I would just like to say that I applaud Pete for bringing this up. I understand some dissenters reflex to go all "I told ya so" on anyone who comes out of the "OMFG its tf on the big screen" trance. I too felt the call of giant robots hitting each other. It wasn't till I caught myself looking at my watch in the theater that I contemplated how much the movie was dragging. Anyway, Good on Pete.

I would probably love everything about the movie if they had cut it by twenty minutes and removed the masturbation joke.

*adds "Transformers" to the list of future projects*

You know what else this reminds me of, Peter Jackson's King Kong, only that movie's problem is that, for all it's visual mastery, it's dull.

I would probably love everything about the movie if they had cut it by twenty minutes and removed the masturbation joke.

I would like to add Bumblebee's "pissing" to that as well, unless you count that in the twenty minutes that should have been removed.

The problem is they had so much material...editing is understandably difficult. I like the pissing scene, but I wouldn't cry were it removed.

Most of the editing here needed to be done at the screenplay level. Some one needed to ask a lot of questions like "What is this schene for?" "What information are we conveying to the audience?" . If the answers to this type of question are "There's some action here" or "a good joke" those aren't good enough. Good scenes are pertenent and entertaining. Not just one or the other. For a writer dropping characters, scenes, or jokes can feel like cutting the limbs off a child, but its not. It's how you craft an enjoyable story.

 

I think the inherent coolness of the Transformers, the charm that has carried most of us for over 20 years, is what kept this movie afloat. For both fans and the General Audience.

Most of the editing here needed to be done at the screenplay level. Some one needed to ask a lot of questions like "What is this schene for?" "What information are we conveying to the audience?" . If the answers to this type of question are "There's some action here" or "a good joke" those aren't good enough. Good scenes are pertenent and entertaining. Not just one or the other. For a writer dropping characters, scenes, or jokes can feel like cutting the limbs off a child, but its not. It's how you craft an enjoyable story.

 

I think the inherent coolness of the Transformers, the charm that has carried most of us for over 20 years, is what kept this movie afloat. For both fans and the General Audience.

That would have to be a lot of charm for the movie to be as high as it is on the list of top-grossing films. I get the impression from what the screenwriters have said that Bay likes to do some on-set ad libbing. (e.g.: the "better than Armageddon" joke). So who knows. I do think the script could have been tightened up, yeah. But I think there's more to it than that. The thing I notice is how many people say "the hackers were unnecessary" when it was Anthony Anderson's character who saved the day at the end. But that didn't register with people for whatever reason. So maybe it was a fault of the director? Were people just experiencing action exhaustion by that point and they weren't really paying attention? I dunno.

Anthony Anderson didn't save anything that wouldn't have been removed with that whole useless plotline.

Most of the editing here needed to be done at the screenplay level. Some one needed to ask a lot of questions like "What is this schene for?" "What information are we conveying to the audience?" . If the answers to this type of question are "There's some action here" or "a good joke" those aren't good enough. Good scenes are pertenent and entertaining. Not just one or the other. For a writer dropping characters, scenes, or jokes can feel like cutting the limbs off a child, but its not. It's how you craft an enjoyable story.

 

I think the inherent coolness of the Transformers, the charm that has carried most of us for over 20 years, is what kept this movie afloat. For both fans and the General Audience.

That would have to be a lot of charm for the movie to be as high as it is on the list of top-grossing films. I get the impression from what the screenwriters have said that Bay likes to do some on-set ad libbing. (e.g.: the "better than Armageddon" joke). So who knows. I do think the script could have been tightened up, yeah. But I think there's more to it than that. The thing I notice is how many people say "the hackers were unnecessary" when it was Anthony Anderson's character who saved the day at the end. But that didn't register with people for whatever reason. So maybe it was a fault of the director? Were people just experiencing action exhaustion by that point and they weren't really paying attention? I dunno.

With regard to the hackers: It isn't that Anthony Anderson's actions didn't register, it's that the action could have easily been given to that Australian chick, who was also a hacker. As such, it would be perfectly in character for her to do what he did.

 

That would cut his introduction scene and probably the donut scene and gotten us to the robots quicker.

