Transformers! (Merged) [Archive]

blueerica

07-02-2007, 10:16 AM

BarTopDancer

07-02-2007, 10:22 AM

My friend and her husband are going to see it on the 4th. I was going to go but shiny fireworks got my attention instead.

If you go into this movie with expectations of shiny transforming robots that blow stuff up you'll love it. Anything else and you'll be disappointed.

blueerica

07-02-2007, 10:25 AM

I'm going in anticipation of a very wrong crush on Shia LeBeouf. It's just wrong. I admit it. (I should scan the picture of him in EW.. or find it somehow online)

That, and I'm just hoping this film is more than meets the eye. If the Bumblebee that was at the 2006 Comicon was any indication.... :D

blueerica

07-02-2007, 10:33 AM

Oh, and yes I was a big fan of the Transformers throughout the 1980s. It's not just a too-young piece of man-meat that's attracting me there.

Morrigoon

07-02-2007, 10:35 AM

...oh, you mean the MOVIE....

:evil:

Nah, I'm not going to see it. If I get to anything it's going to be Ratatouille.

xharryb

07-02-2007, 11:59 AM

Who's going to brave the possible disappointment and go see it. I probably won't be able to see it tonight since I probably won't get out of class until 10, and most showings are for 8 and 8:30 (which I find incredibly lame... it can't even be considered midnight anywhere in the United States... boo.)

I'm thinking we can blame our beloved Disney for this 8pm crap, since they started the recent trend by doing that with POTC:AWE.

That being said, I'm too old to stay up for midnight showings, so I appreciate the fact that I'll be seeing the flick at tonight's 8pm. I'm going in expecting/hoping for a fun summer blockbuster full of giant robots blowing stuff up action. I'd like it to be more than that, but then i remind myself that the show was always just a really cool toy comercial. I mean, even killing off so many characters in the '86 film was just a means of clearing the way for the new line of toys.

Speaking of the '86 film... I had friends over to watch it last night as an apetizer for tonight's movie outing... cause we're all just a bunch of geeks. :cool:

blueerica

07-02-2007, 12:06 PM

You know, the only reason Duke didn't die in the G.I. Joe film was due to the disappointing <cough> reaction from fans over the death of Optimus Prime. The G.I. Joe flick, which was due to come out just prior to Transformers, found even more delays as they worked to not have Duke die. I think he just went into a coma, right?

And no, I did not just type that. I'm not *that* big of a geek.

xharryb

07-02-2007, 12:16 PM

If I recall, we never see Duke again, but one of the other characters either talks to him on the phone or mentions his condition. Perhaps I'll rewatch that one again soon.

Mousey Girl

07-02-2007, 12:32 PM

I figure that since I was forced to view Yugioh, the Movie, and SpongeBob the Movie in the theater, I should have an automatic pass for this one. I have offered to lend out Nick to a few friends who want to see it.

Babette

07-02-2007, 03:59 PM

I just talked to Fej and we are going late tomorrow night. I love summer blockbusters and have no expectations except a cute Shia LeBeouf (nothing wrong with a crush on him BE)

blueerica

07-02-2007, 11:34 PM

Early reports from the boyfriend who was previously agitated that Bumblebee was no longer a VW Bug.

"It was bad ass. And I was cool with Bumblebee not being a Bug. And I'm going to go out and buy a bunch of toys."

He also sounded like he was going to be awake for hours on the excitement buzz. Someone's going to be tired at work tomorrow...

xharryb

07-03-2007, 05:20 AM

He also sounded like he was going to be awake for hours on the excitement buzz. Someone's going to be tired at work tomorrow...

A feeling I'm all too familiar with at the moment. By the time I got home last night I was exhausted and ready to crash, but my body was so juiced still I just couldn't drift away. Thank god I have tomorrow to sleep in. :cool:

The movie far exceeded my expectations. I went in cautiously optimistic for a good summer action flick, and walked out in awe. It had it's flaws of course, but was so mind blowingly action packed that I'm only just beginning to come down from the high and process those flaws. My most enjoyed movie of the summer thus far.

blueerica

07-03-2007, 08:24 AM

I'm happy to know that two fans of the animated series seemed to like it. It bodes well. I don't think anyone's saying it's an academy award winning flick (maybe outside of special effects).

For months, I've been griping about Michael Bay, and the boy politely pointed out that he's got Spielberg as a babysitter. Hmmm...

I might see it this afternoon.

xharryb

07-03-2007, 09:18 AM

I totally get the Michael Bay complaints, and if it were a subject that required a more subtle touch I wouldn't want him around either, but this movie fits his style perfectly. He may not be right for most films, but for giant robots blowing things up, he's got what it takes.

keith - SuPeR K!

07-03-2007, 09:42 AM

I expected this movie to be completely stupid and really didn't want to see it. My step-mom got free tickets to a preview screening last week and I figured I might as well see it free so as not to have to waste money to see something that looked so retarded.

Boy was I in for a surprise! The movie was just awesome- the storyline was coherent and there was tons of amusing humor just watching the Transformers being themselves. It was a million times better than I *never* expected it to be.

Seriously, go see it!

wendybeth

07-03-2007, 11:13 AM

My nephew used to play with Transformers and Power Rangers all the time when he was very small. When I first saw the trailer for 'Transformers' last year, I just burst out laughing. I can't help it- in my mind, Power Rangers and Transformers symbolize campy, poorly made t.v. shows and action figures. I hope it is good, because I like Shia Lebeouf and it's nice to see him taking his career to a new level, as opposed to becoming another child actor who hits the skids.

Alex

07-03-2007, 01:49 PM

I was big into Transformers as a kid. I took Megatron to show and tell in the 5th grade and Optimus Prime was a prized possession.

When the show came out on DVD a few years ago I made the mistake of putting it on my Netflix queue. Oh what a disappointment that was. Never has the feebleness of the juvenile mind ever been so well demonstrated.

But if it is playing on the local IMAX screen I'll be seeing it this Sunday with friends (followed by dinner at Zachary's Pizza so if the movie sucks that will be good reward).

blueerica

07-03-2007, 01:57 PM

I've decided against seeing it today. I'm hoping that's the wise move.

By not seeing it today, I run into the holiday movie traffic between now and the end of this following weekend. I could see it just after that, but I'll be in the heat of studying for two finals, so... I shouldn't. Or maybe that's when I should.

BarTopDancer

07-03-2007, 02:21 PM

It's getting great reviews from people who understand what the Transformers are.

I am so tempted to see this today. Perhaps I should change my bargaining chip of seeing 1408 from seeing Ratatouille to this.

I must know though, does Josh Duhmel have his shirt off at all? And if so, how often?

Alex

07-03-2007, 04:20 PM

Just in case I'm not as hip to it as I'd think, what "are" the Transformers? I'm not sure if you mean that literally, artistically, etc.

blueerica

07-03-2007, 04:25 PM

I'll assume, for the sake of assuming, that "those who know what Transformers are" means "those who are more intimately familiar with the animated series and/or toy line from the 1980s."

Alex

07-03-2007, 04:40 PM

That's what I was assuming but from what I've seen describing the plotline, the movie does not keep at all to the "mythology" underlying the TV series and animated movie.

But I've only been half-reading reviews so maybe that is a wrong understanding on my part.

blueerica

07-03-2007, 04:43 PM

Since I have yet to see it, I don't know. From what I understand from first-person account, it does not follow the Transformer universe. It does, however, have some b*tchin' effects that make this totally okay.

In terms of long-time Transformer fans, I'll just assume it's just great to see what you've dreamed of (ordinary objects transforming into powerful giant robots right before your very eyes in a larger-than-life fashion). At least that's what I'm going for. Oh, and my lust for that LaBeouf kid.

FEJ

07-04-2007, 03:15 AM

Kick. A$$.

saw it a couple hours ago.

