Post by: Termin8Anakin on June 11, 2003, 08:11:35 PM
There's a live-action Transformers movie coming from the makers of LXG and X-Men.
IGN Filmforce
Post by: PIAC on June 11, 2003, 09:44:12 PM
Post by: oohhboy on June 11, 2003, 11:39:45 PM
. Also no punk whinny kids and PC restrictions found in Adamda aka no shooting at humans or fighting in populated areas.Does live action men guys in rubber suits?
Post by: Infernal Monkey on June 12, 2003, 03:16:53 AM
The majority of it's going to have to be GC, why not just go for a whole GC look. WHO NEEDS REAL ACTORS ANYWAY?
And yeah, the new anime series blows. What's with the mini-cons? It's NOT POKEMON HASBRO!
Post by: Termin8Anakin on June 12, 2003, 03:20:21 AM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on June 12, 2003, 03:28:03 AM
, GO GO POWER RANGERS! DOOO DO DOOO DO DO! IIEE IIEE IEE! "WHAT IS IT ALPHA 5?"
'I JUST REALIZED THIS SUIT IS DAMN HOT AND SWEATY ZORDON!'
DOOOO DO DOOOOOOOOOOO DO DO!
... Sorry for that little outburst. I just loved the Power Rangers.
<3
Post by: Termin8Anakin on June 12, 2003, 03:35:14 AM
The acting is soooo crap.
Ivan Ooze is kick ass.
And the Sydney backdrop?
Cooooool.
The new Ninja Zords kick ass too, in all their computer animated glory.
And that Ninja/Owl chick.....*droool*
Post by: nitsu niflheim on June 12, 2003, 04:03:00 AM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on June 12, 2003, 04:13:02 AM
New Transformers: Live action. With CG.
Post by: oohhboy on June 12, 2003, 04:29:19 AM
Quote
Transformers: New Live Action Film. Power Rangers anyone?
LOL. Your one in a million termin8.
They could so go for another animation. If they revert back to the old rules where they can do the following:
1. Fight anywhere, anytime.
2: Megatron goes back to his NAZI look and just as evil.
3. No min-cons (Cons <- doesn't that tell you something)
4. No kids leading the Autobots just so they can be caputered again!
5. Set it on Cybertron. Would be nice.
6. No beastwars or insecatrons.
7. Deceptacons must lose energron cubes
8. Humans if any can get hurt but not killed (Following with original series rules)
9. All bots must show battle damage when hit.
10. battles must be reasonablely tatically sound. eg. No episode 2 type armies shooting each other point blank.
11.Kill some bots.
Simply just follow th guild lines set out in th original series. Bloodless, but never the less deverstating.
In it's current form, I am so not seeing it.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on June 12, 2003, 05:01:46 AM
Post by: oohhboy on June 12, 2003, 05:19:54 AM
1. They can not fight anywhere, anytime. Always away from population centers and no one esle on earth are allowed to know there are 4 story robots fighting on earth.
2. The deceptacons are not to totally ruthless in thier quest for power.
3. Must include kids in every episode.
4. No humans are allowed to get hurt let alone kill.
5. Humans must have more than one color/sex and have token fat kid.
6. Every episode has to be a "Autobot of the show".
7. No charaters are to be killed.
8. There must not be any convenient way to get back to cybertron, but be easy to get to earth.
9. All charaters must be sterotypical except for the girls who all must be strong minded.
10 Every 2/3 episode has to introduce a new Mini-con.
11. Plots must be totally linear. eg No twists.
12. Must have over animated "Super modes" for everybody ala DBZ.
13. There must not be any charater development.
14. No direct hits of any kind are to be shown. Therefore none of the bots can ever shot straight at another bot.
15. Must be PC.
16. must have moral of the story.
17. no saddness.
That's the ones on the top of my head.
Post by: Smithy on June 12, 2003, 08:54:10 AM
As for this movie it better have some good CG if it wants to do good. Alot Better than beastwars cg anyways.
Post by: Oldskool on June 12, 2003, 03:03:27 PM
Post by: Oldskool on June 12, 2003, 03:07:23 PM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on June 12, 2003, 05:10:29 PM
20th Century Fox is making the DBZ live action movie.
They're the ones who are making Transformers as well.
Have you seen the teaser poster?
Post by: Griffin on June 30, 2006, 11:52:42 PM
www.transformersmovie.com
Post by: nitsu niflheim on July 01, 2006, 04:42:36 AM
Post by: Griffin on July 01, 2006, 08:58:32 AM
Post by: Ceric on July 01, 2006, 09:02:31 AM
Post by: Athrun Zala on July 01, 2006, 08:50:00 PM
Post by: Nile Boogie on July 03, 2006, 10:11:36 AM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on July 03, 2006, 10:28:22 AM
Post by: nitsu niflheim on July 03, 2006, 10:40:12 AM
Post by: Ceric on July 03, 2006, 10:45:58 AM
Post by: slacker on July 03, 2006, 01:06:37 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on July 03, 2006, 01:20:18 PM
Post by: Donutt007 on July 03, 2006, 06:47:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Griffin
Well, the movie is over a year away, so you know they probably have to keep most of it under wraps. Still.... it's a real-life Megatron, and how can you go wrong with that?
Well you could start by having Megatron be an actualy gun and not a tank. Or maybe having Bumblebee be an actual bug instead of a frikcing camero (I think it was camero, some sports car) Or maybe having soundwave actually be a boombox instead of a helicopter....a helicopter!!! WTF!!!
Post by: Ceric on July 04, 2006, 04:11:28 PM
Edit: I know Boomboxes aren't the thing any more but they could have made a Laptop. A lot of the same premise and could misconscrue it se he has the same capabilities...
Post by: Donutt007 on July 04, 2006, 05:43:48 PM
And yeah, I understand the whole boombox thing. Ya know what sucks, I had written a transformers live-action mixed with CG script, and ya now what? It was all based in the 80's like it should be. I even had a more bad-ass idea for a teaser trailer. It was gonna be a side shot of a bunch of people walking around all decked out in 80's clothes, even a guy walking around with a ghetto blaster on his shoulder, maybe some fools breakdancing. Then a familiar looking semi drives by off the screen, then you hear the familiar transforming sound followed by a loud thud. The camera shakes (reacting to the thud) and all the people look up in that direction in awe and terror. Now that's a f***ing teaser trailer for transformers, not some damn mars rover BS.
Sorry, just a little angered by this movie. I know it's probably gonna be good and I should just get used to it, but hell if I had the clout that guys doing the movie do it would have been so much better. (gee I sound like the other million fanboys now)
Post by: couchmonkey on July 07, 2006, 12:59:28 PM
Now, Camaro Bumblebee, yuck! That's stupid. The idea of changing an old Camaro one into a new one halfway through the movie is just the strawberry jam on this rancid hotdog. It really exposes the corny advertising ploy for what it is. I could probably live with it if they just started out with the Camaro concept, though it would still be wrong. I like Donutt's idea of having a badgeless Beetle-like car, but I guess that won't fly in this day and age of corporate-sponsored everything.
Possible changes to the storyline don't bother me so much. The series has been reimagined so many times now, I'll forgive an inaccurate retelling of the story if the acting and writing are decent. That and the effects, obviously.
Post by: Nile Boogie on July 07, 2006, 05:40:33 PM
Post by: mantidor on July 07, 2006, 08:50:44 PM
Post by: JonLeung on December 07, 2006, 10:17:39 AM
Anyway, Barricade looks BADASS.
Barricade in robot form
If only because no one remembers Barricade, that is. He was a G1 Micromaster race car toy from 1990 who's only appeared in Dreamwave Comics' Micromaster series (thanks, Wikipedia!) so he doesn't have the history (or fan-expectation baggage) weighing him down.
It's only logical that us Transformers fans are so critical of the designs for all the Autobots that will be in the film and certain Decepticons like Megatron and Starscream, but I can live with Barricade like this. (He's the Decepticon cop car formerly known as Brawl.)
A teaser trailer (apparently the previous footage was just an announcement trailer) is due out the weekend of Dec. 22, where we'll supposedly see an on-screen transformation.
Post by: couchmonkey on December 08, 2006, 04:22:18 AM
I'm interested in the movie but I figure it's not going to be that good...and I'm not sure I want to be seen walking into a Transformers movie.
Still, thanks for the heads-up. Barricade looks cool, and it gave me something to do on YouTube for a few minutes. BACK TO VERK!
Post by: mantidor on December 08, 2006, 08:09:19 AM
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on December 09, 2006, 02:48:07 AM
I really hope the movie doesn't suck.
Post by: TrueNerd on December 09, 2006, 06:33:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
I really, really don't get the overall anger of transformers fanboys about the designs, given that anything new in the series reinvents them completly, it started with beast wars and it has been going on since then, and the designs are not that bad to begin with.
And I really, really don't get why ANYONE would have even the slightest interest in a Michael Bay movie.
Post by: segagamer12 on December 09, 2006, 06:54:33 PM
Post by: vudu on December 10, 2006, 02:44:29 AM
QuoteQFT. Seriously, look at the guy's track record.
Originally posted by: TrueNerd
And I really, really don't get why ANYONE would have even the slightest interest in a Michael Bay movie.
