i just saw 3rd transformers movie
- Thread starter monoxide_child
- Start date
Enemy242
Member
yeah I love The Rock and still watch it to this day. The soundtrack also reallyyy adds to the movie for me and makes a lot of the parts extremely tense, though now a lot of movies have that same type of sound and not all of them can get it right. Everything else Michael Bay really blows though and I've said that a billion times.
Dead Winter
STAHP
I was just about to say that. There is only one true Transformers movie, and it stars Orson Welles as Unicron.
Michael Bay can suck it.
"I...am Unicron..."
Last edited by a moderator:
Lord Foul
I don't spank men
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
wait
wait
wait
the movie that i saw was shiny metal robots killing each other and blowing stuff up, with spectacular special effects that included completely destroying the city of chicago and lots and lots and lots of fire
did anyone, anyone at all, really have any freaking kind of expectation that this movie would even ever be able to be even be nominated for any kind of movie award for "best actor/actress" or "best writer/director/screenplay"?
no
this was not "the kings speach"
this was the kind of flashy movie that completely deaf people watch, in the fucking theaters (where there are no subtitles) this is the kind of movie where the sound isn't really nessassarry and no one expects any kind of movie award nomination except "best special effects"
and having said all that,
the special effects were AWESOME
wait
wait
the movie that i saw was shiny metal robots killing each other and blowing stuff up, with spectacular special effects that included completely destroying the city of chicago and lots and lots and lots of fire
did anyone, anyone at all, really have any freaking kind of expectation that this movie would even ever be able to be even be nominated for any kind of movie award for "best actor/actress" or "best writer/director/screenplay"?
no
this was not "the kings speach"
this was the kind of flashy movie that completely deaf people watch, in the fucking theaters (where there are no subtitles) this is the kind of movie where the sound isn't really nessassarry and no one expects any kind of movie award nomination except "best special effects"
and having said all that,
the special effects were AWESOME
Lord Foul
I don't spank men
I only saw the first live action film, and my only real gripes with it were that it almost completely ignored its source material in terms of character design and plot, and it had action sequences so frenetic that I couldn't actually tell what the fuck was happening.
But that Spectre gunship making that wide banking turn to open up with its cannons was pretty great.
But that Spectre gunship making that wide banking turn to open up with its cannons was pretty great.
Metalmilitia2000
UM's Resident Asshole
This thread is even further proof that Michael Bay should stop directing and just exclusively be a special effects consultant for film studios. His effects are absolutely brilliant, but a good (or even mediocre for that matter) director, he is not.
I think this sums it up:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/michael-bay-signs-50m-deal-to-fuck-up-thundercats,2702/
http://www.theonion.com/articles/cgi-team-creates-realistic-oscar-for-michael-bay,2389/
Oh, and with all of that said, The Rock kicked ass. Only movie of his I've ever seen that I thought was good. Bad Boys and Bad Boys 2 were watchable, and Armageddon *shudders* don't get me started.
I think this sums it up:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/michael-bay-signs-50m-deal-to-fuck-up-thundercats,2702/
http://www.theonion.com/articles/cgi-team-creates-realistic-oscar-for-michael-bay,2389/
Oh, and with all of that said, The Rock kicked ass. Only movie of his I've ever seen that I thought was good. Bad Boys and Bad Boys 2 were watchable, and Armageddon *shudders* don't get me started.
WhiteBeastofWotan
Apostitutes!
Seeing a bad movie with low expectations doesn't make said bad movie any better.
neal
wizard in black
i thought Armageddon had its moments, pretty much only because of great casting, buscemi, willis, huge black guy, billybob etc. havent seen it in quite some years though, older more jaded neal might hate it all 
except when he's hitting golf balls at the greenpeace boat, who doesnt love that?
except when he's hitting golf balls at the greenpeace boat, who doesnt love that?
Krigloch the Furious
Pants full of poo
El Stormo
Member
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
ignoring the source material was purpousfully done to make it into a movie that could actually be entertaining to all of the people that knew absolutely nothing about the source material except that the word "transformers" was the name of a cartoon that was made in the 80's
if you found someone that didn't even know that the movie was even based on anything that came before it (a child, or someone that's only been in america for a few years), that person would still be able to understand what was going on
Lord Foul
I don't spank men
Then why not just call it Robot Wars and save yourself the cost of licensing the Transformers name?
Starship Troopers should probably just have been called Spacecraft Soldiers while we're at it.
Starship Troopers should probably just have been called Spacecraft Soldiers while we're at it.
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
it was becuase of the people that haven't even ever sat through an entire episode of the cartoon, still showed up the OPENING DAY just because they remember the name "transformers"
kind of like how so many of the people that saw LOTR in the movie theater were people that hadn't even bothered to try to read the book
and like how 2/3 of the people that saw the movie "Daredevil" hadn't actually ever read a single daredevil comic before seeing the movie and 1/3 of the people that saw the movie in theaters didn't even have any idea that it was even based on any pre-existing source material, and people just showed up to see ben afleck/jennifer garner/michael clarke duncan in a movie
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
yes you've got a "built-in audience" when you make a movie based on pre-existing source material, (most of the theatrically released movies that are going to be coming out in the next few of years are going to be based on pre-existing stuff, btw) but, you really can't rely on that alone, you really have to make a movie where someone that knows absolutely nothing about the source material can still enjoy the movie
Mr.Sister
Member
- Jun 5, 2010
- 446
- 0
- 16
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
OneDaySky
Clint
Karmic
speedy meatmonger
Alright, I'll try and keep this concise. The quota of entirely useless people/things relevant to the storyline/products was bigger and more than the non-useless. I would disagree that Bay fixed the things wrong with 2, and argue that he kept exactly that crap. It's all still there, the massive amounts of product placement in all forms, the humanized robots and the random cameos of various actors that had little to no effect on the movie or plot relevance altogether. The story is a sad mess, with what seems to be large things made trivial moments later.
Regardless, it's still one of the most visually stunning movies you'll see, and should definately bee seen in a cinema for both visual and audio. Any cinematography regarding robots and fights with said robots is amazingly made, while everything else is pretty unimpressive, or pretty standard anyways for a movie of this caliber. It's a shame though, when the robots can convey more emotion than the actors. That said, Shia Leboof did a pretty alright job, for once.
2 out of 5 viking battleaxes.
also John, you really shouldn't be making those kind of judgement calls on people when you're known for making pretty idiotic comments yourself. If we were to judge a whole person off their opinion on one movie, shouldn't people judge you for what some others would call questionable views/taste/deeds?
Regardless, it's still one of the most visually stunning movies you'll see, and should definately bee seen in a cinema for both visual and audio. Any cinematography regarding robots and fights with said robots is amazingly made, while everything else is pretty unimpressive, or pretty standard anyways for a movie of this caliber. It's a shame though, when the robots can convey more emotion than the actors. That said, Shia Leboof did a pretty alright job, for once.
2 out of 5 viking battleaxes.
also John, you really shouldn't be making those kind of judgement calls on people when you're known for making pretty idiotic comments yourself. If we were to judge a whole person off their opinion on one movie, shouldn't people judge you for what some others would call questionable views/taste/deeds?
Similar threads
