yeah I know that's what they said about the Dinobots, but then, when did the Dinobots ever care about disguises? They were built for raw power; to be the muscle in tough battles against greater odds.

Again, you need to see this from the POV of someone who is not a TF fan or even a scifi fan. I don't know how many people would be keen on seeing a movie featuring transforming Mecha-Godzillas roaming around.

 

I'd say one good way to do it would be: The Allspark fires off a shockwave in a museum, hitting an animatronic dinosaur exhibit that is still under construction (so the Dinobots look robotic). The dinosaurs transform and start tearing through the streets, not knowing where they are or what's going on, like other bots created by Allspark energy in the first movie did.

The Autobots wrangle them up and, not being the murdering types, try to calm them. By the end, the Dinobots, who are kind of dumb due to recently being born, are loyal to the Autobots (or maybe one in particular like Prime), and they help fight the Decepticons.

That's what I mean by being creative. They can make a decent reason for anything to happen and be accepted if they just try instead of making excuses.

It's not the implausibility that's the issue - it's whether or not the idea would be appealing to a general audience. Would most people really want to pay money to go to a cinema and watch a movie with an entire scene (more likely more than 1 scene) dedicated to seeing the Autobots wrangle Dinobots?? And how would they move about without attracting attention (since they have no disguise mode)? The whole menacing aspect of the Transformers in the live action movie universe is, as Keller said in the trailer, "They can take on any form. They can be anywhere." -- the fact that even a vending machine or your X-Box can be a killer robot... this just doesn't work with Dinobots.

 

Also, as a Transfan I would hate to see the Dinobots being portrayed as stupid. The Dinobots, while aggressive and hostile, weren't really that stupid in the G1 comics (at times even proving Prowl and Optimus Prime wrong) nor the pre-movie cartoon episodes. TFTM made them retarded for some reason, then in the post-movie eps they just got stupider... and I hated that. Don't even talk to me about the Animated Dinobots <shudder>

 

It's a B movie. People go to B movies to see awesome, totally unrealistic fight scenes and skimpy bikinis.

I disagree. The Transformers movie is anything but a B movie. Transformers The Movie and the Beast Wars Movie (Lio Convoy's Crisis) were B movies, but not the Bay movie. The movie set multiple records when it opened, including biggest opening week gross for a non-sequel (US$155.4 million), biggest Tuesday release gross (US$27.4 million), biggest July 4th gross (US$29 million), and the biggest film opening in mainland China (US$3 million). The movie closed in the US on November 8 2007, during which time it took in US$319,246,193. (US gross accounted for US$310,578,372 before the IMAX version's release.) It has earned a worldwide gross of US$708,272,592.

 

And I wouldn't say that the fight scenes are unrealistic. If anything, they seemed too realistic for some people - especially those who complained that the fights were too blurry and messy, which is precisely how a REAL fight looks like. I don't know if you've ever been in or witnessed a street brawl, but it's really messy and chaotic. Anyone else who's done martial arts would know this and understand that what martial arts essentially does is give you the ability to ride the chaos, not defy it. As Buzz Lightyear would say, it's "falling with style" (whereas unrealistic movie fights defy gravity using wire stunts, e.g. The Matrix). But even the TF movie had its fair share of wire stunt choreography too; but again, we're looking at robots scrapping with a far greater degree of velocity, momentum, torsion, force etc. than any human fighter would use.

 

Transformers The Movie (1986) was hugely successful with TF fans but flopped at the box office because it failed to engage the general audience. If you're not a TF fan TFTM makes no sense and as a result it received scathing reviews from critics. Remember that in order for the movie franchise to continue being successful, it needs to appeal to Joe-average, not hardcore TF buffs like us.

yeah I know that's what they said about the Dinobots, but then, when did the Dinobots ever care about disguises? They were built for raw power; to be the muscle in tough battles against greater odds.

Again, you need to see this from the POV of someone who is not a TF fan or even a scifi fan. I don't know how many people would be keen on seeing a movie featuring transforming Mecha-Godzillas roaming around.

 

 

LOTS OF PEOPLE. People like stuff that looks cool, sounds cool, and blows up cool. People who don't won't want to watch the movie anyway.

 

And as far as I care, a B movie is a movie with writing as bad as Bay's movie, box office numbers be DAMNED. It relies on kick-ass special effects and arousing men's penises, not a FANTASTIC plot.

You know. I haven't seen Terminator yet, but in the comercials, the giant upright walker looks well, stupid.

 

I'm no engineer or scientist, but the arched and hunched joints of the movie bots on screen do look more realistic.

