# Transformers



## jezter6 (Jun 29, 2007)

Just got back from watching the movie. I'm fired up like nobody's business. I doubt I'll fall asleep in the next 2 hours or so.

All I can say was: AWESOME!

The tongue in cheek comedy was interesting, special effects were great but bordering on a little too much.

Wow!

Oh, and since when was a Pontiac Solstice ever part of the frickin Autobots? :/


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jun 29, 2007)

What were the circumstances of you getting into this sneak preview?


----------



## jezter6 (Jun 29, 2007)

Friend of a friend works at a local radio station. Had some spares for tonight's showing.


----------



## developmentusa (Jun 29, 2007)

Just saw it at an advance screening, not bad I missed Megatron's old voice....


----------



## Arkhandus (Jun 29, 2007)

Please don't post spoilers for a while!  Most of us poor bastages can't see the movie yet!


----------



## horacethegrey (Jun 30, 2007)

Well, I just got back from watching this. And I just have two words:

GUILTY PLEASURE

This movie won't win any awards except on technical grounds, and drama wise it falls flat on it's face. It doesn't even bother taking it's story seriously, despite the whole premise of an invasion by nasty alien robots. 

That said, I can honestly say I wasn't bored, not by a long shot. For one, the transformers look incredible. True, those designs may look silly in static poses, but in motion they are a sight to behold. The action scenes too are very well done, despite the usual Bay bombast. 

Oh, and Optimus Prime rules. No question.  

Anyway, I'd post a more detailed review, but I'd have to go into spoilers for that. Since many of you haven't watched it yet, I'll refrain from doing so and post it some other time.


----------



## Acid_crash (Jun 30, 2007)

To use spoilers now would be a great injustice towards those of us who have not seen the movie yet and I do feel that your life would be in great jeopardy should you choose to use spoilers before the 4th of July...  

Until then, just say the movie is awesome, and nothing else.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 1, 2007)

Some of us have to wait even more. It won't open here until July 20th.


----------



## PieAndDragon (Jul 1, 2007)

July 27th here, I think


----------



## Umbran (Jul 2, 2007)

horacethegrey said:
			
		

> Well, I just got back from watching this. And I just have two words:
> 
> GUILTY PLEASURE




That seems to be the basic critic's response to the film, too.  With 48 reviews in, the thing is running at 67% on the tomatometer, which is surprisingly high.  I think if I go to the movie expecting to see a romp of big honkin' robots slugging it out, I won't be disappointed.


----------



## Krug (Jul 3, 2007)

Well I wish there was more of the big honkin' robots and less of the flag waving or necessary 'human' action. But it was all right. Not astounding.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 3, 2007)

Krug said:
			
		

> Well I wish there was more of the big honkin' robots and less of the flag waving or necessary 'human' action. But it was all right. Not astounding.



 I'll go the other way and say it WAS astounding.

Nearly two and a half hours of almost constant action. Even if they were fighting humans some of the time just WATCHING them move and fight was amazing. The transforming didn't get old. It was EXACTLY what a Transformers movie should be, and I'm shocked because I had very low expectations with Michael Bay attached.

Oh, and while the Autobots are, obviously, rocking...Starscream > All.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 3, 2007)

Just got back myself.

Hell yeah! Awesome movie. Well, would have been better without all the parts with the stupid fleshbags, but even those weren't so bad.

Biggest disappointment for me was what they did to Jazz. He used to be one of the cooler autobots, now he's a freaking... uhh... rigga? (Robot... you know what).

Very pleased they got the same voice actor for Optimus Prime. Wish they'd been able to get some others, though... In particular, Starscream, Megatron and Ironhide are all voices I fondly remember. I didn't like the fact that all the autobots had mouths. I kinda wish they'd kept a featureless mouthpiece over some, like Optimus

[sblock]So glad Jazz died. Loved all the fan service, particularly Optimus's "One shall stand, one shall fall" line. I just wish they'd had Megatron say "I'll rip out your optics, Prime!" Oh, and I wish they had the original theme song from the movie playing during the credits. That would have just been way too cool.[/sblock]

Oh, and I really wish I could find my Transformers: The Movie DVD  So jonesing for it right now, wanted to watch it before the movie.

Oh well... I leave you all with the universal greeting.

Bah weep grahna weep ninibom!


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 3, 2007)

Wow! finally a good action movie this summer.  It had everything, good intense action, fast chases, robots battling, a solid story, a bit of love and a drunkard mother for comic relief.


----------



## paradox42 (Jul 3, 2007)

You can add my accolade to the pile. For me, it was awesome, and by that I mean I was in awe. My jaw dropped for the final battles in the city, and stayed that way throughout. I wondered idly what time it was during the scenes when the Autobots were "sneaking around" the house, but didn't actually look at my watch, and that was the only time during the entire movie that I even came close. I don't even *remember* the last time a movie over two hours long kept my attention so completely- my eyes were all but glued to the screen.

Oh, and stay for a few minutes after the credits start rolling, there's a couple of extra comic treats.


----------



## jonathan swift (Jul 3, 2007)

Everything about the movie was spot on for me.

The comedy was very funny.

The action was glorious.

The two girls were both very attractive.

And the CG was easily the best I've ever seen. The robot forms all looked REAL to me. It was crazy.


----------



## Wormwood (Jul 3, 2007)

Man oh man I wish I saw the movie you guys did.

When the most entertaining thing in a movie about kung-fu robots from outer space is _Shia LaBeouf_, then something is definitely wrong. 

I can't wait for the DVD, because I'm going to enjoy this movie a *lot* more with a Fast-Forward button at my disposal.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 3, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> When the most entertaining thing in a movie about kung-fu robots from outer space is _Shia LaBeouf_, then something is definitely wrong.




Are you saying you enjoyed Shia more than the Transformers themselves?


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 3, 2007)

The humans were enjoyable in this movie. They weren't annoying and at times they were very entertaining.  that said, nothing outdid the robots. I didn't like the last action scene too much (megatron and starscream were difficult to tell apart because of all of the camera shaking) but the robots and cgi delivered.

I also marked out a bit because a lot of that last sequence is filmed in detroit and its the first film i've seen in a while where you can really recognize all the detroit landmarks. Michael bay must really like "the D" because this is the second movie he's filmed here and in this one he didn't even try to make it seem like it wasn't detroit.


----------



## Seonaid (Jul 3, 2007)

I loved it. I wish there was less romance and more giant robots kicking the crap out of each other, but what can you do?

We'll be seeing it again on Friday. Hopefully with the second viewing I can appreciate the details more, as the sheer awesomeness of it overwhelmed me last night. As others have mentioned, at times it's hard to tell them apart because of the motion, but maybe seeing it again will help that.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Jul 3, 2007)

Michael Bay directs a live-action, 2.5 hour PG-13 version of the cartoon.  Armageddon + The Rock meets Transformers.  It's going to irritate some people.

Pros:  The robots (obviously).  Look great, sound great, move great.  Every scene with them was lots of fun.

Cons: the standard Michael Bay stuff, like cheesy drama and "realistic" shaky camera action.  It borders on nerve-wracking.

This is a movie that you go to watch and _see_ and _hear_.  Ignore all the other junk, exercise a little patience, and you will be rewarded with a spectacular sensory experience.  Find the nearest theater with the biggest screens, best sound systems, and see it there.  Is this bad-boy out on IMAX?  If not, it should be.

If you have any inclination to see this movie, spend the 8 bucks and experience it in a theater.  You're doing yourself a real disservice if you don't.


----------



## Randolpho (Jul 3, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> Oh, and I really wish I could find my Transformers: The Movie DVD  So jonesing for it right now, wanted to watch it before the movie.




Curse you, I'm gonna be singing/humming/whistling "You got the touch!" all day now!


----------



## Halivar (Jul 3, 2007)

My childhood obsession with Transformers knows no bounds. For the last 21 years, I have fantasized (at least once a week) about what a live-action Transformers movie would look like and what I would want it to look like.

Michael Bay took all my dreams,   on them, and screamed "Not good enough! Let me show you what BIG ING ROBOTS *should* be!"

Half-way through the movie, my contacts were killing my eyes due to the fact that I had not blinked in an hour (thus did my friends think I was crying).

This movie is awesome. It truly honors my childhood nostalgia. It is, bar none, the best movie adaptation of any cartoon I have ever seen.

PS: When Optimus quoted the '86 movie, "It ends this day, Megatron! One shall stand, one shall fall!" I wanted to squeal like an 8-year-old.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 3, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> This movie is awesome. It truly honors my childhood nostalgia. It is, bar none, the best movie adaptation of any cartoon I have ever seen.




Yeah, I thought Transformers really paid homage to the old-school cartoon and the hardcore fans while still updating the genre for more casual moviegoers.  It's also been a while where people were actually clapping during the movie.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 3, 2007)

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> Michael Bay directs a live-action, 2.5 hour PG-13 version of the cartoon.  Armageddon + The Rock meets Transformers.  It's going to irritate some people.
> 
> Pros:  The robots (obviously).  Look great, sound great, move great.  Every scene with them was lots of fun.
> 
> Cons: the standard Michael Bay stuff, like cheesy drama and "realistic" shaky camera action.  It borders on nerve-wracking.



You know what? I've never heard a single person say how much they like shaky cameras during action scenes. Why on earth do they keep doing it. It's like you can't appreciate the action because the camera is gyrating all over the place.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 3, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> You know what? I've never heard a single person say how much they like shaky cameras during action scenes. Why on earth do they keep doing it. It's like you can't appreciate the action because the camera is gyrating all over the place.




Amen.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Jul 3, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> You know what? I've never heard a single person say how much they like shaky cameras during action scenes. Why on earth do they keep doing it. It's like you can't appreciate the action because the camera is gyrating all over the place.




Maybe because it puts you in media res, as it were.  I guess the idea is that the shaking camera makes it seem like you're right in the middle of the chaos, as opposed to viewing it through a window.

For what it's worth, I can appreciate the technique used conservatively.  _Firefly_ and _Battlestar Galactica_ use well, but not to the point where it obscures awesome visuals.  _Transformers_ does it way too often for my taste, and there were a few times where I thought "Gee, I bet whatever's happening is really awesome, but I have no idea because the camera's about as steady as a homemade Bigfoot video."

But don't get me wrong, for all my issues with it, it's a great flick.


----------



## Goldmoon (Jul 3, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> PS: When Optimus quoted the '86 movie, "It ends this day, Megatron! One shall stand, one shall fall!" I wanted to squeal like an 8-year-old.




I'm a 31 year old woman and I _DID_ squeal like an 8-year-old.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 3, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> PS: When Optimus quoted the '86 movie, "It ends this day, Megatron! One shall stand, one shall fall!" I wanted to squeal like an 8-year-old.




In the theater I was in, the entire audience cheered at that. Might have been squealing, too.


----------



## crazy_monkey1956 (Jul 3, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> PS: When Optimus quoted the '86 movie, "It ends this day, Megatron! One shall stand, one shall fall!" I wanted to squeal like an 8-year-old.




I haven't seen the movie yet, but I would wager that this line was the winner of the "Put words in Prime's mouth" contest the website had going almost a year ago.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 3, 2007)

crazypixie said:
			
		

> I haven't seen the movie yet, but I would wager that this line was the winner of the "Put words in Prime's mouth" contest the website had going almost a year ago.



 Actually, no. It was "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings".

God, July 22nd can't get here fast enough!


----------



## Quasqueton (Jul 3, 2007)

99.9% pure awesome. During the movie, and so far within a few hours of having seen it, I'm saying this is the best movie I have ever seen. For many reasons.

Quasqueton


----------



## WayneLigon (Jul 4, 2007)

I left work an hour early and went with some friends. Awesome; very possibly the best summer movie yet. I was never a Transformers fan, so all I know is through general geek cultural osmosis, but I still had a tremendously fun time.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 4, 2007)

That was really fun. Way better than I was expecting/dreading.


----------



## thatdarncat (Jul 4, 2007)

Much goodness. Saw it tonight, going again tomorrow night with more friends.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Jul 4, 2007)

What cool day.  We roll on down the river and buy nice (  perfectly legal: cough  ) fireworks to take back home dirt cheap for the 4th.  Then we go see Transformers.  Yeah so they could have reduced a couple of the required formula plot elements with the human actors a bit.  But it doesn't matter, the Transformers are so cool it just complteley overshadows everything else.
I can even laugh at the ridiculous second turret on Devastator and the troops using piddling little 40mm GLs on things with that much armor.  Because the transformers are built of pure win and


----------



## niolo (Jul 4, 2007)

Oh man this sounds great. I can't wait to see it. My wife and I are debating whether or not to allow our 6 yr old to see it. A bit of context... he's seen all 6 Star Wars with no nightmare issues. Our concern is the violence. Is it comparable to SW? Thanks.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 4, 2007)

MINOR SPOILER WARNING! Re: violence level/appropriate for kids

[sblock]There's not much graphic violence as far as humans go... I can't off the top of my head remember any blood or particularly noteworthy deaths... Lots of humans do die, but it's mostly just extras and people that have the bad luck to be in the way of awesome energy waves. If you're okay with him seeing luke get his hands cut off, anakin getting his limbs chopped off, etc, I think you'll be fine with this.[/sblock]


----------



## Harmon (Jul 4, 2007)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> That was really fun. Way better than I was expecting/dreading.




Ya, what he said.


----------



## Catavarie (Jul 4, 2007)

*Transformers Movie*

Okay so I just got home from watching Transformers (first movie I've seen in the theater in over a year) and I was pleasantly surprised at how freaking awesome this movie was. I thought for sure that Micheal Bay was going to do something horrible to ruin the whole thing, but he did a great job putting together a truly epic flick. Even if you didn't grown up in the '80s with the original cartoon series (which I highly recommend you watch f you haven't) you will love this film. It had action from the beginning to the end with a solid plot and script throughout. The battles are great and the love interest is definitely pure hotness. So spend the $10 and see this movie in the theater you will not be disappointed I promise you.

Now just have to wait for the next one after all all movies are made into Trilogies these days.

And on a side note the trailer for Rush Hour 3 looks hilarious.


----------



## Bront (Jul 4, 2007)

Shouldn't this be in the media area?


----------



## Dire Bare (Jul 4, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> You know what? I've never heard a single person say how much they like shaky cameras during action scenes. Why on earth do they keep doing it. It's like you can't appreciate the action because the camera is gyrating all over the place.




I like it.  And while I certainly don't know for sure, I have a sneaky suspicion that others appreciate it also as it is now used in quite a few films.

Just because YOU'VE never heard someone exclaim, "Hey, I really like that shaky camera cinematography!", doesn't really mean that it's just something director's do to piss off audiences.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jul 4, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Man oh man I wish I saw the movie you guys did.
> 
> When the most entertaining thing in a movie about kung-fu robots from outer space is _Shia LaBeouf_, then something is definitely wrong.
> 
> I can't wait for the DVD, because I'm going to enjoy this movie a *lot* more with a Fast-Forward button at my disposal.




I've been hearing a lot of grief about poor Shia LaBeouf recently and I don't get it.  Every movie I've seen him in, including Transformers, he's been great.  Then again, I've never really understood why some people (not picking on you Wormwood) need to get a hate-on for various successful movie stars (LaBeouf, Affleck, Cruise, etc).

About seeing the same movie, maybe you got some bad popcorn or something, because the Transformers was the coolest movie I've seen in years!


----------



## Asmor (Jul 4, 2007)

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> Affleck, Cruise




Personally, I dislike cruise because he's a litigious cuckoo. As far as making fun of affleck, that's more light hearted ribbing IMHO. YMMV


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 4, 2007)

I'll just add to the general consensus. Don't expect plot. Don't expect deep characterizations. And be prepared for a few clumsy scenes and cheesy speeches.

But all that said, if you're going for spectacle, for some truly impressive action sequences, for several "holy crap!" moments, and for special effects that are truly revolutionary...

In other words, if you acknowledge that you're going to see a Michael Bay summer blockbuster based on a cartoon based on toys...

The movie is fantastic. I had a blast and a half, and I'd be willing to see it again while it's still in theaters.

(And of course it's going to be a blockbuster. As everyone knows, the primary ingredient for success is to have Hugo Weaving talk smack about the human race. And of course, Megatron does just that, ergo...)


----------



## Umbran (Jul 4, 2007)

Bront said:
			
		

> Shouldn't this be in the media area?




Yes it should.  I'll be merging the threads.

In the future, if you see a thread like this, please report the post.  It isn't as if the OP has the power to move the thread, and we won't see this until one of us gets around to findining it in the morass of threads out here.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 4, 2007)

[sblock]So I've seen it mentioned that some people say one of the F-22s that nailed Megatron towards the end was actually Starscream.

He doing doing so much shifting in and out that I lost track of him here and there, but this would make things even better. Another excuse to go see this again.[/sblock]


----------



## Wormwood (Jul 4, 2007)

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> Then again, I've never really understood why some people (not picking on you Wormwood) need to get a hate-on for various successful movie stars




I apologize if I wasn't clear---I thought Shia LaBoeuf was *really good*. In fact, he was more consistently entertaining than anything else in the movie.

Which made me sad beyond the telling of it.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 4, 2007)

I'm definitely a Shia fan.  I've liked him since I saw him in that Project Greenlight show.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 4, 2007)

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> I like it.  And while I certainly don't know for sure, I have a sneaky suspicion that others appreciate it also as it is now used in quite a few films.




You're certainly entitled to your preferences, but I really dislike the technique. Or rather, it's just fine _in moderation_, but I've rarely seen it used that way.