Disneykat

07-04-2007, 08:00 AM

Movie was great. Awesome Brain candy. I went in not expecting much, and despite 2 cheesy parts it was a good movie. The effects were awesome and caused our little Tanglet to stir a few times.

I think everyone should see it.

cirquelover

07-04-2007, 11:08 AM

I guess we're off to the see it. The boy has decided that is how we'll spend our 4th. I'll let you know what a non transformers person thinks. At least it has the guy from the tv show Vegas in it and it should be interesting to see a more grown Shia LeBeouf acting. I'm off to the movies!

flippyshark

07-04-2007, 01:53 PM

FEJ

07-04-2007, 03:01 PM

The chief reason I'm not psyched about this movie - in the trailers, the transformations are lightning fast (and thus awfully CGI fakey). The main appeal of the Transformers characters for me would be to see the transformations happen gradually enough that I can follow the sequence of steps and get some idea of how these robots are put together. For any of you who have seen this, do such sequences exist in the movie?

Yes and no.

They do show the transformation, but some things are so intricate that you can't follow it all. The first transformations of the Autobots are the best to follow as I remember. They are a lot more complex than the ones I had when I was a kid. They go together like I always dreamed they should. It was non-stop action, and a good story line. Our theater was really loud, almost deafening, but it still rocked.

cirquelover

07-04-2007, 04:31 PM

It was a long movie but at least I wasn't bored like I was with Superman5. The CGI was amazing and I enjoyed the differing personalities. There were a lot of moments where I grabbed the boys leg, lots of action. Our theater was mostly men, only about 8 children. I think they all enjoyed it, the guy behind us was really getting into it.
I'd say it was a good movie just not one I'd go to without the boy. Zach says he loved it and would give it a strong recommendation!

Nephythys

07-06-2007, 10:24 AM

Ok Swank gang- this movie is amazing!

Go....see it...now.

Seriously!

I know some of you played with Transformers as kids (admit it :))- and this movie is great fun!!!

So go...see it :D

Kevy Baby

07-06-2007, 11:45 AM

A couple of cow orkers were wondering if it would be appropriate for 5 and 6 year olds?

Nephythys

07-06-2007, 12:01 PM

hmmm....my 7 year old sat through it and loved it. Depends on their personal taste for their kids I guess...

There is some off color humor, robot violence of course-nothing that stands out to me but I am pretty liberal in what I let my kids watch.

xharryb

07-06-2007, 07:42 PM

Plenty of action violence, but none of it gory. The two most questionable moments i would think, with regard to children seeing it, are the robot giving the middle finger and the seen where the mother asks if the teen has been masturbating.

I know children tend to react to things differently, so some would be fine with the film and excited about it while others might not sit throughn it so well. It's very loud and some younger children might be frightened by that. Each parent propbably knows their own children well enough to know if they'd be ok I suppose, though some may want to save it for the kids to watch at home where there's more control of the environment (volume levels, ability to stop if it's too much, etc).

Just my thoughts, but I don't have kids of my own so I'm probably not a good authority.

Moonliner

07-06-2007, 07:49 PM

I rather gapped the entire transformer thing. I'm too old and the kids are too young.

Is there anything here for me or just those who know what the heck a decepticon is?

innerSpaceman

07-06-2007, 09:12 PM

I never played with transformers, and certainly never watched the cartoons. Just not of that generation.

But I've heard the movie is good ... and, believe it or not, want to see it for its qualities as a film. Heheh.

Prudence

07-06-2007, 10:41 PM

It was actually better than I expected. Reminded me of the first Spiderman movie, in that it was enjoyable for those who really didn't know much about the franchise. Good amount of humor. Only a few moments that were sort of extra cartoon-y - where the script veered into dialogue reminiscent of Saturday morning cartoons. It was mostly when the Autobots were talking amongst themselves, I think.

Requires complete suspension of disbelief, obviously, but it wasn't horrific. I wouldn't insist that the channel be changed if someone were watching it on the telly.

xharryb

07-07-2007, 06:41 AM

I rather gapped the entire transformer thing. I'm too old and the kids are too young.

Is there anything here for me or just those who know what the heck a decepticon is?

If you go into it as a fun summer action flick, then I would say yes. Even as a Transformers fan, that's all I went in expecting, and they both met and exceeded my expectations. I've seen comments from several folks who went kicking and screaming into the film for the sake of their significant others and came away completely enjoying it.

BarTopDancer

07-07-2007, 09:20 AM

OMG it was amazing. Loved it. So loved it.

I laughed. I cried. It was beautiful. It was action packed. It was everything I could have hoped for and more. Shiny robots blowing stuff up. YES! Not once did I look at my watch, or my phone. Not once did I think *are we done yet*. I was staring at the screen the entire time. Well almost the entire time. I did look away to ask my friend why no one noticed the giant robots tramping around the neighborhood. It felt like the cartoon in some aspects. I was waiting for Optimus Prime to say "The More You Know". Thought the "more than meets the eye" line was a perfect corny throwback to those who knew the series.

Go see it! Even if you didn't follow the cartoon. It's amazing!

Babette

07-07-2007, 10:41 AM

I never followed the cartoon but I loved this movie. It established the plot and had jam-packed action. It was a little long, but I think that was just me being uber-tired after little sleep the days before and watching the 11pm show.

Shia and the girl were both adorable. There were many surprise actors that I never saw in any of the ads. That tells you something when they do not have to use the big names in the movie to sell it.

I really expected it to be awful like Spiderman2. Boy was I wrong.

Go see it! (Well GD and CP will hate it if I like it!)

Mousey Girl

07-07-2007, 10:48 AM

I am beginning to waver on my original thought of, "Not a snowball's chance in Hell I would see this in the theater." My biggest problem is the sound level seemed deafening from the theaters it was playing in. We were watching Evan Almighty and you could hear booms and crashes through the walls.

blueerica

07-07-2007, 10:54 AM

If anything, that's evidence that it should only be viewed at the movie theater. ;)

BarTopDancer

07-07-2007, 11:10 AM

GO SEE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FEJ

07-07-2007, 11:31 AM

Looks like we had 2 threads of the same thing, so I merged them.

innerSpaceman

07-07-2007, 12:07 PM

Hmmm, will I like it if I happen to think Spiderman2 is the far-and-away best of that series ... and one of the 2 or 3 best comicbook movies ever made??

Nephythys

07-07-2007, 03:29 PM

GO SEE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What she said!

This movie gave us a high we took a long time to come down from- it's amazing. Loved loved it!

Must see it again!

"Bumblebee! Stop lubricating the man!":D

mousepod

07-07-2007, 08:42 PM

We just got home from the theater.

Hated it.

We're going to watch something else to cleanse our palates.

...are we the only ones here who didn't like it?

CoasterMatt

07-07-2007, 08:50 PM

I'll go see it if somebody else pays for my ticket, and dinner, and drinks after that.

Cadaverous Pallor

07-07-2007, 08:57 PM

Go see it! (Well GD and CP will hate it if I like it!)We're /this/ close to seeing it, but now that I read this review, I don't know...;)

Babette

07-08-2007, 10:32 AM

We're /this/ close to seeing it, but now that I read this review, I don't know...;)
:p

BarTopDancer

07-08-2007, 11:04 AM

We're /this/ close to seeing it, but now that I read this review, I don't know...;)

Go expecting nothing more than shiny robots blowing stuff up. :p

Moonliner

07-08-2007, 11:06 AM

shiny robots blowing stuff up. :p

*sniff* *sniff* is that a whiff of Oscar I detect?

mousepod

07-08-2007, 11:57 AM

Go expecting nothing more than shiny robots blowing stuff up. :p

"Stuff" like hundreds of innocent people.