 

I don't need my toys all hunched over, but it does work on screen.

yeah I know that's what they said about the Dinobots, but then, when did the Dinobots ever care about disguises? They were built for raw power; to be the muscle in tough battles against greater odds.

Again, you need to see this from the POV of someone who is not a TF fan or even a scifi fan. I don't know how many people would be keen on seeing a movie featuring transforming Mecha-Godzillas roaming around.

 

I'd say one good way to do it would be: The Allspark fires off a shockwave in a museum, hitting an animatronic dinosaur exhibit that is still under construction (so the Dinobots look robotic). The dinosaurs transform and start tearing through the streets, not knowing where they are or what's going on, like other bots created by Allspark energy in the first movie did.

The Autobots wrangle them up and, not being the murdering types, try to calm them. By the end, the Dinobots, who are kind of dumb due to recently being born, are loyal to the Autobots (or maybe one in particular like Prime), and they help fight the Decepticons.

That's what I mean by being creative. They can make a decent reason for anything to happen and be accepted if they just try instead of making excuses.

It's not the implausibility that's the issue - it's whether or not the idea would be appealing to a general audience. Would most people really want to pay money to go to a cinema and watch a movie with an entire scene (more likely more than 1 scene) dedicated to seeing the Autobots wrangle Dinobots?? And how would they move about without attracting attention (since they have no disguise mode)? The whole menacing aspect of the Transformers in the live action movie universe is, as Keller said in the trailer, "They can take on any form. They can be anywhere." -- the fact that even a vending machine or your X-Box can be a killer robot... this just doesn't work with Dinobots.

 

Also, as a Transfan I would hate to see the Dinobots being portrayed as stupid. The Dinobots, while aggressive and hostile, weren't really that stupid in the G1 comics (at times even proving Prowl and Optimus Prime wrong) nor the pre-movie cartoon episodes. TFTM made them retarded for some reason, then in the post-movie eps they just got stupider... and I hated that. Don't even talk to me about the Animated Dinobots <shudder>

 

It's a B movie. People go to B movies to see awesome, totally unrealistic fight scenes and skimpy bikinis.

I disagree. The Transformers movie is anything but a B movie. Transformers The Movie and the Beast Wars Movie (Lio Convoy's Crisis) were B movies, but not the Bay movie. The movie set multiple records when it opened, including biggest opening week gross for a non-sequel (US$155.4 million), biggest Tuesday release gross (US$27.4 million), biggest July 4th gross (US$29 million), and the biggest film opening in mainland China (US$3 million). The movie closed in the US on November 8 2007, during which time it took in US$319,246,193. (US gross accounted for US$310,578,372 before the IMAX version's release.) It has earned a worldwide gross of US$708,272,592.

 

And I wouldn't say that the fight scenes are unrealistic. If anything, they seemed too realistic for some people - especially those who complained that the fights were too blurry and messy, which is precisely how a REAL fight looks like. I don't know if you've ever been in or witnessed a street brawl, but it's really messy and chaotic. Anyone else who's done martial arts would know this and understand that what martial arts essentially does is give you the ability to ride the chaos, not defy it. As Buzz Lightyear would say, it's "falling with style" (whereas unrealistic movie fights defy gravity using wire stunts, e.g. The Matrix). But even the TF movie had its fair share of wire stunt choreography too; but again, we're looking at robots scrapping with a far greater degree of velocity, momentum, torsion, force etc. than any human fighter would use.

 

Transformers The Movie (1986) was hugely successful with TF fans but flopped at the box office because it failed to engage the general audience. If you're not a TF fan TFTM makes no sense and as a result it received scathing reviews from critics. Remember that in order for the movie franchise to continue being successful, it needs to appeal to Joe-average, not hardcore TF buffs like us.

The Dinobots wouldn't have to look like "Mecha-godzilla's". They could be complex and awesome. A new take on robotic Dinosaurs like the rest of the TFs are a new take on advanced robots.

Regardless of the comic version of the Dinobot's they have been pretty dumb in every series known to the general TF audience. Also, new to the world and "Dumb" are two different things. They could end up being noble and good hearted, and fight for the good cause of saving the Earth and their respected friends.

I'm thinking in the third and final film, by the end, no Transformers will care that much about disguises anyway. Hopefully they will be too worried about stopping Unicron, who happens to be about the only thing worthy of an awesome finale, and a more menacing enemy than Megatron, the Fallen, and Starscream with their teams.

 

I think when dude said B-Movie, he meant Bay movie. The films are obviously anything but low budget.

 

Oh and the reason Transformers the Movie in '86 bombed was because it was too adult, and was pulled from most theaters after it's first week. It was originally going to be called "Overdrive" (so I heard on TV at the time, before there was the internet) because it was almost too adult for the younger audiences. For many years after it's release it was considered by many to be the best animated film ever.