When I go to see a movie, I want to be able to tell what I'm looking at. With the whole "jerky camera" bit, I often find that I have trouble following the action. Even now, I'm not 100% certain which of the Decepticons survived the final battle, for instance.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 4, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> You're certainly entitled to your preferences, but I really dislike the technique. Or rather, it's just fine _in moderation_, but I've rarely seen it used that way.
> 
> When I go to see a movie, I want to be able to tell what I'm looking at. With the whole "jerky camera" bit, I often find that I have trouble following the action. Even now, I'm not 100% certain which of the Decepticons survived the final battle, for instance.



 [sblock]I believe the only Decepticon that is shown to have definitely survived is Starscream in a clip in the final credits.

-Megatron is definitely dead. (Hooray for Galvatron!)
-Bonecrusher got axed by Prime.
-Blackout was taken out.
-Frenzy killed himself.
-Devastator(or Brawl, depending on what source you ask) is dead.
-Barricade kind of disappeared, but his door was on the ship that was dumping Megatron into the see, so that wound suggest he was taken out off screen.
-Scorponok seems to have survived, as he just dug into the sand after losing his tail.

So one survivor definitely...two probably.[/sblock]


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 4, 2007)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> [sblock]I believe the only Decepticon that is shown to have definitely survived is Starscream in a clip in the final credits.
> 
> -Megatron is definitely dead. (Hooray for Galvatron!)
> -Bonecrusher got axed by Prime.
> ...




That's what I thought, but I wasn't 100% certain. (Particularly about 



Spoiler



Barricade, whom we didn't see in the final battle.


)

But the point, at least for me, stands thus: I should have been able to tell based on the details of the final fight. And I couldn't. I loved the movie, but a bit more clarity and a bit less frenetic camera spasming would have been better.


----------



## Acid_crash (Jul 4, 2007)

I see the camera shaking as the ground shaking when there was a ground collision, or something of an equivalent.  For me, it puts me into the movie more, as if I was actually there.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Jul 4, 2007)

I'm okay with the shaking camera in small portions. I'd much rather see giants robots beating the snot out of each other from a bit further away so that I can see as much as I possibly can.


----------



## paradox42 (Jul 5, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> DonTadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thirded. Or fourthed. I haven't finished reading the thread. 

EDIT: Okay, thirded. But I also agree that the shaky camera was used mostly where one would expect the ground to shake, so it works in that sense.


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

The shaky camera technique is sort of a cheat, to make the CGI in the shot look more real. 

I enjoyed this movie immensely. As joked by one of the characters, it's much better than some other epic globe-spanning apocalyptic summer blockbusters from the past decade. It does follow the formula set by its predecessors in that the action focuses on a diverse cast of everyman misfits who all get pulled together at the end. In fact, there are direct analogues to Will Smith's and Jeff Goldbloom's characters from _Independence Day_.

The humor is spot on here, and does its job perfectly--namely, it gets the audience so relaxed that suspension of disbelief becomes a non-issue (well, for 99% of the audience anyway). I don't understand how "not taking itself seriously" is a legitimate criticism of a movie that has a premise that would fall flat on its face if a director tried to play it with a completely straight face.

It got a round of applause when the credits rolled. I was happy to join the clapping.


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

Oh, one thing I wanted to comment on by itself--in fact, it may even deserve its own thread:

What the hell is this crap with trailers that don't give us a freaking title for the movie they're advertising? We got two in a row. One was some goofball comedy about some loser Super-Dave wannabe, and another was some kind of Godzilla movie shot from the clueless screaming extra's point-of-view (you don't get to see the monster, just stuff getting smashed while the masses get all scared and slack-jawed). I actually thought for a second that the first one's title was "August 3rd", as it was presented in big crazy text in place of where a title would go.

I can only suppose there's some half-baked "leave them wanting more" theory at work. Seems pretty insipid to me, since if you overuse the technique, it just makes the trailers run together into some thoroughly forgettable hodgepodge of scenes.


----------



## Jeysie (Jul 5, 2007)

I'd like to state my own feelings that this movie was two-and-a-half hours of pure awesome. 

Aside from the sheer coolness of seeing giant transforming robots fighting (and hearing Peter Cullen's classic bass), the movie *did* have more character and depth than I was expecting. For instance, at the point where 



Spoiler



Bumblebee got damaged in the city fight scene and he was dragging himself along after Sam


 I was thinking to myself, "Damn, I'm actually getting *weepy-eyed* about a *CGI-generated giant robot*."

And I didn't even notice the shaky cam, to be honest. *sheepish look*

Other than that, I can't really make any nitpicks or specific praises that weren't already made.

Peace & Luv, Liz


----------



## drothgery (Jul 5, 2007)

Saw this afternoon. Definitely a fun romp. The plot-lines got a little cheesy. Hollywood's insistance that 3/4 of all star computer geeks be something other than dorky white or Asian guys (unlike the vast majority of real computer geeks) grates. Continued small arms against giant robots that have proved immune to small arms fire, especially when they're disguising themselves as things that normally wouldn't be bothered by small arms fire grates; you'd like to see someone break out a grenade, or a shoulder-launched missile if you're not going to give the 'important' humans tanks or planes.

But that's nitpickery. Best geek movie so far this summer.


----------



## thatdarncat (Jul 5, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> and another was some kind of Godzilla movie shot from the clueless screaming extra's point-of-view (you don't get to see the monster, just stuff getting smashed while the masses get all scared and slack-jawed).




Per IMDB, that'd be "Untitled J.J. Abrams Project". You've summed up what's known about the movie pretty well. 



Went again tonight, with a different group of friends. Just as good the second time around.

My only problem goes behind a spoiler tag:



Spoiler



Why, after they rescue the kids from Sector 7, does Prime not shift to truck form and drive the kids out?


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Saw this afternoon. Definitely a fun romp. The plot-lines got a little cheesy. Hollywood's insistance that 3/4 of all star computer geeks be something other than dorky white or Asian guys (unlike the vast majority of real computer geeks) grates.



Hollywood's insistence that dorks get paired-off with ridiculously hot supermodel chicks also grates...yet gratifies to no end as well!


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

thatdarncat said:
			
		

> Per IMDB, that'd be "Untitled J.J. Abrams Project". You've summed up what's known about the movie pretty well.



Wikipedia refers to it as "Cloverfield", but yeah the movie isn't even finished yet, despite the trailer being shown.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 5, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Wikipedia refers to it as "Cloverfield", but yeah the movie isn't even finished yet, despite the trailer being shown.



 It definitely got the attention of the theater I was in.

It was the last of the previews shown, and when it ended with NO name, the entire theater erupted. Most of the cries were "WHAT?!" and "COME ON!" but there were a fair amount of not-so-grandma-friendly phrases in there, too.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 5, 2007)

I know most of my friends, and myself as well, are quite intrigued by "Cloverfield." Godzilla from the PoV of the extras sounds like it could be a pretty cool concept.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 5, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Saw this afternoon. Definitely a fun romp. The plot-lines got a little cheesy. Hollywood's insistance that 3/4 of all star computer geeks be something other than dorky white or Asian guys (unlike the vast majority of real computer geeks) grates. Continued small arms against giant robots that have proved immune to small arms fire, especially when they're disguising themselves as things that normally wouldn't be bothered by small arms fire grates; you'd like to see someone break out a grenade, or a shoulder-launched missile if you're not going to give the 'important' humans tanks or planes.
> 
> But that's nitpickery. Best geek movie so far this summer.



It's always good to have an african american or hip-hop friendly actor in a movie because it helps them advertise and get press in urban media.  I think anthony's role was pushed though in transformers considering he's playing someone way younger than who he is. Perhaps my images of him are tainted from seeing his role in the shieds where he appears to play someone in his 30s or 40s.


----------



## Arkhandus (Jul 5, 2007)

GLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!     

I just saw Transformers, and it was sweet!  

A few minor things I didn't like, but all in all it was a good action movie.  Too much focus on the humans was one of my minor problems with it, though.    

Bumblebee was funny, and Jazz was cool though he didn't get much screentime (like I said, too much focus on the humans).  Some of the fights were a bit too short, but the last battle goes on quite a while, so it kinda balances out.  And it definitely shows just why Megatron and Optimus are the leaders of their factions; they each make short, easy work of a lesser opponent at least once.


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 5, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> You know what? I've never heard a single person say how much they like shaky cameras during action scenes. Why on earth do they keep doing it. It's like you can't appreciate the action because the camera is gyrating all over the place.



I feel it can work. Unfortunately shaky camera{and most first person perspective games] gives me a nasty headache if i watch them too long. IMHO it worked nicely for Blair Witch, sadly if i watch it through i will suffer a buttload of pain.

I liked the film. I think we got lucky with as bad as hollywood can mess things up. 

I loved how they tried to catch up on their lowbrow humor quota from the past 2 decades.


----------



## Donovan Morningfire (Jul 5, 2007)

Fun movie.  I loved it.  And considering how much I loathed just about everything else Michael Bay has touched, that is saying something.

It's a summertime blockbuster popcorn flick.  And it doesn't dissapoint, although I would have preferred giving the Jazz, Ironhide, and Ratchet a bit more screentime as opposed to all the meatbags or stuff like Bumblebee spilling gasoline/lubricant on the Sector 7 guy.  Though I did crack a grin at Prime saying "my bad" after stepping on the yard fountain, or his answer about the Autobots learning all about Earth culture from the World Wide Web (which could have been frightening if any of them had come across 4chan), or the glasses ("eBay").

And since (if I'm remembering correclty) it was the lead F22 Raptor that blasted Megs (aka Starscream after trashing a bunch of other F22 Raptors), then we indeed got our backstabbing Starscream.  And Prime taking out Bonecrusher with the forearm sword was a great homage to his energy axe from the 80's TV series.

I'm seriously hoping for a director's cut, hopefully with more Autobot characterization and action sequences put in.


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> I know most of my friends, and myself as well, are quite intrigued by "Cloverfield." Godzilla from the PoV of the extras sounds like it could be a pretty cool concept.



In theory, yeah, but it takes more than a little skill to make it believable as to why the extras are standing on the street waiting to get stepped on by the something that isn't exactly subtle. Evacuate, guys. Might be a bridge smashed here, a few pile-ups there, but it'd be pretty tough to block all of the ways out of New York.

Guess it'd have to be Manhattan in particular.


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

Donovan Morningfire said:
			
		

> Though I did crack a grin at Prime saying "my bad" after stepping on the yard fountain, or his answer about the Autobots learning all about Earth culture from the World Wide Web (which could have been frightening if any of them had come across 4chan), or the glasses ("eBay").



Reminded me a lot of "Small Soldiers" in those scenes, patricularly with them bickering with each other while trying to evade parental notice.


----------



## Tarthalion (Jul 5, 2007)

Best movie of the year so far...as has been stated many times the graphics were absolutely mind boggling.  

Other than KNOWING in the back of my mind that what I was watching was not real, I could never have been able to tell that just by looking for visual cues.

Oh...and I <3 Megan Fox...


That is all.


----------



## F5 (Jul 5, 2007)

Donovan Morningfire said:
			
		

> I'm seriously hoping for a director's cut, hopefully with more Autobot characterization and action sequences put in.




Ditto that.  A scene that I would like to see would involve one of the marines (probably the army Sergeant Lennox), and one of the Autobots (Ironhide, maybe?) commiserating soldier-to-soldier.  It could have been a very short scene, but would have tied the two groups of characters together better at the end.  Ideally, it could have been reminiscent of the ribbing the soldiers were giving each other in the helicopter in the opening scenes.

I'm not generally a Michael Bay fan, so I was really, pleasantly surprised.  This was an awesome summer popcorn movie.  I went in wanting to see giant robots fight each other in spectacularly destructive ways, and I was not disappointed.  I did not expect any character behind the giant robots to come through at all, and it did.

I was really impressed with the amount of respect that Bay had for the nostalgia elements, while still updating the story to make it more relevant and modern.  To those who say "Bumblebee is supposed to be a yellow VW bug!", he gave a nod in that direction in the car dealer's scene.  Some throw-away lines about "more than meets the eye".  Prime actually said "Autobots, roll out!"  That was enough for me…"One shall stand, One shall fall" was just icing on the cake.

Did I mention the part about giant robots beating the tar out of each other?  Because that was good, too.  

The gamer geek in me has to analyze some of the plot-holes that bugged me at the end:
[SBLOCK]
I missed something with the whole "I'll sacrifice myself to destroy the all-spark" bit at then end.  I was not the only one leaving the theatre wondering why, if you know that inserting the thing into a robot's chest is immediately fatal, that Prime wasn't suggesting that as a last resort, stick it into MEGATRON'S chest?  If you've gotta sacrifice someone for the greater good, sacrifice the BAD GUY!  Unless there's something we don't know about the after-effects of absorbing the all-spark, which we will find out about in the sequels…(ps, please make sequels!)

Also, why is it that all new transformers created by stray zaps from the all-spark were evil?  I'm thinking the clue is how Prime said that their own race was savage and warlike in their own past, and had to overcome it…maybe he wasn't talking about their ancestors, but that they themselves started out savage and had to learn civilization?  Maybe the Autobots are thousands of years old?
[/SBLOCK]


----------



## Providence (Jul 5, 2007)

> I can only suppose there's some half-baked "leave them wanting more" theory at work.



The Godzilla-like movie is being produced by the guys who do _Lost_ . . . "leave them wanting more" is pretty much what they do.  Personally, I like that sort of style, but I can understand people getting tired of it.  I can barely read fantasy anymore because I would rather have my dentistry performed by a coked-up mandrill with a jigsaw than hear about another prophecied--"the one"--hero.

As far as the movie itself went, let me clarify first that I normally _hate_ CGI.  No matter how pretty it is, it always looks fake to me.  Give me grade-A costuming and puppetry over CGI any day.  Of course, with a live action _Transformers_ CGI is pretty much your only option.  I went in to the movie expecting to have to just shut the disappointing effects out of my mind, but they ended up completely blowing me away.  The shakiness (which I do actually like) and the excellent camera angles made you really feel that there were giant robots towering above you and fighting around you.

The plot was simple, the dialogue was corny, and there were not many surprises, but it was still a great movie.  The comedy was excellent and I like the way they stressed the alienness of the transformers.

Two big complaints:

[sblock]Jazz just kind of dies, which doesn't even get mentioned again until Ratchet and Ironhide bring his body to Optimus, who commemorates his close friend's death in barely more than a sentence and can only keep up a sad tone long enough to say, "Aw, Jazz."  Jesus, it was like watching _X3_ all over again.[/sblock]
[sblock]What the hell happened to Barricade and Scorponok?[/sblock]

But one scene made up for all of that:
[sblock]"You have failed me yet again, Starscream."[/sblock]


----------



## The Serge (Jul 5, 2007)

While I certainly wouldn't call this the "greatest movie ever," _Transformers_ is certainly a fun action flick.

I liked the ample amount of internal humor, I liked the explanation for the manner in which the Autobots spoke with humans, I liked the fight scenes and the CGI.  I thought the story was fine as well, something that can make or break an action flick...  It was balanced well between the out-and-out action and the exposition.

That said, this film had a number of challenges.  First, there were waaaaay too many secondary characters running around.  We have the chick that discovers the message and then pulls in her cyber-geek friend, to the army guys, to the Sector 7 guys, to Sam and the chick, to the Autobots and Decepticons.  Waaaay too many characters, most of whom weren't necessary.  The portions I found most intriguing and worked the best were those interactions with Sam and his family/friends and the military discoveries (including most of the scenes with Voight's character).  Virtually everything else could have been collapsed into one of those two areas in order to give more screen time to the Cybertonians themselves.  Which leads to my second gripe.

While the Transformers were cool, we saw too little of them in action, particularly the Decepticons.  Essentially, the Decepticons show up to get slaughtered and that's that.  The only Decepticons we get a feel for are Frenzy and Megatron...  Aside from the one comment Megatron makes to Starscream, we've no idea about their inter-relationships.  Now, I'm not saying we needed a lot, but it wouldn't have taken much to give some of the Decepticons a little more oomph.

Now, Prime was cool.  My major issue with him was how much difficulty he had taking on Megatron...  That ticked me off.  I've always preferred the approach being Optimus having greater natural fighting skill compared to Megatron having slightly greater fire-power and willingness to "cheat."  In this, Megatron beats the hell out of Prime...  Still, the voices were universally cool.  Hugo Weaving sounded a great deal like Frank Welker (Megatron in the original cartoon) and Cullen was perfection.  

Finally, the movie was too long.  Like so many movies over the past decade, it was over two hours.  Now, while this can work in the hands of an expert director dealing with a well-written script, most often the result is lulls in the narrative.  We had a lot of that here.  Sometimes, the humor was dragged on needlessly and sometimes the saccharine was a bit much (at least there's not really a kiss until the end).  The film could have been trimmed by 15 to 30 minutes.

Despite these issues, I did enjoy this movie and will see it again this weekend.  There were a lot of cute jokes for those who were fans of the toys, comics, or cartoon.  From Bumblebee being discovered besides a Volkswagon bug to quite a few of Optimus Prime's statements ("One shall stand, one shall fall") to Megatron's disgust with Starscream ("Once again you fail me") there's quite a bit here for fanboys.  Casual fans will love the action sequences and the humor.

B


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 5, 2007)

F5 said:
			
		

> The gamer geek in me has to analyze some of the plot-holes that bugged me at the end:



[SBLOCK]







> I missed something with the whole "I'll sacrifice myself to destroy the all-spark" bit at then end.  I was not the only one leaving the theatre wondering why, if you know that inserting the thing into a robot's chest is immediately fatal, that Prime wasn't suggesting that as a last resort, stick it into MEGATRON'S chest?  If you've gotta sacrifice someone for the greater good, sacrifice the BAD GUY!  Unless there's something we don't know about the after-effects of absorbing the all-spark, which we will find out about in the sequels…(ps, please make sequels!)




