Transformers

great movie with great fx!!!!!

Best Sci-Fi movie of the year!!!

I hope Michael Bay pays be back on that $15 I lead him in college.
 
why does everyone hate Micheal Bay, I have one word for you Player haters, Okay that's two words. the man knows how to shoot good action movies and he's great I hate people who start criticising other directors when they make it big.
 
hes been big but he makes shallow films. he needs better scripts. but like i said i like this film
 
c.g._eads said:
This was maybe the worst movie I've seen in over a year. It is EASILY the worst action movie I can remember. This movie was so stupid and so bad and so outdated and so ridiculous and so mind-numbingly AWFUL. Unless you are 14 years old, stay far far far away from this awful movie. I will now go into all the things that made this movie so awful.

THERE WERE NO SCENES
Outside of the very first scene, there wasn't a single scene for the rest of the film. There was nothing resembling a setup, an attempt to resolve something, and then a conclusion. It was just random pace-challenged bits and pieces that blurred together. In the middle of "scenes" we'd jump into another "scene" and I don't remember a single moment where there was quiet in the film.

THERE WAS NO STORY OR PLOT
Michael Bay's idea of a story is to let Shia LeBeaof go Vince Vaughn Swingers style, run without a script, and try out his Laugh Factory routine, then intertwine that with Transformers transforming. That was the whole movie. Shia riffing, transformers transforming. Nothing else happened.

THE TRANSFORMING AND TRANSFORMERS WERE AWFUL
When they transformed, little bits and pieces would come out of nowhere! The cool thing about the real transformers was that they really transformed. Everything you saw in robot form really did transfer into a car. But they had 8 million things that would come out of nowhere that were never on the car. And the robot versions looked 8 times bigger than their vehicle counterparts. And then stupid-ass Michael Bay (and I really do officially believe now that he is the worst director in the history of directing) could never just straight-on watch the transformers transform. He had to do eight 360s around every angle of the robot whenever they transform, eliminating the chance to actually SEE how the vehicles transformed. Man is this guy an idiot.

PULL BACK THE CAMERA YOU MORON!
There were only two times in the entire movie where he pulled back the camera and was still while watching the robot carnage and those were the only two cool moments in the movie and they only lasted a few seconds.

MICHAEL-BAY'ISMS
Does this retard have any original bones in his body? If there weren't any robots in this movie, IT WOULD BE BAD BOYS II! He used every single exact shot he used in that movie. Every single piece of music. Every single movement and beat. This guy is so f*cking dumb.

THAT BOOMBOX MINI-ROBOT THEY STOLE FROM THAT OLD MARS MOVIE
What the hellll was that???? Why was it in the movie? Why did it make noises that turned the movie into a comedy club? Did Lucas direct this robot? This was maybe the stupidist thing I've ever seen.

I did not think that any director with a key to the ILM tool shed could f*ck up a Transformers film , but this guy f*cked it up so bad, that I will never ever see a Michael Bay movie again for as long as I live, even if it's called, "This Movie Was Made Only For C.G. Eads". He is a worthless worthless director and ruined this film.
Click to expand...

Dude . . .

Bro . . .

(Channeling Hudson now.)

Why are you such a gigantic

Debbie_Downer.jpg


?
 
I enjoyed it. Had a few problems with it.

It was sometimes pretty hard to tell the difference between the characters in their robotic modes -- too much of the vehicle exteriors disappeared (there's a reason they were so varied in color, originally).

The Decepticons were pretty disappointing. They didn't do much.

The AllSpark seems only to want to make "evil" robots now.

But as an action flick, what more could you really want? It doesn't try to rise above anything, and you shouldn't expect it to. It was a cartoon. Will be nice to see the sequel.

And, there was a lot of nice eye candy.
 
DC said:
Spike Witwicky ("Sam Witwicky" in the movie) was the boy befriended, especially by Bumblebee. Spike's love interest, Carly (introduced in season 2), is about a year older than him. His father, nicknamed "Sparkplug," was also allied with the Autobots.
Click to expand...

They were oilmen.
 
I hear ya, But

I hear ya, But

UncleBenji1977 said:
SPOILER ALERT
I feel they should have spent more time with the kid and his giant freakin' robot friend. Instead, as soon as he learns he even has a robot it seems we must jump to the next action scene. The friendship of Bumblebee and the kid should have been developed.
Click to expand...

I see what your saying, but in a movie like this about Giant robots fighting the last thing people want to see is a long drawn out story about the love between a boy and his alien robot. Prim example the Incredible Hulk movie. What the "F". So drawn out it sucked.
People came to see the Hulk smash. I bet they won't make the same mistake in the new HULK movie coming in June 2008 with Jim Van Wyke producing and Edward Norton as Bruce Banner.

The only things I that bothered me alittle was Star Screams voice like Staygettin said, and lack of self expression, and how close up on the robots they were during the fight scenes. I think when this movie goes to video more people will be disappointed about that fact. The voice should be simular to the cartoon. That is not alot to ask. They got Prime, Megatron, and Jazz's voice right on. I think Star Scream's voice should have sounded closer to the original. But regardless the movie was sick.


