TRANSFORMERS 2 Rumblings/Filming! (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Agreed.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Edwin, I wholeheartedly disagree. They had a good script going in the first (a boy and his car) section and threw it out the window for the action later on.

A good script for a movie based on a toy contains the same ingredients as a good script for a literary adaptation. Motivation, narrative, themes. They can be simple and direct, but they should at least be present.

I reject the notion that our choices are mindless popcorn like Transformers and Oscar winning No Country for Old Men. It's not binary, and your strawman example is a poor one. There are gradations between the extremes.

Batman, which is also a ridiculous concept, managed to find a smart script. Iron Man was very simple, but effective. Speed Racer was 10 times the script Transformers was, and still managed to outshine it visually.

The bar is NOT the source material...it is the script. Pirates was based on a RIDE.

No offense, Edwin and John, but I consider that a cop-out excuse for the flimsy effort to make a coherent and tolerable narrative.

 

[Brent M]

I'm not going to get into another debate with you that will inevitably end with us arguing over Titanic, but I still contend that Bay is better at blowing up stuff than Cameron. T2 is one of my all-time favorite films and other Cameron movies like Terminator and True Lies are better than any of Bay's work, but when it comes to pure non-stop action I still think Bay does a better job.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

The boy and his car concept is still present in the released film, Chuck, I don't see how you think it's missing.

I simply don't agree that the film is mindless, the characters are well defined and their purposes and motives known, the Decepticons want to take over and rule the Earth while Sam and the Autobots want to stop them.

Those are themes and motivations as well defined as Skynet wanting to exterminate mankind and Sarah, Terminator and John trying to prevent it are.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

This has nothing to do with Titanic. If it did, I could say that Titanic is 1000000 times better than Pearl Harbor and that would be that

This is about action-specific directing. And I feel that, based on his body of work, Cameron is still better than Bay. We'll know in December, won't we?

And if you feel the motivations and structure of TF are the same as Terminator and T2, John, we'll have to disagree. Skynet is not assigned a voice or dialogue. It is simple, and Michael Biehn's basic characterization of the war is brilliant economy. Sarah's themes are much MORE defined, and build from one movie to another

Here is a question. How did a random Decepticon tank get to the little city for the final battle? What happened to the police car? These are simple things that a concerned director would address, at least visually. Bay doesn't care. Details like continuity are irrelevant to the man. That's OK, but let's not pretend that TF was anything other than mindless action. Only the superior direction marks it apart from Van Helsing or it's ilk. I don't see why a decent script is so hard to generate for the film. Especially with that budget.

EDIT: That is more than enough discussion on a movie essentially designed to sell toys to kids and adults. Those who enjoyed the first have a lot to be excited about, no doubt.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I would argue that it's a movie designed to entertain and have a good time at but that would be crazy.

As for your questions, Devastator could have reached the city any number of ways considering that he probably didn't remain in vehicle mode for the entire journey.

And who knows what happened to Barricade, perhaps Megatron sent him on another mission or he was a coward and ran from the fight. This is something that can be answered with a little imagination on the viewers part.

As long as we're on the subject of plausabilities in films, how can the T-1000 drive a semi off a bridge and have it still be operational? Likewise with Arnold's Harley? How can there be one huge cauldron of molten steel in a steel mill when even experts will tell you that in actuality no such item exists in steel mills? How can Sarah press the button to send the T-800 down when she actually pressed the one to send it up?

See what i'm getting at? Many films, even brilliant one's, have things in them that don't always make sense.

 

[Cory S.]

Inspector,

Barracide is the Audi you see in the TV spot....

 

[TravisR]

Me too and I'm not even remotely a fan of Michael Bay. Of course, like Chuck says they want to sell toys but I really do think that Bay first and foremost wants to make a movie that he considers a cool time and the rest of the stuff (like toys and marketing tie-ins) are something he has to deal with.

 

[Diallo B]

this debate is pointless.

people expecting plot development the likes of 'the godfather 2' need to make sure that you don't ever see this movie as you will obviously be disappointed.

seriously, i am a stickler for intelligent movies. i annoy the hell out of my peers with my stance on many movies. but get real, for as many faults of the first movie it was still a great movie.

i am very surprised that so many people here are expecting oscar worthy buzz for a movie with the background of transformers.

the real issue here is that many of the people here at htf have a jones for bashing on bay..........

 

[Edwin-S]

It's cool. I respect your opinion, even if I don't entirely agree with it. For example: the boy and his car theme is present from beginning to end in the film. It appears that you would have liked to see a film that focussed more on developing the boy's relationship with the car, but as I see it that would require every other character to take a back seat to the kid and Bumblebee.

For a Transformers movie that would have spelt death. The audience for Transfomers were expecting to see as many Autobots and Decepticons on the screen as possible. The expectation was for a bloody big smash up to occur. Bay's name would have been mud if he had turned Transformers into a boy and his car character piece: not that Bay is capable of actually creating such a film.

Bay's strength is action, action, and more action. When he tries to create a character driven movie you get something like Pearl Harbor.

 

[Diallo B]

this is exactly the truth right here.

and in all honesty fans of the movie would have been ecstatic if 'the boy' would have gotten crushed by megatron. nobody gave a damn about shia's character.

 

[Edwin-S]

Yes. I'm pretty sure there were probably a lot of fans that were disappointed when Shia's character survived; Mostly because it confirmed that his annoying character would be back for round two.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Not true in my case, I liked Sam, I thought he was funny.

Yep, you know a Bay film is approaching when the "Bay sucks!"-"no he doesn't!" arguments start.

 

[Holadem]

This has to be the single most irritating straw man in all of movie-discussion-land.

Good grief.

--
H

 

[RobertR]

Good grief is right. Do people really think there's nothing between "mindless drivel focused only on blowing lots of things up" and "great movie drama with top notch acting and writing"? An intelligent action film is NOT possible? Really?

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I personally never stated that.

 

[Diallo B]

as inspector hammer stated, i am not saying that either.

i would appreciate a more intelligent action film. imo, the matrix sequels tried to inject some intelligence but were lambasted for it. bladerunner is one of the more polarizing sci-fi action films. some were bored to death. others really enjoyed the pacing.

my point is to set realistic expectations. and an additional point is the majority of people in here are complaining about m. bay and looking for a reason to string him up.

i would appreciate a great intelligent transformers flick. i just know that there is not a high probabilty of that happening. i have to be concerned about what i control in my sphere of the universe. and that is whether i will see the movie or not and thus enjoy it or not.

i really enjoyed the first one and caught many subtle nuances that folks not as ingrained in sci-fi or the transformers universe may have understood. the intelligence quotient for this type of movie really depends on your understanding of the material in the first place.

there was a bunch of dumb stuff that happened in the first movie. but far more things happened to make the movie the success that it was.

enjoy a WATCHABLE/ENTERTAINING movie for that which it is intended.

 

[Diallo B]

holadem,

your opinions here on htf i often respect. so your statement has me intrigued.

can you help me understand your proclamation that my statement is a straw man argument? i don't see how i am using hyperbole to make a point here.....

 

[TravisR]

^ I can't speak for Holadem but given what he quoted from you, I think he means that there's a difference between wanting a movie that is a fun and exciting ride that doesn't insult your intelligence and an Oscar-caliber movie like The Godfather Part II.

 

[RobertR]

I agree. It does NOT necessarily follow that a good, intelligent script means you are striving for Godfather-level sophistication and "Oscar buzz", which is what the quoted post clearly implied.