Quite possibly it just hadn't occurred to Prime to do that.  Honestly, that's something I'd expect from a really creative player in Spike's position..."Hey, if Optimus has this spark thingy, shouldn't Megatron?"[/SBLOCK]

[SBLOCK]







> Also, why is it that all new transformers created by stray zaps from the all-spark were evil?  I'm thinking the clue is how Prime said that their own race was savage and warlike in their own past, and had to overcome it…maybe he wasn't talking about their ancestors, but that they themselves started out savage and had to learn civilization?  Maybe the Autobots are thousands of years old?




That's what it probably is.  They start out feral, and then at some point developed a veneer of civilization, which Megatron brought crashing down on them.  Possibly if they had time, they could've educated and civilized the random transformers.

And they do mention that the Allspark crashed to earth about 10,000 BC.  IIRC, they also mentioned that the Allspark left Cybertron when it was trashed, so the war's been going on since then (probably in fits and starts as Autobots and Decepticons find each other).  So, yes, they're old.[/SBLOCK]


----------



## Asmor (Jul 5, 2007)

The Serge said:
			
		

> Hugo Weaving sounded a great deal like Frank Welker (Megatron in the original cartoon)




Really? That's one of the things I didn't like about the movie, I thought Megatron's voice was pretty far off from the cartoon voice.


----------



## Pyrex (Jul 5, 2007)

That was fun.  And brought far more funny that I would have expected.

I do think they went a little overboard on the slapstick a couple times though (specifically, trashing the yard and "lubricating" the Sector 7 agent).

But I do have to agree with the post above:  2.5 hours of awesome.


----------



## Seonaid (Jul 5, 2007)

The Serge sums it up *quite* nicely.


----------



## Providence (Jul 5, 2007)

Latest I've been able to find out about the nameless movie from the previews is that it is currently going under the name of "Cloverfield" and it is supposed to be a giant monster (currently called "the parasite") plot told completely through home video.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 5, 2007)

> While the Transformers were cool, we saw too little of them in action, particularly the Decepticons. Essentially, the Decepticons show up to get slaughtered and that's that. The only Decepticons we get a feel for are Frenzy and Megatron... Aside from the one comment Megatron makes to Starscream, we've no idea about their inter-relationships. Now, I'm not saying we needed a lot, but it wouldn't have taken much to give some of the Decepticons a little more oomph.




I can sort of understand why they'd focus on the humans for the _first_ movie, when introducing the Transformers to Earth and the mythology to a (somewhat) new audience.

Now that it's done, though, I'd love to see them do movies 2 and 3 back to back, and more closely linked, much as the _Pirates_ series did. This would allow them to develop more intricate stories, and to spend a lot more time on nonhuman character interaction.

I'd love to see movie two have Starscream in purported command of the Decepticons, but have a faction of the Decepticons actually working to restore Megatron. (And of course, have his "resurrection" occur at the end of the second movie, heralding the major challenge of movie three.) That would allow for a lot more characterization of the various Decepticons, I think, without requiring _too much_ screen time taken from the Autobots, who also need some development.


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

The Serge said:
			
		

> First, there were waaaaay too many secondary characters running around.  We have the chick that discovers the message and then pulls in her cyber-geek friend, to the army guys, to the Sector 7 guys, to Sam and the chick, to the Autobots and Decepticons.  Waaaay too many characters, most of whom weren't necessary.



Well, while they weren't "necessary" per se, but I did feel that each one those characters added to the plot. You've got Spike (or "Sam") as the everyman hero; you've got the love interest; you've got the brainiac who figures things out and makes plans; you've the tough take-charge boy scout; and finally you've the pain-in-the-neck bureaucrat who's there to provide the protagonists with something they can overcome without relying on the robots.

I mean, you could say Star Wars didn't need all those characters. Could've dropped Chewbacca or the droids. And Lord of the Rings, geez, talk about superfluous characters...You can easily collapse skills and roles in order to create fewer characters, but a big cast feels epic. The Day After Tomorrow, Armageddon, Independence Day...think about movies like that and how many extraneous characters they had just to add a little flavor.



> While the Transformers were cool, we saw too little of them in action, particularly the Decepticons.  Essentially, the Decepticons show up to get slaughtered and that's that.  The only Decepticons we get a feel for are Frenzy and Megatron...  Aside from the one comment Megatron makes to Starscream, we've no idea about their inter-relationships.  Now, I'm not saying we needed a lot, but it wouldn't have taken much to give some of the Decepticons a little more oomph.



True, the Decepticons never even muster. Their interactions pretty much consist of briefly talking over radio about getting the ball rolling. Barricade was the face of the Decepticons early in the film ("To Protect and Enslave"...gotta love it!), but then he falls off the radar.

OTOH, there is very much a "less is more" element to rock'em sock'em robots. Heck, even in the cartoon, the fights usually weren't protracted. Generally one solid hit from a blaster would take a bot down. 



> Now, Prime was cool.  My major issue with him was how much difficulty he had taking on Megatron...  That ticked me off.  I've always preferred the approach being Optimus having greater natural fighting skill compared to Megatron having slightly greater fire-power and willingness to "cheat."



Did prime even have his giant exhaust-pipe gun?


----------



## The Serge (Jul 6, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Well, while they weren't "necessary" per se, but I did feel that each one those characters added to the plot. You've got Spike (or "Sam") as the everyman hero; you've got the love interest; you've got the brainiac who figures things out and makes plans; you've the tough take-charge boy scout; and finally you've the pain-in-the-neck bureaucrat who's there to provide the protagonists with something they can overcome without relying on the robots.



They could have collapsed the brainiac with her buddies and the black guy (which, as an African American, I thought his inclusion was actually not forced or strained).  Heck, they should have had her be one of the analysts working in NSA, not some hire.  That would have eliminated one character.  The same for the Sector 7 guys.  Gone or have them show up from the beginning...  This would have eliminated the need for Tuuro's character and/or Voigt's character if they made him a high ranking agent.  That was an extra level of plot that was utterly meaningless.  



> I mean, you could say Star Wars didn't need all those characters. Could've dropped Chewbacca or the droids. And Lord of the Rings, geez, talk about superfluous characters...You can easily collapse skills and roles in order to create fewer characters, but a big cast feels epic. The Day After Tomorrow, Armageddon, Independence Day...think about movies like that and how many extraneous characters they had just to add a little flavor.



Chewbacca and the droids provided a bit of levity in the proceedings and their characters didn't take up much unnecessary space/scenes (arguably the droids do near the beginning, but my thought on them is that they're there to get the audience from the Blockade Runner to Tatooine and Luke...  They kind of drop out after we meet Luke).  And in LotRs, most of those characters are actually featured prominently in relatively important scenes...  Furthermore, they're characters adapted from a book and it's difficult to excise them without drawing fan ire; such is not the case in _Transformers_ since we're dealing with no more than two prominent human protagonists from the cartoon or comic miniseries who (sort of) make it to the flick.  

As for your other examples, I hated all of those movies in part because of the large casts (_The Day After Tomorrow_ gets something of a pass since the effects were so cool).    




> True, the Decepticons never even muster. Their interactions pretty much consist of briefly talking over radio about getting the ball rolling. Barricade was the face of the Decepticons early in the film ("To Protect and Enslave"...gotta love it!), but then he falls off the radar.



Apparently, Prime was written to have killed him but that portion was edited from the script.  To me, the face of the Decepticons was initially Blackout and then Frenzy, so -- although I noticed that Barricade disappeared -- I wasn't too bumbed out about it.  

More than anyone else, I missed Starscream playing a more prominent role.  Of the Decepticons, he's my favorite after Soundwave (well, he actually like him as much as Megatron), so I was miffed that he didn't speak more.



> OTOH, there is very much a "less is more" element to rock'em sock'em robots. Heck, even in the cartoon, the fights usually weren't protracted. Generally one solid hit from a blaster would take a bot down.



But the 'toons were 20 minutes or so with five minute fights, usually two a piece for 10 minutes.  That's have the show of fighting.  This didn't have that.  Now, I'm not saying that I wanted a bunch of fighting, but more interaction between the Decepticons would have been nice.




> Did prime even have his giant exhaust-pipe gun?



Yes, and Megatron did create a canon, although it wasn't like the big, honking thing he used in the cartoon series.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 6, 2007)

So, Hugo Weaving voiced Megatron. Well, now we know what happened to Agent Smith’s program. 

I don’t want big robots talking about my pheromone levels.

Why didn’t my Dad buy me a big honking car robot from space?

If 



Spoiler



temp’s of 6K or high damage them, then why not drop the ‘Cons into the big volcano in


 Hawaii?

The 



Spoiler



soda machine, desk top computer and angry suburban awakened by the Allspark seem to have been unaccounted


for at the end.

Cullen was so cool, some of my gray haired turned back to brown.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 6, 2007)

For a sequel, I have two words.

Shock.

Wave.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

Klaus said:
			
		

> For a sequel, I have two words.
> 
> Shock.
> 
> Wave.




As long as he turns into something other than a big honkin' ray gun, I could live with that. But I think the days of 30-foot robots transforming into objects small enough to hold in the palm of the hand are (rightfully, and not a moment too soon) over with.

(Or else they could make Shockwave tiny, like they did Frenzy, but I don't see that going over well. )


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 6, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> As long as he turns into something other than a big honkin' ray gun, I could live with that. But I think the days of 30-foot robots transforming into objects small enough to hold in the palm of the hand are (rightfully, and not a moment too soon) over with.
> 
> (Or else they could make Shockwave tiny, like they did Frenzy, but I don't see that going over well. )



 I've seen it mentioned that they will do mass-shifting transformers IF they can get it to work right. Honestly, I'd doubt it because of how awkward it is, but who knows. I did read somewhere about Bay wanting to put an Aircraft Carrier transformer into a movie, which could be interesting.

Honestly, I just ask for more Starscream.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 6, 2007)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Honestly, I just ask for more Starscream.




Word.

And possibly a performance of _Dare to be Stupid._

And maybe Grimlock...

And Astrotrain....


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> And Astrotrain....




That would be the best way to get me to skip the movie entirely. Or rather, I could possibly tolerate the character, as long as they _change the bloody name_!!

Stupidest moniker in the history of language.


----------



## Halivar (Jul 6, 2007)

My experience with Transformers is probably different that a lot of others here, since while I watched Transformers season #1 and the movie, my further experiences after that were solely through the Marvel comic book (I lived in Germany, and the cartoon was not played, but the comics were available).

1) Megatron dies somewhere around issue #8 (at the hands of Ratchet), and doesn't resurface until near the end of the comic (where he dies again at the hands of Ratchet). Thus, my iconic big-baddies are Ratbat, Scorponok, Shockwave, and Starscream.

2) Optimus died three issues before I started collecting. Most of the Marvel run was with the Autobots in civil war between the tyrannical Grimlock (the self-styled King of the Autobots) and Spike Witwicky, aka Fortress Maximus (I swear, it's true... go get the toy... the head transforms into Spike). In my early childhood, Spike Witwicky was my hero, as opposed to Optimus (because his transformer was bigger and had more guns, and he _wasn't dead_). Spike was also the one who blew Galvatron to smithereens in the very last issue.

3) The biggest rivalry was not Optimus vs. Megatron... it was _Ratchet_ vs. Megatron. Ratchet killed Megatron *three* times in the comic book, and is the only Autobot to do so. As the Autobot pacifist, he was the perfect protagonist to pit against the belligerent Decepticon leader.

What I want from the next movie:

1) I wanna see another Decepticon leader. Hopefully Shockwave.

2) I wanna see Fortress Maximus. I wanna see Sam transform into his friggin' _head_.

3) I wanna see Ratchet get more screen time. Ratched freakin' _rocks_ and you guys just don't _know_ how much.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 6, 2007)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Word.
> 
> And possibly a performance of _Dare to be Stupid._
> 
> ...



 What if we just got to have "The Touch"?


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 6, 2007)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> What if we just got to have "The Touch"?




I forgot you could tempt me with thing I want!



			
				Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Or rather, I could possibly tolerate the character, as long as they _change the bloody name_




Mostly I want to see a big, honking cargo train diesel engine transform into a robot.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 6, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> 1) Megatron dies somewhere around issue #8 (at the hands of Ratchet),




That was a transporter accident and when they came back they were fused together. It was trae cool.


----------



## Halivar (Jul 6, 2007)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> That was a transported accident and when they came back they were fused together. It was trae cool.



That was the second time. The first time was during the first appearance of the dino-bots. Megatron had taken all the other Autobots (including Optimus) off-line, and ratchet agreed to fight Megatron in a fair duel to the death. Megatron never suspected that an Autobot would cheat, and so Ratchet got the upper hand and buried Megatron in an avalanche.

The third time was near the end, where Ratchet (being binary-bonded to Megatron due to the transporter accident you mentioned) had to kill himself in order to kill Megatron. So he crashed the Ark, killing himself, Megatron, Starscream, and Shockwave. I don't know what a 'bot's got for  s, but Ratchet had 'em in spades.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 6, 2007)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> So, Hugo Weaving voiced Megatron. Well, now we know what happened to Agent Smith’s program.
> 
> I don’t want big robots talking about my pheromone levels.
> 
> ...




Didn't an XBox 360 get turned into one?

Also, what the heck was happening to the two women in the SUV, when that robot arm came out of the steering wheel and covered their faces with a mask or whatever?

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 6, 2007)

I have to say....when I heard about the movie being made, I was pretty worried it was going to be a sucky cheese-fest.  But I saw it tonight with two buddies, one of whom isn't even a Transformers fan, and it was good...really good.  As an action movie, it stands on its own.

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 6, 2007)

I know Devastator was in the movie, but that was really Brawl.

I want to see the Constructicons, lead by Starscream in all his stupidity and arrogance in the next movie.  Why not make it bigger and badder the second time around?  Prime can't take Devastator by himself so he he call in/searches for the big gun: Omega Supreme.

Yeah, it doesn't make for great trilogy fare but then again Matrix & Pirates did it so well that ... oh wait.  Oops.    Give me a second movie, pull out all the stops and go nuts.  No need to turn this into a trilogy.  If the next movie does well, make another one.


----------



## D.Shaffer (Jul 6, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> As long as he turns into something other than a big honkin' ray gun, I could live with that. But I think the days of 30-foot robots transforming into objects small enough to hold in the palm of the hand are (rightfully, and not a moment too soon) over with.



Shockwave apparently shows up in the video game adaption. He's a Triple Changer now. Apache helicopter and...something else I dont remember.







People are clamoring for Hasbro to make a toy of him as is.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 6, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> As long as he turns into something other than a big honkin' ray gun, I could live with that. But I think the days of 30-foot robots transforming into objects small enough to hold in the palm of the hand are (rightfully, and not a moment too soon) over with.
> 
> (Or else they could make Shockwave tiny, like they did Frenzy, but I don't see that going over well. )



 IIRC, he changed into a space cannon, and never actually changed in size like Megatron. At least not in the Marvel comics. He showed up very rarely in the cartoon. I'd be cool with a Shockwave that changed into a flying gun turret like those in Episode 2: Attack of the Clones.

Unless, of course, they're aiming for the Big U to show up.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 6, 2007)

The Serge said:
			
		

> More than anyone else, I missed Starscream playing a more prominent role.  Of the Decepticons, he's my favorite after Soundwave (well, he actually like him as much as Megatron), so I was miffed that he didn't speak more.



Thanks to michael bay, we might have missed something important in the movie. From what the web rumors are saying, Starstream fires on Megatron when he's dueling with the f16s.  I need to see the movie again to varify this (considering the camera was having a heart attack) .


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 6, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Thanks to michael bay, we might have missed something important in the movie. From what the web rumors are saying, Starstream fires on Megatron when he's dueling with the f16s.  I need to see the movie again to varify this (considering the camera was having a heart attack) .




Those were all F-22s in that fight; while they showed F-16s getting ready, none participated that I can recall.  That would've made Starscream stand out a bit more, but as they can switch what they look like onscreen (Bumblebee did), that would've definitely led to some friendly fire.

But, yes, I heard that rumor (here, I thought), too; certainly, whoever hit him was more effective than you'd expect the typical human air-to-ground ordnance to be, as it apparently messed Megatron up bad.

Which could bring up the question of what's going to hurt a Transformer.  I'd suspect a tank round (a depleted uranium one) would probably put a serious hurting, just through sheer kinetic energy transfer.



			
				Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I've seen it mentioned that they will do mass-shifting transformers IF they can get it to work right. Honestly, I'd doubt it because of how awkward it is, but who knows. I did read somewhere about Bay wanting to put an Aircraft Carrier transformer into a movie, which could be interesting.




Well, they did play some mass/volume games, with the Allspark going from big huge cube to 1' cube.

Brad


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

You know, I have to say...

There are _plenty_ of Transformers out there who haven't been used yet. There's still plenty more they can do with them.

I really _don't_ want to see them ratcheting up the size/power level much more. I don't particularly want to see Omega Supreme, or any of the "five-in-one" robots. They worked as part of a cartoon, but in the (slightly) more real-world setting of the movie, I don't think they'd come across all that well.

Plus, bringing in new characters that stand out so heavily would make it that much less likely that we'd get further character development on the Transformers who have already appeared.


----------



## F5 (Jul 6, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> You know, I have to say...
> 
> There are _plenty_ of Transformers out there who haven't been used yet. There's still plenty more they can do with them.
> 
> ...




I dunno...

The way they ended the movie, with Prime sending out a message to "any autobots still out there", I think it's a foregone conclusion that a second movie will involve new autobots showing up.  And with the bit at the end where Starscream gets away, I think it's just as likely that we have new Decepticons coming in after them.

