Transformers Movie

[Klep]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/06/film.transformers.reut/index.html

The topic says it all.  Also I suspect Bram now needs new pants.

[Klep]

Greetings,

The Transformers movie has been in the planning stages for months now.

The movie is being produced by Don Murphy and he has been fairly active on his own boards www.donmurphy.net. He has been making announcements and listen to fan feedback on the various ideas for the film.

So far the most exciting tidbit of news is that Frank Cullen and Mark Welker are possibly inclusions in the cast this time around. If you don't know them by name they are the original voices for Optimus Prime and Megatron (among others). Other news recently has been that various car companies have been expressing interest in lending their vehicles to be the various transformers.

Stephen

[Bram]

This rumor (even the Michael Bay part) has been floating around the net for some time now and it was even on imdb.com at some point.

Even so:

:rock:

[Matt]

I feel bad for raining on this parade but I feel I should remind that Michale Bay is the man who brought the world Pearl Harbor, for which he has still not apologized.

[Klep]

I feel bad for raining on this parade but I feel I should remind that Michale Bay is the man who brought the world Pearl Harbor, for which he has still not apologized.

Mistakes were made.  The Academy has also refused to apologize for giving that drek an Oscar.  Perhaps it is best if we just put the past behind us and move on.

[Bram]

Am I the only one who didn't totally hate that movie? The director's cut was far from awful, IMO. It had some decent special effects, some cool looking aeroplanes. So what if the revisionist version of events merely served as a backdrop for a flimsy romance story? I honestly don't see what's wrong with that. It's not a historical document in the way, say, Schindler's List is, but it was still good fun to watch.

Anyway, I'm not rooting for any academy awards for a Transformers movie. I'm hoping for decent special effects, some cool aeroplanes and a revisionist history that serves as the backdrop for a lot of kickass energon-induced pwnage. I have faith in Bay.

[Matt]

It would not surprise me if they completely neglected to mention energon. I refuse to get my hopes up.

[jpmeyer]

I feel bad for raining on this parade but I feel I should remind that Michale Bay is the man who brought the world Pearl Harbor, for which he has still not apologized.

But then again, he also DID make The Rock.

[Matt]

And, may I remind you, Armageddon.

[kirdape3]

The attack was so lame - you could tell that all the cruisers/destroyers were newer than WWII vintage (they were actually part of the Reserve fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor), and as such lacked the heavy gun turrets that the real ships would have.  I was not a fan of the movie really at all except Kate Beckinsale is HAWT.

[Bram]

Yes, and a lot of good those gun turrets did them in the real world :-/

Oh come on, it was just a movie, not a documentary. And a damn good looking one, too. It had a superd opening scene, lots of planes, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (the ugliest and strangely most attractive japanse actor alive), and a hot chick. How bad can that possibly be?

IMO people are just mimicing eachother in saying how bad they think it was. Apparently, its in vogue to crack down on people's hard work. I've seen the statement that Bay should 'apologize' for it all over the net, and I am honestly offended by it. Why should he apologise for something you don't like? Whose problem is that? And don't start the propaganda thing with me. Noone ever wanted Bruckheimer to apologise for Top Gun, which is just as bad from a propaganda viewpoint.

[TracerBullet]

Yes, and a lot of good those gun turrets did them in the real world :-/

Oh come on, it was just a movie, not a documentary. And a damn good looking one, too. It had a superd opening scene, lots of planes, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (the ugliest and strangely most attractive japanse actor alive), and a hot chick. How bad can that possibly be?

IMO people are just mimicing eachother in saying how bad they think it was. Apparently, its in vogue to crack down on people's hard work. I've seen the statement that Bay should 'apologize' for it all over the net, and I am honestly offended by it. Why should he apologise for something you don't like? Whose problem is that? And don't start the propaganda thing with me. Noone ever wanted Bruckheimer to apologise for Top Gun, which is just as bad from a propaganda viewpoint.

Here, I'll say why it's bad- Utterly predictable 1940's romance plot without any humanity to save it, sorta in a Attack of the Clones way.  Bad acting, bad dialogue, and the only cool part of the movie doesn't start until an hour or so in.  Even then, while the action is fun, that's CERTAINLY not enough to save a movie (read: Jerry Bruckheimerx1029301293).

[Joel Rojo]

You can say that you like something, but it doesn't make it good.

And lets not start with subjectivity and whatnot, because I don't want to start some philosophical debate, you can set criteria on what makes a movie good, you could take about the acting, the story and whatnot, and in most people's opinion this movie fails to deliver awfully.

Now, if you like it, that's cool, many of us get laughs out of movies like the one where Jesus slays vampires and shit, but one reckons that the movie just isn't good, and I think that, even when I try to be objective, Peal Harbor sucks, and so does Armageddon.

Then again, so do most big budget flicks lately, at least the epics. Troy, King Arthur and Alexander hurt brains bad.