Expect none of the campiness of Godzilla, none of the retro tongue-in-cheek of Mars Attacks.

Expect to see Jon Voight as a Rumsfeldian cool-thinking hero.

Technically, there was nothing wrong with the movie, but its moral bankruptcy was unnerving and ultimately frightening.

We left the theater more 'bummed out' than exhilarated.

Just my .02.

mousepod

07-08-2007, 12:39 PM

...but I was glad to see the J.J. Abrams "trailer"(?) before the feature.

Anyone following the mystery at ethanhaaswasright (http://ethanhaaswasright.com/) or ethanhaaswaswrong (http://ethanhaaswaswrong.blogspot.com/)?

If so, perhaps this merits its own thread.

blueerica

07-08-2007, 01:51 PM

"Stuff" like hundreds of innocent people.

Expect none of the campiness of Godzilla, none of the retro tongue-in-cheek of Mars Attacks.

Expect to see Jon Voight as a Rumsfeldian cool-thinking hero.

Technically, there was nothing wrong with the movie, but its moral bankruptcy was unnerving and ultimately frightening.

We left the theater more 'bummed out' than exhilarated.

Just my .02.

I have yet to see the film, however, while I had no thought toward camp or tongue-in-cheekiness, the other stuff is somewhat of a given, in my opinion.

As the story goes, and those familiar with Transformers from the 1980s would well be aware of this, the Decepticons are baddies that are looking to take Earth's energy at all costs. I presume that includes innocent lives. If taken into the context of "imagine giant evil robots" I'd be surprised if the human toll didn't go into the millions - the Decepticons wouldn't be worth their salt if they weren't bad enough to take out at least thousands lives. They're evil.

Of course, this is my assumption and opinion based on seeing the cartoons and playing with the toys as a kid. As for Jon Voight being Rumsfeld-like, perhaps it's just a reflection of the times.

I'll reserve my opinion on the cheesy teen story I suspect is a part of it until I see it. And I very well could hate the violence, though I doubt it. It's what the Transformers were about... well, that and selling a bunch of toys.

innerSpaceman

07-08-2007, 04:13 PM

That was likely the one of the worst movies I've ever been subjected to.

I've never played with the toys or watched the cartoon, so I had no cherished childhood memories to be destroyed by Michael Bay's adaptation.

I was not entertained for a moment. There was nothing redeemable about this movie.

The effects were even lame.

:mad:

How can you make this bad a film about shiny robots blowing things up??!? I am amazed.

mousepod

07-08-2007, 04:33 PM

I'm sorry if my sole negative response to the movie (well, until iSm chimed in) merits a defense, but perhaps I need to better explain why I think that Tranformers is one of the most offensive movies I've seen recently.

Firstly, I'm completely aware of the storyline of the Transformers from the 80s, thank you very much. I know that the Decepticons are really really bad and the Autobots are really really good. I never called myself a fan of the original series, because I was acutely aware of the fact that the show was nothing more than a long-form toy commercial that utilized sub-standard animation and mediocre writing. I thought that Transformers, along with G.I. Joe, He-Man, She-Ra et al were insults to the intelligence of their target audience.

However, I think that the most detestable aspects of the movie have to do with the places that plot diverges from that of the original cartoon. The additions to the story take the movie out of 'escapist blockbuster' territory and instead place it firmly into paranoid right-wing nightmare territory, at least for me.

Lots of spoilers follow:

- The movie begins with a Decepticon attack on a US military base in Qatar. The 2003 invasion of Iraq began with attacks from Qatar-based US military. Are the Decepticons agents of Iraq? Al Qaeda? Of course not. They're just evil-doers.

- Unlike the animated series, there are no evil humans siding with the Decepticons. The only thing close to evil are the agents of the secret US organization "Sector 7," and the only thing that makes them "evil" is that they're arrogant (but it's OK, because the snarkiest one get urinated on by an Autobot, thereby receiving his comeuppance - boyoboy is Michael Bay funny). However, we're constantly reminded that we're a country prepared for war. Our military secrets are vital. Our war machines are sleek, elegant and deadly. The Decepticon attack momentarily almost triggers a world war and the reality that war between people is a real thing is never far from the surface.

- The death of innocents is wholesale, casual, and basically inconsequential. The US government makes a conscious decision to bring the cube to a city. This is the only reason that the final battle takes place among so many people. Transformers smash into cars, buildings and people. Deaths aren't acknowledged or mourned, it's just shiny robots and stuff blowing up. In a world where our government constantly reminds us of the evils of terrorism by pointing to two US buildings that were destroyed, it's hard not to think of the senseless loss of lives as Megatron and Optimus Prime smash through one occupied building after another.

What's despicable about Transformers is that it's still just a vehicle (pardon the pun) to sell merchandise. But by upping the ante, it shows cavalier disregard for the intelligence of a whole new audience.

I can't wait for the two sequels that have been given the green light. Or the Voltron movie. Or Masters of the Universe.

innerSpaceman

07-08-2007, 04:59 PM

Hmm, I didn't give it that much credit as to analyze why the story points were despicable. It simply was a piece of crap that failed to entertain on its own meager merits.

It was BORING.

It was UNBELIEVABLY FREAKING STUPID!.

I really gave no credence to the fact that wanton deaths occurred during the supposedly climactic finale that I almost slept through.

But come to think of it, why did they bother to take the cube all the way from Hoover Dam to "Mission City" aka L.A., and why did they pretend that L.A. was an hour's drive from Hoover Dam? Why didn't they call it "Johnson" Dam if they were going to fake world-famous locations and their geographic relations to each other?

But I quibble.

I was glad at the beginning that Bumblebee was a Camaro and not a VW, but only because my first car was a Camaro.

The rest of the movie was an insult to my first car. Damn Michael Bay! Damn his eyes!!

Strangler Lewis

07-08-2007, 07:25 PM

Why didn't they call it "Johnson" Dam if they were going to fake world-famous locations and their geographic relations to each other?

I felt the same way about Nine Months when they showed Hugh Grant speeding the wrong way on the road to Fort Point--a road no one would actually drive in their daily routine--just to show the Golden Gate Bridge in the background. Ruined the movie for me.

Stuff like that seems to happen a lot with San Francisco movies.

innerSpaceman

07-08-2007, 07:39 PM

It happens less with L.A. movies ... probably becaue the director's friends and neighbors also live in Los Angeles, and would rib him about it.

Michael Bay has no shame.

but we've known that for a very long time.

BarTopDancer

07-08-2007, 07:40 PM

If we're going to start nickpicking reality details (never mind that the movie is about ROBOTS from outer space fighting their war on earth) then how come no one saw the robots in the neighborhood hiding amongst the houses?

MP - the Decepticons were killing the humans. Not the Autobots. "We must not harm the humans" [no matter how annoying they are].

mousepod

07-08-2007, 08:19 PM

Technically, the Autobots weren't directly killing humans. But if I remember correctly (and with Michael Bay's stupid editing, I might not), weren't both kinds of Transformers smashing through buildings during the climactic battle? Even if tossed by a Decepticon, an Autobot hitting an office building full of people does do some damage.

Which wasn't really the point of my anti-Transformers rant, anyway.

innerSpaceman

07-08-2007, 08:40 PM

And I see no reason to not complain about false reality when a fantasy film portrays such things as, for example, the military with such verisimilitude.

Of course, if the Giant Robot movie had been entertaining, the quibbles about Los Angeles and Hoover Dam geography wouldn't matter. It's sort of how a lot of people are bugged by the way Remy controls Linguini by hair pulling in Ratatouille, but because the film is so entertaining - - they're willing to let it go.

I guess many people are willing to overlook lots of stuff in The Transformers because they were entertained by it ... but I just don't see how anybody could be.

BarTopDancer

07-08-2007, 08:44 PM

I can't wait for the two sequels that have been given the green light.