I would really like to see the Mountain Dew Machine feature in the next movie, if not prominently than at least as a cameo.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

F5 said:
			
		

> The way they ended the movie, with Prime sending out a message to "any autobots still out there", I think it's a foregone conclusion that a second movie will involve new autobots showing up.  And with the bit at the end where Starscream gets away, I think it's just as likely that we have new Decepticons coming in after them.




Oh, absolutely there'll be new characters on both sides. I expect and approve of that.

What I don't want are new characters that are _blatantly more powerful_ than the ones we've got now. I'm more than fine with Sideswipe or Cliffjumper or Ramjet or whoever showing up. What I passionately _don't_ want is to see Omega Supreme, or the Constructicons, or any of that ilk.


----------



## The Serge (Jul 6, 2007)

If they did a sequel, I'd be shocked if they didn't have the Constructicons or some other combining group.  While I agree that something like Omega Supreme would be a little dull, the Constructicons and the like would be cool as hell if handled properly.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 6, 2007)

I believe its been said that they really want to do Constructicons and Dinobots in the next one. I want to say its from Bay, but can't really remember exactly who said it.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

The Serge said:
			
		

> the Constructicons and the like would be cool as hell if handled properly.




Maybe. But I'd still rather they hold off--at least until a hypothetical third movie. I _really_ don't want a bunch of shiny new toys to take attention off the "normal" Autobots and Decepticons just yet. I really want to see them have a chance to establish some real personalities and character interactions--the lack of such was one of the few weaknesses of the first movie--and we're not going to get that if we have a whole slew of new and "more interesting" gimmicks to take attention away from them.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 6, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I really _don't_ want to see them ratcheting up the size/power level much more. I don't particularly want to see Omega Supreme, or any of the "five-in-one" robots.




I *think* I heard somewhere that they were trying to put at least one gestalt/combiner in this one, but they just couldn't fit it in.

I do think having one as a concept could work.  It'd probably have to be the crux of the plot, too, to avoid character overload.  Sadly, they kind of removed the possibility of the Constructicons, what with having Bonecrusher and Devastator as characters in this one.  Then again, the Combaticons are almost as good.  The choices fall off rapidly afterward, though; the Stunticons are probably the most likely to be used (more product placement), but are kind of meh, and the choices after them fall off rapidly (Predacons, Sharkticons?).

And, yes, no Omega Supreme.  Except maybe as background in a flashback...that would be good fan service.

Brad


----------



## Aeolius (Jul 6, 2007)

So long as Johnny Depp portrays captain Jack Sparrow, I will continue to eagerly await PotC sequels, and so long as Peter Cullen remains the voice of Optimus Prime, I will stand in line for Transformers sequels.

   So, can we get Casey Kasem in the next one, please?


----------



## Asmor (Jul 6, 2007)

Yes! And Leonard Nimoy! And Eric Idle! And Orson Welles!


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

...

You know, I watched the old _Transformers: The Movie_ a couple of years ago. It was the first time I'd seen it since I was a kid.

It does _not_ hold up, IMO. I'm not going to accuse anyone else of seeing through nostalgia-tinted glasses, but I know that, at least for me, that's all it had going for it.

So while I realize that most of the above comments are meant in jest, I do want to say that I am opposed to anything that would make the sequel to the new movie more like the old movie.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 6, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> I *think* I heard somewhere that they were trying to put at least one gestalt/combiner in this one, but they just couldn't fit it in.
> 
> I do think having one as a concept could work.  It'd probably have to be the crux of the plot, too, to avoid character overload.  Sadly, they kind of removed the possibility of the Constructicons, what with having Bonecrusher and Devastator as characters in this one.  Then again, the Combaticons are almost as good.  The choices fall off rapidly afterward, though; the Stunticons are probably the most likely to be used (more product placement), but are kind of meh, and the choices after them fall off rapidly (Predacons, Sharkticons?).
> 
> ...




Weren't there 5 fighter jet ones that combine into one big robot?  And did the Insecticons join into one big robot?

I'm sure that if the first movie does well, we might see more product placement in the sequel, which would allow for the addition of other Gen 1 Transformers like Sideswipe (Lamborgini), and Sunburt or Sunray or whatever his name was (yellow car, Lotus or something?).

Oh, and weren't there some that turned into dragons or something?  I remember seeing one that became a two-headed dragon.  But that was a few years after I stopped collecting.  I think the last purchase I made was a red one that turned into a tiger or something....Rampage or something like that.

Did all the Decepticons get destroyed, though?  I think several of them escaped.

I'd assume that there might be more in hiding, who just couldn't get to the action in time?

Banshee


----------



## Asmor (Jul 6, 2007)

You know, I completely disagree Mousey. I absolutely love the old TF movie-- it's the DVD I've watched the most, literally dozens of times, compared to one or two a piece tops with my hundreds of other DVDs... Hell, there's a lot of DVDs I own which I've never watched at all. I still cry when Optimus Prime dies, and overall I think the movie holds up remarkably well. If anything, I appreciate it now more than ever because I really like the animation style.

For comparison, a few years back I found an old VHS copy of the GI Joe movie in a box while cleaning my room. I watched that and I thought it was horrendously cheesy and corny; to the point that I was still able to enjoy it just because it was so bad it was good, but that's not a movie that I'd want to watch very much.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 6, 2007)

Well, I'll agree with you about the G.I. Joe movie, certainly. Bleah. 

But I think we'll just have to accept that we disagree on the old Transformers movie. *shudder*


----------



## Nuclear Platypus (Jul 7, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Weren't there 5 fighter jet ones that combine into one big robot?  And did the Insecticons join into one big robot?
> 
> Other Gen 1 Transformers like Sideswipe (Lamborgini), and Sunburt or Sunray or whatever his name was (yellow car, Lotus or something?).
> 
> ...




There was a -bunch- of combiners and this is going from memory.

Constructicons (Devastator) 
Aerialbots (Superion?)
Combaticons (Bruticus)
Protectobots (?)
Stunticons (Menasor)
Terrorcons? had the 2 headed dragon you're thinking of IIRC 
Predacons (Predaking), one of which might've been Rampage (a lion I think but they also had a tiger IIRC) but it did have 6 members
A sea creature themed Decepticon team (Piranhacons?), unusual as one of which would form the weapon I think, one of which was a nautilus.

Nope, the Insecticons were just Bombshell, Kickback and Shrapnel but later got some newer toys. They did have a tendency to swarm but it might've been like how there were so many Starscream, Thundercracker and Skywarp clones.

Sideswipe's "twin" was Sunstreak (the yellow one).

As far as I can tell, only 2 Decepticons escaped - Starscream and Scorponok but since Barricade didn't get killed onscreen, there's a chance he survived (slim to nil tho).


----------



## Nuclear Platypus (Jul 7, 2007)

Nuclear Platypus said:
			
		

> There was a -bunch- of combiners:
> 
> Constructicons (Devastator)
> Aerialbots (Superion) who's main enemy were the Stunticons (Menasor)
> ...




Ok, I cheated.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 7, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Well, I'll agree with you about the G.I. Joe movie, certainly. Bleah.
> 
> But I think we'll just have to accept that we disagree on the old Transformers movie. *shudder*



 Add me to the TF: The Movie fan list. I love that movie and the soundtrack. "The Touch" and "Dare" are two of my favoritest songs ever.

I really doubt they'll do combining robots, since that reeks of Power Rangers now.

I agree with Mouse that the power level can't jump too fast, but there's plenty of room for growth before that. I mean, aircraft carriers, that new Airbus that is larger than a 747, an oil tanker... those robots would be pretty BIG...


----------



## Aeolius (Jul 7, 2007)

You're thinking of the wrong scale... Transformers 2 will be Chatbots vs. Emoticons!


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 7, 2007)

Hrmmm…

I wonder about the “Cheese factor” of some of these guys. Granted, the idea of cars and tanks turning into alien robots is inherently cheesy. However, in this movie neither the item-mode nor robot-mode looked silly, looked cheesy.

I worry that a two-headed robot monsters, or a transforming T-Rex will look, well, dumb.

Some more scenes on Cybertron would be cool, as would some sort of cameo mention of Unicron. But I don’t want something that would look dumb. And let’s face facts here – the movie is 90% eye candy. Something that looked cheesy could spoil the entire effect.

Granted, I asked for Astrotrain a few posts ago. But I think that could work if he doesn’t fly around as a train or triple change.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jul 7, 2007)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Add me to the TF: The Movie fan list. I love that movie and the soundtrack. "The Touch" and "Dare" are two of my favoritest songs ever.
> 
> I really doubt they'll do combining robots, since that reeks of Power Rangers now.
> 
> I agree with Mouse that the power level can't jump too fast, but there's plenty of room for growth before that. I mean, aircraft carriers, that new Airbus that is larger than a 747, an oil tanker... those robots would be pretty BIG...




I'm partial to Instruments of Destruction myself.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 7, 2007)

So, just because I have to tell the internet how I feel about every movie I see, this one was a badly made, horribly written, entertaining movie. Kinda like Spider-Man 3.

Too many characters. Too many unnecessary scenes. Terrible designs for the robots, and an apparent unwillingness to actually _show_ the damned things on camera. I have practically no idea what most of the Decepticons look like in robot form, because of the badly-framed shots that shook all the time.

Oh, and making out with your girlfriend on top of an intelligent robot while other robots watch?! 8-O What the hell?!


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 7, 2007)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> So, just because I have to tell the internet how I feel about every movie I see, this one was a badly made, horribly written, entertaining movie. Kinda like Spider-Man 3.
> 
> Too many characters. Too many unnecessary scenes. Terrible designs for the robots, and an apparent unwillingness to actually _show_ the damned things on camera. I have practically no idea what most of the Decepticons look like in robot form, because of the badly-framed shots that shook all the time.
> 
> Oh, and making out with your girlfriend on top of an intelligent robot while other robots watch?! 8-O What the hell?!




I have to agree. In fact, I have to go farther.

My big beefs are as follows:

1) For an "action movie," there sure wasn't much action. You have to wait nearly -half the movie- before you get your first really good fight. What do they spend all this time on? Setting up characters? No. They spend it pointlessly teasing us with the "mystery" of what's going on. I promise Mr. Bay...NO ONE who sees this movie will -for one second- not know what's going on. The movie would have been a lot better (not saying much) if it had started out with the Transformers already on Earth (all of the Transformers, I mean), and the opening scenes were used to establish MUCH NEEDED characterizations.

2) When the action started, you couldn't SEE it. Most of the time the camera was either so shaky, or so close to the scene that the frame simply wasn't big enough to show more than...a leg whizzing by, or a momentary glimpse of a torso. 

3) Only the Autobots got any noncombat screen time, and what time THEY got was HORRIBLE! 30' robots -sneaking around the kid's house so as not to get caught?- While muttering complaints. Making -pee jokes-. I just...gah! It was as if Bay watched the TV show and said, "Well, these robots are cool and all, but we need to DUMB IT DOWN a bit."

Etc etc...I could go on for ages.

And, like Spiderman 3, what really hurts is that this movie was maybe 2 rewrites (Admittedly, rather drastic ones) away from being a passable, even good movie! If the scriptwriter had just stuck to his guns, picked a focus and went with it...if he'd been able to write decent dialogue and didn't get hobbled with demands to make the Autobots act like frathouse goons, and to completely ignore the Decepticons... If Bay knew how to frame shots and spread the budget more evenly between beginning and end (CGI wise that is)... If if if.

But they didn't. And it isn't.

Mew.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 7, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> I have to agree. In fact, I have to go farther.
> 
> My big beefs are as follows:
> 
> 1) For an "action movie," there sure wasn't much action. You have to wait nearly -half the movie- before you get your first really good fight.



Except for the very first sequence.



			
				Shayuri said:
			
		

> 2) When the action started, you couldn't SEE it. Most of the time the camera was either so shaky, or so close to the scene that the frame simply wasn't big enough to show more than...a leg whizzing by, or a momentary glimpse of a torso.



Saw it in digital (twice, now) some things were a little hard to see from time to time but the action was excellent.  A leg?  A torso?  I saw much more than that.



			
				Shayuri said:
			
		

> 3) Only the Autobots got any noncombat screen time, and what time THEY got was HORRIBLE! 30' robots -sneaking around the kid's house so as not to get caught?- While muttering complaints. Making -pee jokes-. I just...gah! It was as if Bay watched the TV show and said, "Well, these robots are cool and all, but we need to DUMB IT DOWN a bit."



The movie was full of cheese, this was simply part of it.



			
				Shayuri said:
			
		

> And, like Spiderman 3, what really hurts is that this movie was maybe 2 rewrites (Admittedly, rather drastic ones) away from being a passable, even good movie! If the scriptwriter had just stuck to his guns, picked a focus and went with it...if he'd been able to write decent dialogue and didn't get hobbled with demands to make the Autobots act like frathouse goons, and to completely ignore the Decepticons... If Bay knew how to frame shots and spread the budget more evenly between beginning and end (CGI wise that is)... If if if.



Frathouse goons?  I don't get the reference.  They are bad-ass warriors on a new world, simply put.  There wasn't enough Decepticon interaction, I admit, but it did not hurt the movie.

I believe you missed the point or simply went in with expectations that were not met.  It's a movie, based off a toy-line made by a notorious over-the-top director who likes lots of patriotic cheese in his movies along with huge explosions.

Stuff blew up real good, there were some classic lines in there.  I don't see the problem.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 7, 2007)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> So, just because I have to tell the internet how I feel about every movie I see, this one was a badly made, horribly written, entertaining movie. Kinda like Spider-Man 3.



Badly made?  You're nuts.  That thing was pure popcorn entertainment and felt from beginning to end like a Transformers movie.



			
				RangerWickett said:
			
		

> Too many characters. Too many unnecessary scenes. Terrible designs for the robots, and an apparent unwillingness to actually _show_ the damned things on camera. I have practically no idea what most of the Decepticons look like in robot form, because of the badly-framed shots that shook all the time.



Does it really matter what they look like in their non vehicle forms?  If you are really that interested, try a GIS for some designs, screensots, etc.



			
				RangerWickett said:
			
		

> Oh, and making out with your girlfriend on top of an intelligent robot while other robots watch?! 8-O What the hell?!



Um.  If the robots had a problem with it, they would have done something.    Like mom, Bubblebee and Prime were probably proud of their new charge. 

After all, it's what teenagers do.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 7, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Except for the very first sequence.




Not to mention that while the the plot was setting up during the beginning of the film, they would cut to Qatar and Scorponok provided a great deal of action early on. Yes, there was a bit of a dry spot after, but by then the Autobots had all shown up and it was good times.

I can't believe people didn't like the 'hiding around the house' scene. Sure, nothing was blowing up, but it was fun.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 7, 2007)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Not to mention that while the the plot was setting up during the beginning of the film, they would cut to Qatar and Scorponok provided a great deal of action early on. Yes, there was a bit of a dry spot after, but by then the Autobots had all shown up and it was good times.



Couldn't agree more.  Sure, there was some pointless exposition in there, but if it wasn't there is zero weight to the proceedings at all.



			
				Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I can't believe people didn't like the 'hiding around the house' scene. Sure, nothing was blowing up, but it was fun.



That sequence was pretty fun and topped off nicely by the gag at the end.


----------



## Halivar (Jul 7, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> The movie would have been a lot better (not saying much) if it had started out with the Transformers already on Earth (all of the Transformers, I mean), and the opening scenes were used to establish MUCH NEEDED characterizations.



I disagree; I thought Bay did a fine job characterizing each Autobot, giving them personality and individuality. I think some screenwriters/directors go too heavy on the characterization and end up with some embarrassing melodramatic scenes. Mikaela's character, for instance, had a good handle on her without the whole "I used to steal cars and now I'm angsty" schtick. Too much characterization, IMHO. In an action movie (an "event" narrative, as opposed to a "character" narrative or "milieu" narrative.), you only need as much characterization as it takes to 1) provide motivation for the characters to do what they do and 2) move the events in the story along. Bay did a good job here.



			
				Shayuri said:
			
		

> Only the Autobots got any noncombat screen time, and what time THEY got was HORRIBLE! 30' robots -sneaking around the kid's house so as not to get caught?- While muttering complaints. Making -pee jokes-. I just...gah! It was as if Bay watched the TV show and said, "Well, these robots are cool and all, but we need to DUMB IT DOWN a bit."



I think Bay was staying true to the source material, which was childishly comical in places (places? I mean whenever they weren't harmlessly shooting at each other).



			
				RangerWickett said:
			
		

> So, just because I have to tell the internet how I feel about every movie I see, this one was a badly made, horribly written, entertaining movie. Kinda like Spider-Man 3.



*HERETIC!!!!*

Inquisitor: Has the imperial magistrate reached a verdict?

Quintesson: I have.

Inquistitor: Guilty or innocent?

Quintesson: Innocent.

Inquisitor: Feed him to the Sharkticons.

RangerWickett: Aaaaaaaa.......

Quintesson: Hahahahahaha*change faces*hahahahahahaha*change faces*hahahahahaha*change faces*hahahahahahaha.


----------



## Evil Monkey (Jul 7, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm sure that if the first movie does well, we might see more product placement in the sequel, which would allow for the addition of other Gen 1 Transformers like Sideswipe (Lamborgini), and Sunburt or Sunray or whatever his name was (yellow car, Lotus or something?).




The trivia for the movie on IMDB.com said that the movie's makers had a deal with GM so that all the cars were GM models (one of a couple reasons why Bumblebee was the Camaro instead of the Bug and Jazz was a Pontiac instead of a Porsche; the other reason being VW and Porsche no longer wanted their cars assocated with 'war toys'.).  I would be surprised if that was changed for the sequels.