Bad Boys
The Rock
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
Bad Boys II
The Island
The only passable movie in there is The Rock. Michael Bay is famous to putting out big budget crap; lots of flashy explosions with very little meat once the special effects are stripped away.
Post by: Ceric on December 10, 2006, 02:27:39 PM
Post by: oohhboy on December 10, 2006, 03:50:49 PM
The rest though I are LOL grabage.
Post by: mantidor on December 10, 2006, 04:43:45 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: vuduQuoteQFT. Seriously, look at the guy's track record.
Originally posted by: TrueNerd
And I really, really don't get why ANYONE would have even the slightest interest in a Michael Bay movie.
Bad Boys
The Rock
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
Bad Boys II
The Island
The only passable movie in there is The Rock. Michael Bay is famous to putting out big budget crap; lots of flashy explosions with very little meat once the special effects are stripped away.
And this is exactly why Bay is perfect for this, I know there are some people that are almost scary in their fanaticism about transformers, but they have to face the franchise is not "meaty", the whole series is just a huge infomercial for the toy line, and this is what transformers is about, giant robots with cool designs that transform in cool cars or other things and beat each other, thats it, their stories are laughable at best, but it never bother me because the robots are great, the only interest I would have for a live action transformers is the awesome action sequences, not some melodramatic scenes because transformers frankly will never pull those off, no matter all their previous attempts at doing that.
Post by: TrueNerd on December 10, 2006, 05:38:24 PM
But still. Robot smashing action scenes can carry a Saturday morning cartoon. Can they carry a two-hour motion picture that you're paying $9 to watch? Color me skeptical.
Post by: segagamer12 on December 10, 2006, 06:00:43 PM
I agree with mantidor on this also. I have every episode of every tf series except Cybertron and energon, and they arent really that good story wise. the comics were ok and the BW and Victory stuff was the best but still not what woudl make a movie good.
Post by: JonLeung on December 15, 2006, 04:28:28 AM
Anyway, approximately a week before we see a real teaser trailer...where there won't be this Mars stuff and we'll see a transformation!
Post by: nitsu niflheim on December 18, 2006, 05:38:49 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 18, 2006, 09:23:42 AM
The new teaser may be showing up online on the 20th now. We'll finally see what the movie is really like. Two days to see coolness - or be disappointed.
Post by: Ceric on December 19, 2006, 03:31:51 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 19, 2006, 05:28:42 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 20, 2006, 01:55:49 AM
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/transformers.html
Stupid thing is I'll probably try to catch it ASAP except I'm at work so I'll see it but not have sound. I'm fairly certain they won't have the same cartoony transforming sound but I'm sure I'll be curious if they did sneak it in there, or what transforming actually sounds like in the movie. Or if they have part of the classic theme in there. Or if Megan Fox sounds hot, or whatever.
I'm guessing I should take my excitement to another forum since it sounds like you guys don't really care. :P
Post by: Ceric on December 20, 2006, 02:25:44 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 20, 2006, 04:15:02 AM
Less than an hour now! o_0
Post by: JonLeung on December 20, 2006, 05:03:07 AM
EDIT: It looks like it's up but it looks like streaming video is blocked at work now. ;_; Anyone have a link to a downloadable .wmv or something? I don't have QuickTime on this computer.
Ah, just someone tell me how cool it is! I'm assuming it's still visually impressive, anyway. Is there a cool transformation, and who is it?
EDIT: I managed to get a peek here at the European site: http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/transformers/
Looks cool, but it's not the same without the sound. >_< Should've had less shots of the humans. >_>
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on December 20, 2006, 05:52:34 AM
Call me when its up on youtube, or something I already have a player for.
Post by: couchmonkey on December 20, 2006, 06:23:23 AM
Still fun to see Optimus, though.
Post by: JonLeung on December 20, 2006, 07:09:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
The movie kind of looks like a heavy focus on humans - kind of an "alien invasion" movie where some of the aliens are good. That could be a unique twist on the Transformers plot, but at the same time, it makes it seem more like a million other movies. That was kind of the feeling I got while watching the trailer. It could be any action movie only with vehicles that turn into robots.
Still fun to see Optimus, though.
Spielberg said that it will be like some of his old Amblin films. I assume these include E.T. and Gremlins, where there is focus on the human characters, as much as or more than what the film is named after. This film will probably be told more from the point of view of the humans, as Spielberg said, he didn't want the movie to start off with a bunch of robots talking to each other in a spaceship, which would "alienate" (pun not originally intended) the audience if they weren't familiar with the Transformers.
I would've liked to have seen more of Starscream or any of Megatron in this teaser, but maybe it's a good sign that they haven't. Despite them saying that the initial cut of the film is complete, I certainly hope they've taken some time to "fix" the appearance of Starscream's robot mode and Megatron as a whole especially due to fan outrage. Sure, you can't please all fans, but not many people at all actually want Megatron to look like Swamp-Thing.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on December 20, 2006, 07:23:29 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 20, 2006, 07:42:53 AM
Bumblebee's battle mask is kind of ugly. The whole concept of battle masks is kind of stupid, especially considering they have many unprotected and exposed parts!
Post by: Ceric on December 20, 2006, 10:08:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeungQuote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
The movie kind of looks like a heavy focus on humans - kind of an "alien invasion" movie where some of the aliens are good. That could be a unique twist on the Transformers plot, but at the same time, it makes it seem more like a million other movies. That was kind of the feeling I got while watching the trailer. It could be any action movie only with vehicles that turn into robots.
Still fun to see Optimus, though.
Spielberg said that it will be like some of his old Amblin films. I assume these include E.T. and Gremlins, where there is focus on the human characters, as much as or more than what the film is named after. This film will probably be told more from the point of view of the humans, as Spielberg said, he didn't want the movie to start off with a bunch of robots talking to each other in a spaceship, which would "alienate" (pun not originally intended) the audience if they weren't familiar with the Transformers.
I would've liked to have seen more of Starscream or any of Megatron in this teaser, but maybe it's a good sign that they haven't. Despite them saying that the initial cut of the film is complete, I certainly hope they've taken some time to "fix" the appearance of Starscream's robot mode and Megatron as a whole especially due to fan outrage. Sure, you can't please all fans, but not many people at all actually want Megatron to look like Swamp-Thing.
I relatively hate the more touchy feely human oriented tranformers series. It be like me needing to get permission from a Stick Bug and have it solves my problems on a minute by minute basis.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on December 20, 2006, 11:46:11 AM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on December 20, 2006, 12:02:53 PM
I will definately go see this when it comes out though.
p.s. the yahoo link is working, no additional player need
Post by: JonLeung on December 20, 2006, 12:23:25 PM
Post by: mantidor on December 20, 2006, 01:49:25 PM
edit: never mind, I rewatched the trailer (which is finally on youtube) and the sound is gone, a bit too "serious" and too many "robots against humans" as oposed to each other, but the movie will have to have plenty of those so no big deal, can't wait.
Post by: Ceric on December 20, 2006, 03:27:01 PM
Post by: mantidor on December 21, 2006, 06:48:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
That trailer was made of phail but no internet.
well this optimus has flames *rimshot out of pity*
Post by: JonLeung on December 21, 2006, 07:05:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
I'll miss the transformation sound, but is it really not going to be there? anyway, as long as there are a couple of cheesy moments with more 80s references (like the llittle pony :P ) I'll be happy, I'll see it for sure just to see giant robots in the big screen.
Notice that at the part where they talk about the sound, the bottom-right corner says "takara83", which is a reference to Takara and 1983.
Also, "takara83" is the login name for sectorseven.org, which is what you see in the upper-right corner as "Sector Seven Org". I haven't tried it yet, but apparently it's part of some "alternate reality game" which treats the events of the movie as real.
The sound clip was dumb, and as a lead, too, but perhaps that's a trailer-only thing meant to "hide" Sector Seven?
Post by: couchmonkey on December 22, 2006, 03:08:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: CericQuote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
I relatively hate the more touchy feely human oriented tranformers series. It be like me needing to get permission from a Stick Bug and have it solves my problems on a minute by minute basis.
I agree when it comes to the stories where the Transformers really have to rely heavily on the humans - that plot in one of the newer series where only the pure thoughts of children could control Fortress Maximus was one of the cheesiest things I've ever seen.
But plot where it's like, "How would we cope if gigantic robots disguised as vehicles invaded the planet?" might be interesting. But it needs to be sure to cover the TRANSFORMERS side of the story.
Post by: Svevan on July 02, 2007, 11:33:20 PM
Why is Transformers a great movie, you ask? Well let me tell you.
Michael Bay is one of those directors that can be ignored. He thinks he's making movies about certain things, like patriotism or self-sacrifice, but his films seem to encompass themes very separate from his perceptions. Bay has always been defined by his rambunctious editing, car chases on long freeways, slick and generic humor, and female body worship. It doesn't sound like he's any different than any other action filmmaker, but oh how wrong that assumption is. His movies are usually edited so fast that they resemble abstract art; the narrative of his action sequences is usually lost in this editing as well. It is hard to keep track of the characters and objects being utilized in, for instance, any of his car chases because the sense of geography is ignored. Consider that we rarely see overhead shots of car chases, and if we do it is from a pretty short distance. Bay puts his camera on the same level as the cars being smashed.
