Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

[RainyDayMan2k]

That is one ugly-ass wordmark for the new movie. I really hope Hasbro isn't planning on adopting that franchise-wide.

[#Sideways#]

Were Optimus' eyes purple after the last movie? Or perhaps there is something... Darker at play, if you catch my drift.

The font kinda reminds me of when they moved from G1 to G2 and Headmasters and such. But for some reason, it kind of feels a little generic. Maybe it's the sword or something, I dunno.

I've always rather been neutral on the Bay films, but I am beginning to think that they should just reboot the whole thing and start a cinematic universe the proper way: On Cybertron. They could even do standalone spotlight films to start things off, like Marvel. Say, a Decepticon spotlight film detailing the rise of Megatron, then an Autobot film to show Optimus' origin story.

But perhaps I'm just tired of the storytelling these movies give us. Doesn't it seem to always start with something along the lines of "Millions of years ago, there was... The CUBE" or "Millions of years ago, there were... The PRIMES" and so on? It almost feels like there was no direction that they wanted to go initially, that every movie was meant to stand alone. The sad part is, the movies do stand alone, and not in a good way. I mean, Bay does a good job of killing off pretty much any important villain at the end of almost every movie.

I know I sound rather salty, but hey, I didn't say I wasn't looking forward to seeing how this movie will develop. It could be really good! I hope it is! I didn't think I'd like Prime at first, but it quickly became one of my favorite Transformers shows. (And honestly I think the TCU could take a few pages out of Prime's book) Marvel movies used to suck really bad, and look how far they've come. But I do think that it should just be rebooted.

[Slashercon]

and it all starts with the one thing they've been lacking from day one, solid writing and solid acting/direction.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

I can't quantify that as well as some others probably could, but, I'm pretty sure that we all know the general rules, you know, quality writing, a coherent plot, depthful characters... like I said, it's cool if you like them, I like them too, but they are not 'good' movies'.

I believe the more appropriate term for this would be "well constructed movies".

[Hellscream9999]

I've always rather been neutral on the Bay films, but I am beginning to think that they should just reboot the whole thing and start a cinematic universe the proper way: On Cybertron. They could even do standalone spotlight films to start things off, like Marvel. Say, a Decepticon spotlight film detailing the rise of Megatron, then an Autobot film to show Optimus' origin story.

That would've been amazing! I mean, Prime did that same story through a bunch of still images, but managed to convey more feelings and characterization than all 4 movies to date

[Hellscream9999]

and it all starts with the one thing they've been lacking from day one, solid writing and solid acting/direction.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

I can't quantify that as well as some others probably could, but, I'm pretty sure that we all know the general rules, you know, quality writing, a coherent plot, depthful characters... like I said, it's cool if you like them, I like them too, but they are not 'good' movies'.

I believe the more appropriate term for this would be "well constructed movies".

Fair enough, but even a well constructed movie can miss the mark of 'good', but I fully agree.

[SlyTF1]

and it all starts with the one thing they've been lacking from day one, solid writing and solid acting/direction.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

I can't quantify that as well as some others probably could, but, I'm pretty sure that we all know the general rules, you know, quality writing, a coherent plot, depthful characters... like I said, it's cool if you like them, I like them too, but they are not 'good' movies'.

So, how can you enjoy a movie and still say it's not good? I've never understood that. I just can't process that. Like, why does there have to be a checklist of elements a movie has to have for it to be good? Why can't it just be good because you enjoy it? People put so much stock into the structure of an idea, but what about the idea itself? You can't just enjoy watching a movie because you enjoy watching it?

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

Compare these two tidbits from Age of Extinction:
a) One of the cast, Drift, was never mentioned by name during the movie's 150 minute runtime.
b) There was apparently time for a scene outlining exceptions to the age of consent present in Texan legislature (although the details were off).

While those aren't the only problems, or even the largest, I think it's fair to say they're clear symptoms of the lack of clear goals/vision/structure in making the film.

a) So? His character was never the focus. Sure it would have been nice to have his name mentioned, but I don't feel like anything in the movie would have been made better if they had mentioned his name.

b) Again, so? It's literally a 20 second conversation in a 3 hour long movie, and it serves a purpose to the story. Isn't that what people want? Things that serve the story?

[Sabrblade]

So, how can you enjoy a movie and still say it's not good? I've never understood that. I just can't process that.

This song explains such a concept:

[Hellscream9999]

and it all starts with the one thing they've been lacking from day one, solid writing and solid acting/direction.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

I can't quantify that as well as some others probably could, but, I'm pretty sure that we all know the general rules, you know, quality writing, a coherent plot, depthful characters... like I said, it's cool if you like them, I like them too, but they are not 'good' movies'.