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 7, 2007)

Except for the very first sequence.

-- I meant a fight. An actual robot on robot fight. Watching a robot blow up a base isn't the same thing...at least that's not how I saw it.

Saw it in digital (twice, now) some things were a little hard to see from time to time but the action was excellent.  A leg?  A torso?  I saw much more than that.

-- Some shots were worse than others, yes, and some (like Starscream taking out the F22's) were even kind of cool. What I should have said was that the action scenes, the few there were, were often filmed and/or framed badly, denying the audience a good view. Not always, just often.

The movie was full of cheese, this was simply part of it.

-- Far -too- full of cheese. And it wasn't good cheese. It wasn't even cheese that was so bad it's good. It was just...tedious, numbing cheese. The worst kind there is.

Frathouse goons?  I don't get the reference.  They are bad-ass warriors on a new world, simply put.  There wasn't enough Decepticon interaction, I admit, but it did not hurt the movie.

-- I couldn't disagree with you more. The autobots never once came off to me as "bad ass warriors on a new world." Silly shenanigans and bathroom humor just don't create that impression. Honestly, I would have thought a Transformer's fan would have hated and been humiliated by that entire sequence.

I believe you missed the point or simply went in with expectations that were not met.  It's a movie, based off a toy-line made by a notorious over-the-top director who likes lots of patriotic cheese in his movies along with huge explosions.

-- And I believe the point was "to sell toys." Just like the cartoons. I really didn't go in with many expectations. I went in with hope. Tender, wide-eyed hopes that Mr Bay took great delight in clubbing like the winsome seal cubs they so resembled.

Stuff blew up real good, there were some classic lines in there.  I don't see the problem.

-- Stuff blowing up and a few catchphrases do not a movie make. That's the problem.

My take on it anyway. Lest this get out of hand, I should make it clear I don't hold it -against- anyone if they saw it and liked it. I'm just glad I only paid five bucks to see it is all.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 7, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> Stuff blowing up and a few catchphrases do not a movie make. That's the problem.




That's pretty much the definition of a summer action flick. Methinks you may have been looking for something other than what this movie actually is.


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 8, 2007)

Yes. I was looking for a -good- movie.     (sorry, couldn't resist )

Seriously though, just because a lot of summer actions flicks aren't any more than that doesn't mean that that's all they CAN be.

Lets set our sights a bit higher here, people. 

And really, I dunno what to say. A lot of the time I LIKE relatively mindless action movies. Not as much as mind-ful action movies, but I still like them. Transformers really just failed on every level for me except that of visual effects...and visual effects alone aren't enough to carry a movie for me.

I honestly don't think my expectations for Transformers were any different than they were for any other action movie I've seen yet. It just failed to measure up, in my estimation.

I'm just as befuddled to see all these glowing reviews as you all must be to see mine, believe me.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 8, 2007)

Oh, I can understand your complaints, for the most part (I can't see how anyone could be dissatisfied with the amount of action in the movie, but that's me). I groaned during that entire scene where the TFs were trampling his yard and trying to hide... I thought it was okay at best, but I could certainly understand someone thinking it was terrible (and I wouldn't entirely disagree with them). OTOH, I loved the part where Bumblebee... lubricated the gentleman from secotr 7, just because it's not something I would ever have expected to see, it was humorous, and they didn't dwell on it like they did the hide-and-go-seek part.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 8, 2007)

I saw it this afternoon.  My wife and I had a rocking good time watching the movie.  

'Nuff said.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 8, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Badly made?  You're nuts.  That thing was pure popcorn entertainment and felt from beginning to end like a Transformers movie.
> 
> Does it really matter what they look like in their non vehicle forms?  If you are really that interested, try a GIS for some designs, screensots, etc.
> 
> ...



Both of you have good points and bad ones. 

There was a ton of action in this movie. Not a lot of robot fighting, but a few good car chases and a good battle. 

The main action happened in the third act, and the camera makes it unwatchable. Yo ucan't make out anything.  Very horrible direction on this part.  

That scene with the robots sneaking around was pretty stupid and they were acting far too silly (frat boy like).  How much property does that family own that 30ft. large robots are maneuvering around and no one noticed it. Where'd the robots go when the sector 7 people showed up.  I live next to a truck depot, someone would have noticed all the commotion.  That scene served as comedy but it could have served a far better purpose.  

The movie did a good job o establishing the decepticons as dangerious villians in a whole (with that first scene, the iceman references and the thing about megatron) but it didn't establish the decepticons individually.  

The object was a bit wierd.  It seemed to turn everything into evil robots. 

Had better action than spiderman 3 and far less musical numbers.  The transformer villians had a motive, though it was a simple one.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 8, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Both of you have good points and bad ones.
> 
> There was a ton of action in this movie. Not a lot of robot fighting, but a few good car chases and a good battle.
> 
> The main action happened in the third act, and the camera makes it unwatchable. Yo ucan't make out anything.  Very horrible direction on this part.



No, *you* couldn't make out anything.  I saw plenty of robots shooting each other and punching each other in the face, as well as protecting young Sam.



			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> That scene with the robots sneaking around was pretty stupid and they were acting far too silly (frat boy like).  How much property does that family own that 30ft. large robots are maneuvering around and no one noticed it. Where'd the robots go when the sector 7 people showed up.  I live next to a truck depot, someone would have noticed all the commotion.  That scene served as comedy but it could have served a far better purpose.



It served as entertainment and dwelling on it is an exercise in futility.  Were you looking for deeper meaning?  It was a silly moment topped off by a masturbation joke followed by a reveal that was even funnier (the mom's reaction).

If you didn't dig it, that's cool.  But don't try and insert meaning or insist that it be replaced by something else.  It was a joke scene and ludicrous to boot.  Most importantly, it was fun and showed that Prime basically got humanity a little bit, if not all the nuances.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 8, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> Seriously though, just because a lot of summer actions flicks aren't any more than that doesn't mean that that's all they CAN be.



Of course.  But this one was gonna be cheese (not the so bad is good kinda, either), camp and big explosions from the start.  Expecting any more than that is ... well ... I've said it already.  You are acting like you have never seen a movie directed by Michael Bay.  If so, stay away from the rest as this is his best so far.



			
				Shayuri said:
			
		

> Lets set our sights a bit higher here, people.



Higher than transforming robots beating the bolts out of each other and having a few laughs along the way?  It's simply that kind of movie.  You didn't dig it, that's okay.  And the vast majority disagrees with you.  And that's okay, too.  I'll put you down for not seeing the sequel.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 8, 2007)

Matt, sure there was _some_ robots punching other robots, but no actual _scenes_ of it. Rather than showing a fight with individual characters -- who you could tell apart, instead of being a blur of robotics -- doing actual cool things, they just presented a general sense of 'stuff going on.'

In the last whole segment, about the only cool thing was Starscream, because, he's like, the awesomest robot ever. Why wasn't there more Starscream?

But c'mon, you really don't think the scenes would've been more interesting if they'd actually let you see a given character for more than 5 seconds, do you? (Oh wait, they did, but it was always in Michael-Bay-motion, where sun beams down from above, everything slows down, a character looks really bad-ass, and a choir sings with amazingly dramatic music, before cutting back to the same tripe as before.)

Bumblebee vs. the evil copcar bot? Yeah, we see about 5 seconds, and then we go to the kids running away and dealing with the Salacious Crumb wannabe.

Optimus vs. Megatron? Badly framed shots with too much panning to get a sense of how the characters are moving.

Really, I want to rewatch the old cartoon movie. I think, even without nostalgia making me love it, at least I could tell who the characters are, and what they're doing. 



Oh, and my personal least favorite moment in the movie: when Optimus is telling the other Autobots about where the cube is, and they're just chilling some place in the middle of the day, talking to each other. And what does the cameraman decide to do? Zoom and pan. Pan and zoom, and have a wide tracking shot. Holy bleeping bleep. Do people just not sit cameras down and record characters doing stuff anymore?

It was entertaining, but if the people who'd made it had been less in love with all the awesome stuff you can do nowadays, it could've actually been _good_.


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 8, 2007)

I'm just calling it like I saw it, man. I'm not sure where the, "Well, what were you THINKING it was going to be" mentality is coming from here. Or the odd notion that there must be something wrong with my perceptions because I wasn't expecting all these problems (and here's the kicker), and that if I -had- been expecting them, that would somehow make them not problems anymore.

That seems to be the implicit argument I'm seeing repeated over and over. If I had only been EXPECTING the movie to be bad going in, I would have magically realized on seeing it that it was NOT bad? All these issues and failures, I would just completely change my mind about, because I should have known already they'd be there?

No. That's really not how I watch movies. I don't go, "Well, this is a Bay movie, therefore it will have this laundry list of problems...which I will now ignore." I at least -try- to judge each movie, regardless of its origins, on its own merits or lack therof.

Now I have no problem with people liking the movie. That's cool! That's fine! I'm GLAD you feel good about what you saw! I'm in no way trying to intimate, in any way, that you all have something wrong with you that causes you to overlook its deep flaws. All I ask is the fans of this movie please stop trying to suggest that my dislike of the movie is due somehow to my flawed perception. I'm confused too, ya know. I sort of figured that the more someone liked the Transformers, the more they'd hate this movie...because it seems to me to be a long insult to fans and source material alike.

But if not, -that's cool-. You're still a healthy human being. I love and respect you unconditionally. Namaste! *holds hands up* I surrender! 

I'd like to think we can just agree to disagree on this subject without being forced to believe that we actually live in alternate universes, just because of our respective reactions to a movie. 

(PS - and to those of you who had a more moderate reaction, yes you, and didn't make any such accusation and don't fit at all the subject of this plea...well, you're not who I'm talking to. In fact, if there's any question at all if this post is directed to you...it's probably not. Rejoice with me, brothers and sisters!)


----------



## Jeysie (Jul 8, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> I sort of figured that the more someone liked the Transformers, the more they'd hate this movie...because it seems to me to be a long insult to fans and source material alike.




Heh. I hate to add to the contrariness, but... I have a friend who *loves* the Transformers... has seen all the series, collects the figures, knows all the details in and out... and he thought the movie was awesome. In fact, it was his gushing that pushed me into going, since I'd been rather dubious about the idea of a live-action version being any good.

Peace & Luv, Liz


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 8, 2007)

Yar, that's one thing that confuses me. I don't pretend to understand it, but I accept it.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 8, 2007)

Jeysie said:
			
		

> Heh. I hate to add to the contrariness, but... I have a friend who *loves* the Transformers... has seen all the series, collects the figures, knows all the details in and out... and he thought the movie was awesome. In fact, it was his gushing that pushed me into going, since I'd been rather dubious about the idea of a live-action version being any good.
> 
> Peace & Luv, Liz



 I'm another that loves Transformers and loved the movie. 

The movie pays a LOT of homage to the old stuff, and even keeps a lot of the charm/cheesiness that was always there. In fact, a lot of the reasons I see people not liking the movie are things that were always in the show to one degree or another.

Shakycam isn't one, of course, but I didn't have a problem identifying things through it. Obviously there are others that didn't, either, so its not a universal thing that shakycam causes problems for people.

"One shall stand, one shall fall."

Weeeee.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 8, 2007)

Another long time TF fan here, and I think I've stated my opinion enough in here


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 8, 2007)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> Matt, sure there was _some_ robots punching other robots, but no actual _scenes_ of it. Rather than showing a fight with individual characters -- who you could tell apart, instead of being a blur of robotics -- doing actual cool things, they just presented a general sense of 'stuff going on.'
> 
> In the last whole segment, about the only cool thing was Starscream, because, he's like, the awesomest robot ever. Why wasn't there more Starscream?
> 
> ...



Ryan, I will respectfully agree to disagree with you on the quality of the movie and its cinematography.  Where you see problems I see an entertaining movie.  While it was far from being celluloid perfected it was a damn good time.  

I'll also mention that Starscream is certainly awesome but is dwarfed in all respects by the excellence of Optimus Prime.  Starscream is an entertaining coward and traitor.  He's no Prime.

I simply can't have an intelligent discourse on this film.  It's a popcorn movie through to its core and there for fun.  It's not intelligent.  It's like trying to discuss the politics and social commentary of ID4.

I was like 7 when I fell in love with the Transformers.  The movie entertained both the 7 year old in me and the 30 year old who just wanted to hear a few classic lines and see big fights and explosions.  It was a spectacle that begs to be experienced much like Jurassic Park (with all its flaws) 14 years ago.


----------



## Asmor (Jul 8, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I simply can't have an intelligent discourse on this film.  It's a popcorn movie through to its core and there for fun.  It's not intelligent.  It's like trying to discuss the politics and social commentary of ID4.




Hey, let's write a computer virus on our circa 1996 computer which can infect and take down an entire alient invasion fleet infinitely more advanced than ourselves!

 Still a great movie.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 8, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> Hey, let's write a computer virus on our circa 1996 computer which can infect and take down an entire alient invasion fleet infinitely more advanced than ourselves!
> 
> Still a great movie.



 Uh oh, I may have mistakenly cast ID4 in a positive light.

Oops.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 8, 2007)

Hey, I loved Independence Day! And honestly, Transformers felt like it was trying to rip off Independence Day.

I won't deny that Transformers was fun. I just always feel sad when a movie is 'fun despite being flawed' when with a little work it could have been 'flawless and awesome to all 11s'.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 8, 2007)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> Hey, I loved Independence Day! And honestly, Transformers felt like it was trying to rip off Independence Day.



And there it goes.  ID4 rips off and sensationalizes War of the Worlds based off the summer blockbuster formula started by Star Wars which was influenced by serials and Kurosawa flicks ... it goes on and on.

As a writer, you know damn well there are no new stories to tell, just new ways to tell them.



			
				RangerWickett said:
			
		

> I won't deny that Transformers was fun. I just always feel sad when a movie is 'fun despite being flawed' when with a little work it could have been 'flawless and awesome to all 11s'.



When dealing with material such as 80's toy lines and Michael Bay I only expect so much.  He did justice to robots in disguise, a preposterous premise to start with.  And looked good doing it.  You had fun with the film?  Then mission accomplished.  They weren't trying to recreate Shakespeare.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 8, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> They weren't trying to recreate Shakespeare.




*Optimus:* (holds up severed robotic head) 
Alas poor Bonecrusher! I knew him, o Bumblebee: a fellow
of infinite bones, of most excellent crushing: he hath
borne me on his mechanical scoop-thingy a thousand times; and now, how
abhorred in my transformation it is! my energon blade stabs at
it. Here hung those asses that I have kicked I know
not how oft. Where be your grappling hook now? your
roller-blades? your lasers? your flashes of bonecrushing,
that were wont to set the table on a roar?


----------



## Victim (Jul 8, 2007)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I'm another that loves Transformers and loved the movie.
> 
> The movie pays a LOT of homage to the old stuff, and even keeps a lot of the charm/cheesiness that was always there. In fact, a lot of the reasons I see people not liking the movie are things that were always in the show to one degree or another.
> 
> Shakycam isn't one, of course, but I didn't have a problem identifying things through it. Obviously there are others that didn't, either, so its not a universal thing that shakycam causes problems for people.




Yeah, the shakycam in Transformers seemed pretty mild, really.  There were generally a few blows per cut, and zoom at least captured most of the characters.  Unlike, say, Batman Begins, which cuts insanely fast in many fights.

What made some stuff difficult to follow was that the robots didn't look so different in transformed mode.  The distinctiveness of the external paint jobs was lost in robot mode since lots of the pieces were from the largely undifferentiated interior.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 8, 2007)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> *Optimus:* (holds up severed robotic head)
> Alas poor Bonecrusher! I knew him, o Bumblebee: a fellow
> of infinite bones, of most excellent crushing: he hath
> borne me on his mechanical scoop-thingy a thousand times; and now, how
> ...



If that was from memory, I'm impressed.

Otherwise ... not so much.


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 8, 2007)

LOL!

Thank you, Ranger Wicket, for making us laugh at love.

Again.


----------



## satori01 (Jul 8, 2007)

Too much humans, too little of the Transformers.   The thing that bugs me about Bay is he could make a great movie if he cared too, but just takes the easy way out.  He always casts for beauty, not for talent,  always has plot holes in his movies,  and always has the shaky camera work, and a point in a movie where you have endured so many explosions, and chases, that you do not really care anymore.

The aspect of Transformers I have always found fascinating is that you have two armed sides that have been battling each other for centuries, that have gone from large armed organized armies to a mere handfull of combatants on each side.  The cartoon obviously had the luxury of more time to build up that antagonistic but intimate element of  the relationship between Autobots & Decepticons.
Bay did next to nothing on that front, which is a shame.  Look at something like Kill Bill, and Tarantino made it a point to bring out that intimate aspect, that sense of one character truly knowing another, with brand new source material.  Bay could have used the cartoons as a guide.

The movie is called Transformers not Section 7 and the Sec Def.  The camera work left me with a headache in the action sequences.  I also had a headache from the Bourne Identity or Supremacy, the shaky camera work is a huge impediment to me, I can not follow the action, and have an adverse physical reaction.

While not common I also know I am not the only one that the camera work has that effect on.


----------



## satori01 (Jul 8, 2007)

Victim said:
			
		

> Unlike, say, Batman Begins, which cuts insanely fast in many fights.




I never got a headache from Batman Begins, and I saw that in a theatre with less screen quality, ( Mann's Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, so still of good quality) than where I saw the Transformers.  While the action can be fast sometimes, e,g, when Batman swoops down, the camera position itself is a stable point, and the essence of the scene is too show how fast and guerilla like Batman is.  Same thing with Gladiator, it is not sped up camera work that gives me the headache, as Gladiator did not, but the stability of the camera itself.

