Kanluwen wrote: If by "stupid" you mean "amazing", then you're right.
You've been given three movies that range from "bad" to "abomination against mankind and we're all worse because it exists" so far. Why are you buying into a trailer again?
Kanluwen wrote: If by "stupid" you mean "amazing", then you're right.
You've been given three movies that range from "bad" to "abomination against mankind and we're all worse because it exists" so far. Why are you buying into a trailer again?
Kanluwen wrote: If by "stupid" you mean "amazing", then you're right.
You've been given three movies that range from "bad" to "abomination against mankind and we're all worse because it exists" so far. Why are you buying into a trailer again?
I haven't enjoyed any of the movies, but Marky Mark should be a fun addition! Is he playing the kid that Shai Labouffe was playing, just all grown up? Or something new?
Kanluwen wrote: If by "stupid" you mean "amazing", then you're right.
You've been given three movies that range from "bad" to "abomination against mankind and we're all worse because it exists" so far. Why are you buying into a trailer again?
I enjoyed the three movies, so nyah!
Then your standards are too low and you allow too much badness to slip by.
I mean, did you REALLY enjoy John Turturro's ass against the camera? Did you REALLY enjoy the racism? Shia LeBouf doing...anything?
I get it. It's hard to turn on something you love, but seriously.
Kanluwen wrote: If by "stupid" you mean "amazing", then you're right.
You've been given three movies that range from "bad" to "abomination against mankind and we're all worse because it exists" so far. Why are you buying into a trailer again?
I enjoyed the three movies, so nyah!
So much is understood now...
I really wish people would understand that there's a difference between enjoying something and saying "I think this is good".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kronk wrote: I haven't enjoyed any of the movies, but Marky Mark should be a fun addition! Is he playing the kid that Shai Labouffe was playing, just all grown up? Or something new?
All new character. No returning characters supposedly.
Here's who's actually responsible for the voices for Skids and Mudflap:
Reno Wilson(Mudflap) suggested them, Tom Kenny(Skids) agreed to do it.
Reno Wilson on developing the voice:
Wilson said Wednesday that he never imagined viewers might consider the twins to be racial caricatures. When he took the role, he was told that the alien robots learned about human culture through the Web and that the twins were "wannabe gangster types."
"It's an alien who uploaded information from the Internet and put together the conglomeration and formed this cadence, way of speaking and body language that was accumulated over X amount of years of information and that's what came out," the 40-year-old actor said. "If he had uploaded country music, he would have come out like that."
It's not fair to assume the characters are black, he said.
"It could easily be a Transformer that uploaded Kevin Federline data," Wilson said. "They were just like posers to me."
It’s Michal Bay’s EXPLOSIONS! If you are going in for anything else you are fooling yourselves. What do he do well Blow up on screen. We all know that, you want plot and story go see a Spielberg move [I am not knocking Steven at all].
Why am I planning on going, to watch giant robots kick the living out of each other, nothing more nothing less. If a plot happens to wander in from the wrong set, great! That is what I want from Bay SPLOSHIONS!
curran12 wrote: Did you really just try to say that because they used a black VA that it is not racist writing? REALLY? REALLY?
I just felt something break in my brain.
Way to not understand what I said or quoted. I can't find the entire interview right now, but essentially, Reno Wilson brings up that he and Tom Kenny interpreted the lines the way they came out, NOT the script or studio and that he's surprised that "people think I'm racist to myself".
I'm not saying anything for or against it, just giving you some background on the interpretation of the character(a black actor making them into a stereotype of white people trying to be black) and their reactions to people's reaction.
Kanluwen wrote: If by "stupid" you mean "amazing", then you're right.
You've been given three movies that range from "bad" to "abomination against mankind and we're all worse because it exists" so far. Why are you buying into a trailer again?
I enjoyed the three movies, so nyah!
Then your standards are too low and you allow too much badness to slip by.
I mean, did you REALLY enjoy John Turturro's ass against the camera? Did you REALLY enjoy the racism? Shia LeBouf doing...anything?
I get it. It's hard to turn on something you love, but seriously.
Loved the three movies for a very simple reason, big robots, lots of explosions. Essentialy the same reason I love Pacific Rim. I can easily ignore all the bs around it as long as the action's fun.
I'm pretty sure Swoop is in the trailer, and I imagine the others will be, especially if they need to repopulate the cast with only Optimus and Bee remaining from 1-3 (does beg the question where Ratchet got to, he survived 3 but I don't think he's in this).
