The Director of Transformers ROTB says his Biggest Goal is to make you Care about the Robots

william-james88 wrote:By the way, while I really want this film to succeed, and I think it's doing everything right with the marketing, I truly think the Flash will wipe the floor with TF ROTB.

I think the Flash will be a juggernaut, an event type movie, and suck up all the hype or good word of mouth ROTB may have.

We'll see what happens but this is my prediction. ROTB will have a strong opening week and then a massive drop (like over 60%) for the following week and then just keep dropping and having little stay factor in cinemas, being pushed to digital quickly to recoup costs there.

Sadly, you're probably right. Though at least this (and GotG3) would be the only movies I'd probably see currently.

ZeroWolf wrote:

william-james88 wrote:By the way, while I really want this film to succeed, and I think it's doing everything right with the marketing, I truly think the Flash will wipe the floor with TF ROTB.

I think the Flash will be a juggernaut, an event type movie, and suck up all the hype or good word of mouth ROTB may have.

We'll see what happens but this is my prediction. ROTB will have a strong opening week and then a massive drop (like over 60%) for the following week and then just keep dropping and having little stay factor in cinemas, being pushed to digital quickly to recoup costs there.

Sadly, you're probably right. Though at least this (and GotG3) would be the only movies I'd probably see currently.

With a 7 year old girl and a 5 year old boy, I'll probably be at the movies all through the coming weeks. We've got Little Mermaid, ROTB, The Flash, Elemental and Indiana Jones. All films I'm planning on watching. It's really packed, the films sudios should have left room for these movies to breathe.

They won't get us to 'care' about the Transformers if they give them the usual Bayverse grossly exaggerated stereotype treatments. We shall see.

DeathReviews wrote:They won't get me to 'care' about the Transformers if they give me the usual Bayverse grossly exaggerated stereotype treatments. We shall see.

Fixed your post for you.

I doubt we'll see those stereotypes with the new director. We didn't with the last movie.

william-james88 wrote:

ZeroWolf wrote:

william-james88 wrote:By the way, while I really want this film to succeed, and I think it's doing everything right with the marketing, I truly think the Flash will wipe the floor with TF ROTB.

I think the Flash will be a juggernaut, an event type movie, and suck up all the hype or good word of mouth ROTB may have.

We'll see what happens but this is my prediction. ROTB will have a strong opening week and then a massive drop (like over 60%) for the following week and then just keep dropping and having little stay factor in cinemas, being pushed to digital quickly to recoup costs there.

Sadly, you're probably right. Though at least this (and GotG3) would be the only movies I'd probably see currently.

With a 7 year old girl and a 5 year old boy, I'll probably be at the movies all through the coming weeks. We've got Little Mermaid, ROTB, The Flash, Elemental and Indiana Jones. All films I'm planning on watching. It's really packed, the films sudios should have left room for these movies to breathe.

Forgot about half those movies to be fair, but yeah I've got no desire to see them (despite Keaton being my favourite movie batman, if the film had been only him or him in a batman beyond esque flick, I'd seen it in a heart beat). Only film my kids wanted to see recently was super mario. Oh and the oldest wants to see RotB

First-Aid wrote:

DeathReviews wrote:They won't get me to 'care' about the Transformers if they give me the usual Bayverse grossly exaggerated stereotype treatments. We shall see.

Fixed your post for you.

I doubt we'll see those stereotypes with the new director. We didn't with the last movie.

Many has expressed disdain for Wheeljack's design being an Urkel-derived stereotype.

I think RotB may have a chance just because the DC movies have been...lets say polarizing, for a while. Michael Keaton's Batman is a big draw, absolutely, but this is still really a Snyder universe movie, and those have been a mixed bag, at best, at the box office. Doesn't help that Ezra Miller has single handedly done everything he can to generate bad press for Flash, despite playing the title character.

It may still be successful, but I doubt it's going to be event movie successful.

That said, I'm more worried that this is going to end up like Bumblebee, where everyone who actually watches it agrees it was a pretty good film, but it also ends up kind of bombing because most people associate "Transformers movie" with "garbage" and avoid it.