Bay is trying to make you feel kinetically you are there in the midst of the chaos & confusion of the shin dig....for some it works...my wife likes those scenes...for others like myself it hurts.  Even my wife agrees if Bay would consider the point of a scene and its impact on the created fabric of the world and universe, like say the action direction of the first Matrix,  his movies could be great, not just popcorn fare.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 8, 2007)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Not to mention that while the the plot was setting up during the beginning of the film, they would cut to Qatar and Scorponok provided a great deal of action early on. Yes, there was a bit of a dry spot after, but by then the Autobots had all shown up and it was good times.
> 
> I can't believe people didn't like the 'hiding around the house' scene. Sure, nothing was blowing up, but it was fun.




The dialog around that scene was pretty good in spots.....sure, it was cheesy, but the lines about the rat infestation, and the embarrassment of Sam with his mother's suspicions about what he was actually doing there?  I don't know about anyone else, but in the showing I was at, everyone in that room was laughing, because most of us can probably relate in one way or another 

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 8, 2007)

Evil Monkey said:
			
		

> The trivia for the movie on IMDB.com said that the movie's makers had a deal with GM so that all the cars were GM models (one of a couple reasons why Bumblebee was the Camaro instead of the Bug and Jazz was a Pontiac instead of a Porsche; the other reason being VW and Porsche no longer wanted their cars assocated with 'war toys'.).  I would be surprised if that was changed for the sequels.




Barricade was a Mustang, which is definitely not a GM   But maybe he was the exception.  The Hummer, SUV, Solstice, and Camaro were all GMs.

Banshee


----------



## Evil Monkey (Jul 8, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Barricade was a Mustang, which is definitely not a GM   But maybe he was the exception.  The Hummer, SUV, Solstice, and Camaro were all GMs.
> 
> Banshee




You are correct (but I'm sure you already knew that ).  I suppose I should have looked in multiple places before just going with imdb's trivia .  Wikipedia has this to say about Barricade being a Mustang:



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> In the 2007 live-action movie, Barricade is a Decepticon, that transforms into a Saleen S281 Ford Mustang (modified to resemble a police car).  Other than Megatron, Barricade is the only non-military Decepticon and the only non-GM car Transformer. It is said that Ford would not allow licensing for the Mustang, so the producers acquired rights to use the Saleen Mustang from Steve Saleen himself.




I'd like to know what kind of military-issue stereo Frenzy is, since this says Barricade is the only non-military Decepticon!  

Edit To Add: And just to throw my .02 in, I too loved the old show and absolutely LOVED this movie.  I wouldn't think twice about seeing it again in the theater.


----------



## Halivar (Jul 8, 2007)

satori01 said:
			
		

> The cartoon obviously had the luxury of more time to build up that antagonistic but intimate element of  the relationship between Autobots & Decepticons.



I don't think you and I watched the same cartoon growing up. The relationship between the Autobots and Decepticons is summarized neatly in the intro: "Autobots wage their battle to destroy the evil forces of the Decepticons." Nothing I saw in the cartoon added any extra dimension to that.



			
				satori01 said:
			
		

> Bay did next to nothing on that front, which is a shame.



Optimus calls Megatron "brother" in a wistful tone at the end, which is more intimate than any words they ever exchanged in the cartoon.

I think your nostalgia has added depth and characterization to the cartoon characters that simply didn't exist in the cartoon as shown. I bought Season 1 and watched it a few months back, and I have to say that I was disappointed that it didn't really live up to my memories.


----------



## Pants (Jul 8, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Except for the very first sequence.



The opening scene was cool as hell, too bad Blackout never did anything like that again in the rest of the movie. Really showed how powerful the transformers were, then Bay managed to pussify them over the rest of the movie. Too bad, that opening rocked.



			
				Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I can't believe people didn't like the 'hiding around the house' scene. Sure, nothing was blowing up, but it was fun.



It went on a little too long, that's all I can say about it.

Hell, that's my main complaint with the entire movie, too long and too full of pointless characters and boring stuff. Otherwise, it was fairly good popcorn entertainment.



			
				RangerWickett said:
			
		

> In the last whole segment, about the only cool thing was Starscream, because, he's like, the awesomest robot ever. Why wasn't there more Starscream?



More Starscream would've made the movie better. It is known.



> It was entertaining, but if the people who'd made it had been less in love with all the awesome stuff you can do nowadays, it could've actually been _good_.



It's frakking Transformers.  It's about frakking robots that change into frakking cars. I think there might be some universal law that prohibits it from being _good_. There's no way it'll be _good_ (I'll agree with Crichton on that), but there are ways that it could've been _more fun_. 

Unfortunately, Bay inhibits the possible fun at various portions of the movie.  Is it fun? Yes.  Could it have been more fun? Hell yes.  Even though I went in to the movie knowing that Bay was at the helm does that somehow prevent me from complaining about the rampant Bay-isms? No, because Bay sucks, though somehow the movie managed to be fun despite him. 



			
				Victim said:
			
		

> Yeah, the shakycam in Transformers seemed pretty mild, really.  There were generally a few blows per cut, and zoom at least captured most of the characters.  Unlike, say, Batman Begins, which cuts insanely fast in many fights.



Yeah, I didn't even notice the shaky-cam. It wasn't bad at all.



			
				Evil Monkey said:
			
		

> I'd like to know what kind of military-issue stereo Frenzy is, since this says Barricade is the only non-military Decepticon!



Frenzy is waaaaaay too lame and annoying to be worthy of a mention.


----------



## Jubilee (Jul 9, 2007)

Can someone tell me what Starscream actually did during the movie to fail Megatron?  I identified some other failures on the part of other Decepticons, but not that one.. 

/ali


----------



## Grog (Jul 9, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I'll also mention that Starscream is certainly awesome but is dwarfed in all respects by the excellence of Optimus Prime.  Starscream is an entertaining coward and traitor.  He's no Prime.




You wouldn't know that from watching this movie. Now, the cartoon didn't exactly have loads of characterization for the Decepticons either, but this movie didn't have even that low level of characterization. Ditto for most of the Autobots. Sure, Bumblebee and Optimus Prime each won a fight with a Decepticon, but for the most part, the Autobots were only there to provide the Decepticons with things to shoot at until the humans came along and beat them.

And the directing was terrible. The Tourette's editing in the action scenes made it impossible to follow what was going on. I'm sure they spent a ton of money on special effects and CGI for this movie, but I couldn't be impressed by any of it because the camera wouldn't stay still long enough for me to see what was going on in any of the fight scenes.

This movie was a tremendous disappointment.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jul 9, 2007)

satori01 said:
			
		

> While the action can be fast sometimes, e,g, when Batman swoops down, the camera position itself is a stable point, and the essence of the scene is too show how fast and guerilla like Batman is.




Hmmm. That may have been what they were looking to achieve but all it did for me was make me pissed off that I couldn't see what was going on in any fight scene in the movie.

As far as Transformers is concerned, I thoroughly enjoyed it. It was the best action movie that I have seen so far this summer (best overall movie of the summer is Knocked Up). I found the shaky-cam distracting at times but overall I found I was able to follow what was going on pretty well. When I first saw the character designs many months ago I wasn't impressed; like others I couldn't tell who was who or really what they looked like. However I found in the movie itself they were more distinct (possibly because it was on the big screen - it may not hold up as well on a tv). I also thought it was pretty funny in a lot of places and the crowd seemed to agree. 

Still, while I did enjoy it I also found it didn't really trigger my nostalgia. After thinking about it I guess it is due to the focus of the movie on the human characters. While I found Spike was good, there were too many secondary characters cluttering things up (as someone else pointed out). The Transformers themselves felt pretty secondary and I never really got to identify with any of them; as weird as that sounds when speaking about giant robots, I think that is where the disconnect was for me. While I agree that the original series never really had strong characterization, it was still about the Transformers. I think this movie would have worked well if Spike had been kept as the main protagonist, the secondary cast thinned out a bit and more time been spent with the robots. If they had been given some more human-like facial features (like the original cartoon) it would have helped too.

But in the end it was still really enjoyable. I'd see it again without hesitation.


----------



## Nuclear Platypus (Jul 9, 2007)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Word.
> 
> And possibly a performance of _Dare to be Stupid._
> 
> ...




Yup and yup and a maybe. I never thought a Weird Al song could be used as a fight song til the original movie. With a kind of odd end to it when Spike's son, Daniel, El Kabongs Wreck-Gar IIRC.

Heck, if Starscream starts off as Decepticon leader in the sequel, they could do some more lines from the original movie: 
"Coronation Starscream? This is bad comedy." 
"M-megatron?" 
"Here's a hint!" *Starscream gets obliterated*

But I like Starscream (RIP Chris Latta) so a really painful wound would suffice.

From the original soundtrack, I'm partial towards Instruments of Destruction too. In maybe 5 minutes, more Autobots were killed than in all the episodes of the cartoon. Especially how Megatron sent Ironhide offline. "Such heroic nonsense."


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 9, 2007)

Grog said:
			
		

> You wouldn't know that from watching this movie. Now, the cartoon didn't exactly have loads of characterization for the Decepticons either, but this movie didn't have even that low level of characterization. Ditto for most of the Autobots. Sure, Bumblebee and Optimus Prime each won a fight with a Decepticon, but for the most part, the Autobots were only there to provide the Decepticons with things to shoot at until the humans came along and beat them.



Bumblebee took out Barricade & Devastator/Brawl.  Yes, he had help with Devastator, I'll give the humans a quarter-kill on that one.  Prime took out Bonecrusher and weakened Megatron enough to give Sam a killshot (giving Sam 25%, here).  The humans, on their own, managed to take down Blackout the second time around.

Autobots:  3.5 kills
Humans: 1.5 kills
Decepticons:  1 kill

Frenzy took himself out.



			
				Grog said:
			
		

> This movie was a tremendous disappointment.



As usual, I'll just ask what were you expecting.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 9, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> No, *you* couldn't make out anything.  I saw plenty of robots shooting each other and punching each other in the face, as well as protecting young Sam.
> 
> It served as entertainment and dwelling on it is an exercise in futility.  Were you looking for deeper meaning?  It was a silly moment topped off by a masturbation joke followed by a reveal that was even funnier (the mom's reaction).
> 
> If you didn't dig it, that's cool.  But don't try and insert meaning or insist that it be replaced by something else.  It was a joke scene and ludicrous to boot.  Most importantly, it was fun and showed that Prime basically got humanity a little bit, if not all the nuances.



Wish I had your eyesight, but all i saw was a bunch of robots shooting and moving and you couldnt make out who was who most of the time.  You probably enjoyed the chaos, but I'd prefer to pay 15 bucks to see the movie and not be moved to vomit.  

I thoguht the seen was funny, but it made everyone in the movie look real stupid. It's like telling a joke at a funeral. The joke may be funny, but it is badly out of place. That scene was badly out of place and implausible. The movie's job is to make things "somewhat" belieavable, not treat the audience as total idiots for a few chuckles.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 9, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> I thoguht the seen was funny, but it made everyone in the movie look real stupid. It's like telling a joke at a funeral. The joke may be funny, but it is badly out of place. That scene was badly out of place and implausible. The movie's job is to make things "somewhat" belieavable, not treat the audience as total idiots for a few chuckles.



Badly out of place, eh?  It's a movie about transforming robots and about zero plot.  Where should it have been?  It was a silly moment before "the serious stuff" began.

Didn't like it or find that part entertaining?  Fine by me.  But to say a cornball scene doesn't belong in a cornball movie makes no sense.  And why does it have to make anything believable?  All it has to be is internally consistent, which it was.


----------



## Arkhandus (Jul 9, 2007)

satori01 said:
			
		

> Too much humans, too little of the Transformers.   The thing that bugs me about Bay is he could make a great movie if he cared too, but just takes the easy way out.  He always casts for beauty, not for talent,  always has plot holes in his movies,  and always has the shaky camera work, and a point in a movie where you have endured so many explosions, and chases, that you do not really care anymore.
> 
> The aspect of Transformers I have always found fascinating is that you have two armed sides that have been battling each other for centuries, that have gone from large armed organized armies to a mere handfull of combatants on each side.  The cartoon obviously had the luxury of more time to build up that antagonistic but intimate element of  the relationship between Autobots & Decepticons.
> Bay did next to nothing on that front, which is a shame.  Look at something like Kill Bill, and Tarantino made it a point to bring out that intimate aspect, that sense of one character truly knowing another, with brand new source material.  Bay could have used the cartoons as a guide.
> ...




Amen!

I fully endorse these statements.    Though I did enjoy the movie, as I did not expect too much out of Bay and a live-action Transformers movie, it still could've been made better without much difficulty.

(Edit: Also, the Cybertronians had been battling one another for _millenia_, not centuries.  )

Minor disappointments aside, there was enough to entertain me and my childhood icons were not brutally abused, so I still like the movie.  Hopefully there'll be a superior director's cut of the DVD when it eventually comes out.

And Rangerwicket: Muahah, great.


----------



## Arkhandus (Jul 9, 2007)

Jubilee said:
			
		

> Can someone tell me what Starscream actually did during the movie to fail Megatron?  I identified some other failures on the part of other Decepticons, but not that one..
> 
> /ali




1) Starscream is Megatron's lieutenant, right?  At least to start with.  Therefore any other Decepticon's failure is Starscream's failure, as their leader, while Megatron's absent.

2) It took too dang long for them to find Megatron and free him, giving the autobots time to catch up and start to close in on the All-Spark.  When Megatron himself had already tracked it down decades (or was it centuries, or millenia, I forget?) ago, and just got stuck in the ice after crash-landing.  Ergo, Starscream was too stupid or something, and took waaaay too long to catch up and bring the rest of the Decepticons to Megatron's aid in getting the All-Spark.

3) Starscream didn't even get the All-Spark or Megatron out of that human facility; he got there too late, as the All-Spark was already being carried off by humans and Autobots trying to escape with it.  Megatron practically freed himself, after Frenzy did a little work to mess with the cryonic suspension controls.  Starscream got to the party way too late to do Megatron any good, let alone stop the Autobots from taking the All-Spark first.

Starscream was awesome when he finally did get into the fight, and I'm fairly sure he escaped afterwards, but he definitely screwed up in his main tasks after Megatron ran into misfortune (crashing and getting frozen).


----------



## Grog (Jul 9, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Bumblebee took out Barricade & Devastator/Brawl.  Yes, he had help with Devastator, I'll give the humans a quarter-kill on that one.  Prime took out Bonecrusher and weakened Megatron enough to give Sam a killshot (giving Sam 25%, here).  The humans, on their own, managed to take down Blackout the second time around.




What I saw was Megatron about to kill Prime, then getting blasted by a bunch of fighter jets. Then, when he was on his knees, Sam killed him with the cube. That looked like a 100% human kill to me.

As for what I was expecting, given that the movie was called "Transformers," I was expecting that the movie would be about, you know, Transformers. Not about a bunch of humans with some Transformers thrown in. Failing that, it could at least have been a decent action movie, but the directing, editing, and camera work ruined that, too.

Obviously, everyone is welcome to their own opinion, but for me, this movie was probably the biggest disappointment since The Phantom Menace.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 9, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Badly out of place, eh?  It's a movie about transforming robots and about zero plot.  Where should it have been?  It was a silly moment before "the serious stuff" began.
> 
> Didn't like it or find that part entertaining?  Fine by me.  But to say a cornball scene doesn't belong in a cornball movie makes no sense.  And why does it have to make anything believable?  All it has to be is internally consistent, which it was.



There's a level that a person suspends there belief too. My belief just wasn't too suspended for that scene. 5 30ft+ machines trodding around a yard in a dense neighborhood raises the ire of no one.


----------



## D.Shaffer (Jul 9, 2007)

The TF Geek in me cant let this go uncorrected. 


			
				Nuclear Platypus said:
			
		

> Protectobots (?) -Defensor
> Stunticons (Menasor)
> Terrorcons? -Abominus
> had the 2 headed dragon you're thinking of IIRC  - Hun-Grr
> ...



Someone mentions that you can see pieces of him on the ship so...looks to be slim chance.  Of course, nothing says they cant bring them back anyways.  If they took a cue from the original cartoon, they had the Decepticons come back after being dunked in molten lava, after all. The first MTMTE series had them all in the drink too.



			
				Shayuri said:
			
		

> I sort of figured that the more someone liked the Transformers, the more they'd hate this movie...because it seems to me to be a long insult to fans and source material alike.



 *cringe* After having to deal with about a years worth of people saying that 'True fans' must only like things a certain way, I REALLY wish you had worded this differently as it invokes an immediate gut reaction that I doubt you meant.  Fans of the material come in a wide spectrum, and this incorporates the various changes that have occured to the franchise over the years. Some people like it, some people wont.  As a long time fan of Transformers, no I dont find it an insult. I find the idea that someone gets to decide whether I'm a 'real fan' or not based on a particular change to be the true insult.  I find something like TF Masterforce to be FAR more offensive to the line then the movie is.


----------



## Jubilee (Jul 9, 2007)

Arkhandus said:
			
		

> 1) Starscream is Megatron's lieutenant, right?  At least to start with.  Therefore any other Decepticon's failure is Starscream's failure, as their leader, while Megatron's absent.
> 
> 2) It took too dang long for them to find Megatron and free him, giving the autobots time to catch up and start to close in on the All-Spark.  When Megatron himself had already tracked it down decades (or was it centuries, or millenia, I forget?) ago, and just got stuck in the ice after crash-landing.  Ergo, Starscream was too stupid or something, and took waaaay too long to catch up and bring the rest of the Decepticons to Megatron's aid in getting the All-Spark.
> 
> ...