Paradigm wrote: I'm pretty sure Swoop is in the trailer, and I imagine the others will be, especially if they need to repopulate the cast with only Optimus and Bee remaining from 1-3 (does beg the question where Ratchet got to, he survived 3 but I don't think he's in this).
generalgrog wrote: I don't know, the trailer looked cool. Here's hoping part IV won't be the disaster part II was.
GG
Part II was a train wreck but Part III was a tsunami crashing to a nuclear plant that proceeded to irradiate the train wreck and kill what little was left to be enjoyed.
Paradigm wrote: I'm pretty sure Swoop is in the trailer, and I imagine the others will be, especially if they need to repopulate the cast with only Optimus and Bee remaining from 1-3 (does beg the question where Ratchet got to, he survived 3 but I don't think he's in this).
It might have been Predaking
More than likely Hun-Gurrr, who transtorms into a 2-headed Dragon. (though admittedly with no wings).
I'm purely guessing here, but the above would be logical as I can only assume the bad guy will be Galvatron and the Terrorcons were affiliated with him.
loki old fart wrote: As someone who as all the original series and movies. These films annoy me, so much of the story changed.
I have gotten to where nI don't mind that. Every time they Re-Boot they make changes. I actualy look forward to the changes to how they are going to make them.
Grimtuff wrote: OP does not know who Grimlock is. Me Grimlock disappointed.
I hope Swoop, Snarl, Slag and Sludge are in there too.
Swoop is in, I think SlagSlug too, the others are replaced by a velociraptor and spinosaurus that we don't know the official names of.
Villains we know so far: Galvatron, Lockdown, and Stunticons rumoured/alt modes seen.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
loki old fart wrote: As someone who as all the original series and movies. These films annoy me, so much of the story changed.
Different universal continuity stream. Movies have nothing to do with G1, just like Aligned(Prime and the newer video games), Animated, and Unicron Trilogy.
You say all, do you have Headmasters, Masterforce, Victory, and Zone?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, Optimus is far from the only robot T-Rex riding Autobot:
There is a larger question floating around these kinds of films about how much respect should be given to the source material. As a huge TF one of my largest complaints would be that I simply don't recognise many characters and those I do are often only by process of elimination. There are changes that need to be made when you go to live action, no doubt but Bay has made numerous changes simply for changes sake. There's no good reason Ironhide couldn't be red or couldn't have been Trailbreaker (who actually is a black 4x4 with guns all over him). Simple stuff like that there's a couple examples of where respecting the source material and pleasing fans was downright easy. By the third film it almost appears Bay is trying to mess with fans.
As to Grimlock with a rider... well we've already seen Wheelie (or something called Wheelie) but then Grimlock has, historically not really gotten along with Prime (as opposed to Wheelie- him friend!) so being Prime's mount does seem out of character. It's also worth noting that while the dinobots were large, this makes Grimlock absurdly large. Prime is 32 feet tall and looks small on Grimlocks back there. Grimlock's robot form must be staggeringly tall.
Kojiro wrote: There is a larger question floating around these kinds of films about how much respect should be given to the source material. As a huge TF one of my largest complaints would be that I simply don't recognise many characters and those I do are often only by process of elimination. There are changes that need to be made when you go to live action, no doubt but Bay has made numerous changes simply for changes sake. There's no good reason Ironhide couldn't be red or couldn't have been Trailbreaker (who actually is a black 4x4 with guns all over him). Simple stuff like that there's a couple examples of where respecting the source material and pleasing fans was downright easy. By the third film it almost appears Bay is trying to mess with fans.
As to Grimlock with a rider... well we've already seen Wheelie (or something called Wheelie) but then Grimlock has, historically not really gotten along with Prime (as opposed to Wheelie- him friend!) so being Prime's mount does seem out of character. It's also worth noting that while the dinobots were large, this makes Grimlock absurdly large. Prime is 32 feet tall and looks small on Grimlocks back there. Grimlock's robot form must be staggeringly tall.
There are lots of thiings that cause changes. One maybe Iron hide was suposed to be red, but it did not look right on film or it showed up black and after two or three shots in someone point out the error and it was to costly to change things.
Look back at Star Treck 3, those Kingons were suposed to be Romulans, but a change was made after the Space Sceens had already been filmed, changing Star Treck History forever.