But yes, it also required audiences to be familiar with the cartoon, which was the biggest cartoon at the time so that wasn't stopping it from being successful.

yeah I know that's what they said about the Dinobots, but then, when did the Dinobots ever care about disguises? They were built for raw power; to be the muscle in tough battles against greater odds.

Again, you need to see this from the POV of someone who is not a TF fan or even a scifi fan. I don't know how many people would be keen on seeing a movie featuring transforming Mecha-Godzillas roaming around.

 

 

LOTS OF PEOPLE. People like stuff that looks cool, sounds cool, and blows up cool. People who don't won't want to watch the movie anyway.

 

And as far as I care, a B movie is a movie with writing as bad as Bay's movie, box office numbers be DAMNED. It relies on kick-ass special effects and arousing men's penises, not a FANTASTIC plot.

 

Your statement is very out of line...

 

Here's my answer to that. My sister is die hard anty all this crap. She's ultra practical, and hates anything that isn't. Initialy she skipped the movie.

 

I told her though that even without the robots, it was amuzing.

 

Knowing how die hard I am about Transformers she took my word for it and loved it.

 

She isn't a fan of giant robot explosion sci-fi fantasy any of that crap, but hell like Mikey, she liked it. The reason why, the interaction going on with the in between stories.

 

Jen's aproval is near impossible to get, hence I say kudos for them having the nerve to stuff the fanboy BS and make a movie for everyone instead of just us.

 

If you wanna complain about that, just remember, the next 25 years will be based on that continued apeal...

Jen's aproval is near impossible to get, hence I say kudos for them having the nerve to stuff the fanboy BS and make a movie for everyone instead of just us.

+1 QFT. My wife's the same.

 

And as far as I care+ a B movie is a movie with writing as bad as Bay's movie, box office numbers be DAMNED. It relies on kick-ass special effects and arousing men's penises, not a FANTASTIC plot.

Whether this movie is "good" or "bad" is entirely subjective. Some of us love this movie while others loathe it. Arguing over opinions is retarded so let's just stick to facts shall we?

 

B movie is defined as "a low-budget commercial motion picture" and Bay's TF movie had a US$151,000,000.

 

Oh and the reason Transformers the Movie in '86 bombed was because it was too adult

A lot of the criticism at the time was also toward the story. Imagine that you know nothing about Transformers - never even heard of them. Then you go and watch Transformers The Movie. Who are these robots? Why do they transform? Why are they fighting? What are these planets? Who are these characters? What the hell's going on?!?

 

Transformers The Movie assumes that the audience has at least watched Seasons 1 and 2 of the cartoon series, hence it completely lacks exposition on a lot of basic story elements. Bay's movie makes no such assumption - all of its exposition is self-contained. You may know nothing about Transformers and still be able to watch and enjoy the movie.

 

From Wikipedia:

Some critics said that the action scenes in the film were enough to keep children's interest into the feature, but also said the storyline would bore viewers who were over 10 years of age. The Transformers: The Movie was also a huge flop in the box office, taking in only $5 million during its opening weekend.

 

From TFwiki:

The film displays an arguably cynical attitude towards itself as a vehicle for advertising toys, especially in the way beloved characters are killed—sometimes gratuitously—for sake of justifying the story's focus on a new group of toys.

 

Further, the two primary plot devices—Unicron and the Matrix—have no prior establishment in the fiction. Unicron is given no backstory or justification; he simply exists, is very dangerous, and is afraid of the Matrix, all for no adequately explained reason. The introduction of the Matrix itself is a heavy retcon. The story asks the audience to accept that this cosmically powerful artifact has been in Prime's possession all along (even though an X-ray of Optimus Prime's innards in the second season episode "A Prime Problem" show absolutely no signs of said Matrix), but has somehow never been relevant before. In fact, this lack of prior establishment is what led Simon Furman to develop the divinity backstory of Unicron and Primus in the UK comics run.

 

The movie bears many similarities to Star Wars: There are several character-parallels (Springer is a Han Solo-type and Arcee even has Princess Leia's hairdo!), the primary threat is similar (it's the Death Star... but it transforms!), and both feature a climactic battle where the young hero hears the voice of his wise mentor one last time before saving the day.

 

To be a bit more fair to The Transformers: The Movie, however, most of these similarities are either superficial (Arcee's Leia-hair; Megatron's "lightsaber" he briefly uses in his duel against Optimus Prime) or can be seen as elements common to thousands of years worth of epic storytelling through human history, not just common to Star Wars.