That all makes very good sense!  Thank you =)

/ali


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 9, 2007)

I think its the opposite. As a long time fan I liked the movie more because I did know the backstories of the individual deceptocins. For an audience member I worried that they wouldn't find the villians engaging enough to care about.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 9, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> I know most of my friends, and myself as well, are quite intrigued by "Cloverfield." Godzilla from the PoV of the extras sounds like it could be a pretty cool concept.




Godzilla?

Cthulhu.


----------



## Shayuri (Jul 9, 2007)

D.Shaffer said:
			
		

> *cringe* After having to deal with about a years worth of people saying that 'True fans' must only like things a certain way, I REALLY wish you had worded this differently as it invokes an immediate gut reaction that I doubt you meant.  Fans of the material come in a wide spectrum, and this incorporates the various changes that have occured to the franchise over the years. Some people like it, some people wont.  As a long time fan of Transformers, no I dont find it an insult. I find the idea that someone gets to decide whether I'm a 'real fan' or not based on a particular change to be the true insult.  I find something like TF Masterforce to be FAR more offensive to the line then the movie is.




I should clarify. Nothing in what I said was intended to single out "real fans" or "true fans" or anything of the sort. I was just saying that in my opinion the movie was terrible and I was surprised so many people who loved Transformers so much still liked a movie that I thought demeaned and devalued the franchise. I wasn't making a judgement against those people (though I was against the movie)...just expressing my surprise.

That's all I meant by it.


----------



## Halivar (Jul 9, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Cthulhu.



Oh, you're one of those _orthodox_ cultists. I can't wait for the Kthulhut to return from R'lyeh to consume you heretics.

La! Shub Niggarath! La! La!

PS: One of my favorite story arcs from the TF comic was kind of Lovecraftian, where an carrion-eating insect got a hold of the Prime Matrix and turned into an evil spectral entity that hung out in dark places and ate Decepticons. It was cool.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 9, 2007)

> It's a movie, based off a toy-line made by a notorious over-the-top director who likes lots of patriotic cheese in his movies along with huge explosions.




Yeah.

Apparently there is some small subset of folks who are both too _smart_ to appreciate the writing, and yet too _slow_ to follow the action. 

This movie is not for them.



> Stuff blowing up and a few catchphrases do not a movie make.




Yippee ki-yay.


----------



## Grog (Jul 9, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Apparently there is some small subset of folks who are both too _smart_ to appreciate the writing, and yet too _slow_ to follow the action.
> 
> This movie is not for them.




Or maybe we just thought that the movie would be about _Transformers_.

If the movie had been accurately titled, for example had it been called "Sam,Mikaela, Captain Lennox and the Secretary of Defense, guest starting the Transformers," I wouldn't have nearly as much of a problem with it. And I also never would have seen it in the first place, so hey! Everybody wins.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 9, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Yeah.
> 
> Apparently there is some small subset of folks who are both too _smart_ to appreciate the writing, and yet too _slow_ to follow the action.
> 
> ...



Or too many people have fandom colored glasses on.  

I liked the movie, because it beat my expectations (heck all I wanted was it to be better than Masters of the Universe and Spiderman 3) . But I can definately see the gripes of the people whom didn't like it.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 10, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Or too many people have fandom colored glasses on.




Too old to be a Transformers fan, actually. Never seen a single episode. Prior to the movie I could identify only Optimus Prime by sight.

Maybe that explains why I enjoyed the movie (and also why it is doing so well).


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 10, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Too old to be a Transformers fan, actually. Never seen a single episode. Prior to the movie I could identify only Optimus Prime by sight.
> 
> Maybe that explains why I enjoyed the movie (and also why it is doing so well).



 Or you simply got what they were going for and had a good time.


----------



## Nuclear Platypus (Jul 10, 2007)

D.Shaffer said:
			
		

> The TF Geek in me cant let this go uncorrected.




Corrected it myself back in #115.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 10, 2007)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Or you simply got what they were going for and had a good time.




For what it's worth, the story was written by ENWorld's *jonrog*.

I can't be certain how much of the final script was his, but every time I laughed, I had him in mind. 

That, too, probably enhanced my enjoyment considerably.


----------



## Acid_crash (Jul 10, 2007)

I just do not understand the shaky camera thing at all... I mean, if I was standing there and there were explosions all around, the ground would shake, the very air would shake with sonic vibrations, nothing would be standing still... so by this whole 'shaky' camera thing, I say bring more of it becuase without it I'd be seeing all these things happening but the world would be standing still... I don't think so.

I don't see where people say Bay makes a bad movie.  I just don't get it.  But, people have very different expectations and standards on what makes a good movie, to them.  It's hard to please everybody, all the time, but the fact is that I went into this movie with the hopes of seeing some transformers transform, and they pulled it off perfectly.  I went in hoping that I'd see some action, and I did.  

Seeing Prime uppercut Barricade and then decapitating him was just fricken AWESOME!  And the camera was shaking the entire time, and I saw those little details.  Quite awesome.  If you didn't see the details I'm sorry you missed them.

I did not expect the humor to be over the top, and I can see why people could say that they put too much into it, but I think that if the entire movie would have been super serious and darker than it was, I'd still love it... I loved the humor, I liked how they did the action, I liked the characterizations and the teenage love story and his parents.

Yes, their real fault is that there wasn't enough Starscream.  That's it.  For that Bay shoulld be punished.


----------



## Acid_crash (Jul 10, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> I should clarify. Nothing in what I said was intended to single out "real fans" or "true fans" or anything of the sort. I was just saying that in my opinion the movie was terrible and I was surprised so many people who loved Transformers so much still liked a movie that I thought demeaned and devalued the franchise. I wasn't making a judgement against those people (though I was against the movie)...just expressing my surprise.
> 
> That's all I meant by it.




It's okay Shayuri, we forgive you and still accept you as part of the EnWorld community even though you don't like the movie.  

Like you said, Namaste or however its spelled, but I get the meaning.  

I might not understand exactly why you don't like the movie, but I'm going to go see it for a third time next week instead of Harry Potter that's how much I liked the movie.


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jul 10, 2007)

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> I've been hearing a lot of grief about poor Shia LaBeouf recently and I don't get it.




Two words - "Even Stevens".

That said, he didn't suck in this movie. I actually found him watchable and believable.


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jul 10, 2007)

Jubilee said:
			
		

> Can someone tell me what Starscream actually did during the movie to fail Megatron?  I identified some other failures on the part of other Decepticons, but not that one..




I had the same question, but it all kind of came back to a lack of focus on the Autobots and Decepticons themselves in lieu of the humans. Frankly, given the time frame involved, I don't know why Starscream was even bothering with Megatron anyway. The Starscream from the cartoon would have been happy to have him out of the way for so long.

Anyway, just saw the movie myself. I enjoyed it, but I agree with the suggestions that the movie was less Transformers and more People Reacting to Giant Robot Invasion. Not bad in and of itself, but not quite the movie I was hoping for. I think- while generally well done, there were enough extraneous "people bits" and characters that could have easily been chopped in order to give the "robot bits" more emphasis. In particular, the fact that I couldn't identify so many of the robots visually when they weren't in vehicle form (especially in the final battle sequences) grated. As a fan of the cartoon, I knew enough about the Transformer characters to enjoy them and know their relationships, but a newcomer with no knowledge wouldn't be able to do so, I'd think. Even still, there were a few (Decepticons, notably) that I couldn't place.

Optimus and Bumblebee were both well done and fleshed out somewhat, but the others were just one-dimensional. Even Megatron didn't really get enough time or space to generate any sort of real feeling of who and what he was. We hear people talking about him a bit, and then he finally shows up and we're supposed to somehow get a sense of his majesty but it fell flat on that end.

Anyway, it was good. Not great, but good.

BTW, what's up with all the Transformers maxing out their ranks in Tumble?


----------



## D.Shaffer (Jul 10, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> I should clarify. Nothing in what I said was intended to single out "real fans" or "true fans" or anything of the sort. I was just saying that in my opinion the movie was terrible and I was surprised so many people who loved Transformers so much still liked a movie that I thought demeaned and devalued the franchise. I wasn't making a judgement against those people (though I was against the movie)...just expressing my surprise.
> 
> That's all I meant by it.



Well, I did mention I didnt think you meant it that, but I had to explain why it made my reaction to it so harsh. That said, again, fans come in wide spectrums.  I loved G1, but it's cheesy as hell and filled with the sort of the stuff 'true fans' were blasting the movie about.  It also ignores the fact that there's been something like 10+ different shows about the transformers, various comic book incarnations, never mind the Japanese only stuff when they start going off about the 'true spirit' of the show.  Which one should they be following? The cheesy G1? The intelligently written Beast Wars? The childish Japanese takes from Headmasters or RiD? Everyone first saw the Transformers at different times, not all of them started with G1.  I'm just glad they didnt take cue from Kiss Players. Anyways, that's my 2 cents on it.


----------



## Seonaid (Jul 10, 2007)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> BTW, what's up with all the Transformers maxing out their ranks in Tumble?



It's a class skill. Obviously giant hunks of metal are acrobatic. :geno:


----------



## Asmor (Jul 10, 2007)

D.Shaffer said:
			
		

> Well, I did mention I didnt think you meant it that, but I had to explain why it made my reaction to it so harsh. That said, again, fans come in wide spectrums.  I loved G1, but it's cheesy as hell and filled with the sort of the stuff 'true fans' were blasting the movie about.  It also ignores the fact that there's been something like 10+ different shows about the transformers, various comic book incarnations, never mind the Japanese only stuff when they start going off about the 'true spirit' of the show.  Which one should they be following? The cheesy G1? The intelligently written Beast Wars? The childish Japanese takes from Headmasters or RiD? Everyone first saw the Transformers at different times, not all of them started with G1.  I'm just glad they didnt take cue from Kiss Players. Anyways, that's my 2 cents on it.




G1 is the true Transformers. The rest are but pretenders to the throne.


----------



## Jeysie (Jul 10, 2007)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> I enjoyed it, but I agree with the suggestions that the movie was less Transformers and more People Reacting to Giant Robot Invasion. Not bad in and of itself, but not quite the movie I was hoping for.




See, IMHO, that's exactly what the first movie needed to be. Not because I wouldn't love more Transformers-only time myself, but because that's what makes it an actual story instead of 2.5 hours of high-budget fanservice. This *is* a 21st century reboot, where you need exposition and setup instead of just jumping straight into things, and I feel it's handled well. (Remember complaints of X-Men 1 being too talky, and similar comments with other recent franchise reboots?)

***

Some specific thoughts:

The military:

[sblock]If I was an alien being trying to research a crash-landed leader and artifact, didn't find much public information, and  stumbled onto the world wide web (where conspiracy theories tend to breed like rabbits), I'd probably finally resort to hacking a military network, too. They're not versed enough in Earth culture to realize the conspirists are nutjobs (or are they nutjobs?  ).

So, it's not a surprise that the military gets involved. One could argue more subtlety on the Decepticons' part... but the fact that Blackout disguised as an Army aircraft suggests they were trying to be. Sneak in, drop Frenzy off and let him do his thing, pull out. Too bad the humans are too blasted suspicious.  [/sblock]

Sector 7:

[sblock]Isn't a secret government agency de rigueur where aliens are involved? And here, instead of being all-knowing and all-powerful, they (IMHO more realistically) get burned because they don't realize exactly what they're playing with.[/sblock]

Sam & Family:

Sam is a teenager. One who's histrionic and self-absorbed at that (traits which appear to be genetic...) So his main concern, at least at first, is getting (and keeping) his car and girl, and not getting killed by his parents. Following from that...

The backyard scene:

[sblock]You have the giant robots. Who - instead of placidly waiting around for The Great Bedroom Search - are impatient, running recon like soldiers, trying to remain inconspicious in the middle of suburbia, and grumbling about how it'd be much easier if they just shot the parents. In other words, behaving fairly realistically (for giant robots).

On the other hand, you have Sam, whose personality I already summarized above. "How do I deal with giant robots in my yard and find my granddad's glasses in my bedroom without my potential girlfriend finding out about my pervy hobbies or my parents grounding me for life?"

On the left foot, you have Sam's parents, who are worried about their son's closed door and voices, mysterious lights, ground shakes, and a trashed yard.

And on the right foot, the neighbors. Truth be told, if I hear loud noises in the middle of the night, I usually roll over, pull my pillow over my head, and hope it goes away so I can get some sleep for work tomorrow.

Anyone who did get up and saw the giant robots would probably figure that one, they had too much "sauce" that night, two, they're dreaming, or three, the neighbors got some blasted new toy that Junior's probably going to want for Christmas.

And even if you didn't conclude one of those things, the cops probably would.  Douglas Adams didn't invent the "Somebody Else's Problem field" out of thin air.[/sblock]

While it did go on a little too long in places, and had its dialogue a bit over-the-top for comedic purposes (both of which could be grumbled at), I don't think the actual existence of the scene is out-of-place.

***

As I commented to my friend after we saw the movie, it was nice to see the whole idea of robots walking around treated somewhat realistically for a change, as opposed to more like a robotic Godzilla vs. Mothra (you know, the aliens duke it out while the humans just run around, scream, and get crushed the entire movie).

Now that 



Spoiler



the military thinks the Decepticons are all dead


 and 



Spoiler



Sector 7 is no more


, that leaves plenty of space to focus on the Transformers in a sequel. And by getting all the setup out of the way first, that makes this a fresh (and hopefully successful) movie franchise as opposed to a big-screen TV episode.

I *would* have liked more character development and robot-on-robot-smashing, but I feel that having Earth be more than an alien playground is better story-telling, and we still got a good amount of those things. I have some grumbles with some of the details thereof, but not with the basic elements that were included.

Just my own $2.00.

Peace & Luv, Liz


----------



## Randolpho (Jul 10, 2007)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> Two words - "Even Stevens".




What's wrong with Even Stevens? Not bad at all for teenage comedy.


----------



## Seonaid (Jul 10, 2007)

Wow, great post, Jeysie. Exactly what I would expect from someone named "Liz." 


			
				Jeysie said:
			
		

> Now that [snip]
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't remember this part. Would someone explain this to me? Was it stated explicitly in the movie? I have a horrible memory, so it's entirely possible that I just forgot. 

 - another Liz


----------



## Jeysie (Jul 10, 2007)

Always good to meet another Liz! 



			
				Seonaid said:
			
		

> I don't remember this part. Would someone explain this to me? Was it stated explicitly in the movie? I have a horrible memory, so it's entirely possible that I just forgot.




At the very end of the movie... 



Spoiler



right before he goes into explaining dropping the Decepticons into the ocean trench, the Secretary of Defense outright says that Sector Seven has been disbanded.


 So yeah, they're gone... officially, anyway.

Peace & Luv, Liz


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 10, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Too old to be a Transformers fan, actually. Never seen a single episode. Prior to the movie I could identify only Optimus Prime by sight.
> 
> Maybe that explains why I enjoyed the movie (and also why it is doing so well).



I enjoyed it.  My wife enjoyed it.  Given our divergent histories, vis a vis the Transformers, that's impressive in its way.



			
				Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> BTW, what's up with all the Transformers maxing out their ranks in Tumble?



When Shaky-cam is all your director understands, you roll with the punches.  You've only got one way to look impressive in that context, and it ain't my actually moving like a 30 foot robot 

Dear lord, there were sequences that looked like copy-and-paste out of Pearl Harbor (and I've only seen about 5% of Pearl Harbor).  I've seen a more impressive variety of camera techniques in fan films shot with camcorders.

Sadly, I feel like the movie succeeded at being a movie about a teenager and his car, but failed at delivering coherent action.

And here are a couple plot gripes:


Spoiler



So.... the marine captain who was the resident human bad-arse chose to maximize civilian risk and collateral damage for a very minor increase in the ability to defend a position?  No intelligent soldier would deliberately put thousands of civilians at risk when he could have achieved an equivalent tactical advantage by holing up in a box canyon.  Which would have arguably been FAR better, because you can have the place carpet-bombed if necessary without risking civilian lives.  Worst case scenario... a tactical nuke ought to hit the magic temperature, so choosing a city for staging your last stand is either stupid or sociopathic.  That choice was borderline offensive, and done for no other plot reason than to ratchet up the collateral damage.

Secondly, after having that battle in the middle of a city in front of thousands of people, the autobots are going to HIDE on earth?  Right.  Again... that box canyon would have at least made hiding _plausible_.  A handful of military people who can be handily sworn to secrecy, and beyond Sam and company, the only civilians to know about it would be people who were out in the wilderness... a small number and easily dismissed as sufferers of heat stroke.

And finally, does it not strike anyone as silly that Jazz was the LEAST developed character among the autobots, with the fewest lines, and then the one-shot him merely to show how powerful Megatron was.  It might have had some dramatic heft if they had killed someone we actually KNEW.  To say nothing of introducing a robot that is OBVIOUSLY intended with some ethnic identity and making him into a Red shirt.  That's not just sloppy, but actually stupid nowadays.


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jul 10, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> To say nothing of introducing a robot that is OBVIOUSLY intended with some ethnic identity and making him into a Red shirt.  That's not just sloppy, but actually stupid nowadays.[/spoiler]




To be fair 



Spoiler



Jazz always had a sort of ethnic identity- at least on the English cartoon, when he was voiced by Scatman Crothers.



The rest of your observation I agree with however, and goes back to my dislike of the lack of character development among the Transformers.



			
				Jeysie said:
			
		

> See, IMHO, that's exactly what the first movie needed to be. Not because I wouldn't love more Transformers-only time myself, but because that's what makes it an actual story instead of 2.5 hours of high-budget fanservice.