Kojiro wrote: There is a larger question floating around these kinds of films about how much respect should be given to the source material. As a huge TF one of my largest complaints would be that I simply don't recognise many characters and those I do are often only by process of elimination. There are changes that need to be made when you go to live action, no doubt but Bay has made numerous changes simply for changes sake. There's no good reason Ironhide couldn't be red or couldn't have been Trailbreaker (who actually is a black 4x4 with guns all over him). Simple stuff like that there's a couple examples of where respecting the source material and pleasing fans was downright easy. By the third film it almost appears Bay is trying to mess with fans.
As to Grimlock with a rider... well we've already seen Wheelie (or something called Wheelie) but then Grimlock has, historically not really gotten along with Prime (as opposed to Wheelie- him friend!) so being Prime's mount does seem out of character. It's also worth noting that while the dinobots were large, this makes Grimlock absurdly large. Prime is 32 feet tall and looks small on Grimlocks back there. Grimlock's robot form must be staggeringly tall.
We have no idea what's in character for this Grimlock, as he's never been seen in any media.
These aren't the G1 characters. Please stop demanding that they must look and act like they're from that time and universal conitnuity.
Also, here's Ironhide from various continuities not including G1:
So let's see, that 3 continuities where he's red, 4 where he's not(5 if you count Shattered Glass, where he's black), and 1 where he's red and blue.
I love G1, but I'm tired of this need people have for things needing to be GEEWUN all the time.
Guys, everyone knows that Michael Bay is only capable of making one good movie every 20 years. And 2013 gave us Pain and Gain. We might get a good Transformers film in 2033.
I thought Transformers was pretty bad. I decided to see Transformers 2 after a friend liked it, and left the theater after 20 minutes. I obviously did not watch Transformers 3, but did briefly flip through it and thought it looked truly awful.
Platuan4th wrote: We have no idea what's in character for this Grimlock, as he's never been seen in any media.
And what, it's absurd to think that a transformer called Grimlock might have some of the characteristics of the iconic character Grimlock?
These aren't the G1 characters. Please stop demanding that they must look and act like they're from that time and universal conitnuity.
Hold your horses there son. No one is demanding anything- artists (loosely as the definition applies to Bay) are free to create whatever content they want and we are free to criticise it as our appreciation of it suits us. Bay's free to make black Ironhides and I'm free to criticise it.That said Ironhide is but one example of such things that could have pleased fans without any real cost.
I personally think the source material should be respected whenever it doesn't detract from the work- you may disagree. Tell me, would you be happy with a 40K film where the Ravenwing wore red? Or would you be fine with Game of Thrones making The Red Viper some foppish noble scared of combat?
Platuan4th wrote: We have no idea what's in character for this Grimlock, as he's never been seen in any media.
And what, it's absurd to think that a transformer called Grimlock might have some of the characteristics of the iconic character Grimlock?
RiD Grimlock. Just saying.
Kojiro wrote: I personally think the source material should be respected whenever it doesn't detract from the work- you may disagree. Tell me, would you be happy with a 40K film where the Ravenwing wore red? Or would you be fine with Game of Thrones making The Red Viper some foppish noble scared of combat?
Meh, not really bothered with a 40K film. GW doesn't care about what they write, I'd expect another film to feel the same.
I actually haven't read or seen Games of Thrones, so your second example means nothing to me.
I'd say that's another example of a poorly named character. Note also RiD is an American dubbing onf a Japanese cartoon where the character was originally called Build Hurricane. It's literally a case of 'slap a name on it' with no good reason to call it Grimlock. If you can't see any compelling reason why Grimlock is an inappropriate name- of all the possibly names to steal (let alone simply translate!) for an upbeat green robot that turns into a crane you're just not seeing reason. Aside from the fact the character HAS an actual name there is already a green Autobot whose schtick is lifting things called Hoist this is Grimlock- an absolutely ICONIC character- a freaking T-REX. Grimlocks popularity and the reason he's in this film- like Ironhide- is because of that classic G1 version (and it's close mirrors) and it's disingenuous to suggest the RiD one is the possible 'source' material. By your rational expecting Grimlock to even be a dinosaur- let alone t-rex- is too much.
Platuan4th wrote: Meh, not really bothered with a 40K film. GW doesn't care about what they write, I'd expect another film to feel the same.
Right- so skipping right past the examples you're fine with change to the source material simply for the same of change?
With the exception of maybe the toys, Transformers has been gak since the beginning it's all just one big ad to sell toys, there's no depth to any if it and the animation is god awful.
shia ladouche isn't in it. While I don't expect the plot to be any less foul smelling than the others, the fact that shia isn't in it makes me want to see how much better the film is without him.