Sabrblade wrote:

First-Aid wrote:

DeathReviews wrote:They won't get me to 'care' about the Transformers if they give me the usual Bayverse grossly exaggerated stereotype treatments. We shall see.

Fixed your post for you.

I doubt we'll see those stereotypes with the new director. We didn't with the last movie.

Many has expressed disdain for Wheeljack's design being an Urkel-derived stereotype.

True. My thought is this: these bots can change their form at will. Why not the ability to change their appearances too? People get plastic surgery, tattoos/piercings, change hair colors, get new glasses, new clothing, etc. WHy not artificial life forms too? DO they have to have a reason? Maybe Wheeljack arrived to Earth, saw Urkel and enjoyed the show and decided to change his look up. We're so used to these guys looking the same over and over (which is part of my current complaints with the Generations line as they continue to recycle the same characters over and over but don't vary the designs) that when something gets changed up, it's startling. It's kind of like cosplaying but with the ability to physically alter the structure of your body.

First-Aid wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

First-Aid wrote:

DeathReviews wrote:They won't get me to 'care' about the Transformers if they give me the usual Bayverse grossly exaggerated stereotype treatments. We shall see.

Fixed your post for you.

I doubt we'll see those stereotypes with the new director. We didn't with the last movie.

Many has expressed disdain for Wheeljack's design being an Urkel-derived stereotype.

True. My thought is this: these bots can change their form at will. Why not the ability to change their appearances too? People get plastic surgery, tattoos/piercings, change hair colors, get new glasses, new clothing, etc. WHy not artificial life forms too? DO they have to have a reason? Maybe Wheeljack arrived to Earth, saw Urkel and enjoyed the show and decided to change his look up. We're so used to these guys looking the same over and over (which is part of my current complaints with the Generations line as they continue to recycle the same characters over and over but don't vary the designs) that when something gets changed up, it's startling. It's kind of like cosplaying but with the ability to physically alter the structure of your body.

Can he also change his age? 'Cause he's gone from being a grownup in Bumblebee to a youngster in this movie.

Unless we're supposed to take that as a sign that this is a different Wheeljack and there are actually two 'bots with that name in the movies.

This sucks. I want to be excited for this movie. Who in charge is saying that they can't say reboot? This is a reboot whether you like it or not. And for how so many people trash on the "Scourge is Bay Prime" theory, wouldn't you rather that than them try to shoehorn this into being the same universe? It seems like an incredibly stupid route to go if they wanna say this is a prequel.

Didn't Starscream and Megatron change their bodies during the first IDW comics run? Starscream had a whole room full of possible bodies, as I recall.

i thought the most important thing was making it clear to people that this movie is a black and latino story?

Well if there's no continuity it's not the same universe is it?
Not that hard to manage.

I'm suprised to see many people arguing about continuity.
The aproach could be seens to be reference what people liked(the 2007 movie for example) and ignoring some of the parts that are more specific to a individual film(like The Last Knight retcons).

It's like how the original Marvel comics, the cartoon and the toy bios didn't always match, but are still considered the same franchise.

griftimus prime wrote:i thought the most important thing was making it clear to people that this movie is a black and latino story?

To the director and writers it is. Transformers are secondary. Hence my disappointment but not surprise.

Yes, I definitely want people to connect with the humans, too, because they now look like us more than ever in this film.

[/quote]

The fuck is that supposed to mean? Dumbass.

84everfan wrote:

Yes, I definitely want people to connect with the humans, too, because they now look like us more than ever in this film.

The **** is that supposed to mean? Dumbass.

This is just corporate word-salad from someone who clearly either don't pay attention nor care about what they're making.

Any Transformers fans, either hardcore or casual, can see that the Transformers were very "human" if not, completely "human" since Day One.

-Kanrabat- wrote:

84everfan wrote:

Yes, I definitely want people to connect with the humans, too, because they now look like us more than ever in this film.

The **** is that supposed to mean? Dumbass.

This is just corporate word-salad from someone who clearly either don't pay attention nor care about what they're making.

