Transformers! (Merged) - Page 13

Nephythys · 07-09-2007, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

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.....

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.

RStar · 07-09-2007, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

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).

RStar · 07-09-2007, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

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.

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?

07-09-2007, 04:39 PM	#2
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	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.
	Submit to Quotes

07-09-2007, 04:46 PM	#3
LSPoorEeyorick scribblin' Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: in the moment Posts: 3,872	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.
	Submit to Quotes

07-09-2007, 05:36 PM	#5
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	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). __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

07-09-2007, 07:17 PM	#6
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	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.
	Submit to Quotes

07-09-2007, 07:59 PM	#10
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	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?
	Submit to Quotes