Kojiro wrote: I personally think the source material should be respected whenever it doesn't detract from the work- you may disagree.
The thing is, the source material in this case is not just G1.
There have been, what, a dozen? different Transformers series', various comics series, and a succession of toy ranges that have ranged from fairly close to wildly different to the media they were supposed to be spawned from, and most of them have been completely unconnected with those that came before, and each included new takes on old characters.
Ironhide was supposed to be a veteran soldier; a solid right hand for Prime. That came through in the movies. He didn't need to be red for that to work.
In these sorts of discussions, I'm always reminded of an interview with Sam Raimi back when his first Spider Man movie was released. His take on being 'true' to the source is that each time you take a story and tell it in a different way, you should change stuff. Otherwise, there's not really any point ... you might as well just stick with the original.
Michael Bay's Transformers movies aren't the G1 cartoons. Or any of the other cartoons. Or the comics. Or the original toys. They're just inspired by them. And that's fine... If I want to watch G1, I can go and grab the DVD and watch it.
insaniak wrote: The thing is, the source material in this case is not just G1....
<<snip>>
Michael Bay's Transformers movies aren't the G1 cartoons. Or any of the other cartoons. Or the comics. Or the original toys. They're just inspired by them. And that's fine... If I want to watch G1, I can go and grab the DVD and watch it.
Again I'm not saying it should be 100% identical. If the changes make the work better as a whole I'm all for them. It's not some G1 or heresy dichotomy. But there has to be more there than the name alone. This Ironhide you talk of- the tough, veteran soldier and Prime's right hand- was nowhere to be seen in the film. Not only does Prime rely more on Bumblebee but this Ironhide makes no mention of being old. His legendary durability (or age) is never mentioned by anyone. His role is now 'weapon specialist', his distinctive voice gone, his alt mode changed and not even the colour preserved. Add to this his desire to turn a small dog into a crater and request to murder Sam's parents and the Ironhide in the film is just that- Ironhide in name only. You don't have to preserve everything but preserve something beyond 'Autobot'. Worse yet this treatment isn't limited to Ironhide but rife in the series.
The main mistake the Bay Films make is that they try to do too much. I actually really liked the first film and that was because it concentrated on a small core group of characters. As a result you knew exactly who everyone was and the action sequences where not over long and tedious like they were in the sequels.
I say slash his budget and you just might make the films enjoyable again.
insaniak wrote: The thing is, the source material in this case is not just G1....
<<snip>>
Michael Bay's Transformers movies aren't the G1 cartoons. Or any of the other cartoons. Or the comics. Or the original toys. They're just inspired by them. And that's fine... If I want to watch G1, I can go and grab the DVD and watch it.
Again I'm not saying it should be 100% identical. If the changes make the work better as a whole I'm all for them. It's not some G1 or heresy dichotomy. But there has to be more there than the name alone. This Ironhide you talk of- the tough, veteran soldier and Prime's right hand- was nowhere to be seen in the film. Not only does Prime rely more on Bumblebee but this Ironhide makes no mention of being old. His legendary durability (or age) is never mentioned by anyone. His role is now 'weapon specialist', his distinctive voice gone, his alt mode changed and not even the colour preserved. Add to this his desire to turn a small dog into a crater and request to murder Sam's parents and the Ironhide in the film is just that- Ironhide in name only. You don't have to preserve everything but preserve something beyond 'Autobot'. Worse yet this treatment isn't limited to Ironhide but rife in the series.
Platuan4th......Kojiro is not a sockpuppet account of mine. ;-)
Soladrin wrote: This thread makes me happy I didn't grow up watching transformers.
I think the original transformers look dumb and boxy so I'm happy to enjoy my stupid big baybots.
The older transformers were good in the '80s and '90s; just like anything they transform with the times. Look at Star Trek, and insert anything else '60s-'80s brought into today....
insaniak wrote: Michael Bay's Transformers movies aren't the G1 cartoons. Or any of the other cartoons. Or the comics. Or the original toys. They're just inspired by them. And that's fine... If I want to watch G1, I can go and grab the DVD and watch it.
The problems with the Bayformer films extend way beyond the "But it's not like G1" whining. The fact that the Transformers have almost cameo appearances in their own film is a much bigger problem.
insaniak wrote: Michael Bay's Transformers movies aren't the G1 cartoons. Or any of the other cartoons. Or the comics. Or the original toys. They're just inspired by them. And that's fine... If I want to watch G1, I can go and grab the DVD and watch it.