This makes me sad.

Megatron is dead. That should be the end of it.

I did think to myself that if they killed Optimus Prime again I was going to be pissed.

innerSpaceman

07-08-2007, 08:48 PM

oh, and worst of all - the actual transformations of the Transformers were stupid-looking and never bothered to use the tremendous power of CG to make the change from car to robot be niftily-believeable.

Giant Giant BAH on that count.

Cadaverous Pallor

07-08-2007, 09:05 PM

Not Afraid

07-08-2007, 09:06 PM

I can't believe so many people saw this film!

Alex

07-08-2007, 09:33 PM

Haven't read today's posts to the thread, though I see iSm posted so I'll be curious but want to be untainted.

Saw it tonight.

Overall a bad movie but there was a lot of energy that kept me along with it for the most part.

1. I don't understand the orgasms people are having about the effects. To make the CGI look good they made the of the film look bad (dark, grainy, jerky camera movement).

2. The action sequences had no spatial existence. It was just motion on the screen with no ability, except in the one on one fights to know where things were in relation to each other. Sure, you can say it was an attempt to create the fog of war, but I just didn't find it very exciting.

3. Most of the comedy bits were completely flat. The dog peeing on one of them; Jazz's single line of dialogue (worse than anything Jar Jar ever did). The only attempt at humor that got even a smile from me was the part over the closing credits.

4. The actual story was beyond absurd. Not the fighting robots part but what they were fighting for, how they were going about that fight, and the motivations in general.

5.

On top of everything else it is a minor detail but how did they get from Hoover Dam to downtown Los Angeles in about 40 minutes and, more importantly, why was the plan apparently to drive from Hoover Dam to downtown Los Angeles in order to have helicoptors fly in and pick up the cube. That just makes no sense at all, even in an otherwise ridiculous set up.

6. In general I don't have a huge problem with product placement but the product placement here was just annoying.

On the plus side, Shia LaBeouf continues to display charisma and has the makings of a big time superstar. The movie did have a lot of energy which tended to carry me through but at any pause (and once the movie was over) a feeling of being had immediately crept in.

I'm all in favor of mindless summer action (and did enjoy Live Free or Die Hard if I need to provide a bona fide) but I saw nothing entertaining in this particularly brain dead summer action.

BarTopDancer

07-08-2007, 09:37 PM

Ok, now that complaint catches my eye - really? Do others agree?

I don't. They transform fast (much faster than I was ever able to transform them) and it is very interesting to see how they are put together. You don't see a car then poof a robot. But it's not in slow motion. I think the speed was appropriate for the movie.

But I suspended all reality going into this movie.

Alex

07-08-2007, 09:42 PM

Ok, I'm definitely in the iSm camp. As I said in my review of Ratatouille there were issues of verisimilitude but because I was entertained they weren't important. Suspension of disbelief is easy when the movie makes it easy. Transformers did not make it easy.

In the climactic fight I really was confused about whether they were supposed to be in "Mission City" or in Los Angeles. If it wasn't Los Angeles but another huge city close to Hoover Dam (I guess destroying Las Vegas is too cliche now) why put so much focus on downtown Los Angeles landmark buildings and at least digitally edit the street signs prominently visible. I'm sorry but if you are in a city that looks like LA, having a big fight in the middle of Wilshire Blvd, then you're in LA.

I'm not so with mousepod on the moral repugnance of it since Transformers is hardly unique it its mass slaughter of innocents. I'll save that for movies that seem to actually endorse it (such as two recent Mark Wahlberg movies, Four Brothers and The Shooter which truly were morally repugnant to me). But I see his point.

When Megatron finger flicked that innocent passerby into a nearby car I was appalled at the people in the audience who laughed.

innerSpaceman

07-08-2007, 09:56 PM

The only attempt at humor that got even a smile from me was the part over the closing credits.
Oh? What was that?

(This was the first movie I haven't stayed for the credits for in ages. I couldn't wait to get out of there.)

Alex

07-08-2007, 10:09 PM

Sam's parents are being interviewed by a local reporter about the "reports of an alien invasion" (or something like that) and they deny it (though if it wasn't completely open knowledge how would the reporter know to interview Sam's parents). That was played for a laugh but what finally got me to smile was a throwaway line by Sam's mom to the reporter that it head was a different size than on TV.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 05:21 AM

I guess some people are too snobby, too immersed in politics, or too analytical to have fun with a fun movie.

(and no, you are not alone- check the forum for the movie on IMDB-though you ARE the minority)

It's like we saw two different movies- seriously.

But that's ok- less people in line.

mousepod

07-09-2007, 06:11 AM

Congratulations, Nephy!

After several days, you're the first to enter a personal attack in the thread!

You win THREADCRAPPER OF THE WEEK!

...and it's only Monday.

LSPoorEeyorick

07-09-2007, 06:34 AM

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 06:37 AM

Congratulations, Nephy!

After several days, you're the first to enter a personal attack in the thread!

You win THREADCRAPPER OF THE WEEK!

...and it's only Monday.

uh huh....I'm a go-getter.

Can you engrave my name on the trophy? I would appreciate it-

It's not meant as an attack- apologies most profusely- I'll grovel if it helps.

I just can't help but think that preconceived attitudes ruin a movie long before you watch it.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 06:45 AM

Oh, Neph. Don't assume that people who didn't like Transformers can't enjoy a fun movie. I enjoy a fun movie... several times a week, usually. But Transformers was simply not my idea of fun. Don't get me wrong-- the Big Dumb Movie is a genre that can be quite fun, but they have to be well-made Big Dumb Movies for me to enjoy them. Sorry, all, I am firmly planted in the 'Pod-iSm camp, and I know Tom is too.

And it is my opinion that filtering a "Big Dumb Movie" through an overly political lense, or some high expectation or over analyzing it- ruins it. Valid- sure- way to ruin the experience- yea.

Our complaints were primarily in the writing (so heavy-handed; such cheap, cheap jokes that, had Michael Bay listened to the advice he gave on "On the Lot," he'd know were "groaners.")

And also in the directing, obviously. I've never been a Michael Bay fan and this is no exception. There is just no excuse for shot after shot in which it is entirely unclear what is happening (from robot transformation to robot-on-robot cllimax action)... particularly when those shots were composed from out of thin air on a computer. That means they CHOSE the blurry, quick-cut style that actually had me falling asleep during the climax. What good is a movie about transforming robots that doesn't actually give you beautiful shots when they do?

LOL- you can always tell people who work in, or are close to, the industry. I love Michael Bay movies. You guys see blurry cuts- I just went for the ride. Not better or worse- but certainly like seeing two different movies.

But, Neph, people like different things and just because I didn't like this one, doesn't mean your enjoyment isn't valid. Likewise, please don't invalidate my opinion by writing it off as snobby. I enjoy my fair share of shoot-'em-up July 4th releases. This one just did not do it for me.

I know my enjoyment was valid- and I am sure that the critical comments are valid.....

You are anything but snobby-

Peace out guys- it's a CRAP monday for me- I am sorry if I came off pissy- really was not the intent.

LSPoorEeyorick

07-09-2007, 06:46 AM

Alex

07-09-2007, 06:46 AM

Yes, my preconceived notion that jokes should be funny, that action scenes should be intense and clearly staged, that storyline should be internally reasonable even if externally fantastical.

Transformers is none of these. But like I said just a week ago I saw a stupid summer action movie that I did enjoy (Live Free or Die Hard) because it was all of those things. The one liners mostly connected. The action, while ridiculously over the top managed to still have clarity (though the one one one fight scene were poorly edited; probably because Willis can't really hold his own on that front any more) and the underlying plotline was real-world stupid but internally consistent.