And things getting smashed is what he does best. Consider The Island, a film much like Transformers or Pearl Harbor in its vacuity of thought. When the clones discover the truth about the harvesting of their body parts and escape their prison, they seek out their originals. Even though the clones have made a strong stand for the value of themselves as individuals, they are given moral license to kill the originals. If that's not far enough, when they get to the obligatory freeway chase scene, they are given moral license to kill anyone. When the movie gives characters dialogue about the sanctity and value of human life, it is nothing but lip-service for the overarching message of the film: things getting smashed is awesome.
This isn't a negative quality of The Island necessarily. It's almost better if Bay's films have ideas in them that are smashed to bits by their own action scenes. Transformers is a film that wants to be about freedom, national identity, and self-sacrifice. Yeah whatever. The movie ends with a 45 minute action sequence filled with sharp edges, explosions, slow-motion impossibilities, and robots getting smashed. How does that relate to freedom? It doesn't really, except for the premise that the military is benevolent and selfless. Transformers shows a government working together with aliens to destroy other aliens who threaten a generic idea of "freedom." Though this premise could have potentially lead to some sort of war on terror allegory or another agenda, Bay strips any possible meaning from his film by making his action scenes, and even his dialogue scenes, completely unrelated to the rousing speech that will inevitably be given at the end.
So what do we have here? Fast cuts, slow motion, lots of robots, explosions, and some humor and character sprinkled on top. The movie doesn't really have "scenes" so much as it is one entire piece, one entire scene, completely undeveloped but totally overcooked. It's brilliant because it's vacuous, it's beautiful because it is simply images. There is no weight to Bay's action, no message or idea. Bay is a visual stylist who is practically baroque in his combination of sight and sound that overpowers and overwhelms while being in every way insignificant. There is no necessary part of this film: consider the stupid jokes, like a robot peeing on a man, or a fat guy eating donuts, or parents talking about masturbation. These things don't belong in the movie and are completely tasteless. Yet Bay's absurd action scene is mechanical pornography itself; taste doesn't really enter into it.
Bay's a master at making heavy-handed frivolity. He's an idiot savant, and this latest misstep is his best piece of trash ever.
Post by: Nick DiMola on July 02, 2007, 11:51:10 PM
That's all I could think of while reading your post Svevan.
Post by: mantidor on July 03, 2007, 05:26:52 AM
Post by: Nile Boogie on July 03, 2007, 06:18:41 AM
PS. Optimus Prime is the GOAT!
Post by: Kairon on July 03, 2007, 07:31:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Svevan
Transformers is a great movie.
Why is Transformers a great movie, you ask? Well let me tell you.
Michael Bay is one of those directors that can be ignored. He thinks he's making movies about certain things, like patriotism or self-sacrifice, but his films seem to encompass themes very separate from his perceptions. Bay has always been defined by his rambunctious editing, car chases on long freeways, slick and generic humor, and female body worship. It doesn't sound like he's any different than any other action filmmaker, but oh how wrong that assumption is. His movies are usually edited so fast that they resemble abstract art; the narrative of his action sequences is usually lost in this editing as well. It is hard to keep track of the characters and objects being utilized in, for instance, any of his car chases because the sense of geography is ignored. Consider that we rarely see overhead shots of car chases, and if we do it is from a pretty short distance. Bay puts his camera on the same level as the cars being smashed.
And things getting smashed is what he does best. Consider The Island, a film much like Transformers or Pearl Harbor in its vacuity of thought. When the clones discover the truth about the harvesting of their body parts and escape their prison, they seek out their originals. Even though the clones have made a strong stand for the value of themselves as individuals, they are given moral license to kill the originals. If that's not far enough, when they get to the obligatory freeway chase scene, they are given moral license to kill anyone. When the movie gives characters dialogue about the sanctity and value of human life, it is nothing but lip-service for the overarching message of the film: things getting smashed is awesome.
This isn't a negative quality of The Island necessarily. It's almost better if Bay's films have ideas in them that are smashed to bits by their own action scenes. Transformers is a film that wants to be about freedom, national identity, and self-sacrifice. Yeah whatever. The movie ends with a 45 minute action sequence filled with sharp edges, explosions, slow-motion impossibilities, and robots getting smashed. How does that relate to freedom? It doesn't really, except for the premise that the military is benevolent and selfless. Transformers shows a government working together with aliens to destroy other aliens who threaten a generic idea of "freedom." Though this premise could have potentially lead to some sort of war on terror allegory or another agenda, Bay strips any possible meaning from his film by making his action scenes, and even his dialogue scenes, completely unrelated to the rousing speech that will inevitably be given at the end.
So what do we have here? Fast cuts, slow motion, lots of robots, explosions, and some humor and character sprinkled on top. The movie doesn't really have "scenes" so much as it is one entire piece, one entire scene, completely undeveloped but totally overcooked. It's brilliant because it's vacuous, it's beautiful because it is simply images. There is no weight to Bay's action, no message or idea. Bay is a visual stylist who is practically baroque in his combination of sight and sound that overpowers and overwhelms while being in every way insignificant. There is no necessary part of this film: consider the stupid jokes, like a robot peeing on a man, or a fat guy eating donuts, or parents talking about masturbation. These things don't belong in the movie and are completely tasteless. Yet Bay's absurd action scene is mechanical pornography itself; taste doesn't really enter into it.
Bay's a master at making heavy-handed frivolity. He's an idiot savant, and this latest misstep is his best piece of trash ever.
*bows down in front of the mastah*
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 08:36:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: Svevan
Transformers is a great movie.
Why is Transformers a great movie, you ask? Well let me tell you.
Michael Bay is one of those directors that can be ignored. He thinks he's making movies about certain things, like patriotism or self-sacrifice, but his films seem to encompass themes very separate from his perceptions. Bay has always been defined by his rambunctious editing, car chases on long freeways, slick and generic humor, and female body worship. It doesn't sound like he's any different than any other action filmmaker, but oh how wrong that assumption is. His movies are usually edited so fast that they resemble abstract art; the narrative of his action sequences is usually lost in this editing as well. It is hard to keep track of the characters and objects being utilized in, for instance, any of his car chases because the sense of geography is ignored. Consider that we rarely see overhead shots of car chases, and if we do it is from a pretty short distance. Bay puts his camera on the same level as the cars being smashed.
And things getting smashed is what he does best. Consider The Island, a film much like Transformers or Pearl Harbor in its vacuity of thought. When the clones discover the truth about the harvesting of their body parts and escape their prison, they seek out their originals. Even though the clones have made a strong stand for the value of themselves as individuals, they are given moral license to kill the originals. If that's not far enough, when they get to the obligatory freeway chase scene, they are given moral license to kill anyone. When the movie gives characters dialogue about the sanctity and value of human life, it is nothing but lip-service for the overarching message of the film: things getting smashed is awesome.
This isn't a negative quality of The Island necessarily. It's almost better if Bay's films have ideas in them that are smashed to bits by their own action scenes. Transformers is a film that wants to be about freedom, national identity, and self-sacrifice. Yeah whatever. The movie ends with a 45 minute action sequence filled with sharp edges, explosions, slow-motion impossibilities, and robots getting smashed. How does that relate to freedom? It doesn't really, except for the premise that the military is benevolent and selfless. Transformers shows a government working together with aliens to destroy other aliens who threaten a generic idea of "freedom." Though this premise could have potentially lead to some sort of war on terror allegory or another agenda, Bay strips any possible meaning from his film by making his action scenes, and even his dialogue scenes, completely unrelated to the rousing speech that will inevitably be given at the end.
So what do we have here? Fast cuts, slow motion, lots of robots, explosions, and some humor and character sprinkled on top. The movie doesn't really have "scenes" so much as it is one entire piece, one entire scene, completely undeveloped but totally overcooked. It's brilliant because it's vacuous, it's beautiful because it is simply images. There is no weight to Bay's action, no message or idea. Bay is a visual stylist who is practically baroque in his combination of sight and sound that overpowers and overwhelms while being in every way insignificant. There is no necessary part of this film: consider the stupid jokes, like a robot peeing on a man, or a fat guy eating donuts, or parents talking about masturbation. These things don't belong in the movie and are completely tasteless. Yet Bay's absurd action scene is mechanical pornography itself; taste doesn't really enter into it.
Bay's a master at making heavy-handed frivolity. He's an idiot savant, and this latest misstep is his best piece of trash ever.
*bows down in front of the mastah*
All I got to say is that Evan would know the most about being vacuous, irrevalant, and condescending while masking it in in a flashy exterior that really says nothing. Bay was creating an action film with Transformers, that is it, and succeeded wonderfully, but if you want to read his "real" motivations or symbolism in the film, go right ahead, doesn't make it any less ridiculous. So congrats Evan you fit right in with the Bay haters, except you manage to cover up your hatred with alittle more fluff that impresses some. Get over yourself and the fact that people have different tastes in movies, and that a mindless action movie that was put together quite well, can be a GOOD movie not trash. Not everything has to be an Evan "philosophical" special where elites can discuss all the great information they pulled from the film.
Post by: Kairon on July 03, 2007, 08:53:31 AM
Post by: vudu on July 03, 2007, 09:13:30 AM
QuoteQFT.