The problems with the Bayformer films extend way beyond the "But it's not like G1" whining. The fact that the Transformers have almost cameo appearances in their own film is a much bigger problem.
I'll agree with this. One of my biggest problems with the whole movie series - Jazz. He had what, one line in the first movie? One of the coolest Autobots was just a name drop, and nothing more? Lamesauce.
Soladrin wrote: This thread makes me happy I didn't grow up watching transformers.
I think the original transformers look dumb and boxy so I'm happy to enjoy my stupid big baybots.
The older transformers were good in the '80s and '90s; just like anything they transform with the times. Look at Star Trek, and insert anything else '60s-'80s brought into today....
Frazzled wrote: Actually, that alone makes me not want to see it. Grimlock, the Mighty suffers not riders.
Me thinks you haven't seen the classic cartoons.
Hey Blur was cool. Prime's too fat.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
As to Grimlock with a rider... well we've already seen Wheelie (or something called Wheelie) but then Grimlock has, historically not really gotten along with Prime (as opposed to Wheelie- him friend!) so being Prime's mount does seem out of character. It's also worth noting that while the dinobots were large, this makes Grimlock absurdly large. Prime is 32 feet tall and looks small on Grimlocks back there. Grimlock's robot form must be staggeringly tall.
I don't mind Bay's Transformers movies much, it's quite nice to see a live action interpretation and I don't take them too serious. Lot of things could be better, get rid of the shaky camera syndrome, a coherent plot would be nice, a few decent mecha designers creating the robots instead of Mann and ILM.
Cheesecat wrote: With the exception of maybe the toys, Transformers has been gak since the beginning it's all just one big ad to sell toys, there's no depth to any if it and the animation is god awful.
So you're saying that the 1986 movie isn't on par with Citizen Kane like we've been led to believe? Interesting.
H.B.M.C. wrote: The problems with the Bayformer films extend way beyond the "But it's not like G1" whining. The fact that the Transformers have almost cameo appearances in their own film is a much bigger problem.
Oh there are most certainly other issues with the films than the lack of reference to the original work, but if it'd had those things I as a fan would have been far more inclined to overlook some of those issues (or at least for my inner fan boy to shout them down). Even the trailer for 4 appears to show a heavier focus on humans than I'd like. Bay does not seem to grasp that the humans are the supporting cast for the transformers in Transformers.
Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci are the screenwriters for the Bay films but they're also in charge of the recently cancelled Transformers: Prime. The contrast between how they portray things under Bay vs running their own (excellent) show is telling. It has the Bay version of Prime and Bumblebee (including him being a 'mute' ninja) and it was great because while a completely new story it maintained the elements required to have a fan look at it and recognise the franchise they liked in it.
Also I may have misattributed comments to Insaniak, if so my apologies but the point is sound.
H.B.M.C. wrote: The problems with the Bayformer films extend way beyond the "But it's not like G1" whining. The fact that the Transformers have almost cameo appearances in their own film is a much bigger problem.
That I can agree with. It wouldn't have been so bad if Shia Le Whatsisface wasn't so darn irritating.
That, and Bumblebee's 'voice'...
But other than that, I enjoyed the hell out of the movies. But then, I didn't really go into them expecting anything more than giant robots blowing the crap out of each other, and that I got in spades.
Hell, the cartoon that inspired these movies was also pretty rubbish, when you look at it objectively. It was a low-budget, slapped together toy advertisement with little attempt to maintain a continuity, and some realy, really dodgy plotlines. I still enjoy watching it every now and then, because it's still fun. And the animated movie, which I originally saw at the cinema, was just all sorts of awesomness... even though it too suffered from being spawned entirely to sell a new range of toys.
djphranq wrote: What we need is for Michael Bay to start chasing serious source material like Gobots.
Interestingly enough, 'Battle of the Rock Lords' was a double-feature at the cinema with the Transformers animated movie here in Oz. The comparison between the two was... interesting.
As a nifty piece of trivia, both Peter Cullen and Frank Welker were in that movie as well...
Turns out Peter Cullen is also one of 3 or 4 guys who has done the voice of Eeyore in the Winnie the Pooh cartoons.
Soladrin wrote: This thread makes me happy I didn't grow up watching transformers.