But yes, if to enjoy a movie I not only need to suspend disbelief but also nearly all brain function then I am too snobby for it.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 06:54 AM

I am not sure how a movie based on toys and a cheesy 80's cartoon could be anything more than it was- but I'm a movie neanderthal who squeaks over shiny things and got a laugh out of many things in Transformers.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 07:04 AM

Well, all of ten minutes before we walked into Transformers, we walked out of Evan Almighty-- a movie which we'd heard was dreadful (and which we rather expected to be dreadful.) We laughed a great deal and walked out smiling. Then we walked into a movie that was based on a toy from my childhood and we'd been told by several people was a brilliant and fun summer movie. I don't think preconceived notions (other than a standing doubt of Michael Bay) had anything to do with it.

(I replied before I saw your reply, btw. You're right-- industry people are much more critical. It's just the reality, really.)

It's less notions about the movie itself than people's own biases they take into anything.

My brother- a huge Transformers fan, said it was everything he hoped for. I gave the guys in my family grief for their geeking out before the movie- but I was as bad as they were!

Alex

07-09-2007, 07:13 AM

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 07:25 AM

They weren't even shiny since the picture was generally so muddy to hide the blend of CGI and non-CGI.

But it is ok with me that you liked it. Being entertained is an entirely subjective experience. It worked for you, I don't invalidate that. You're the one who attempted to invalidate my reasons for why I did not like it.

For a summer action movie I am not going in looking for high art and am perfectly willing to judge it on different criteria than I did Before Sunrise or other art pieces (by that standard all the great summer tentpoles would pretty much be crap). But I do expect a basic level of craftsmanship, as I define it, and did not experience that.

I did NOT try to invalidate anything. In fact I said critical comments ARE valid- but I do think over analyzing it ruins it. Heaven forbid I respond with my opinions on that- geesh.

I've apologized- I've explained- I am DONE with it. Fvcking done.

FUN movie- I'll be going again.....it's Harry Potter week too- more shiny.

blueerica

07-09-2007, 08:23 AM

Hey, to be fairly noted, LSPE does know other people "in the business" who liked Transformers.

I agree with Nephy, in one sense. Page 2 (I read mine in 50-posts per page mode) has been nothing but the insinuation from a handful of very vocal people that those that enjoyed Transformers are morally bankrupt and are otherwise not intelligent enough to see past the shiny-shiny.

And frankly, it does come off as snobby. We are all snobs of one sort or another... so get over it. Everyone.

It's just a cheesy blockbuster. You either like that kind of thing or you don't. No need to have everyone harp.

ETA: I didn't mean everyone came off sounding like a total snob. Just those who used hyperbole to make some dramatic points.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 08:24 AM

Hey, to be fairly noted, LSPE does know other people "in the business" who liked Transformers.

I agree with Nephy, in one sense. Page 2 (I read mine in 50-posts per page mode) has been nothing but the insinuation from a handful of very vocal people that those that enjoyed Transformers are morally bankrupt and are otherwise not intelligent enough to see past the shiny-shiny.

And frankly, it does come off as snobby. We are all snobs of one sort or another... so get over it. Everyone.

It's just a cheesy blockbuster. You either like that kind of thing or you don't. No need to have everyone harp.

In my tiny voice- Thank you

I AM sorry I phrased it in an abrasive tone- I DID apologize.

Squee shiny shiny.....

blueerica

07-09-2007, 08:28 AM

There have been times, mostly elsewhere, and in emails where I walk away from the computer and say "Sh*t... Did I just type/post that. I didn't mean it quite like that."

In other words, I live in perpetual-post-posting regret.

This, however, will be the last time I open this thread until I'm able to see the movie. I'll have lots of time on my little mini-vacation this weekend. :)

Oh, and then there's Harry Potter.

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 08:32 AM

All my co-workers loved it.

And does everyone realize that "Mission City" is not LA? They say "Mission City is 20 minutes away". It may look like LA but in the movie it is not LA.

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 08:37 AM

Page 2 (I read mine in 50-posts per page mode) has been nothing but the insinuation from a handful of very vocal people that those that enjoyed Transformers are morally bankrupt and are otherwise not intelligent enough to see past the shiny-shiny.

And frankly, it does come off as snobby. We are all snobs of one sort or another... so get over it. Everyone.

It's just a cheesy blockbuster. You either like that kind of thing or you don't. No need to have everyone harp.

Thank you. To be honest, those posts really made me sad. Not because people didn't like the movie (you like what you like and lord knows I find quite a few movies that people here enjoy uber-boring) but because I felt as if people who are my friends think I am stupid for not seeing some hidden message behind the shiny robots blowing stuff up.

Bay and Spielberg are not political activists. They make action movies. This is an action movie, not a recruitment movie, not a propaganda movie.

Strangler Lewis

07-09-2007, 09:08 AM

And frankly, it does come off as snobby. We are all snobs of one sort or another... so get over it. Everyone.

It's just a cheesy blockbuster. You either like that kind of thing or you don't. No need to have everyone harp.

ETA: I didn't mean everyone came off sounding like a total snob. Just those who used hyperbole to make some dramatic points.

Exactly. I mean, how much of an intellectual stretch can it be to realize that an overly loud killfest with apparent urine jokes is doing its best to appeal to the Schwarzenegger/Stallone fans who think the blood and degradation can't run freely enough?

Personally, I think a happy, bouncy movie like Cars is far more dangerous. In addition to being one of the worst written movies that I was supposed to like in some time, it was one big red state NASCAR, oil company blow job.

And I seem to be the only one who gets it.

mousepod

07-09-2007, 09:14 AM

Alex

07-09-2007, 09:15 AM

I could either say simply "I didn't like it" or I can explain why I didn't like it. That is what I did.

The only time I couched my views in terms of anybody else was in saying that I really don't see whatever it is that has others so ecstatic about the special effects which, in my opinion were muddy, blurry, and operated mostly through a magician's misdirection, making you think you saw things you hadn't.

If me explaining my reasons for not liking it is insinuation that others are stupid, I do not feel that way. However, it was in defense of the movie that I was told I had to stop thinking if I wanted to enjoy it.

Yes, a cheesy summer blockbuster can be morally repugnant, and many have been (I previously mentioned Four Brothers; see also Mr. and Mrs. Smith). I don't necessarily agree that Transformers is but it is, to me, and interesting aspect to discuss.

I would hope that a movie can be discussed. Even the dumb so-called mindless ones, and that we're not supposed to limit ourselves to a simple binary thumbs up or thumbs down. If that is the case, each movie thread should just be a Yes/No poll closed to comments.

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 09:24 AM

I never meant to insinuate that those who liked Transformers were stupid.Here's how I see what went down:- Many people posted that it was great even if you're not a fan of the brand.- Based on these and other raves, I took my wife to see it. We both hated it.- I shared that fact.- More LoT posts about how it was just shiny and robots and explosions.- I explained why I disagreed.- Erica (having not seen the movie) snipes that I somehow don't get the franchise.- I rebut in greater detail.Where's the snobbishness? If anything, it's in the attempts to invalidate any criticism of your beloved Transformers.Some of us liked it. Some thought it sucked. Like Nephy says, everyone is entitled to their opinion....and just for the record, I'm fairly sure that a handful of Spielberg's movies can be considered political - and even the New York Times has referred to Bay as "casually sadistic".

In the breakdown done in your original review (and somewhat in our offline conversation) I felt that you felt that I was dumb* for not getting a hidden message and not seeing beyond the shiny robots blowing stuff up. For not seeing a big deal in the bad guys causing havoc and harm to humans. For not seeing it for anything more than a summer blow-up fest.