I think you don't have to exclusively do one rather than the other, though. Particularly if you are trying to develop a franchise in which the continuing characters will be the robots rather than the humans. I think they did a great job with the human angle- through Sam and his family and friends- but went overboard on it as well- with the excessive military/political/technological characters, most of whom don't even get a real coda, since there are just too many of them. The hacker guy really didn't need to be there- he served no function whatsoever. Not even for comedic value, as the comedy roles were already well covered elsewhere.

Even if some of the human character time had been covered solely to develop the Megatron character in lieu of the other Autobots/Decepticons, I think it would have been far better served.


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 10, 2007)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> To be fair
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh, aye.  Not complaining about that.  I have no problem with the ethnic identity.  I have problems with the correlation between ethnic identity and being an ineffectual non-character.

Also...


Spoiler



Is it just me, or did Frenzy get his full body back with no explanation?  Or did I miss something?


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> Also...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...




I wondered about that, too. 



Spoiler



I just assumed I missed something where he used the power of the cube to create a new body for himself or something. I also thought it kind of silly that he dies when he cuts his own head off, but that having his head removed earlier in the film didn't stop him.


----------



## Jeysie (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> Also...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...




I had thought... 



Spoiler



that he got it back when he touched the Allspark before going to free Megatron.


 Am I misremembering?

Peace & Luv, Liz


----------



## Arkhandus (Jul 11, 2007)

They mentioned at one point earlier, when studying Skorponok's severed tail that it seemed the robots' bodies regenerated over time, using some kind of nanotechnology or whatnot (I forget exactly what the explanation/hyphothesis was).  The All-Spark might have had something to do with it, too, of course.  Also, earlier Frenzy's head had been knocked off, but not really damaged.  Later his head was actually chopped in half, which would've severed the components within.


----------



## Kaodi (Jul 11, 2007)

Absolutely realistic visuals is why I was waiting for a live-action Transformers since I was in public school, and this movie delivered that in spades. I had a couple of nit-picks about the All-Spark, but ultimately, the movie delivered what I wanted out of it, real transforming vehicles.

I have to comment on the many series though. I'm actually too young to have remembered much of G1, and I can't afford to get it on DVD yet, but I am in the group that thinks of Beast Wars as the true sequel to G1. Beast Machines has a bit of a weirder vibe too it, and it can ignored if you don't like the technorganic stuff, because its plot is seperated well enough from its predecessor. (Edit: Scratch that. According to Wikipedia, in the G1 animated series, the Quintessons allegedely created some technorganic creatures _before_ they created the original Transformers, and subsequently locked the unstable creatures deep within Cybertron. So, I guess Beast Machines wasn't a tangent, it really was full circle.)


----------



## Halivar (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> And here are a couple plot gripes:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...



I had a huge gripe with this until one of my friends gave me a very cogent explanation. If they'd stayed on Hoover dam, had their battle there, and the dam had cracked, what would happen then? Thousands, possibly tens of thousands of deaths. What if they'd gone out into the open desert? The All-Spark would get picked off no sweat (at the time they made the decision, the soldiers only had two buggies and Bumblebee). The city was the only reasonably safe option.



			
				Canis said:
			
		

> Also...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...



Actually, you saw it happen on-screen (though it was a short scene), when he came in contact with the All-Spark, he regenerated almost instantly.


----------



## satori01 (Jul 11, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> I don't think you and I watched the same cartoon growing up. The relationship between the Autobots and Decepticons is summarized neatly in the intro: "Autobots wage their battle to destroy the evil forces of the Decepticons." Nothing I saw in the cartoon added any extra dimension to that.
> 
> Optimus calls Megatron "brother" in a wistful tone at the end, which is more intimate than any words they ever exchanged in the cartoon.
> 
> I think your nostalgia has added depth and characterization to the cartoon characters that simply didn't exist in the cartoon as shown. I bought Season 1 and watched it a few months back, and I have to say that I was disappointed that it didn't really live up to my memories.




Throwing in a "Brother" at the end of the movie is not really great characterization or adding depth to the plot.....most people left the theatre going " I guess they were brothers" /shrug/.
Now I have not seen the cartoon since I was a kid but there were forays to cybertron, flashbacks to cybertron, *especially if memory serves correctly in the Autobot jet episode* and the fact that time was taken by the cartoon to explore the fact that Autobots, and their symbols were a slave brand.

I would argue that even as a child it was not hard to infer from the facts:  The Transformers had crash landed in the age of the dinosaurs, flashback scenes to Cybertron showed quite a few robots, and the fact that the Autobots & Decepticons new each others names showed an intimacy that is not found in opposing sides of most human conflicts...except for civil wars.  I always like that aspect, have from childhood, so no I would say chalking my opinion up to "nostalgia"  is incorrect.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 11, 2007)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> To be fair Jazz always had a sort of ethnic identity- at least on the English cartoon, when he was voiced by Scatman Crothers.




Are you shitting me? Man, I really did miss out!


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 11, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> I had a huge gripe with this until one of my friends gave me a very cogent explanation. If they'd stayed on Hoover dam, had their battle there, and the dam had cracked, what would happen then? Thousands, possibly tens of thousands of deaths. What if they'd gone out into the open desert? The All-Spark would get picked off no sweat (at the time they made the decision, the soldiers only had two buggies and Bumblebee). The city was the only reasonably safe option



I'm not buying that.  They were calling in air support, and the area certainly appeared to have LOTS of places to go to ground.  If nothing else, taking it into a city removed tactical options, unless they were willing to destroy the city to prevent the Decepticons from getting the MacGuffin.  Good soldiers choose self-destruction over the potential death of tens of thousands of civilians.

The only way I can conceive of the city really being a good idea is if the large amount of concrete and "EM pollution" as it were would help them hide from Decepticon sensors (I was trying to make up excuses for them too  ).  This did not prove to be the case (eventhough it would have made the final battle _more_ interesting, IMO, and certainly more appropriate to Bay's visual style).



> Actually, you saw it happen on-screen (though it was a short scene), when he came in contact with the All-Spark, he regenerated almost instantly.



That must have been quick.  Not one of the 6 people I was with saw that.

And if that worked for Frenzy.... why didn't Bumblebee grow himself some new legs in the last battle?


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> If nothing else, taking it into a city removed tactical options, unless they were willing to destroy the city to prevent the Decepticons from getting the MacGuffin. Good soldiers choose self-destruction over the potential death of tens of thousands of civilians.




Good commanders choose the death of tens of thousands of civilians over the death of tens of millions of civilians.


----------



## Halivar (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> Good soldiers choose self-destruction over the potential death of tens of thousands of civilians.



Except in this case self-destruction equals losing the cube which equals genocide of humanity (potentially). Staying out in the open is a bad, bad idea (IMHO). Being in the city did help. They had tons of cover they were able to shoot out of, and they could move through buildings, while the Decepticons were forced to fight out in the open. Being in the city gave the humans a clear tactical advantage.



			
				Canis said:
			
		

> That must have been quick.  Not one of the 6 people I was with saw that.



I promise you it happened, every one of the four times I watched it. Pinky-swear. Big arcs of energy went all over, Frenzy convulsed, and he sprouted new parts. Then he scrambled off and sent his Decepti-buds the message "All-Spark located." Then we went off to the Decepti-creep roll-call ("Bonecrusher rolling." *shudder* That was a silly line).



			
				Canis said:
			
		

> And if that worked for Frenzy.... why didn't Bumblebee grow himself some new legs in the last battle?



Because it was in the middle of a battle? I don't claim the whole plot is hole-proof; not by a long-shot. Just I don't think there's anything that is glaringly, idiotically illogical.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jul 11, 2007)

Halivar said:
			
		

> Just I don't think there's anything that is glaringly, idiotically illogical.




The geek gets the girl, not the jock.


----------



## Jubilee (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> That must have been quick.  Not one of the 6 people I was with saw that.
> 
> And if that worked for Frenzy.... why didn't Bumblebee grow himself some new legs in the last battle?






Spoiler



Actually, I think that Bumblebee's voicebox was restored by contact with the Allspark (although why he waited until the end of the movie to reveal that he could speak is a mystery to me), but presumably once it had been shrunk, it didn't have the same potentcy from merely being touched (evidently it had to be jostled roughly to activate at that size).


----------



## Halivar (Jul 11, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> The geek gets the girl, not the jock.



_Touché_.


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 11, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Good commanders choose the death of tens of thousands of civilians over the death of tens of millions of civilians.



They had already decided to call in air support, and knew they didn't have a prayer without that support anyway.  They could just as easily dropped a tactical nuke right on top of that cube.... provided they took it somewhere besides the middle of Detroit.

Actually, I'm still trying to figure out where that dam was.  The geography was certainly suggestive of plenty of bolt holes, as plot-inconvenient as that might have been.


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 11, 2007)

Jubilee said:
			
		

> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I think that Bumblebee's voicebox was restored by contact with the Allspark (although why he waited until the end of the movie to reveal that he could speak is a mystery to me), but presumably once it had been shrunk, it didn't have the same potentcy from merely being touched (evidently it had to be jostled roughly to activate at that size).



Movie promotional materials revealed 



Spoiler



that Bumblebee's vocal system wasn't non-operational, but simply painful to use.  That would fit with Bumblebee's behavior, including the ragged voice at the end, but not with what other characters said.  But it confuses the issue of why Frenzy gets repairs and Bumblebee does not.



But this one's a minor issue.  Not really something that jumped out at me.  Being unable to find a single defensible position without an enormous civilian population inbetween what appeared to be the Hoover Dam and Detroit was a larger issue, IMO, though clearly I'm not a good cultural barometer on that one


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> Actually, I'm still trying to figure out where that dam was.  The geography was certainly suggestive of plenty of bolt holes, as plot-inconvenient as that might have been.




That's pretty obviously Hoover Dam.

My best guess is that the battle at the end took place in Las Vegas, or possibly another urban area around Hoover Dam that was large enough to have some skyscrapers.  (edit)  Certainly, the terrain between the dam and the city doesn't appear to be in Michigan.  I'd expect there to be more trees.

As much as I hate to say it, going to ground in a city was probably about as good an idea as they could come up with.  All they knew they had at the time was a few squads of human infantry, and a built-up urban area gives the infantry more of an advantage against heavy armor and aircraft than would, say, holing up in a canyon somewhere.  Adding the Autobots doesn't necessarily invalidate that, either.

Brad


----------



## drothgery (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> Actually, I'm still trying to figure out where that dam was.  The geography was certainly suggestive of plenty of bolt holes, as plot-inconvenient as that might have been.




Hoover Dam is a real place; it's on the Nevada/Arizona border.



			
				cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> That's pretty obviously Hoover Dam.
> 
> My best guess is that the battle at the end took place in Las Vegas, or possibly another urban area around Hoover Dam that was large enough to have some skyscrapers.




There isn't one. The only large city within 200 miles of Hoover Dam is Las Vegas (Phoenix, LA, and San Diego are all 250-300 miles away). Though Henderson (a Las Vegas exurb) might be big enough to have skyscrapers now; it's one of the fastest-growing cities in the US.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jul 11, 2007)

Canis said:
			
		

> They had already decided to call in air support, and knew they didn't have a prayer without that support anyway.  They could just as easily dropped a tactical nuke right on top of that cube.... provided they took it somewhere besides the middle of Detroit.




They needed airsupport, but they didn't know they had it.

I liked the movie, the plotholes were nothing major, but heck, if we're going to get nitpicky, Bumblebee shoulda just merged the All Spark as Optimus wanted to do and ended the movie then.


----------



## Seonaid (Jul 12, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> The geek gets the girl, not the jock.



Why would the geek want the jock?


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jul 12, 2007)

Jubilee said:
			
		

> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I think that Bumblebee's voicebox was restored by contact with the Allspark (although why he waited until the end of the movie to reveal that he could speak is a mystery to me), but presumably once it had been shrunk, it didn't have the same potentcy from merely being touched (evidently it had to be jostled roughly to activate at that size).





Maybe he was given a choice and that was more important to him than new legs....


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jul 12, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> The geek gets the girl, not the jock.




It was probably the most amusing part, when the geek looks at her like she's somehow "wrong" when her criminal past is mentioned.

Sure she's a hottie, but a criminal hottie? Best leave that alone and go back to your magazines!


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 12, 2007)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Maybe he was given a choice and that was more important to him than new legs....




The time that he touched the Allspark, his legs were fine.

I suspect it's not quite so powerful in its convenient pocket-size form.

Brad


----------



## Arkhandus (Jul 12, 2007)

Yeah, I would assume that when the All-Spark was compacted, much of its mass or something was probably shunted into another dimension, or otherwise unuseable while it was just in an easily-transportable miniaturized form.  So it was probably more or less inactive while in mini-cube form (getting energy-zapped and jostled during the fight was all that caused it to transform nearby machines into savage proto-cybertronians).


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 13, 2007)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> The geek gets the girl, not the jock.




Jocks don't always get the girl   My wife had a choice between me (the "geek"), and one of my best friends (the "jock")....needless to say....she's my wife now 

Banshee


----------



## Gog (Jul 23, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Hoover Dam is a real place; it's on the Nevada/Arizona border.
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't one. The only large city within 200 miles of Hoover Dam is Las Vegas (Phoenix, LA, and San Diego are all 250-300 miles away). Though Henderson (a Las Vegas exurb) might be big enough to have skyscrapers now; it's one of the fastest-growing cities in the US.





Just saw this today.

The last fight isn't in Vegas or Henderson (which dosen't have skyscrappers) it is in a place called "Mission CIty" by the Captain. While there may be such a city there isn't one anywhere near Hoover Dam which unless I missed it they never call Hoover Dam in the movie.

So I figure they weren't trying for a real city in the movie.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 24, 2007)

Just saw it last week.

I didn't enjoy it all that much, but it didn't suck. A 6/10 - slightly above average for a "summer blockbuster". Spent a few moments bored (who knew that someone could make giant robots boring? But looks like the (director? screenwriter?) managed to) and it was about 40 minutes too long. Hunting for glasses and that lame "Section 7" nonsense didn't do much for me.

I might have enjoyed it more if I were 10 years younger - basically it was some teenage masturbation movie, which has long since been lost on me. Way too many snot-nosed teenagers getting in the way of giant robots.

And the poor, poor Autobots. What terrible luck it was for them to have happened to each land on Earth in front of a _GM_ dealership. No wonder the Autobots needed the meatbags' help to win - the Decepticons get cool forms, while the Autobots get stuck with the iest cars on earth. Nice going, losers. (And no wonder 



Spoiler



Jazz died - a Pontiac Solstice? That car has universally reviewed badly. You got what you deserved, Jazz


.)

What dipstick thought it would be a good idea to bring the cube straight to a major population center? Oh yeah - the moron that thought there would (read: might) be a good fight sequence there. Whatever. (And no - I don't buy the excuses given in this thread, sorry. In any case, I expect movies to show clearly why such questionable decisions are made, and this movie failed on that, regardless.)

Finally - shakey cams suck. They've always sucked, and they still suck today. Hard.

Megatron and his pure Cybertronian form rocked. And, while I didn't get much out of some of the Transformers, the normal/mundane military hardware - namely the desert sequence with A-10s and gunships - was awesome.


----------



## Orius (Mar 29, 2008)

*resurrect* 

Not a bad movie.   I remember watching the Transformers cartoons when I was a kid, but I have to be honest here.  I haven't seen them in like 20 years, and I left the Transformers behind when I hit puberty.  Honestly, I sometimes am surprised the toys are still popular.  The only ones I remembered were Optimus Prime and Megatron, I pretty much forgot all the rest of the stuff.

So I'm almost coming to this movie from the angle of the uninitiated (though I knew damn well when that rig rolled by the crashed Autobot that that would be Prime (and when did Prime get those flames, wasn't he solid red and blue?)).  And to be honest, I think it turned out to be a pretty good movie that was born out of an '80's toy line and the cartoon that was pretty much a marketing device for those toys.  It could have been way cheesier.  The story wasn't too bad, and there were some decent action sequences.  Shaky camera doesn't bother me that much, but I'd have to say it's a bad cinematic technique.  Sometimes realistic DOESN'T work in a movie, for whatever reason.

I do agree that there wasn't enough screen time of the Autobots and too many humans.  The Sector 7 crap and the hip-hop hacker in particular felt extraneous.  But the scenes with the army guys fighting the Decepticons was pretty good.

Did Hasbro think they weren't getting enough of a plug out of an entire movie based on one of thier toy lines?  There was that girl with a big stuffed My Little Pony when the one Autobot crashed into the family pool, and the big fight scene in the city had a truck with a Furby on it. 

The DVD was kind of disappoiting.  No special features, cut scenes, theatrical trailers or anything like that.  Am I the only one who's getting disappointed by the seemingly increasing lack of material on DVDs these days (are they saving all the stuff for freakin' Blu-Ray?)


----------



## John Crichton (Mar 29, 2008)

Orius said:
			
		

> The DVD was kind of disappoiting.  No special features, cut scenes, theatrical trailers or anything like that.  Am I the only one who's getting disappointed by the seemingly increasing lack of material on DVDs these days (are they saving all the stuff for freakin' Blu-Ray?)



You must have the non-Special Edition.

http://www.amazon.com/Transformers-..._bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1206783409&sr=8-1

This is the one you want for the special features:

http://www.amazon.com/Transformers-..._bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1206783409&sr=8-2

I believe it has a little more, in extras, than the HD-DVD version (that I own).


----------



## Asmor (Mar 29, 2008)

I think the Target exclusive had the best special feature...

...the DVD case transforms into Optimus Prime. 

It's not very complicated, arms and legs just swing out or tuck back in, but it's still freaking cool. Stands as tall as my Unicron figure, too.


----------



## Orius (Mar 30, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> You must have the non-Special Edition.




No big deal, it was just Blockbuster.


----------