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
"Why does Michael Bay get to keep on making movies? Pearl Harbor sucked, just a little bit more than I miss you"
That's all I could think of while reading your post Svevan.
I miss you more than Michael Bay missed the mark, When he made Pearl Harbor. / I miss you more than that movie missed the point, And that's an awful lot, girl. / And now, now you've gone away, And all I'm trying to say, is: Pearl Harbor sucked and I miss you. / I need you like Ben Affleck needs acting school, He was terrible in that film. / I need you like Cuba Gooding needed a bigger part, He's way better than Ben Affleck. / And now, all I can think about is your smile, and that sh*tty movie, too! Pearl Harbor sucked and I miss you. / Why does Michael Bay get to keep on making movies? / I guess Pearl Harbor sucked, just a little bit more than I miss you.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 09:15:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
Saw the movie on monday night. I was the biggest skeptic about the movie. From BumbleBee being a camero, to the "Bionicle design" of the Transformers themselves, I came into the theater with mid to low expectations. On top of that, Transformers: The Movie(1986) is my favorite movie ever, hands down. Now that I've said that, Transformers is a very good popcorn movie, very very good. The CG is the best I've ever seen. ILM has outdone themselves. I was about 90min into the film before I realized that the robots were CG. The best way to describe it: Bad Boys 2 meets the Transformers. Bay has got to be the best big budget action director in movies today, as the action in this film is almost "anime" in its design and execution. The writing is classic Transformers and any fan of G1 will appreciate the little things they added that was true to the source material. Transformers is a really fun summer movie. Save form some dialogue missteps and classic movie clichés, that are ever ridiculous in a movie about robots from outer-space, you're left with the best Sci fi/Action movie since Firefly and Michael Bay's best film to date.
PS. Optimus Prime is the GOAT!
How dare you agree with with majority and go against Evan the final word on what is trash and what is good.
Post by: Kairon on July 03, 2007, 10:21:40 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 10:38:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Wait, I'm confused. I thought Svevan ultimately illustrated why the movie should be appreciated?
Calling it the latest misstep and Bay's best piece of trash is not a complement. Really I think this kind of movie is what Bay can excel at, he should focus on the action genre (which I think should be appreciated as much as any other) where he is brilliant when it comes to making some of the best action around while making good use of limited budgets.
Post by: Kairon on July 03, 2007, 11:01:32 AM
Every supposed negative is matched with a positive. A Master of frivolity. An idiot savant. A misstep, AND a masterpiece. He's the type of director who can be ignored, AND our assumptions about him are wrong. If anything, this is an argument for why Bay is unique, worth a second look, and NOT someone who we should just pooh-pooh.
Just because we can detect a slight sheen of cynicism doesn't mean that that's the lesson we should learn. It merely means that despite the content of his writing, the author couldn't let go of certain prejudices that are, thankfully, lacking in us.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 11:05:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
While his personal stance on Michael Bay is somewhat derisive, there's no real argument put forth for WHY we shouldn't like or appreicate these films.
Every supposed negative is matched with a positive. A Master of frivolity. An idiot savant. A misstep, AND a masterpiece. He's the type of director who can be ignored, AND our assumptions about him are wrong. If anything, this is an argument for why Bay is unique, worth a second look, and NOT someone who we should just pooh-pooh.
Just because we can detect a slight sheen of cynicism doesn't mean that that's the lesson we should learn. It merely means that despite the content of his writing, the author couldn't let go of certain prejudices that are, thankfully, lacking in us.
Now we are referring to Evan as the author?
Post by: Kairon on July 03, 2007, 11:16:03 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 11:20:08 AM
Post by: Kairon on July 03, 2007, 11:23:51 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 11:32:49 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I prefer Evan the "I wanna be the next Roger Ebert."
That works too considering I think Ebert is a elitist reviewer who is overrated!
Post by: Nile Boogie on July 03, 2007, 12:54:28 PM
But wait...I know nothing for I also have enjoyed such "hated-on" classics such as: Star Wars Episode 3, Maroon 5 and Allen Iverson!
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 01:13:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
Haters be damned, Transformers is a blessing from the summer movie gods. Please enjoy responsibly.™
But wait...I know nothing for I also have enjoyed such "hated-on" classics such as: Star Wars Episode 3, Maroon 5 and Allen Iverson!
Never heard of the last two movies but Star Wars Episode 3 was fairly well received.
Post by: ShyGuy on July 03, 2007, 01:15:38 PM
Post by: Svevan on July 03, 2007, 01:29:24 PM
So, Sophia:
What I was trying to say was that Transformers is a great film because it is vacuous, that it's lack of a message (or any meaning) makes it a perfect exercise in stylistic violence. I've loved Michael Bay for a long time, and Transformers may be the pinnacle of his work so far. I'm sorry you misread my post as sarcastic.
I do think being intellectual is important, and I prefer not to call that "elitism." I believe you are a strong supporter of anti-intellectualism. Knowing how and why something is good is better than being ignorant of it, especially for those who are passionate about movies. That doesn't necessarily mean everyone should agree, but it does mean that everyone should think. Also, your responses to my movie posts have always been calls to relativism (the "if I think it's good, then it is" mentality, which is nothing more than a justification of ignorance), and have been filled with vitriol that is undeserving of my statements.
So please, cool it.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 01:34:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Svevan
How about we stop discussing how much we do or do not hate me and start discussing the film? Let it be said that GoldenPhoenix DID misread my post, and though she wrote a PM to me saying the same things here, I choose to respond to her in public since she's taken up a mission against me.
So, Sophia:
What I was trying to say was that Transformers is a great film because it is vacuous, that it's lack of a message (or any meaning) makes it a perfect exercise in stylistic violence. I've loved Michael Bay for a long time, and Transformers may be the pinnacle of his work so far. I'm sorry you misread my post as sarcastic.
I do think being intellectual is important, and I prefer not to call that "elitism." I believe you are a strong supporter of anti-intellectualism. Knowing how and why something is good is better than being ignorant of it, especially for those who are passionate about movies. That doesn't necessarily mean everyone should agree, but it does mean that everyone should think. Also, your responses to my movie posts have always been calls to relativism (the "if I think it's good, then it is" mentality), something you know I disagree with, and have been filled with vitriol that is undeserving of my statements.
So please, cool it.
So now I'm an anti-intellectual? This is exactly what I"m talking about your posts come accross not as "intellectual" but pseudo-intellectual drivel filled with overly complex ways of saying the simplest of things (see wasn't that much easier to say what you meant instead of masking it in bombastic wannabe intellectual garbage?). That is elitism when you take down someone elses opinion who thinks it is good, because you say otherwise. I'm sorry butif it is good to an individual, just like any form of art, some may thing it is brilliant while others may not, deal with it. I doubt there are few people that don't know why they like something, it is just that people have different REASONS for liking or not liking something. Not everything revolves around Evan's definition of "good" and everything that is contrary to that is wrong or ignorant.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 01:38:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Hey, I like Evan!
I thought I did but when someone accuses you of being an anti-intellectual and ignorant because you may have differing views on what makes something good has pretty much ended my positive feelings toward him. That is the kind of crap I was talking about.
Post by: Svevan on July 03, 2007, 01:57:48 PM
Quote
I thought I did but when someone accuses you of being an anti-intellectual and ignorant because you may have differing views on what makes something good has pretty much ended my positive feelings toward him.
What about my view? Why are you getting so vehement about someone else's feelings and ideas about a movie when you yourself say this:
Quote
"I'm sorry butif it is good to an individual, just like any form of art, some may thing it is brilliant while others may not, deal with it."
I didn't accuse you of being anti-intellectual because you had differing views, no sir, please read again:
Quote
That doesn't necessarily mean everyone should agree, but it does mean that everyone should think.
I accused you of being anti-intellectual because of this:
Quote
Not everything has to be an Evan "philosophical" special where elites can discuss all the great information they pulled from the film.
You attacked me for even thinking about the movie at all. Oh, BTW, did you not notice that we have the exact same opinion about the film?
Quote
Really I think this kind of movie is what Bay can excel at, he should focus on the action genre (which I think should be appreciated as much as any other) where he is brilliant when it comes to making some of the best action around while making good use of limited budgets.
Although Bay has huge budgets, everything else here is true. Bay excels at making action movies, they are a valid genre of film, and he IS brilliant. But wait, why is it that when you say it it's okay, but when I say it with a
Quoteit's not okay?
flashy exterior that really says nothing
You're saying two different things here, one, that Transformers is a great film and no one should disagree with you, and two, everyone has a right to their opinions about movies regardless of what the "elitists" say. Shellshock: I like Bay, almost every movie of his I've seen (except Pearl Harbor). He is tasteless, he makes trash, and his movies are brainless. And they're good. My point is that what is typically considered "good" is not necessarily so. But that's because I believe there is such a thing as "good," and it is not defined by the individual.
Having strong opinions is not elitism, and writing passionately about a film does not automatically make it "pseudo-intellectual drivel." You're using buzzwords and prejudiced categorization to dismiss my opinion, and that is one of the strongest anti-intellectual tactics.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 02:20:45 PM
Quote
You attacked me for even thinking about the movie at all. Oh, BTW, did you not notice that we have the exact same opinion about the film?