 

Characters don't just become extraneous when they don't do anything, they are extraneous when what their actions can easily be given to someone else.

Most of the editing here needed to be done at the screenplay level. Some one needed to ask a lot of questions like "What is this schene for?" "What information are we conveying to the audience?" . If the answers to this type of question are "There's some action here" or "a good joke" those aren't good enough. Good scenes are pertenent and entertaining. Not just one or the other. For a writer dropping characters, scenes, or jokes can feel like cutting the limbs off a child, but its not. It's how you craft an enjoyable story.

 

I think the inherent coolness of the Transformers, the charm that has carried most of us for over 20 years, is what kept this movie afloat. For both fans and the General Audience.

That would have to be a lot of charm for the movie to be as high as it is on the list of top-grossing films. I get the impression from what the screenwriters have said that Bay likes to do some on-set ad libbing. (e.g.: the "better than Armageddon" joke). So who knows. I do think the script could have been tightened up, yeah. But I think there's more to it than that. The thing I notice is how many people say "the hackers were unnecessary" when it was Anthony Anderson's character who saved the day at the end. But that didn't register with people for whatever reason. So maybe it was a fault of the director? Were people just experiencing action exhaustion by that point and they weren't really paying attention? I dunno.

With regard to the hackers: It isn't that Anthony Anderson's actions didn't register, it's that the action could have easily been given to that Australian chick, who was also a hacker. As such, it would be perfectly in character for her to do what he did.

 

That would cut his introduction scene and probably the donut scene and gotten us to the robots quicker.

 

Characters don't just become extraneous when they don't do anything, they are extraneous when what their actions can easily be given to someone else.

I thought his character added waaaaaay more to the movie than Australian Model Chick did. For one thing, her being a hacker is just LOL-worthy. For another thing, Anthony Anderson made me laugh and she didn't.

 

And just to remind everyone:

 

The Secretary of Defense was trapped inside Hoover Dam with no means of communication, and no way of coordinating a military response to the Fan-Hitting Of Shit that was about to happen. Fat Hacker Boy was the one who got communications up and running, which enabled the SecDef to contact the military, which made the airstrikes happen, which weakened Megatron to the point where Sam was able to get close enough to PWN him.

Most of the editing here needed to be done at the screenplay level. Some one needed to ask a lot of questions like "What is this schene for?" "What information are we conveying to the audience?" . If the answers to this type of question are "There's some action here" or "a good joke" those aren't good enough. Good scenes are pertenent and entertaining. Not just one or the other. For a writer dropping characters, scenes, or jokes can feel like cutting the limbs off a child, but its not. It's how you craft an enjoyable story.

 

I think the inherent coolness of the Transformers, the charm that has carried most of us for over 20 years, is what kept this movie afloat. For both fans and the General Audience.

That would have to be a lot of charm for the movie to be as high as it is on the list of top-grossing films. I get the impression from what the screenwriters have said that Bay likes to do some on-set ad libbing. (e.g.: the "better than Armageddon" joke). So who knows. I do think the script could have been tightened up, yeah. But I think there's more to it than that. The thing I notice is how many people say "the hackers were unnecessary" when it was Anthony Anderson's character who saved the day at the end. But that didn't register with people for whatever reason. So maybe it was a fault of the director? Were people just experiencing action exhaustion by that point and they weren't really paying attention? I dunno.

With regard to the hackers: It isn't that Anthony Anderson's actions didn't register, it's that the action could have easily been given to that Australian chick, who was also a hacker. As such, it would be perfectly in character for her to do what he did.

 

That would cut his introduction scene and probably the donut scene and gotten us to the robots quicker.

 

Characters don't just become extraneous when they don't do anything, they are extraneous when what their actions can easily be given to someone else.

I thought his character added waaaaaay more to the movie than Australian Model Chick did. For one thing, her being a hacker is just LOL-worthy. For another thing, Anthony Anderson made me laugh and she didn't.

 

Well, the other way to go is to have Anthony Anderson working for the Defense Department from the start and cutting her entirely. Either way, you don't need both of them - hence extraneous hacker character.