Page 1 of 3

Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:33 pm
by Naka
I was just watching ROTF again and I was thinking about all the things that have to do with the movies that I didn't like. So I would like to hear what you don't like, or what bugs you, about the movies. I can be something about the toys, the characters, the robot designs, the plot, etc. So just let it all out below.

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:27 pm
by ironrod prime
personaly ive got nothing against the movies in fact i like em both

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:13 pm
by Blademan91
A lot of my transformers friends said that the only problems that they had was the fact that megs didnt become galvatron when he was revived, and how easy bay made the fallen die. I remember his War Within self was a bad-ass. As for myself, I didnt have any problems with either movie.

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:09 am
by Sabrblade
The first movie gave way too much screen time to the humans and not enough to the bots, battle scenes aside.

Here's what I previously wrote about ROTF.
Sabrblade wrote:When I first saw ROTF, I thought it was the coolest, most awesome movie ever. Then I saw again, and still thought it was cool. Then the third time was in IMAX, so what was added in looked pretty sweet, but the film's overall coolness started to waver with me.

Now, I look back at ROTF and see that it could have been done a bit better.

One thing that I will forever defend about the movie is that, in places where the first movie failed, the second one suceeded. The first movie had so few robots, ROTF had many. The Deceptiocns had barely any charatcerization in the first film, but a much more decent amount of it in the second. There were way too many main human characters over robot robot characters in the first movie, whereas ROTF focused more on the bots (even if it was mostly BB, Optimus, Skids, Mudflap, and Jetfire).

On the other hand, where this movie failed, the first suceeded too. The plot of the first movie seemed done better. The humor wasn't as crude or as forced in the first film (granted the first film did have some crude and forced humor in it, but just less of it than ROTF).

In regards to Skids, Mudflap, and Wheelie, when I first saw the movie, I thought they were hilarious (aside from their cussing and crudeness, that will never be funny). But now, they kinda bug me because they got most of the spotlight instead of some of some other, cooler looking characters like Sideswipe, Arcee, or even Jolt (all three of which I was looking forward to seeing charatcerized in this movie, but sadly had little screentime of such - Jolt never even spoke and appeared in Robot Mode only once or twice).

But my biggest gripe with ROTF is something that many would consider to be a very minor thing, but it it's a major problem in my book: the vulgarity. I cannot stress this enough. "Obscenity" =/= "Funny"! "Cussing" =/= "Funny"! They are both "Not Funny". And as the Nostalgia Critic taught us in his review of the Super Mario Bros. movie, "Not Funny" + "Not Funny" = "NOT SLAGGIN' FUNNY!!!"
  • The two dogs messing around was disturbing.
  • Sam's mom getting "high" was both dumb and time-consuming.
  • Some of Skids' and Mudflap's dialogue jokes were bothersome.
  • Simmons' full on exposed thong-clad butt was irritating and disgusting.
  • Jetifre "farting" a parachute was lame.
  • Wheelie on Mikaela's leg was stupid.
  • Devastator's wrecking ball scrotum was both pathetic and illogical (none of his components even have wrecking balls!).
All of these and more make up probably 10% of the movie's content, but that's still an unnecessary 10% that could have been used for plot progression, character development, action, drama, anything! Good humor is not something that can be forced, but is something that comes about naturally.

Other than that, the movie was an epic, action-packed, popcorn movie that's good for an evening of fun and thrills.
Though over time, I don't really find it all that fun anymore since I've coem to experience more enjoyable stories with more likeable characters.

Bot-wise, here's my opinion on the characters:
For the Autobots, nobody. Seriously, none the Autobots in the live-action movies really appealed to me. Not even Optimus. Sure, I thought he was awesome when I first saw him, but now he's just another Optimus Prime to me. Bumblebee barely spoke, and I like characters who talk. Ironhide, Ratchet, Sideswipe, and Arcee were all underused. The former two we know a little bit about, but these four overall didn't click with me. Jazz was killed off too soon, so I didn't get to know him that well. Jolt was barely on screen, so he's an unknown. Jetfire overplayed the "angry senile war vet", and his only real crowning moment is when he kills himself for Optimus (and we've seen much better and cooler self-sacrifices before). The Twins and Wheelie were annoying to me. If they weren't so... crude, I may have enjoyed them more, but they just come off as irritating instead.

For the Decepticons, ditto. Again, I didn't find any of the Decepticon characters all that appealing either. Between both movies, the only ones who got any real dialogue were Megatron, Starscream, The Fallen, and Soundwave, but they were all cliche villains who didn't stand out as appealing characters to me. I know that Barricade and Demolishor each spoke in their respective films, but they were merely a few sentences that tell us little-to-nothing of their personalities. And any other Decepticons with voice actors just growled, spoke nigh-incomprehensively (like Frenzy), or just made random noises. Let's face it, the humans were the main stars of these movies. :roll:

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2011 7:16 am
by CYLON (13)
What I didn't like about the movies was:

* Optimus' new design, even though I know it was necessary.

* The Fallen's quick defeat at the end of ROTF. (Watching it now actually. :p ) Although, with the writer's strike happening at the time of the film's production I can understand why it is what it is. Truthfully, for such a major hurdle I think they did a pretty good job.

* No more Megan Fox, technically a gripe of the upcoming film...but still.

* 'Bots need more screen time/more battle time.