*but that is what I get for presuming to know what other people are really thinking.

mousepod

07-09-2007, 09:33 AM

We could go around in circles on this. I don't think you or any of the millions of people who enjoyed the movie, are dumb for enjoying it.I differ with you on the belief that anything can be "just" one thing.When H and I left the movie, we felt uncomfortable and angry. The two of us explored why we might feel that way. I shared that here.I can't control how you interpret the hidden messages in my posts any more than you can control the way I watch a movie.

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 09:54 AM

Dangers of the internet and perceived tone of posts. No harm.

Was anyone else's theater was cracking up when they were trying to call the Pentagon and hit a call center in India?

innerSpaceman

07-09-2007, 10:12 AM

And does everyone realize that "Mission City" is not LA? They say "Mission City is 20 minutes away". It may look like LA but in the movie it is not LA.
So, it that not the Orpheum Theater prominently shown? Is that not a Wilshire Boulevard street sign prominently displayed?

I guess the CG budget must have run out at that point, huh?

I tried to get in more movies this weekend, but was swamped. I fully expect to see Die Hard 4, another completely cheesy summer flick. It might be good or it might be bad, but that's got nothing to do with whether it's cheesy, as far as my personal opinion goes.

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 10:34 AM

So, it that not the Orpheum Theater prominently shown? Is that not a Wilshire Boulevard street sign prominently displayed?

I guess the CG budget must have run out at that point, huh?

I didn't even notice those buildings or street signs. I was so immersed into the action that the scenery was just that. Scenery. And stuff being blown up. Besides the people here, I have yet to talk to someone who noticed anything LA. But maybe we're just unobservant.

Not Afraid

07-09-2007, 10:38 AM

I'm not sure you can actually call someone who paid to see Transformers a snob. You can call me a snob, however, because I will not see it.

Moonliner

07-09-2007, 10:43 AM

I think that from now on whenever a thread turns ugly I shall...

http://www.webdesign.org/img_articles/7072/BW-kitten.jpg

Post a cute kitten.

Hey, it's worth a shot. It just derailed the Sooo thread...

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 10:48 AM

KITTY!

Strangler Lewis

07-09-2007, 10:51 AM

Alex

07-09-2007, 10:58 AM

And if I was entertained I'm sure I wouldn't have cared much. But at the first aerial shot I leaned over to Lani and said "I thought they were going to Mission City; why are they in LA").

I don't think geographic inconsistency is a really big deal (after all, I'm pretty sure that they were shown driving away from Hoover Dam on the road that eventually takes you to Yuma) but after explicitly saying they were going to a place that was not LA it seems weird that they didn't do anything to mask that it was LA. Digitally remove the Bank of America building; add some buildings. Don't film on Wilshire. The helicopter shots and scenes of Starscream flying through skyscrapers were pretty much the same establishing shots a movie set in LA would use to identify that it was set in LA.

The streets they were fighting in isn't even a part of LA I've ever been in and I recognized it.

Again, not a make or break issue. Just something that, since the movie wasn't working for me, did stand out like a sore thumb.

Conversely, to use Live Free or Die Hard as an example again, I wasn't overly bothered by Willis flying a helicoptor in an east coast blackout from West Virginia to Baltimore and successfully finding a single house without any navigational aids. But I was having fun so I rolled my eyes a bit and moved on.

LSPoorEeyorick

07-09-2007, 11:07 AM

Hey, to be fairly noted, LSPE does know other people "in the business" who liked Transformers[/I]

Oh, absolutely. But I've seen that particular person tear new assholes for movies that she didn't like. I didn't say "industry people don't like Transformers," (because, obviously, somebody gave the screenplay a greenlight) I said that industry people (and industry-savvy people, for that matter) are often more critical of movies, whether they like them or not. When you spend a lot of time studying something, or working closely with something, you're bound to find more flaws in it than those who do not.

I say again: taste is completely subjective. Where does my dislike of something invalidate your like of it? My enjoyment of, say... eating tomatoes... is not lessened by GD's intense dislike of them. It does not make tomaotes any more or less good. It does not mean that GD and I think each other are stupid for not agreeing. Every bite will still be sweet and tangy and yummy to me, and slimy and disgusting to Greg. The tomato itself remains the same.

So I don't like the movie you enjoyed. So what? This does not me I do not like you, or you do not like me. (If identical taste was what friendship required, EH and I could never be friends! She likes Marie Antoinette, and I like The Queen. She likes Infamous, I like Capote. But this doesn't mean we don't like each other.)

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 11:11 AM

I'm not sure you can actually call someone who paid to see Transformers a snob. You can call me a snob, however, because I will not see it.

I'd be shocked if you saw it. Just like I'd be shocked if you saw The Simpson's movie. It's no secret you don't *do* pop culture. Doesn't make you a snob.

Ghoulish Delight

07-09-2007, 11:20 AM

I say again: taste is completely subjective. Where does my dislike of something invalidate your like of it? My enjoyment of, say... eating tomatoes... is not lessened by GD's intense dislike of them. It does not make tomaotes any more or less good. It does not mean that GD and I think each other are stupid for not agreeing. Every bite will still be sweet and tangy and yummy to me, and slimy and disgusting to Greg. The tomato itself remains the same. Hey, how'd I get dragged into this.

And speak for yourself lady. Those truly evolved among us who recognize the tomato as the orb of evil that it is are surely superior beings.

Alex

07-09-2007, 11:22 AM

Yeah, I was with you on the idea that liking a movie or not is ultimately entirely subjective and personal, but enjoying raw tomatoes really is a sign of physical and/or mental defect.

I have to endorse forced sterilization for people who like both tomatoes and raisins.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 11:37 AM

Strangler Lewis

07-09-2007, 11:37 AM

I take the opposite approach to the tomato question. I will grant the average adult one or two foods within our cultural eating taboos that they are allowed not to like. Any more, and the person is either suffering from a genetic disability or a failure of will.

Morrigoon

07-09-2007, 11:38 AM

Hey, how'd I get dragged into this.

And speak for yourself lady. Those truly evolved among us who recognize the tomato as the orb of evil that it is are surely superior beings.

Yeah, I was with you on the idea that liking a movie or not is ultimately entirely subjective and personal, but enjoying raw tomatoes really is a sign of physical and/or mental defect.

I have to endorse forced sterilization for people who like both tomatoes and raisins.
Meh, what's a little deadly nightshade between friends, eh?

Besides, if you've only had refrigerated tomatoes, I'm not surprised you find them slimy and disgusting. A good chef will see that his tomatoes are kept at, or at least brought to, room temperature before serving. The tomato's flavor is also enhanced (albeit altered) by cooking.

Tomatoes are amazing... to those of us with palates advanced enough to appreciate them :cool:

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 11:38 AM

Oh, absolutely. But I've seen that particular person tear new assholes for movies that she didn't like. I didn't say "industry people don't like Transformers," (because, obviously, somebody gave the screenplay a greenlight) I said that industry people (and industry-savvy people, for that matter) are often more critical of movies, whether they like them or not. When you spend a lot of time studying something, or working closely with something, you're bound to find more flaws in it than those who do not.

I say again: taste is completely subjective. Where does my dislike of something invalidate your like of it? My enjoyment of, say... eating tomatoes... is not lessened by GD's intense dislike of them. It does not make tomaotes any more or less good. It does not mean that GD and I think each other are stupid for not agreeing. Every bite will still be sweet and tangy and yummy to me, and slimy and disgusting to Greg. The tomato itself remains the same.

So I don't like the movie you enjoyed. So what? This does not me I do not like you, or you do not like me. (If identical taste was what friendship required, EH and I could never be friends! She likes Marie Antoinette, and I like The Queen. She likes Infamous, I like Capote. But this doesn't mean we don't like each other.)

Meh- from now on I will have a friendship application- no religion or politics-just one question:

"Did you enjoy Transformers?"