BTW, Has anyone seen this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STQ3nhXuuEM&NR=1
 
Last edited:
spidey said:
vw and porche dont want their cars affiliated with war anymore so thats why they couldnt get them.
Click to expand...

All you guys that think this are blowing my mind... if you think for one second that this isn't a money issue then... uh... you gotta' be KIDDING me... (that's the nicest way I can put it).

Guess how much it costs to make a $100M movie... or a $300M movie... Do you think George Soros is gonna' step up and plunk down matching funds to the deal that GM made for ultimate product placement... just to keep the capitalist machine out of it?

Did you notice that ALL of GMs ad campaigns even for cars not appearing in the movie are now TRANSFORMER ADS?

VW and Porsche didn't want to endorse war movies... pff... man that's... pff... you gotta' be kidding me.

Is that why Fanta cans don't appear in more movies and Coke and Pepsi do?

When I saw the BTS for Transformers on the TV Guide channel and the asked Bay about this he went on a long story about how the car chosen as BB was a careful CHOICE... that they initially considered ferrari, porsche, etc (<direct quote)... and that HE (meaning Bay himself) chose what he thought was the coolest car. All I could say was mmm-hmm.

Just like in the last Bond movie there were Fords-a-plenty... it's not too hard to spot who is footing part of the bill on these giant movie budgets... and it has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with money. Remember the BMW films? Well there you go... that's the difference in how much money BMW has to inject into pop culture versus how much GM has.
 
First. i love this movie!!!!!


GM was cast as the staring roles because they saved the production 3 million dollars. The role(s) were open to all manufactures. Gm won the bid. Plus all the bonus advertisements DreamWorks didn't have to foot the bill for when GM was proud to do so. This film Cost 150 million. Pirates cost somewhere around 300 million. Besides the question of who has more production value, The point is that the more you can trim the budget, the more profit the studio & and others involved earn. GM made them an extra 3 million.

Transformers turned a profit of about 100 million in one week. Thats a profit..... already matched the budget in less time then that. And some people say this movie stinks. The world voted with their pockets. I voted twice already and i'd be willing to do it again. Some places like UK haven't even gotten the chance to vote yet.....


<<POLITICAL COMMENT DELETED>>


For the record I will proudly admit that i've been a die hard fan of Michael Bay since The Rock. (Didn't see Bad Boys yet at that point.) If that makes me a little biased towards this movie, I don't care.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you just re-stated what I said... or re-affirmed it... in case I wasn't clear... that was my point.

While I think it's perfectly reasonable to love this movie and sit in awe of it's effects... I still want people to separate entertainment from logic and politics because it's so easy to throw personal opinions on those issues against something cool just to hope it sticks. Stating that VW and Porsche had personal motives to distance themselves from the project begs for a source of that information. Blockbuster movies like this are big business... and not a whole lot more. We are 2 decades into product placement as a means to offset the outrageous costs to produce big movies... and the placement only gets more obvious and more prevalent throughout. Hopefully everybody can balance personal opinions with business logic and separate the two.
 
Last edited:
I read an article about it so I would think its somewhat true.

MattinSTL said:
All you guys that think this are blowing my mind... if you think for one second that this isn't a money issue then... uh... you gotta' be KIDDING me... (that's the nicest way I can put it).

Guess how much it costs to make a $100M movie... or a $300M movie... Do you think George Soros is gonna' step up and plunk down matching funds to the deal that GM made for ultimate product placement... just to keep the capitalist machine out of it?

Did you notice that ALL of GMs ad campaigns even for cars not appearing in the movie are now TRANSFORMER ADS?

VW and Porsche didn't want to endorse war movies... pff... man that's... pff... you gotta' be kidding me.

Is that why Fanta cans don't appear in more movies and Coke and Pepsi do?

When I saw the BTS for Transformers on the TV Guide channel and the asked Bay about this he went on a long story about how the car chosen as BB was a careful CHOICE... that they initially considered ferrari, porsche, etc (<direct quote)... and that HE (meaning Bay himself) chose what he thought was the coolest car. All I could say was mmm-hmm.

Just like in the last Bond movie there were Fords-a-plenty... it's not too hard to spot who is footing part of the bill on these giant movie budgets... and it has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with money. Remember the BMW films? Well there you go... that's the difference in how much money BMW has to inject into pop culture versus how much GM has.
Click to expand...
 
I went to see it with the family, and we loved it. Even my wife was laughing and having a good time, even though she was hesitant to see it. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun to watch.

As far as Porsche, they have become elitist, picking and choosing who gets the pleasure of using the Porsche likeness. I believe the newest Batman paid a bundle to use one. I got a kick out of Dad taking the kid for a car and driving into a Porsche dealership. The kid says "No way! You're getting me a Porsche? Dad just laughs and says "No Way! You ain't getting a Porshe!" and keeps going to a crap dealer.

My only problem was, it wasn't as kid friendly language wise as I had hoped. Although it was cool to see Optimus rip the head off of a Decepticon. would be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top