Any Transformers fans, either hardcore or casual, can see that the Transformers were very "human" if not, completely "human" since Day One.

Read the quote again. It's not talking about the movie's robot characters.

Sabrblade wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:

84everfan wrote:

Yes, I definitely want people to connect with the humans, too, because they now look like us more than ever in this film.

The **** is that supposed to mean? Dumbass.

This is just corporate word-salad from someone who clearly either don't pay attention nor care about what they're making.

Any Transformers fans, either hardcore or casual, can see that the Transformers were very "human" if not, completely "human" since Day One.

Read the quote again. It's not talking about the movie's robot characters.

Oh dear...
I should stop assuming people are generally logical and intelligent. My brain tuned out the WTF part.

So he wants the humains to be more... humain? What?
Is he admitting that he's written mindless NPCs this whole time?

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:

84everfan wrote:

Yes, I definitely want people to connect with the humans, too, because they now look like us more than ever in this film.

The **** is that supposed to mean? Dumbass.

This is just corporate word-salad from someone who clearly either don't pay attention nor care about what they're making.

Any Transformers fans, either hardcore or casual, can see that the Transformers were very "human" if not, completely "human" since Day One.

Read the quote again. It's not talking about the movie's robot characters.

Oh dear...
I should stop assuming people are generally logical and intelligent. My brain tuned out the WTF part.

So he wants the humains to be more... humain? What?
Is he admitting that he's written mindless NPCs this whole time?

No, he's saying the main human characters are black and latino, unlike before when they were always white. He's a black guy and says that the human characters look like him more than ever.

william-james88 wrote:No, he's saying the main human characters are black and latino, unlike before when they were always white. He's a black guy and says that the human characters look like him more than ever.

Holy shiiiiiiiit.
That director is not even aware of his own disgusting racism and narcissism.
Seriously, he straight up admit that he doesn't see white characters as human. That's pretty fukked-up.

Anyone who can't relate to a main character just because of their race or gender is seriously bigoted. If one wants to see "themselves" as the main character in a story, then they should just play a video game that allows you to create your own Character.

Jesus.

84everfan wrote:

Yes, I definitely want people to connect with the humans, too, because they now look like us more than ever in this film.

The **** is that supposed to mean? Dumbass.

Look like "us" rather than "them." Pretty damn racist statement had it come out of the mouth of a white dude, but stunning and brave from a POC. I guess everyone who shares the same skin color look the same to this guy? If you can't relate to a character unless he or she is your doppelganger, then that's your problem, not anyone else's. I don't recall anyone that looked anything like me in any of the Bayverse mess except maybe that fatass throwaway Hound, but since I'm not green, I guess I should be totally triggered.

Someone needs to tell this knucklehead to stop talking into microphones.

What in the world? Man’s just tryna say that it’s easier to relate to a character that looks like you, because race/ethnicity tends to run a little more than skin-deep. That shouldn’t be controversial.

Marketing for the Transformers Rise of the Beasts movie is ramping up with just a month to go before its release. While we got a lot of content for the maximals in their beast modes, and the autobots, we didn't see much of the terrorcons or the maximals in robot mode. Well, this new TV Spot rectifies that by starting with a shot of Scourge transforming while he rams into Optimus Prime. We then get a shot of Rhinox in bot mode charging with Cheetor transforming in the foreground.

There's bot a lot of excitement and doubt when it comes to this film. The excitement comes from the simple fact that this films appears to have the robots be the main characters in their movie for once, with only a couple of humans tagging along. At the same time, doubt comes from June being a stacked month for movie releases. Rise of the Beasts is being released right between The Little Mermaid's release week-end and the week-end that has both The Flash and Elemental, all family films. We'll see which of these films gets the bigger impact.

Hydrargyrus wrote:What in the world? Man’s just tryna say that it’s easier to relate to a character that looks like you, because race/ethnicity tends to run a little more than skin-deep. That shouldn’t be controversial.

THAT is the main problem. If you can only relate to a character that "look like you", you have a serious problem.

I've seem movies since ever.