So, how can you enjoy a movie and still say it's not good? I've never understood that. I just can't process that. Like, why does there have to be a checklist of elements a movie has to have for it to be good? Why can't it just be good because you enjoy it? People put so much stock into the structure of an idea, but what about the idea itself? You can't just enjoy watching a movie because you enjoy watching it?

Well, it's difference of being something being 'good' and 'liking' something. These movies missed many of the marks that are taught in movie-making 101 in college, they're a mess; I'm almost certain they could be dissected and then used over the course of several lectures of how not to make movies and why.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

Compare these two tidbits from Age of Extinction:
a) One of the cast, Drift, was never mentioned by name during the movie's 150 minute runtime.
b) There was apparently time for a scene outlining exceptions to the age of consent present in Texan legislature (although the details were off).

While those aren't the only problems, or even the largest, I think it's fair to say they're clear symptoms of the lack of clear goals/vision/structure in making the film.

a) So? His character was never the focus. Sure it would have been nice to have his name mentioned, but I don't feel like anything in the movie would have been made better if they had mentioned his name.

b) Again, so? It's literally a 20 second conversation in a 3 hour long movie, and it serves a purpose to the story. Isn't that what people want? Things that serve the story?

SO! That's the point, there are certain fundamental keys to making a well-constructed, good script, and not mentioning a lead characters name, and instead cramming in stupid sh|t like point b are critical mistakes in creating a solid script. They could have easily remedied it by having his daughter be an adult, then the conversation would've been at least more relatable

[RevTibe]

and it all starts with the one thing they've been lacking from day one, solid writing and solid acting/direction.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

I can't quantify that as well as some others probably could, but, I'm pretty sure that we all know the general rules, you know, quality writing, a coherent plot, depthful characters... like I said, it's cool if you like them, I like them too, but they are not 'good' movies'.

So, how can you enjoy a movie and still say it's not good? I've never understood that. I just can't process that. Like, why does there have to be a checklist of elements a movie has to have for it to be good? Why can't it just be good because you enjoy it? People put so much stock into the structure of an idea, but what about the idea itself? You can't just enjoy watching a movie because you enjoy watching it?

In the words of one of my favorite critics, YMS, "I like movies that get better the more you think about them." There's nothing wrong with enjoying a movie that's kinda in shambles, but it's worthwhile to apply a bit of analysis. It doesn't negate the enjoyment of flawed stuff, and also provides a newfound enjoyment for the less flawed stuff - a win-win.

Also, keep in mind that we're discussing the potential of these movies if better executed - having a tighter focus, better management of plot and pacing etc. wouldn't damage any of the positive qualities the movies have; it would enhance them.

[Seibertron]

Great title. Bad cartoonish font.

[Slashercon]

and it all starts with the one thing they've been lacking from day one, solid writing and solid acting/direction.

Ok, what would these movies have to do to be considered "good"?

I can't quantify that as well as some others probably could, but, I'm pretty sure that we all know the general rules, you know, quality writing, a coherent plot, depthful characters... like I said, it's cool if you like them, I like them too, but they are not 'good' movies'.

Why can't it just be good because you enjoy it?
If someone enjoys Biodome, Garbage Pail Kids, Home Alone 4, does that mean that these are good movies? Heck, If I watched and enjoyed a video of Iggy Izalea falling off the stage for two hours on a loop and called it a movie, would it necessarily be considered a "good movie"?

There's also a term that means enjoying something bad for different reasons than anticipated. I enjoy Batman and Robin...as the major train-wreck of a film that it is. It's NOT a good movie in my eyes, but I can still laugh at the stupidity on screen and enjoy it. This isn't the case with all movies. But hey don't sweat it. You live in a world where what you enjoy = perfection. Even if there are even little errors like scene transitions or continuity errors,
the movie MUST be perfect, because you enjoy it. Now if you THINK a movie is good because you enjoy it, that's different. That's a clear cut opinion; something we ALL have. But when people start trying to pass off their opinions as facts, then I have a problem. A fact is something that can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, like the sky is blue, there are 3 colors on the American flag, and that movies have been loved and admired seemingly since their inception. Saying that a movie is PERFECT, cannot be a fact, since taste is often subjective and movies are often filled with errors, big and small, story wise, character wise, acting wise, or visuals and music. and even if a movie delivers in one area, if can't necessarily be guaranteed to 100% succeed in others.

I guess what I'm trying to say is...do not confuse fact with opinions and do not mistake enjoyment for someone else definition of quality. People at times will be able to admit to liking something that they feel they shouldn't or feel that isn't "good".

[Burn]

*sigh* Just for once I would like to see a news post about the movie NOT devolve into ANOTHER discussion about whether the previous movies were good or bad.

