday morning television show?

 

I dissagree completely.

While that visual of the gundam is direction back towards a more classic feel it has some elements that make it feel hokey in comparison. They head design and the giant yellow buttons are obviously rediculous.

Now if this was GP02 or GP03 I think the point would be better illustrated with designs a little more up to date. Hell Wing0 would completely look amazing in this format.

Most of all the Designs of the current Transformers are OVERLY GENERIC. Its amazing you would make the point they are not.

Holly wood always goes with what is safe and random freeky looking monster robots is what they did. If they attempted to make them seem like humanoid living robots it would have been to scary a proposition for them because they cant think beyond what their yes men ( or women ) say.

Megatron and every decepticon is as classic a generic monster as you can get they just turned the medium of their design from Flesh to Metal and thats how you get to where we are.

I think any adaptation of Transformers to the big screen would have the same realism if thought and care is put into it. The ILM crew did just that for these designs and they seem real world and livable but just because these worked does not mean any thing else could not have done as well or better even. With some of these designs especially the new ones they have added more paneling and box-iness to them which already kinda proves the point that there was not enough definition to the mass.

Whats the point of your posts? You seem to be always over skeptical on this board and others when saying that anything other than this movies direction could not work. You take the comment of G1 designs far to literal to be serious. You would not obviously have card board box style design but how about a movie design that atleast emulates the character like Optimus ( mostly anyways ). Optimus is pretty much as close to that G1 concept you can get with this movie style and its not that bad now if only they made others with so much attention to detail and history.

 

Are you being intentionally argumentative? Jazz's fingers all work off a single central wrist point with no palm to speak of. Neither digit is any more a finger or a thumb than any other digit on the hand. How is that "human like"?