I was Ripley fighting Aliens.
I was Axel Foley solving crimes in Miami.
I was Rambo, mowing down enemies.
I was a German Shepherd trying to find his way home.
I was a freaking TOASTER having a trippy journey.

If you want to "look at you", you narcissist, just get a mirror.

Frankly, I think this film is going to flop. I'm stoked for it myself, but no one I've talked to IRL even knows this movie exists. The thing has been barely marketed even though it was announced like two years ago. Hell, we got that first "teaser" back in December and then nothing until, what, like a few weeks ago until we finally got a "full" trailer? Furthermore, these trailers tells us absolutely nothing about the Maximals. Why are there suddenly animal Transformers? Chances are if you're under 30, you'll have no clue about what Beast Wars is and who these characters are. I used to work with a lot of teenagers who were self-professed big fans of Transformers, and none of them had any idea what Beast Wars was, and thought the idea was stupid when I explained it to them. There's also the notion that G1 fans (most of whom don't like these movies, anyway) are aging out of being regular theatre moviegoers, so I have to wonder who this film is even for. Hopefully kids will see this and immediately become fans of Ronnie Primal and Cheetor, but who knows?

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:G1 fans (most of whom don't like these movies, anyway) are aging out of being regular theatre moviegoers . . .

We're not ageing out. We just aren't impressed by CGI explosion porn and shallow, ham-fisted identity politics, which is what this is shaping up to be.

We grew up watching movies that redefined genres. Star Wars. Raiders of the Lost Ark. Alien. John Carpenter's The Thing. The Terminator. Not the Disney-fied stripmined versions or "reimagined for modern audiences" nonsense they're trying to sell us now. We're not too old to go to the theater for a good movie. We're smart enough to spot a shit-show when we see it and not waste our money on it. Nursing homes are expensive.

Brokebot wrote:

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:G1 fans (most of whom don't like these movies, anyway) are aging out of being regular theatre moviegoers . . .

We're not ageing out. We just aren't impressed by CGI explosion porn and shallow, ham-fisted identity politics, which is what this is shaping up to be.

Just like the Bay movies.

Brokebot wrote:

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:G1 fans (most of whom don't like these movies, anyway) are aging out of being regular theatre moviegoers . . .

We're not ageing out. We just aren't impressed by CGI explosion porn and shallow, ham-fisted identity politics, which is what this is shaping up to be.

We grew up watching movies that redefined genres. Star Wars. Raiders of the Lost Ark. Alien. John Carpenter's The Thing. The Terminator. Not the Disney-fied stripmined versions or "reimagined for modern audiences" nonsense they're trying to sell us now. We're not too old to go to the theater for a good movie. We're smart enough to spot a shit-show when we see it and not waste our money on it. Nursing homes are expensive.

You can take that stance if you like, but statistically people DO age-out of the movie theatre experience by and large. How many movies does you grandmother and great-grandmother go to see per year? Way less than when she was 20. I love all those movies you mentioned (I'm pushing 40 myself), and completely agree with you about being unimpressed by CGI spectacle. One of my favourite moviegoing experiences of the past several years was walking into a movie theatre in the middle of the day and watching The Peanut Butter Falcon.

EDIT: Representation in media is not a bad thing. White people are not the only race on earth. Get used to it.

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:Representation in media is not a bad thing. White people are not the only race on earth. Get used to it.

I never said it was, so stop trying to paint me as a racist. But when the skin color, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the cast is more important than the quality of the story, your movie will fail and deservedly so.

Brokebot wrote:

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:Representation in media is not a bad thing. White people are not the only race on earth. Get used to it.

I never said it was, so stop trying to paint me as a racist. But when the skin color, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the cast is more important than the quality of the story, your movie will fail and deservedly so.

Amen.

Brokebot wrote:

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:Representation in media is not a bad thing. White people are not the only race on earth. Get used to it.

I never said it was, so stop trying to paint me as a racist. But when the skin color, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the cast is more important than the quality of the story, your movie will fail and deservedly so.

I don't recall the director saying it's "more" important than all else. Just that it's one aspect of the movie that's important to him.

Sabrblade wrote:

Brokebot wrote:

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:Representation in media is not a bad thing. White people are not the only race on earth. Get used to it.