I attacked you for the way you presented yourself which came accross as condescending. Oh yeah since you misread my statement I was being sarcastic towards the way you presented yourself (I am speaking in regards to your supposedly deep analysis of Transformers, trying find things that most likely were never meant to be there). You even admit over and over again that good is not subjective, so isn't that being elite in that your opinion of what truly is a good movie is the only truth? Doesn't that come across as a bit condescending to you
Quote
lthough Bay has huge budgets, everything else here is true. Bay excels at making action movies, they are a valid genre of film, and he IS brilliant. But wait, why is it that when you say it it's okay, but when I say it with a
In case you haven't noticed but compared to other big budget movies in the action/sci fi genre Transformers does have a limited budget and managed to do more with it than most of the bigger ones (Spider-man 3 being one). So yes he can get the best out of minimal budgets, and I stand by that statement. Also why do I have a problem with you saying your opinion? For one it isn't really clear, if you read your review there is little to no praise besides the buzz words you use in the beginning and the end. You call the director an idiot savant and the movie itself trash. Not to mention you seem to pull an indended symbolism out of the film which you then use to critisize it, which seems like a big strategy. The movie itself is tasteless, and oh I dunno maybe that the movie is vaccuous (which in itself is a completely subjective term)?
Quote
ou're saying two different things here, one, that Transformers is a great film and no one should disagree with you, and two, everyone has a right to their opinions about movies regardless of what the "elitists" say. Shellshock: I like Bay, almost every movie of his I've seen (except Pearl Harbor). He is tasteless, he makes trash, and his movies are brainless. And they're good. My point is that what is typically considered "good" is not necessarily so. But that's because I believe there is such a thing as "good," and it is not defined by the individual.
Doesn't sound elitist at all does it? If Evan says is "good" then it is the ultimate truth. I am sorry but greatness is completely subjective to the individual and if you tend to take offense to it, it is gamefaqs namecalling, just wrapped in a nicer package. Whether something is "good" or not depends on what you put more importance on. Even movies that widely considered good does not mean it ultimately is, just that the common consensus and perceptions of what is good is the same.
Post by: Khushrenada on July 03, 2007, 05:50:13 PM
Anyways, if I'm seeing things correctly, this is a war between autobots(?) and decepticons(?) and they are transforming their words into weapons and using them to attack one another all while fighting over the allspark(?) which is the speculative nature of what is "good." Both sides think they are right from their viewpoint. It really is quite fascinating.
I can't wait to see what's next. Forum users! Critics in disguise!
Post by: ShineGet887 on July 03, 2007, 06:04:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
Haters be damned, Transformers is a blessing from the summer movie gods. Please enjoy responsibly.™
But wait...I know nothing for I also have enjoyed such "hated-on" classics such as: Star Wars Episode 3, Maroon 5 and Allen Iverson!
I wouldn't mind AI if he didn't hog the ball and knew how to shoot the rock properly.
Post by: Arbok on July 03, 2007, 06:50:56 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 03, 2007, 07:40:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok
I sense a Funhouse spinoff topic sometime in the future related to this "anti-intellectual" versus "pseudo-intellectual" argument...
It be great and vacuous all at the same time!
Post by: Athrun Zala on July 04, 2007, 05:16:16 AM
Quotelike the funhouse!
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Arbok
I sense a Funhouse spinoff topic sometime in the future related to this "anti-intellectual" versus "pseudo-intellectual" argument...
It be great and vacuous all at the same time!
Post by: Ceric on July 04, 2007, 03:46:45 PM
Post by: bustin98 on July 05, 2007, 05:36:11 AM
I'm surprised no one complains of the 'car commercial' aspect of the film. I would be completely removed from the film each time the cars would come rolling down the road with the sweeping camera running by overhead. I tend to think the action would have been alot more fun if the cars were fake name brands without any sort of 'image' attached. The rest of the product placement is commonplace these days. Though I did see some tv show the other day that had a widescreen tv and the name brand had tape over it.
Greatest line: Sam's happy time.
They should have had something similar to the end of Grumpy Old Men with Sam's mom running through various names. That would have been awesome.
Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on July 06, 2007, 02:11:09 AM
Yo Burchfield, how about it?
Post by: Ceric on July 06, 2007, 12:45:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: bustin98
I think the movie is great with popcorn. As a Transformers G1 fan, I feel like I should be upset, but the knowledge that the movie was not made for G1 fans diminishes the queeziness.
I'm surprised no one complains of the 'car commercial' aspect of the film. I would be completely removed from the film each time the cars would come rolling down the road with the sweeping camera running by overhead. I tend to think the action would have been alot more fun if the cars were fake name brands without any sort of 'image' attached. The rest of the product placement is commonplace these days. Though I did see some tv show the other day that had a widescreen tv and the name brand had tape over it.
Greatest line: Sam's happy time.
They should have had something similar to the end of Grumpy Old Men with Sam's mom running through various names. That would have been awesome.
But thanks to the ending we got we know that Transfomers like to watch.
Post by: Svevan on July 06, 2007, 01:18:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ViewtifulGamer
Reading this thread makes me want to do another movie podcast with Evan.
Yo Burchfield, how about it?
Yeah let's do it. But don't let any relativists on the show.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 06, 2007, 02:44:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SvevanQuote
Originally posted by: ViewtifulGamer
Reading this thread makes me want to do another movie podcast with Evan.
Yo Burchfield, how about it?
Yeah let's do it. But don't let any relativists on the show.
Funny.
Post by: ShyGuy on July 07, 2007, 06:06:33 AM
Post by: Kairon on July 07, 2007, 08:55:03 PM
Post by: IceCold on July 07, 2007, 09:23:18 PM
Just another example of Bay's amateurism.
Post by: Kairon on July 07, 2007, 09:29:28 PM
Chill, IceCold. It's a general riff, not a barb aimed directly at anyone's politics. Like I said before, the closest this movie gets to politics is saying that everything we spend on our defense budgets is justified.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 07, 2007, 09:31:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but the not-so-veiled jabs at the government were horribly tacky.. From what is obviously Bush ordering ding-dongs to the slogan of "To imprison and enslave" on the cop car to the "I'd bet my ridiculous government salary on it" quote.
Just another example of Bay's amateurism.
I think you are reading way too much into it, yeah the first was unnecessary, but the other two were nothing to get upset about. Especially Barricade's slogan which was meant to be an evil opposite of "Protect and Serve), I fail to see how that is "anti-government", in fact I thought it was a pretty neat little addition . The government salary one was a cheesy joke that may or may not have been in the original script which Bay did not write. Besides the stupid Bush joke, the others you mentioned, are some really silly complaints regarding Bay being "amateurish" in regards to an anti-government message, one of which you would probably find in other movies (the over used government salary one).
Post by: Kairon on July 07, 2007, 09:38:42 PM
Geez, what's so insulting about the President of the United States getting the munchies?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 07, 2007, 09:41:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
OH! *smacks himself in head* I didn't know that was supposed to be a reference to Bush. Until recently, I lived in smack dab in the middle of leftist San Francisco/Bay Area, yet the only thoughts going through my mind when I got to that scene was "Gee, now I want a Ding Dong," AND "OH! Ho-Hos are a COMPLETELY different snack product!" AND "Oooh! Red socks!"
Geez, what's so insulting about the President of the United States getting the munchies?
Lol.
Post by: IceCold on July 07, 2007, 10:16:12 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 07, 2007, 11:05:41 PM
When I say “Transformers,” what comes to mind? Do pleasant memories of years gone by dance through your head of the epic battles between Megatron and Optimus Prime? Do you have memories of an excitement that drowned out all other thoughts after getting the original Optimus Prime’s toy or Megatron in his controversial gun form? Or perhaps you have memories of a TV show that was horribly cheesy with some of the most cliché and poorly written dialog around that was created solely for the purpose of selling toys, with perhaps fonder memories for Beast Wars or other additions to the Transformers saga? Whatever your view of Transformers may be, you MUST see the new movie!
After Transformers was announced for the big screen, the Transformers fan base became a buzz about what it would be like. Would it trounce their childhoods like so many other movies have? Or would it be a carbon copy of the original series right down to the story and Boxformer design? Well, I am happy to announce that it was neither of those. Michael Bay has pulled off something truly special in this new film; he managed to imagine Transformers for a new generation while maintaining many of the elements that hardcore fans will eat up. Make no mistake about this, this is not your old G1 Transformers, but at the same time, it manages to pay homage to it in many ways that will make you smile.
Before I get into the meat of this review, let me state that I was cautiously optimistic about the film and was unsure about the new Transformer designs. Now that I have experienced the movie, I cannot imagine anything else that would have worked better. Even if there was an alternative, it would not have been the classic designs, which would have looked out of place and overly cheesy in this film.