Otherwise I can't possibly like them. ;)

Strangler Lewis

07-09-2007, 11:39 AM

So I don't like the movie you enjoyed. So what? This does not me I do not like you, or you do not like me. (If identical taste was what friendship required, EH and I could never be friends! She likes Marie Antoinette, and I like The Queen. She likes Infamous, I like Capote. But this doesn't mean we don't like each other.)

I think the comparisons in the air are more: Person A likes snuggling to "Bambi." Person B likes masturbating to "Faces of Death" videos.

Broadly speaking, I don't see a problem with pulling away from someone because of the movies they like. It's appropriate to say you won't be friends with someone because of the choices they make or the company they keep, and our entertainment choices are part of the company we keep--and fund.

Cadaverous Pallor

07-09-2007, 11:53 AM

If I saw a movie I find morally repugnant, it would be hard to post as such without offending people who liked it.

If I saw a movie I find entertaining in a dumb actiony vein, it would be hard for me to let it go when people say the movie was too unbelievable/dumb to enjoy, since I am sure that they just tried to take it too seriously.

I get in trouble for being on either side of these equations all the time.

Thanks to everyone for understanding such a conundrum. :)

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 01:05 PM

But are you going to go see it and decide for yourself?

Cadaverous Pallor

07-09-2007, 01:13 PM

But are you going to go see it and decide for yourself?I'll see it eventually - either in the theaters or on DVD. We don't see many movies in the theater, but we are due for an actioner, since we didn't see Spiderman 3. If we get a spare evening we'll totally go for it.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 01:17 PM

I'll see it eventually - either in the theaters or on DVD. We don't see many movies in the theater, but we are due for an actioner, since we didn't see Spiderman 3. If we get a spare evening we'll totally go for it.

No loss on Spiderman 3 ;) this movie is MUCH better.

innerSpaceman

07-09-2007, 02:43 PM

And, heheheh, for me to find The Transformers even worse than Spiderman 3 is another woeful comment on the former.

Alex

07-09-2007, 03:19 PM

I'll have to agree that Transformers is better than Spider-Man 3. At least has more screen presence than Mr. Peter Parker and the girl was better to look at than Pointy Face Dunst.

Mousey Girl

07-09-2007, 03:41 PM

Since I could not find my gift certificates it looks like we won't be going to see Transformers. I, honestly, would much MUCH rather see Harry Potter this weekend.

xharryb

07-09-2007, 04:25 PM

I'd like to make a comment on the geography issues...

First of all, i completely agree that they should have made a greater attempt at making the locations nonspecific if that is what they wanted. However, for those of us that don't live in that part of the country and have never even visited those places, where they were never even crossed my mind. Since I don't live there, i don't autimatically see buildings and say "hey! That's LA!" I don't find that skyline to be nearly as recognizable as say NYC. What it comes down to really is that I don;t think they intended for it to be LA in the movie, they were just overly lazy at disguising the details. A flaw? Sure. Does it take me, a non Californian out of the picture? not really.

I did find, however, that my biggest complaint was the fact that they went to any city. It just seems to go against the nature of the Autobots. They're mission is to protect the humans, so they willingly choose to take the bait from a less populated environment into a center of population. Even in the cartoon they would surely have taken the fight further away from people, into the desert or something.

innerSpaceman

07-09-2007, 04:34 PM

Well, in defense of the Autobots, I think it was Hotty the Army Dude who decided to take the cube to the nearest huge metropolis.

That they took a wrong turn on the way to 'Mission City' was also his fault.

Hey, were they supposed to be in Mission City when they were all over Griffith Observatory, or was that enough of a landmark to be Los Angeles to the average filmgoer??

Alex

07-09-2007, 04:39 PM

I also want to give props to the people who did the recent rehabilitation of the Observatory. Apparently they built it so strong that multi-ton robots can walk around on the roof without doing any damage.

And they did have a CGI budget for altering the locations. I'm pretty sure they edited out the new bridge they are building over the canyon just below Hoover Dam

There was one action scene that I did think was phenomenally well done and showed some of the creating. When Starscreamer was taking out the F-16s above Los Ang...er Mission City. Bouncing around, transforming and untransforming too good effect. That 15 seconds was quite admirable.

LSPoorEeyorick

07-09-2007, 04:46 PM

You know what? I didn't catch the Mission City line (or the line about it not being Hoover Dam), so I just assumed it was a long trek to LA from Vegas, shortened by movie magic.

Personally, I wouldn't have known about Griffith being an LA landmark before I moved to LA if I wasn't a "Rebel Without a Cause" fan. But I am.

Still, many are not, so maybe LA doesn't 'read' as heavily as we locals think it does. Nevertheless, there was one fun progression of shots where I leaned over to Tom and whispered-- "hey, look. We saw 'A Star is Born' there last year.... I ate at that Mountain-Dew-sponsored-cafe once during my old Shakespeare job... Oh, look, that's on the Universal Studios lot where we took the tour... I drive by that Wilshire corner every day!"

Maybe they mean Mission City=LA the way that Gotham=NY. In that fictional-but-you-know-that's-it kind of way.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 04:48 PM

Since I could not find my gift certificates it looks like we won't be going to see Transformers. I, honestly, would much MUCH rather see Harry Potter this weekend.

I'm going through Harry Potter grief right now. I won't get to see it til the weekend or later :( we have so many appointments and craziness this week that seeing it any sooner won't happen.

Nephythys

07-09-2007, 04:50 PM

Hey, were they supposed to be in Mission City when they were all over Griffith Observatory, or was that enough of a landmark to be Los Angeles to the average filmgoer??

No - and I still have no clue what that is. I was born in Cali- but have no idea of what or where the Observatory is other than I know what they do at an Observatory.....

RStar

07-09-2007, 05:16 PM

I have to endorse forced sterilization for people who like both tomatoes and raisins.And what if a person likes raw potatos?

My mom loves to go to the movies, and now that my wife is unable to get out of the house I go with her. She wasn't sure about the movie, but knew I wanted to see it. She really enjoyed it, and so did I. Ok, it may not have a lot of value other than a great action movie romp, but hey- that's a fun ride once in a while!

RStar

07-09-2007, 05:21 PM

Maybe they mean Mission City=LA the way that Gotham=NY. In that fictional-but-you-know-that's-it kind of way.
That's a really good comparison. That works for me!

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 05:36 PM

Not once did I think it was LA. Didn't recognize the observatory either. Not a clue. And I live here. Perhaps the entire city background should have been CGI too. Maybe they should have done the entire movie in CGI.

And Steve - Hottie Army Dude is Josh Duhmel from TVs Las Vegas. (which isn't filmed in Las Vegas).

Alex

07-09-2007, 07:17 PM

And I don't live there and have never personally seen any of the places I recognized (other than the general downtown LA skyline). Mostly I recognize because they are used in movies so often to represent iconic LA (particularly Griffith Observatory which is probably in a couple hundred movies; Rebel Without a Cause; it is where Schwarzenegger first materialized in the first Terminator movie; more recently Drew Barrymore and Demi Moore beat each other up in Charlie's Angels. It played prominently in The Rocketeer).

Connecting to another summer blockbuster (one I did enjoy) a couple of the aerial shots you can see the U.S. Bank Tower which is the iconic LA skyscraper hovered over and then blown up by the aliens in Independence Day.

I'd like the Mission City : Los Angels :: Gotham City : New York City if they hadn't said Mission City is 20 miles from Hoover Dam. That's like if Batman crossed the George Washington Bridge into St. Louis.

Obviously it is not something that bothers most people watching. And like I've said I wasn't really bothered by it, I just had plenty of time to think about what I was seeing since I wasn't otherwise being entertained.

I was also mildly annoyed at them adding a completely unnecessary line of diaglog about how "NASA/JPL lost the Beagle 2 Mars probe." Why go to the trouble of adding that line just to get it wrong. Yes, only 1 in 500 people probably recognized the problem with it, but why not just say "remember that Mars probe we lost?"