Otherwise I thought they were awesome. :grin:

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 2:05 am
by cyberwuss
Not really a problem with the movies themselves, but more some of the misconceptions that are actually popular in real life being in the first movie. What I mean is when Rachel Taylor's character discovers the Blackout/Frenzy hack going on at the pentagon she tells the SecDef that it would take a supercomputer 20 years to hack the passwords on the network. The way the movie handled it would actually work probably from the Transformers point of view if that type of technology existed at all. It is totally the human perspective I have the problem with. Even a "DNA based computer" attached to a network would still have a limit set by the speed of the servers response. So if you have a computer that had 1000000000THz as a hacker seeking the password on a regular network, even if you had a network fast enough to send its password guess attempts full speed, you are limited by the password checking and response time of the server side, which in the movie wasn't really that fast of a supercomputer. An analogy would be a bouncer at a nightclub who can find a name on his letin list in 10 seconds and let you through the door, but if you go up and are trying to guess someone else's name on the bouncer's list by spitting out 1000 words a second, the bouncer won't even understand you and will never let you through and even if he does it will take him 10 seconds to find each of the 1000 names a second you have said. The way Transformers side is OK is that theoretically, they could have a technology that used an electromagnetic wave (or something similar) go through the hardlines to the servers hard drive and do some high tech things to download the entire hard drive on the server through a kind of VERY high tech radar analysis system that would probably leave the hard drive on the pentagon server toasted into the Transformer's (Blackout/Frenzy) memory where it could be analyzed at full speed from there then cracked in a single try since the password is on the harddrive, decrypted in the Transformer, and hacked in a single attempt once the password is known. The film actually handled this really well with the energy waves coming from Blackout's fist to the computer network hardlines in Bayformers 1, but the misconception by one of the characters is a popular one held by alot of people who don't know any better than to leave out the limitations of the server. Such high amounts of traffic can really happen on some networks and this is what causes certain types of Denial of Service attacks that have dropped sites like amazon around the internet boom in the mid 90s as an example of the limitation itself in real life. For the most part all of the other problems with the movies are either preference problems (ie, the person complaining just doesn't like the way it looks or sounds or acts) or are mistakes in the dialogue or similar misconceptions as this one (Devastator was really Brawl in movie one and the specified abyss was not the deepest known place on earth.) Most of that can still be explained by the fact that the earth all this takes place on is FICTIONAL and that maybe on that specific fictional earth the place with that name really is the deepest. Similar to how Marvel and DC comics handled its different worlds so that they don't conflict with each other. The one on yahoo movies was really lame to me because it was complaining about in ROTF where the railgun shoots Devastator on the pyramid that the red sea / ocean isn't visible from that place in the desert. The thing is, it doesn't have to be as long as they have proper GPS coordinates of Devastator as broadcast by Simmons, because the railgun shot will follow the gravitational pull of the earth in a curve, similar to the way sattelites move, and this could have actually been calculated, especially by an advanced military that can use smartbombs and laser guided weapons like in the rest of the movies. Other than that I don't really have any prefrence problems, because I'm not hasbro or michael bay and it isn't my movie to say "Well the art was terrible" but I can say "Rachel Taylor's character lied about DNA based computers" as much as I want from my point of view.

OH ONE MORE THING: The only thing that really got me upset was the stupid way computer technology is depicted when Rachel (Maggie in the movie) takes the flash drive with the signal to her DDR playing friend's house and they are all WoWing over the decrypted files because a decryption program would never look like that with all the flying letters and stuff unless the programmer was extremely eccentric! This portrayal is common in movies though where special effects are more important even on fake computer screens than being realistic about what it would really look like.

And that is all I have to say about that for now.

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 2:28 am
by cyberwuss

I can agree with most of your viewpoints, even though I still enjoy watching ROTF every now and then. I think the biggest problem most people had was with the vulgarity. Let's face it, vulgarity has been a mainstay in movies almost since they were invented, especially action ones like Robocop, Terminator, Die Hard, etc etc. I think the problem with ROTF was that it was trying to hard to be a mixture of a grown up action movie and a kids toy movie and the lines blurred so bad that it seemed like a kids movie with vulgarity from an adult action movie. I would say the screen time of the vulgar stuff was less than 10 percent (Still annoying but more like 3 or 4 percent of the total movie time) whereas in a standard 80s/early 90s action film it would have been about 30-40 percent of the movie.) In essence it was a new type of movie that way and that is alot of where it stumbled because such a movie hadn't been produced for a worldwide audience before. It would be like making a horror movie like Saw 2 and making action figures of the murderer dude who wears that mask and sets up the trap game and marketing them in the preschooler section of walmart, it just doesn't work that way, for anyone lol.

I also agree with the robot characterizations, but that is very G1 in and of itself, with the only person really getting a deep character being Optimus Prime and a select few of the others with a special episode designed just for them. I thought ROTF did better with showing Optimus Prime's classic character traits and staying some away from Bumblebee for the first half of the movie and the last 5 minutes when he returns than the first movie did, which was focused entirely on Bumblebee. Megatron has been different than his G1 self with the Fallen acting more like Megatron from G1, but Starscream was also G1 accurate like Prime. These movies aren't about totally changing all the classic ideas of these old characters after all, it is mostly about making them look a little different. That being said, most of them did just grunt a bit as you pointed out haha!

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 10:15 pm
by Mechabreaker
My biggest problem with the movies is the unfunny "comedy".

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 11:53 pm
by ironrod prime
Mechabreaker wrote:My biggest problem with the movies is the unfunny "comedy".

i prefer to call it a forced comedic effect

and to be fair that only happens in rotf

in the first movie the comedy was suttle but effective

Re: Problems with the Movies

PostPosted: Tue May 24, 2011 10:55 am
by Sabrblade
ironrod prime wrote:in the first movie the comedy was suttle but effective
Except for the whole "Were you... masterbating?" scene. That was just as forced and unneeded as the stuff put into ROTF (in fact, that scene was purposely cut out from several foreign releases of the film). :|