Now onto perhaps the most important question, how are the CGI effects used to make these new Transformer models come to life? To put it as clearly as possible, they are gorgeous. Taking into account that Transformers, when compared to other action focused blockbusters such as Spider-man 3 and Pirates of the Caribbean, it had roughly half the budget, which makes Michael Bay’s use of the CGI even more stunning. The CGI makes the Transformers come to life in this movie, complete with moving parts made even more amazing by the almost seamless interaction between themselves and humans. At times, you can really believe that the Transformers are really interacting with human beings. Perhaps one of the most stunning features of the CGI is the believable transformation sequences, which gets rid of the goofy inconsistency from the original film in which the Transformers could change into something that is drastically smaller than their robot forms. Now you can almost see how the Transformers change into a vehicle and back to their robot form piece by piece. The only unfortunate part of the visuals is that at times it appears that budget constraints were hidden through shaky and limited camera views of the Transformers. Luckily, for the most part, you don’t notice this, and at times it even creates an exciting scene.
What would these Transformers be without actors, including a competent voice cast? To put it clearly, it would be one drab movie. Thankfully, Transformers manages to have a great cast of both human actors and a brilliant voice cast. The main character, Sam (played by Shia Labeouf), is a surprisingly interesting character that we actually have fun getting to know. Labeouf really adds to the magic of this movie by his interaction, not only with other human characters but also with the Transformers that he interacts with in a believable and engaging way. The other human characters all put on solid performances but were not interesting enough to be memorable in any way.
Onto the Autobots and Decepticons. All I can say about them is that I was very impressed, but yet disappointed at the same time. Peter Cullen does an amazing job as Optimus, and the emotion you get from his voice work is top notch and I cannot imagine anyone doing it any better. The other Autobots had great voice castings, but sadly, they were underutilized and did not say much (though when they did it was usually good!). On the Decepticon side, Megatron and Frenzy did most of the speaking (Frenzy spoke in another language), with little dialogue coming from everyone else. For those that were worried about Megatron’s voice, don’t be, because the voice fits perfectly with his new, almost frightening look and it plays well off of Peter Cullen. It is just too bad that he did not have more lines.
Enough with the behind the scenes things like CGI and talent, what was the movie like? This movie is a thrill ride from beginning to end, and I can almost guarantee that there will be a moment where you will go “Whoa” (hopefully in a more dramatic voice than Neo in the Matrix). Michael Bay has crafted some of the most spectacular action scenes of all time, and shows that he has the artistic talent it takes when it comes to action, with some action sequences never before seen on the big screen. In fact, there is so much going on that you will miss some of it and you will probably have to go see the movie again. The robot battles are epic for the most part (despite a disappointing Megatron vs. Optimus final battle), and your adrenaline will be pumping, to say the least. To help provide some much needed change of pace, the movie has its share of humor, some of which is low brow, but at the same time it provides a fun laugh. What makes the movie so good is that it never takes itself too seriously. It manages to suck you into things with the visuals. One of the most frightening visual sequences involves Megatron chasing Shia Lebeouf’s character, which is one of the most exciting I have seen in years.
Believe it or not, through the flashes there are actually solid characters that you actually care about. As was stated before, Shia Labeouf does an amazing job of making us care about him. In addition to him, we can’t help but root and relate to Optimus Prime. What is most shocking is how our hearts go out to a Bumblebee that never talks. We are brought to this character through a combination of songs he plays and through his mannerisms, and it is amazing how much complexity was put into this character. There is one point during the film where you can’t help but feel a bit disheartened by what happens to him. For all the flack Bay has gotten, this movie manages to have some heart and substance through his characters.
Now, how does this movie help bring in the hardcore fans of Transformers? Well, through many ways, a lot of which only hardcore fans will get the references to. Many of the lines are stripped right from the G1 Transformers and will bring smiles to the faces of fans everywhere. With that said, it does change the storyline a bit. Instead of crash landing on earth thousands of years ago, the Transformers arrive on earth during present day (well, except for Megatron, whom is a homage to the old show) and are searching for the Allspark, which gives life to machines. Megatron wants this Allspark to rule the galaxy, while Optimus wants it to help restore life to Cybertron. Granted, this story won’t win any academy awards, but it works, and it manages to stay true to the ideas behind the original show.
What symbolism does Bay manage to convey in this film? In all seriousness, I think you have to really look hard to find anything, but for the fun of it, let me give it a shot. The main theme is that we can work together regardless of our differences, whether it is the Transformers being different sizes, or the variety of ethnic groups and the human race as a whole joining together with the Transformers as one to face off against the Megatron’s minions. In fact, you could say this film symbolizes that if we come together as one, we can destroy evil, even when we are outnumbered (the Decepticons outnumbered the Autobots by 3). This is a consistent theme throughout the movie, and even the final battle required teamwork from everybody.
Frenzy represented how someone small and that is regarded as “weak” can do many great things, and that we should never doubt someone based on physical appearance. Bay expertly crafts this character to symbolize this ideal, even making him be the primary conduit, setting the stage for the final battle. Even the character of Sam shows this characteristic, when the most unexpected character can help save the world is a teenager. This theme is masterfully woven into the fabric of Transformers, making this movie a lake full of substance.
Ok, perhaps that was a bit of sarcasm, but this movie is one of the best action movies around and it is truly a great movie within the genre. This is due to a combination of characters, expertly shot action sequences, CGI, humorous dialog, and a rollercoaster ride when it comes to emotions. Hardcore fans of Transformers will find enough familiarities with the movie that they should appreciate it, while new fans will find an experience like no other one out there. This is a cartoon to movie adaptation done right, and Michael Bay should be applauded for accomplishing this. Transformers was not easy to adapt without getting into the realm of B movie territory, or on the flip side, making it into something that definitely is not Transformers. He managed to find a fine balance between these two sides of the fence and created a thrill ride that sucks the audience in and won’t let go. I have no doubt the cheers I heard at the end of this film is not limited to my area. But that is true that for most who see this movie and are looking for a movie that is well made and above all else, fun. So make plans to see this film and ROLL OUT to your local movie theater right away!
8.5-The primary negatives being the underdeveloped characters, like the Transformers and sometimes erradic camera shots.
Post by: Ceric on July 08, 2007, 08:31:59 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 08, 2007, 08:38:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
GP you are wrong. The main theme is clearly that Man is Oblivious to the abnormal. ;P
You know, you may be onto something there, but I think that is in conjunction with teamwork. When I think about it is obvious Bay was trying to show the complexity of Teamwork even if human beings are oblivious to who they are teaming up with!
Post by: Kairon on July 08, 2007, 01:48:34 PM
Like I said, this movie makes me want to increase the defense budget.
Post by: oohhboy on July 08, 2007, 11:33:32 PM
The casting was well thought out, but there was so much wasted potential. I didn't mind Sam seeing he was cast for the solo purpose to identify with the geeks but got way too much time.
It wasn't really a transformer movie. It was more like a subtle propaganda film that circle jerks sci-fi keyboard jockeys with robots thrown in. It didn't matter where or who the robots were, as long as there were robots, it didn't matter. A perfectly entertaining C. G1 this is not, but as a blow crap up movie, acceptable.
Post by: Kairon on July 09, 2007, 12:07:18 AM
Uh oh, but watch out. I think you just earned yourself a spot on GP's naughty list.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 09, 2007, 05:07:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
You have got to be kidding me GP. That movie was so full of the U.S military is awesome go AIR FORCE! Overkill on the product placement. Wasted redundant characters like everyone from or associated with the government. Action sequences have almost no chronological cohesion and focuses on the wrong fight, but were technically impressive. The transformations were excellent, but felt far too busy.
The casting was well thought out, but there was so much wasted potential. I didn't mind Sam seeing he was cast for the solo purpose to identify with the geeks but got way too much time.
It wasn't really a transformer movie. It was more like a subtle propaganda film that circle jerks sci-fi keyboard jockeys with robots thrown in. It didn't matter where or who the robots were, as long as there were robots, it didn't matter. A perfectly entertaining C. G1 this is not, but as a blow crap up movie, acceptable.
The product placement was not that bad at all, especially taking into consideration it was a sacrifice in order to keep the budget costs down. Not sure what you mean about "chronological cohesion", but the action sequences, for action sequences, fit well. Also if you read my review I said that most of the characters were underutilized besides Sam, though saying Sam had too much screen time is entirely subjective, personally I appreciated his screen time. I think the movie had a lot more Sam in order to develop the human characters and their interactions with the Transformers (I hear the sequel will focus more on the Transformers themselves). The U.S. Military thing, all I have to say is, so what? I guess the original Transformers was propaganda too because Optimus was red white and blue. But who really cares, it is not that big of a deal (Personally I found alot of the military officials to be shown in a negative light).
Thank god it wasn't a G1 movie, have you seen the old animated series lately? I'm sorry but it is flat out terrible in about every sense of the word (Fun for nostalgia but it is not very good), it basically goes like ::Megatron hatches a plan, terrible dialog, plan fails, Decepticons retreat. Rinse and repeat::. In regards to the Transformers themselves being thrown in with little to no thought, I strongly disagree at least when it comes to Optimus, Bumblebee, and Megatron all of which played important, vital roles and it was easy to track them (some of the others, I agree were harder to follow but I think that was more because of the limited development time for the secondary characters). Yeah the others were underutilized, but like I said the movie was more focused on the human characters than the Transformers themselves (Probably due to more budget restraints but there are rumblings there will be more Transformer development in future movies). Anyway those are fair concerns I can understand why it would bother some. Besides you said you'd give it a C and I gave it an 8.5, that is only a 10pt difference!