It's simple, some people liked them, some people didn't. There's been years of the same discussion across various threads, can't you all just talk about the CURRENT piece of news instead of rehashing the same stupid debate?

[Slashercon]

*sigh* Just for once I would like to see a news post about the movie NOT devolve into ANOTHER discussion about whether the previous movies were good or bad.

It's simple, some people liked them, some people didn't. There's been years of the same discussion across various threads, can't you all just talk about the CURRENT piece of news instead of rehashing the same stupid debate?

to be fair, i was even just talking about the old movies, I was talking about film in general an d difference of opinions. However, I can see that the thread has gone off track. So my apologies for my overzealous comments.

[Hellscream9999]

*sigh* Just for once I would like to see a news post about the movie NOT devolve into ANOTHER discussion about whether the previous movies were good or bad.

It's simple, some people liked them, some people didn't. There's been years of the same discussion across various threads, can't you all just talk about the CURRENT piece of news instead of rehashing the same stupid debate?

We did: the font's weird; transformer knights rock

[Slashercon]

As for the actual title...does it really even matter.Given what little we know from Aoe and the whole concept of cybertronian knights, will this even have a payoff that will leave me satisfied? Probably not, and sadly with the last movie toyline being of little interest to me, I don't even know what the next film will bring. I guess it's too much to ask for the bots to have their own character moments and arcs, but that's for a another discussion.

[Hellscream9999]

As for the actual title...does it really even matter.Given what little we know from Aoe and the whole concept of cybertronian knights, will this even have a payoff that will leave me satisfied? Probably not, and sadly with the last movie toyline being of little interest to me, I don't even know what the next film will bring. I guess it's too much to ask for the bots to have their own character moments and arcs, but that's for a another discussion.

Well, considering what little payoff we've gotten to the dinobots, the primes, The Fallen and Devs, I'd say not at all, besides, the Age of Extinction didn't even have anything to do with the overall themes of the movie, did it?

[Fires_Of_Inferno]

Personally, I'm not going to bother seeing it in theaters unless I hear a hell of a lot of good about it. I've been disappointed and unhappy with the movie franchise for a while with the only exception being DoTM. I'll probably buy into the toys if they interest me and I have cash. Otherwise I'm done with the Bay films.

Any word on who the writing team is for this? I've been out of the loop for a while about this movie. If it's the same guys as AoE then I'm DEFINITELY out!

[Madeus Prime]

Personally, I'm not going to bother seeing it in theaters unless I hear a hell of a lot of good about it. I've been disappointed and unhappy with the movie franchise for a while with the only exception being DoTM. I'll probably buy into the toys if they interest me and I have cash. Otherwise I'm done with the Bay films.

Any word on who the writing team is for this? I've been out of the loop for a while about this movie. If it's the same guys as AoE then I'm DEFINITELY out!

Same here I'd rather spend my, what, $30 bucks for a ticket, on two Titans Return figures.

[Rodimus Prime]

The font is a step back, the title is average at best. However, I believe "The Last Knight" is someone other than Optimus.

[ZeroWolf]

transformer knights rock

If we're talking knights of unicron then hell yeah or am I the only one who liked that idea?

Moving on...

Liking this so far but it will probably be a dvd watch for me as I doubt my cinema buddy or the missus will want to watch it. Also surprised no one has thought that this is the way hasbro will introduce ROM the space knight to cinema audiences

[Va'al]

transformer knights rock

If we're talking knights of unicron then hell yeah or am I the only one who liked that idea?

Moving on...

Liking this so far but it will probably be a dvd watch for me as I doubt my cinema buddy or the missus will want to watch it. Also surprised no one has thought that this is the way hasbro will introduce ROM the space knight to cinema audiences

Boom - there you have it.

What if, indeed, this is the beginning of the wider cinematic universe?

[Ironhidensh]

*sigh* Just for once I would like to see a news post about the movie NOT devolve into ANOTHER discussion about whether the previous movies were good or bad.

It's simple, some people liked them, some people didn't. There's been years of the same discussion across various threads, can't you all just talk about the CURRENT piece of news instead of rehashing the same stupid debate?

All it is, is a title and a font. Not much to discuss. Also, as this is a continuation of a series, the previous four movies are AL we have to judge on, and it's not a good legacy.

That said, this news does not impress of incoudage me. In fact, until the news is "a complete reboot of the film franchise", I can safely say I won't be impressed.

[frogbat]

the title is good.. the logo and the sword look quite cheap though

maybe if it were a jedi knight it'd be even more interesting hmmm

[alex1986lunatic]

Omg...Can these movies get any worse??

[Va'al]

This thread is going to be an endless source of joy for the next year and a bit.