They also said "gravity" when they meant "magnetic belt" in explaining why Megatron crashed. And, unless these robots are for some reason filled with air, dumping them to the deepest part of the ocean won't actually crush them. And unless these incredible pieces of machinery are taken out of action by a chilly October morning, the also won't freeze. The water at the bottom of the ocean is cold, but not that cold. Keep in mind it is still liquid while salinity allows a subfreezing temperature even at the deepest part of the ocean it isn't going to be any colder than 29 or 30 degrees Fahrenheit. In other words, if they have any fear of Megatron coming back to life the government's top people came up with a very stupid plan.

See the things I had to think about? Not because I went in looking to over analyze things but because I was somewhat bored so starting thinking about what I was seeing. So I would say the over analysis was a result of the (in my opinion I'll say again) suckiness and not the other way around.

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 07:22 PM

And, unless these robots are for some reason filled with air, dumping them to the deepest part of the ocean won't actually crush them. And unless these incredible pieces of machinery are taken out of action by a chilly October morning, the also won't freeze. The water at the bottom of the ocean is cold, but not that cold. Keep in mind it is still liquid while salinity allows a subfreezing temperature even at the deepest part of the ocean it isn't going to be any colder than 29 or 30 degrees Fahrenheit. In other words, if they have any fear of Megatron coming back to life the government's top people came up with a very stupid plan.

Maybe that is how they will explain why Megatron is back in the sequels (which I think are a very bad idea).

innerSpaceman

07-09-2007, 07:59 PM

Heheh, I was going to go thru the litany of Griffith Observatory movie appearances, and why average dweeb moviegoer should recognize it ... but Alex saved me the trouble.

Ok, I've been wondering ... was there a dog named "Mojo" in the cartoon, or was that just a fortuitous coincidence of the movie to our swanky message board?

Also ... to go back to something on page one .... who else besides me and mousepod had that weird J.J. Abrams hoax trailer before the film? At least, I've heard it was a hoax of some sort. I found it far more interesting than The Transformers. Anyone else see it? Know anything about it?

Prudence

07-09-2007, 09:22 PM

I had that trailer, I shrugged and said "it's J.J. Abrams."

BarTopDancer

07-09-2007, 09:36 PM

Also ... to go back to something on page one .... who else besides me and mousepod had that weird J.J. Abrams hoax trailer before the film? At least, I've heard it was a hoax of some sort. I found it far more interesting than The Transformers. Anyone else see it? Know anything about it?

My friend swears it's Godzilla. Rumors are rampant on the internets from a new Godzilla to a LOST! tie in. The website: http://www.ethanhaaswasright.com/ is very bizarre. There is a star on the left that launches my email every time I click it. The URL is http://[mail info I removed]/?view=cm&fs=1&to=van%40ethanhaaswasright.com&su=I'm%20one%20of%20you...%20help%20me!

I sent an email to van@ethanhaaswasright.com (the email address provided) that said "Who Are You" and this was the reply:

think I’m safe, for now. Wherever I go it isn’t long before they find me.

It seems The Mezin are connected to every aspect of humanity, from culture and religion to our most advanced technology

I have to be more careful contacting all of you. When I began I thought I could safely speak about his writings and perhaps save us all...

but now it seems I will have to find a more subtle way to share his visions.

If this is the first message you have received from me do not give up hope! There are others that have gone before you, the way has been found, you only need to search and you will find the answers you seek. We are getting stronger, our voices will be heard!

I have more of Haas’s writings, once I find a secure way to transmit them I will leave you clues to find them.

The more I read the more I realize Haas was right………

Alex

07-09-2007, 09:40 PM

It's a a new J.J. Abrams movie. It is not Godzilla (no way that could get made without it being known) but apparently is a monster movie with the working title (but almost certainly not the release title) Cloverfield (http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/archives/2007/07/abrams_on_clove.php).

The entire thing is shot in that first person hand held camera perspective seen in the trailer.

At least according to a Jeffrey Wells source and he's generally reasonably solid on such things.

RStar

07-09-2007, 09:47 PM

I'd like the Mission City : Los Angels :: Gotham City : New York City if they hadn't said Mission City is 20 miles from Hoover Dam.Really? I thought I heard them say 200 and some miles, like "220 miles north of here". I guess I heard it wrong, but I remember thinking "that's about how far Vegas is from LA" when I heard that line (not realizing it wasn't suppose to be LA).

xharryb

07-10-2007, 04:13 AM

I was also mildly annoyed at them adding a completely unnecessary line of diaglog about how "NASA/JPL lost the Beagle 2 Mars probe." Why go to the trouble of adding that line just to get it wrong. Yes, only 1 in 500 people probably recognized the problem with it, but why not just say "remember that Mars probe we lost?"

That was a nod to the first teaser trailer that came out last year where we only saw a shadow of a robot as it destroyed the Mars probe.

I'll give you Grifith Observatory as a recognizable landmark for the average filmgoer. I'm not sure if the average filmgoer automatically associates it with LA, but they should remember seeing it in other films and TV shows. Of course, the observatory scene was before they went to the Dam, so they could have meant for that to be a different location from the city they go to after the Dam.

Again, I'm not saying they did a good job with the location issues. It's one of the big, sloppy flaws of the movie. It shows lack of focus on the details because they figured you'd be too busy watching the big shiny robots to think about these things. However, as the average filmgoer living on the East coast the observatory and the dam were the ONLY recognizable landmarks to me, and that was only because they've been featured in other films, not because I associate them with their actual locations.

Alex

07-10-2007, 06:08 AM

That was a nod to the first teaser trailer that came out last year where we only saw a shadow of a robot as it destroyed the Mars probe.

What was a nod? I understand the purpose of the scene but why use the real name for that mission but reassign it from the European Space Agency to NASA/JPL? Again, it is really, really, really minor but why go to the trouble of adding unnecessary words just to add the wrong ones. For those who do know it is jarring, as if in Star Trek IV they'd said the USS Enterprise was part of the British navy.

xharryb

07-10-2007, 06:57 AM

What was a nod? I understand the purpose of the scene but why use the real name for that mission but reassign it from the European Space Agency to NASA/JPL? Again, it is really, really, really minor but why go to the trouble of adding unnecessary words just to add the wrong ones. For those who do know it is jarring, as if in Star Trek IV they'd said the USS Enterprise was part of the British navy.

Sorry. I misunderstood the point you were making.

Ghoulish Delight

07-10-2007, 08:05 AM

The entire thing is shot in that first person hand held camera perspective seen in the trailer.That counts me out. I'm not a fan of vomiting 1/3 of the way through movies (I'm still shocked I made it all the way through Blair Witch).

Alex

07-10-2007, 09:16 AM

Yeah, I wondered about that. Blair Witch didn't cause me any problems but I know a lot of people did have motion sickness issues (like my mom). And the trailer is a lot more choppy than Blair Witch, but I have to assume (hope) it settles down a lot.

innerSpaceman

07-10-2007, 11:40 AM

Who cares? That guy who the party was in honor of was totally hot.

He can hand my hold any time!

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

07-10-2007, 10:09 PM

So I don't like the movie you enjoyed. So what? This does not me I do not like you, or you do not like me. (If identical taste was what friendship required, EH and I could never be friends! She likes Marie Antoinette, and I like The Queen. She likes Infamous, I like Capote. But this doesn't mean we don't like each other.)

I'm stepping into the middle just to clarify that your examples seem to imply I didn't like The Queen or Capote, when I simply haven't gotten around to seeing them. No reason why I can't like all 4 of the films you mentioned. A better example might actually be the topic of this thread, since you disliked Transformers and I loved it, enough to see it twice. :)