Post by: bustin98 on July 10, 2007, 03:45:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Oohhboy, I think you need to go back and read Svevan's review! In particular, he adresses your "chronological cohesion" concerns.
Uh oh, but watch out. I think you just earned yourself a spot on GP's naughty list.
The way you say that it almost sounds like a fun thing to do . . .
Post by: oohhboy on July 10, 2007, 10:51:35 PM
Megatron Vs Optimus fight was cut and chopped up to be interrupted by far less important scenes. What could have been an epic fight was reduced to animated robot wrestling. Megatron was reduced to a measly generic villain and none of the ideological conflict that exist between them played out.
No doubt it is a good looking movie and individual action shots are awesome, but as a whole, it makes no sense. Bay made a very unbalanced movie.
Post by: Luigi_1326 on July 13, 2007, 06:04:33 AM
Post by: SixthAngel on July 18, 2007, 08:50:52 PM
Every human besides people directly related to Shia should have been a total bit part. They were totally worthless and pointless the entire movie. I never cared about the army guy with a wife, I wanted him and the soldiers to die since all they did was shoot at the decepticons to absolutely no effect and miraculously survive missile barrages. Their guns did nothing until suddenly famous army guy decides that he knows that Blackout is weak underneath (how?) and does a motorcycle trick that would tear off all of his skin and manages to take him down with his worthless grenade launcher looking handgun after surviving countless rocket and gun blasts that missed him and his platoon.
The army was trying to take the allspark away from Megatron and Starscream with a helicopter!! The two could turn into jets!! Jets!! They could easily take it back, Starscream took out a whole squadron alone. Even Blackout could fly and take it yet somehow even the autobots went along with this ridiculous plan. My friend looked over to me and said "They do realize they can fly right?"
I had my suspension of disbelief on high coming into the movie and it was still too much for me. (I let Soundwave walk away from a recently attacked airforce one slide with no complaints) The action scenes are cool and I like how they portrayed Shia, getting Bumblebee and the girl but once it moves to anyone else it goes way downhill.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 08:59:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
This movie would have been far better if they got rid of the ridiculously worthless humans.
Every human besides people directly related to Shia should have been a total bit part. They were totally worthless and pointless the entire movie. I never cared about the army guy with a wife, I wanted him and the soldiers to die since all they did was shoot at the decepticons to absolutely no effect and miraculously survive missile barrages. Their guns did nothing until suddenly famous army guy decides that he knows that Blackout is weak underneath (how?) and does a motorcycle trick that would tear off all of his skin and manages to take him down with his worthless grenade launcher looking handgun after surviving countless rocket and gun blasts that missed him and his platoon.
The army was trying to take the allspark away from Megatron and Starscream with a helicopter!! The two could turn into jets!! Jets!! They could easily take it back, Starscream took out a whole squadron alone. Even Blackout could fly and take it yet somehow even the autobots went along with this ridiculous plan. My friend looked over to me and said "They do realize they can fly right?"
I had my suspension of disbelief on high coming into the movie and it was still too much for me. (I let Soundwave walk away from a recently attacked airforce one slide with no complaints) The action scenes are cool and I like how they portrayed Shia, getting Bumblebee and the girl but once it moves to anyone else it goes way downhill.
Soundwave was in the movie? I think not, so in turn your whole post fails! All I can say, is that thankfully there are far more people who appreciated the film (the weekend return only dropping less than 50%), most of whom tried not to take a movie too seriously that had giant talking robots that could transform into cars and other vehicles.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 09:05:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
It was trying to describe the bottomless bullet mag equivalent of time. One moment there are guys running towards their planes, next is back to the ground war, then the very next thing the air strikes arrive. Every single plane has got to be flying something like mach 30 to make the time that they do. Also the final fight inside the city had time moving around everywhere. Fire fights not in view would simply pause and on return it starts up again like no time has passed.
Megatron Vs Optimus fight was cut and chopped up to be interrupted by far less important scenes. What could have been an epic fight was reduced to animated robot wrestling. Megatron was reduced to a measly generic villain and none of the ideological conflict that exist between them played out.
No doubt it is a good looking movie and individual action shots are awesome, but as a whole, it makes no sense. Bay made a very unbalanced movie.
The transformer character development will be in the sequel, this movie mainly centered around introducing the Transformers and the humans. Your complaints about the time inconsistency shows you went into the movie with a non-action movie mindset (or you were just thinking of something to complain about), and shows you are reading way too much into the movie, these errors pop up all the time. Heck you see errors and inconsistencies everywhere, when you are dealing with the action genre, which for the most part is extremely unbelievable. THough I think it could be argued that this unbelievability adds to the genre, and personally would have it no other way.
In regards to Megatron, he was a generic villain in G1 as well, he was evil and did evil things. I swear people need to go back and watch the original cartoon, it is quite bad if you look at it objectively. The only ideological conflict Optimus and Megatron had is one wanted power and to destroy, while the other wanted to protect. This was shown in the movie as well, especially Optimus talking about how freedom belongs to every sentient being. Not to mention that there was the line taken directly from the Transformers movie from the 80s about how one shall stand and one shall fall, in addition to some bantering back and forth between Megatron and Optimus (Though I do wish Megatron was given more screen time).
Post by: SixthAngel on July 18, 2007, 09:22:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Soundwave was in the movie? I think not, so in turn your whole post fails! All I can say, is that thankfully there are far more people who appreciated the film (the weekend return only dropping less than 50%), most of whom tried not to take a movie too seriously that had giant talking robots that could transform into cars and other vehicles.
So instead they had a different transformer that was also a music player. They couldn't use tapes because it is 2007 so they used a cd player instead. They gave him the name Frenzy (which I just looked up) to satisfy superhardcore fans who couldn't take Soundwave being so small and different. Frenzy was a tape not an actual boombox, the transform mode gives away who it was always supposed to be and who they wanted most people to think it was. I don't even think they mention his name the whole movie. It was Soundwave no doubt to everyone that didn't look up everything online before hand, they just put Frenzy on the internet to calm the rabid fans. We know the truth though. It would be like if Nintendo decided baby Mario's name would be Frank to keep hardcore Mario fans happy yet kept his big red cap with an M on it. We all would know who it really was only those hardcore enough to look up information about it would see the propaganda to make them happy.
You used one small nitpick only super hardcore fans would know in order to ignore the truth throughout the entire post.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 09:24:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngelQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Soundwave was in the movie? I think not, so in turn your whole post fails! All I can say, is that thankfully there are far more people who appreciated the film (the weekend return only dropping less than 50%), most of whom tried not to take a movie too seriously that had giant talking robots that could transform into cars and other vehicles.
So instead they had a different transformer that was also a music player. They couldn't use tapes because it is 2007 so they used a cd player instead. They gave him the name Frenzy (which I just looked up) to satisfy superhardcore fans who couldn't take Soundwave being so small and different. Frenzy was a tape not an actual boombox, the transform mode gives away who it was always supposed to be and who they wanted most people to think it was. I don't even think they mention his name the whole movie. It was Soundwave no doubt to everyone that didn't look up everything online before hand, they just put Frenzy on the internet to calm the rabid fans.
Actually Soundwave is rumored to be in the sequel, and may very well be voiced by Frank Welker. Not sure about your conspiracy theory either, you may have forgotten but Frenzy was in G1 as well and was the smallest of the Decepticons. His alternate mode was a cassette too.
Post by: SixthAngel on July 18, 2007, 09:36:17 PM
Different = Hardcore fans are gonna get pissed. Lets keep everything about the character we were going to use, even the trademark transform mode of Soundwave except lets change his name.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 09:38:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
I only watched the cartoon when I was kid but even the makers of the movie say the role was originally supposed to be Soundwave but they changed who it was because they thought the model was too "different."
Different = Hardcore fans are gonna get pissed. Lets keep everything about the character we were going to use, even the trademark transform mode of Soundwave except lets change his name.
There still was a frenzy in the original series who matches the profile of this new one. So called hardcore fans would know that as well. It doesn't matter what the role was originally intended as, because like many other movies things change and so do characters. Like I said though I believe the writer has stated they will try to include Soundwave in the next movie, since they are fans of the character.
Post by: SixthAngel on July 18, 2007, 09:46:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
I only watched the cartoon when I was kid but even the makers of the movie say the role was originally supposed to be Soundwave but they changed who it was because they thought the model was too "different."
Different = Hardcore fans are gonna get pissed. Lets keep everything about the character we were going to use, even the trademark transform mode of Soundwave except lets change his name.
There still was a frenzy in the original series who matches the profile of this new one. So called hardcore fans would know that as well. It doesn't matter what the role was originally intended as, because like many other movies things change and so do characters.
The difference is that Frenzy doesn't have enough fans to bitch that he is totally different with a new transform mode just like Soundwave's but after looking on the internet Soundwave has a large fanbase that would crucify the movie for making him small. The transform mode has always been the trademark of all the characters and this is Soundwave's transform mode and him, just technically Frenzy. I did like the cd shurikens he had though.
Enough about technicalities. Did you honestly not laugh when they brought the allspark into a city for no apparent reason besides a fighting backdrop and then decide to run from Starscream and Megatron with helicopter?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 09:50:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngelQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
You used one small nitpick only super hardcore fans would know in order to ignore the truth throughout the entire post.