I never said it was, so stop trying to paint me as a racist. But when the skin color, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the cast is more important than the quality of the story, your movie will fail and deservedly so.

I don't recall the director saying it's "more" important than all else. Just that it's one aspect of the movie that's important to him.

Go back to page 1 and read about his first interview. He literally stated that this movie was "made for black and brown people." I called it out back then, and of course was labeled a racist by a couple narrow minded idiots here.

Regardless, that's not even a problem for me, there were non-whites in all the other movies and it wasn't a problem. My problem is that yet again the Transformers story gets short-changed.

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Brokebot wrote:

TOO MUCH ENERGON! wrote:Representation in media is not a bad thing. White people are not the only race on earth. Get used to it.

I never said it was, so stop trying to paint me as a racist. But when the skin color, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the cast is more important than the quality of the story, your movie will fail and deservedly so.

Amen.

And people should be allowed to discuss it. If a hollywood studio makes a diversity obsessed cringe-fest and calls it a movie (or a TV show), people should be free to call it out for what it is. Deciding that you don't like certain truths doesn't make them UN-true, nor unnoticed by the population. Forcing silence isn't creating 'unity', it's applying control - and wandering dangerously close to "peace through tyranny" (to loop it back to Tranformers-talk).

That said? The movie will probably make lots of money - after all, you never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator...

DeathReviews wrote:That said? The movie will probably make lots of money - after all, you never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator...

It'll make money, but will it make enough to get into the black. This has a $200 million production budget. Add to that marketing, distribution, and the theater's cut, they'll have to clear $500 million or more to get out of the red.

Brokebot wrote:

DeathReviews wrote:That said? The movie will probably make lots of money - after all, you never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator...

It'll make money, but will it make enough to get into the black. This has a $200 million production budget. Add to that marketing, distribution, and the theater's cut, they'll have to clear $500 million or more to get out of the red.

Yeah, it needs at least $500 M, but the good news is that it doesn't need much more than that either. Unlike the other big films, like Indy, Little Mermaid, Elemental and even Spider-verse, the film is very merchandise/licensing heavy. So any marketing push will contribute to sale of all things Transformers, not just the movie. I think we saw from past stats that Hasbro doubles in revenu from toy sales during movie years. If the film can prosper as a paid commercial for more consumer products, then that can be enough to justify making more of them.

The Flash movie is in the same boat as that where it's also very licensing and merchandise heavy.

william-james88 wrote:

Brokebot wrote:

DeathReviews wrote:That said? The movie will probably make lots of money - after all, you never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator...

It'll make money, but will it make enough to get into the black. This has a $200 million production budget. Add to that marketing, distribution, and the theater's cut, they'll have to clear $500 million or more to get out of the red.

Yeah, it needs at least $500 M, but the good news is that it doesn't need much more than that either. Unlike the other big films, like Indy, Little Mermaid, Elemental and even Spider-verse, the film is very merchandise/licensing heavy. So any marketing push will contribute to sale of all things Transformers, not just the movie. I think we saw from past stats that Hasbro doubles in revenu from toy sales during movie years. If the film can prosper as a paid commercial for more consumer products, then that can be enough to justify making more of them.

The Flash movie is in the same boat as that where it's also very licensing and merchandise heavy.

Even the worst movies like AoE and TLK broke records.

So for a Transformers movie to fail, it should be done on purpose.

I'm also thinking it will have a rough weekend given it comes out at the same time as the Flash and Spiderverse. That is going to be a very busy movie weekend

-Kanrabat- wrote:Even the worst movies like AoE and TLK broke records.

So for a Transformers movie to fail, it should be done on purpose.

TLK was such a turd burger that it's been blamed for affecting Bumblebee, which only cleared $468M against a budget of $130M.

I'm thinking that the Beasties will have a good opening weekend, then will have a second week nosedive. Hasbro may profit from it, but the movie itself will be a box office failure or barely profit.

Oh yeah, I remember that TLK did "fail" thus the Bee Movie "reboot".