 

Though most likely coincidental, the movie also bears many similarities to the Marvel Comics Fantastic Four story "The Galactus Trilogy":

* The presence of an enormous world-devouring cosmic entity that threatens to destroy the heroes' home planet (Galactus/Unicron).

* The presence of a single item that is the only thing that can stop said cosmic entity (Ultimate Nullifier/Matrix of Leadership).

* The presence of a herald of said cosmic entity, who ultimately betrays the entity (Silver Surfer/Galvatron).

 

------------------------

 

"I spent the day playing a toy in a movie about toys who do horrible things to each other." - Orson Welles

I know. I read that on Wiki too. It almost makes me want to abandon the TF stories I loved as a kid, accept that it was jumbled up spur of the moment toy ad junk, and grow up. lol.

Maybe by the 3rd TF bay film, the series will have been reborn sensibly enough to be the new standard. Supposedly ROTF will fix a lot of the problems from the first film.

I know. I read that on Wiki too. It almost makes me want to abandon the TF stories I loved as a kid, accept that it was jumbled up spur of the moment toy ad junk, and grow up. lol.

Maybe by the 3rd TF bay film, the series will have been reborn sensibly enough to be the new standard. Supposedly ROTF will fix a lot of the problems from the first film.

 

I doubt that... I am ready for Bayformers to complete its trilogy so someone else can do their take...

yeah I know that's what they said about the Dinobots, but then, when did the Dinobots ever care about disguises? They were built for raw power; to be the muscle in tough battles against greater odds.

Again, you need to see this from the POV of someone who is not a TF fan or even a scifi fan. I don't know how many people would be keen on seeing a movie featuring transforming Mecha-Godzillas roaming around.

 

 

LOTS OF PEOPLE. People like stuff that looks cool, sounds cool, and blows up cool. People who don't won't want to watch the movie anyway.

 

And as far as I care, a B movie is a movie with writing as bad as Bay's movie, box office numbers be DAMNED. It relies on kick-ass special effects and arousing men's penises, not a FANTASTIC plot.

 

Your statement is very out of line...

 

Here's my answer to that. My sister is die hard anty all this crap. She's ultra practical, and hates anything that isn't. Initialy she skipped the movie.

 

I told her though that even without the robots, it was amuzing.

 

Knowing how die hard I am about Transformers she took my word for it and loved it.

 

She isn't a fan of giant robot explosion sci-fi fantasy any of that crap, but hell like Mikey, she liked it. The reason why, the interaction going on with the in between stories.

 

Jen's aproval is near impossible to get, hence I say kudos for them having the nerve to stuff the fanboy BS and make a movie for everyone instead of just us.

 

If you wanna complain about that, just remember, the next 25 years will be based on that continued apeal...

 

She didn't want to see it in the first place, right? She's not a fan of robots exploding, and other sci-fi things, right? If it weren't for you, she probably wouldn't have seen it for a long time, if ever, right?

 

It's just like I said: People who don't[like robots exploding and other cool stuff] won't want to watch the movie anyway[because that's the overall premise].

 

She ended up liking it because of the plot, right? The physics of the robots and their coolness had nothing to do with it, right?

 

I'm willing to bet she would have liked it even if the special effects and choreography were COMPLETELY unrealistic, yet still cool as fuck.

 

Whether or not it's really a B movie, I DON'T CARE. That's not the point I'm trying to make. I'm not going to waste my time in a debate on red herrings. It was a single point for my case, take it or leave it. For everyone who knew what I meant, good for you! For everyone else, DON'T quote a dictionary at me. What the dictionary has to say and what I REALLY mean are usually two different things.

 

I AM arguing that the choreography could be a LOT more insane without alienating ANYONE. The abilities of the Transformers has no bearing on the quality of the story, barring a Deus Ex Machina:

 

Those who like kick-ass action scenes will love the kick-ass action scenes birthed by not giving a damn about physics in the hectic fights or the practicality of a specific alt. mode as long as it's cool.

 

Those who aren't there for the action scenes will care more about the plot. Make the plot good and sensible, despite the obviously non-nonsensical setting of Transformers and they might like it.

 

If you have a GOOD story, it won't be ruined by having fun with the special effects.

 

While there are SOME things that go over the line, like the Refrigerator scene in Indy 4, It's hard to go over the line when the premise is as outlandish as Transformers'.

I'd like to see Ultra Magnus and Hot Rod in the next one. And how about Prime's trailer? What I would really like to see is them not butchering character designs anymore than they already have. I think Starscream is the most hideous design they came up with. In the first movie, I was impressed with Blackout's transformation and design. And in ROTF I think I really like Sideswipes, but think Devastators design makes me wanna throw up. The proportion looks completely wrong. Looks stumpy. Should be towering like the real Devastator. That's my opinion.