The truth is that your complaints were nitpicky in their own right, and are entirely subjective. Maybe the army guy seen something in the armor that he could exploit? Who knows and frankly who cares? You see that stuff all the time in even some of the best action movies, it is one of things that makes an action movie and action movie, they always get into the realm of "Yeah right, that wouldn't happen in real life!". In regards to the autobots flying, I don't recall them doing much flying in G1 either. It was an artistic choice, to differentiate the two sides, the Decepticons were best airborn while the autobots were best on the ground.
Post by: Shift Key on July 18, 2007, 09:50:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
It may be the best pure action movie I've ever seen in my entire life. It starts with a bang and doesn't really let up, and Shia Lebouf is the PERFECT everyman.
1. Shia LeBouf doesn't shut up at all for the entire movie. He's like a small child on sugar. It got annoying at times.
2. It seemed a bit long and drawn out. Some of the jokes (like Transformers in the backyard) were done until they were no longer funny.
3. They kept the "transforming sound" almost identical to what I remember from my childhood.
It was a decent movie, but I can list off several action movies which were better. Die Hard for one (I saw #2 the night before) was higher quality because it didn't have ridiculous CG graphics (to the point where I had no idea what was happening in the mess of pre-rendered junk flying at the screen)
Is there even a "pure" genre because I certainly got the feeling there was a simple storyline in there. If it was 2 hours of transformers fighting then I'd call it a pure action movie.
PS: Hot chick and Aussie chick = not a pure action movie.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 09:55:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngelQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
I only watched the cartoon when I was kid but even the makers of the movie say the role was originally supposed to be Soundwave but they changed who it was because they thought the model was too "different."
Different = Hardcore fans are gonna get pissed. Lets keep everything about the character we were going to use, even the trademark transform mode of Soundwave except lets change his name.
There still was a frenzy in the original series who matches the profile of this new one. So called hardcore fans would know that as well. It doesn't matter what the role was originally intended as, because like many other movies things change and so do characters.
The difference is that Frenzy doesn't have enough fans to bitch that he is totally different with a new transform mode just like Soundwave's but after looking on the internet Soundwave has a large fanbase that would crucify the movie for making him small. The transform mode has always been the trademark of all the characters and this is Soundwave's transform mode and him, just technically Frenzy. I did like the cd shurikens he had though.
Enough about technicalities. Did you honestly not laugh when they brought the allspark into a city for no apparent reason besides a fighting backdrop and then decide to run from Starscream and Megatron with helicopter?
So if they bring in Soundwave are you still going to whine about Frenzy? The writers of the film were big Transformer fans as well, and the creative team made the decision to change Frenzy's character in order to stay in line with the re imagined transformers. In regards to laughing about that part with the all spark, I didn't think much of it, it didn't matter one way or another. Like I said finding logic in situations that happen in the action genre shows you really aren't there to watch an action movie but to pick things apart.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on July 18, 2007, 09:58:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Shift KeyQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
It may be the best pure action movie I've ever seen in my entire life. It starts with a bang and doesn't really let up, and Shia Lebouf is the PERFECT everyman.
1. Shia LeBouf doesn't shut up at all for the entire movie. He's like a small child on sugar. It got annoying at times.
2. It seemed a bit long and drawn out. Some of the jokes (like Transformers in the backyard) were done until they were no longer funny.
3. They kept the "transforming sound" almost identical to what I remember from my childhood.
It was a decent movie, but I can list off several action movies which were better. Die Hard for one (I saw #2 the night before) was higher quality because it didn't have ridiculous CG graphics (to the point where I had no idea what was happening in the mess of pre-rendered junk flying at the screen)
Is there even a "pure" genre because I certainly got the feeling there was a simple storyline in there. If it was 2 hours of transformers fighting then I'd call it a pure action movie.
PS: Hot chick and Aussie chick = not a pure action movie.
You should see the making of feature, Bay did everything he could with conventional means (actually he is known for trying to avoid CGI whenever possible), in fact alot of the stuff he insisted on doing conventionally (some of the scenes were quite impressive when you seen how they pulled it off). Though when you are talking about giant robots that transform into vehicles you can't very well do that with conventional means.
Post by: DAaaMan64 on November 23, 2007, 06:30:49 PM
I love this movie and I can't pinpoint why. When I watch It, I get that feeling like a sitcom or anime I really like is coming to it's show finale. That real heart felt weird butterfly feeling and nearly a depression, but I am still happy. Totally screwed up really. I don't understand why I get it, but I get it whenever I watch this movie and it'll last for about a day after I watch it.
I kinda think it has to do with the music and Megan Fox. haha I am being completely honest. I bought the score to this movie and I love it. The reason why I mention Megan Fox is that, even though I don't like her in any other movie or sitcom, she just gets me in this one. And not like, got my attention gets me. She has me in love with her by the end of movie. I don't know why, and frankly it's sick that I would feel that way about an actress I've never met. I have never felt that way during a movie I will never ever action on this retarded feeling in such an outlandish and impossible circumstance. I think I get this same feeling when I go on vacation and see a girl I am interested in.
TOTALLY Lame
Post by: Shift Key on November 23, 2007, 09:08:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DAaaMan64
The reason why I mention Megan Fox is that, even though I don't like her in any other movie or sitcom, she just gets me in this one. And not like, got my attention gets me. She has me in love with her by the end of movie. I don't know why, and frankly it's sick that I would feel that way about an actress I've never met. I have never felt that way during a movie I will never ever action on this retarded feeling in such an outlandish and impossible circumstance. I think I get this same feeling when I go on vacation and see a girl I am interested in.
GET OUTSIDE IMMEDIATELY
Post by: DAaaMan64 on November 24, 2007, 05:12:57 AM
Oh Ya er something! This is why I think it totally retarded that I would feel that way. absolutely the dumbest thing ever.
I mean look at this girl:
She had this look on her face constantly through the whole movie, I don't think a damn thing goes on in her head ever.
Post by: nickmitch on November 24, 2007, 05:40:39 AM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on November 25, 2007, 05:59:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: TVman
While Shia LeBeouf has a look of general concern/fear on his face, the female looks like she's glaring at somebody.
Well I don't know. But a couple more viewings of that movie and I'll stop glorifying the girl. Back to normal.
Post by: DAaaMan64 on May 18, 2008, 06:42:49 PM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3085/2502868047_87c0f1cb13_o.jpg)
She was recently named world's sexiest woman by an online pole. OH THEY R SOO RITE
YES THAT IS MEGAN FOX.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on May 18, 2008, 07:22:21 PM
Post by: nickmitch on May 18, 2008, 07:48:25 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on May 18, 2008, 09:31:20 PM
Quote
The difference is that Frenzy doesn't have enough fans to bitch
You sire have never spent ANY time in a Transformers forum if you can say this, the whole Rumble vs Frenzy debate is one of the most heated Transformers argument to this day.
Basically it goes like this, Soundwave had 5 smaller cassettes originally, they added more latter but the originals were Rumble, Frenzy, Buzzsaw (the bird that CAME WITH Soundwave BUT NOT featured in the show more than 2 or three episodes, Laser Beak (sold seperately from Soundwave but WAS his sidekick on the show and featured prominatley every single episode., then there was Ravage (the what was it bob cat?)
Anyways it goes something like this, Rumble and Frenzy were twins, the exact same robot mode the difference was ONE was Red and ONE was BLUE. Here is where it gets tricky and WHY it was IMPROTANT to have Frenzy as the name in this movie.
In the cartoon the BLUE robot was referred to as RUMBLE, but the RED robot was called Frenzy (causing most cartoon fans to mix up the names)
The toys AND COMICS switched the names around, the RED robot was RUMBLE and the BLUE robot was Frenzy (but in BOTH cases the BLUE robot was the most used)
So he was the ONE cassette that had the most fans to piss off and pelase at the same time. No matter which name they went with, Soundwave, Frenzy or Rumble, some fans were gonna be pissed.
See the Toys came first so it SHOULD be the standard, but they had a RED Bumble Bee AND a Yellow Bumble Bee toy (there were other mix ups in the series as well, too many to list but worth noting the major ones due to their placement in the new film)
So most fans generally accept the toy colors and names aren't always right, so they side with either the cartoon OR the comics (which had different stories and main characters)
So the comics and pilot of the cartoon both came out close enough to the launch of the toys to cause this mass confusion, depending on which you were exposed to first, toys, cartoon or comics, would determine what name you associated with the RED/BLUE robot cassettes.
So for this movie to settle that Frenzy is the main robot that everyone associated with and was acting as Megatrons right hand man (a role Rumble played in the cartoon and Frenzy played in the comics) so this was likely a way for the film makers to sorta 'settle' the great debate. (even though I take the stance that Rumble is Blue and Frenzy is Red so to me the character in the movies is RUMBLE *NOT* Frenzy despite what the writers may say)
Also I don't get the whole Bumblebee as a sports car hate most people had, in G2 he was a beetle but then turned into a sports car (not an actual Camero but a Camero looking car)
So of all non-beetle alt modes the Camero was the obvious choice, aside from cooperate meddling that is. But a lot of transfans contest the legitimacy of G2 in the first place so why do I even care right?