-Kanrabat- wrote:Oh yeah, I remember that TLK did "fail" thus the Bee Movie "reboot".

Isn't it amazing that it's considered a failure because it didn't break a billion dollars during its theatrical run? Did DoTM and AoE (the 2 billionaires) spoil Hasbro's accountants that much?

Also, I don't have the link but I just read that Mark Wahlberg asked for and got a $40 million salary for TLK after AoE made that billion.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:Oh yeah, I remember that TLK did "fail" thus the Bee Movie "reboot".

Isn't it amazing that it's considered a failure because it didn't break a billion dollars during its theatrical run? Did DoTM and AoE (the 2 billionaires) spoil Hasbro's accountants that much?

Also, I don't have the link but I just read that Mark Wahlberg asked for and got a $40 million salary for TLK after AoE made that billion.

TLK is considered a failure because it lost money, only TF movie to do so.

william-james88 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:Oh yeah, I remember that TLK did "fail" thus the Bee Movie "reboot".

Isn't it amazing that it's considered a failure because it didn't break a billion dollars during its theatrical run? Did DoTM and AoE (the 2 billionaires) spoil Hasbro's accountants that much?

Also, I don't have the link but I just read that Mark Wahlberg asked for and got a $40 million salary for TLK after AoE made that billion.

TLK is considered a failure because it lost money, only TF movie to do so.

Seriously? Didn't it make close to a billion? The production costs couldn't be that high.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

william-james88 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:Oh yeah, I remember that TLK did "fail" thus the Bee Movie "reboot".

Isn't it amazing that it's considered a failure because it didn't break a billion dollars during its theatrical run? Did DoTM and AoE (the 2 billionaires) spoil Hasbro's accountants that much?

Also, I don't have the link but I just read that Mark Wahlberg asked for and got a $40 million salary for TLK after AoE made that billion.

TLK is considered a failure because it lost money, only TF movie to do so.

Seriously? Didn't it make close to a billion? The production costs couldn't be that high.

$605 million against a budget of $260 million. The Chinese market lost interest after AoE.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

william-james88 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:Oh yeah, I remember that TLK did "fail" thus the Bee Movie "reboot".

Isn't it amazing that it's considered a failure because it didn't break a billion dollars during its theatrical run? Did DoTM and AoE (the 2 billionaires) spoil Hasbro's accountants that much?

Also, I don't have the link but I just read that Mark Wahlberg asked for and got a $40 million salary for TLK after AoE made that billion.

TLK is considered a failure because it lost money, only TF movie to do so.

Seriously? Didn't it make close to a billion? The production costs couldn't be that high.

No, not close at all. And yes, production cost was ridiculously high, 40 M alone went to Wahlberg.

The only thing TLK succeeded at was finally convincing Hasbro to let go of Bay as director, like he wanted ever since DOTM.

william-james88 wrote:No, not close at all. And yes, production cost was ridiculously high, 40 M alone went to Wahlberg.

ah the joys of movie producers having to pay over-rated actors.

And by over-rated I mean, they could have slotted any generic actor into that role. There was nothing amazing about what he did. Most people will be going to see these movies for the Transformers, not the big name actors anyway.

Burn wrote:

william-james88 wrote:No, not close at all. And yes, production cost was ridiculously high, 40 M alone went to Wahlberg.

ah the joys of movie producers having to pay over-rated actors.

And by over-rated I mean, they could have slotted any generic actor into that role. There was nothing amazing about what he did. Most people will be going to see these movies for the Transformers, not the big name actors anyway.

Something that just can't get into the heads of those Hollywood pundits.
That's why we got Chris Pratt Mario.

The age of the Hollywood Superstar is over for years now, but Hollywood desperately wants it to come back. And the necromancy keeps failing.

There's been rumblings of a live action Multiverse through rumours and wishful thinking but it's finally officially mentioned. It is part of Unicron's official bio, where he is mentioned to be the most omnipotent "force in the multiverse." The bio also mentions his intention for the Terrocons to get a key that "opens a portal in space and time".

You can read all the bios below. Though please be aware that while they do come from Hasbro, some parts are just copy pasted from TF Wiki.