I think the original transformers look dumb and boxy so I'm happy to enjoy my stupid big baybots.
The older transformers were good in the '80s and '90s; just like anything they transform with the times. Look at Star Trek, and insert anything else '60s-'80s brought into today....
Well, yeah, that's kinda my point ( though star trek will always look silly ) the old transformer design would look like completely gak in full CGI.
Unless I hear some insanely good praise over the film there isn't a chance in hell I will see it in the theater considering how god awful the last two were.
Rotary wrote: I actually liked dinobot a bit more than grimlock when i was a kid.
Well of course. Dinobot was Grimlock 2.0.
Are we talking about the Beast Wars Dinobot? If so, I feel I must disagree. I felt that BW Dinobot was substantially more layered and nuanced, plot development wise - his motivations were more complex. In general I found that Beast Wars was probably the apex of character development and storytelling for the franchise, at least in proportion to what is possible for a cartoon designed to sell toys.
Rotary wrote: I actually liked dinobot a bit more than grimlock when i was a kid.
Well of course. Dinobot was Grimlock 2.0.
Are we talking about the Beast Wars Dinobot? If so, I feel I must disagree. I felt that BW Dinobot was substantially more layered and nuanced, plot development wise - his motivations were more complex. In general I found that Beast Wars was probably the apex of character development and storytelling for the franchise, at least in proportion to what is possible for a cartoon designed to sell toys.
And the body count at the end was epic, though I hated the last season back on cybertron
I felt that BW Dinobot was substantially more layered and nuanced, plot development wise - his motivations were more complex.
Exactly why he's Grimlock 2.0. He has most of the basic personality traits of the original Gen 1 Rexbot but he layers them up with a much stronger sense of honor and character progression. EDIT: Probably why he managed to beat Grimlock into the Hall of Fame first time through.
Yeah. As far as story telling went, Beast Wars was #1 for the franchise. Not Beast Machines though. That was an abomination @_@
Dinobots are fine, but when is Bay going to bring some serious, mature storytelling to the Transformers franchise and include Transformers: Kiss Players?
Rotary wrote: I actually liked dinobot a bit more than grimlock when i was a kid.
Well of course. Dinobot was Grimlock 2.0.
Are we talking about the Beast Wars Dinobot? If so, I feel I must disagree. I felt that BW Dinobot was substantially more layered and nuanced, plot development wise - his motivations were more complex. In general I found that Beast Wars was probably the apex of character development and storytelling for the franchise, at least in proportion to what is possible for a cartoon designed to sell toys.
Beast Wars was leaps above any previous Transformers cartoons for character development. Even if the idea of turning into animals to fool... animals? Made no sense.
I recommend Transformers Prime. It just wrapped up, but it really crafted some incredible characters. Shockwave was the only character with no development in the show, nor should he have displayed any. Arcee and Knockout really stand out as minor characters that are allowed to blossom and grow.
Beast Wars was leaps above any previous Transformers cartoons for character development. Even if the idea of turning into animals to fool... animals? Made no sense.
The beast modes weren't supposed to fool other animals. They were protection against the raw energon in the local environment.
Where's the brutality? Where is the undisciplined berserker whose only problem is where to find a bigger hammer to hit this new problem with? I am horribly disappointed. Me Grimlock need new strategy!
On the other hand, as a parent of two boys under 5, I am thrilled at the idea of one step Transformers toys. That is the best idea since Bot Shots to recruit a fresh legion of fans.
Well, the robot form seem logical, as the trailer seems to hint at a heavily Asian backdrop. I still have to say that if he transforms in the movie, that's going to be one helluva 'bot. Has to be at least a third the size of Devastator, judging by Optimus' comparative size.
Shia and Megan Fox are now both out of the franchise that means 2 of the 3 requirements to making a decent transformers movie have been met, is it not signs of the apocalypse?
If Transformers 5 is done without Bay the world may finally explode.... from AWESOME.
There are problems besides casting which I am not sure are surmountable regardless of who is in the directors seat. To wit even from just the trailer it is clear this movie will likely have numerous sequences comprised of big blurry machiney things smashing into each other, where you can't be sure what exactly is going on.
Gitzbitah wrote: Grimlock is a Samurai, or Chinese Warrior or something.... he looks like Bludgeon. .
Gitzbitah wrote: Grimlock is a Samurai, or Chinese Warrior or something.... he looks like Bludgeon. .
Sure, why not.
Because when you think of ancient Japanese/Chinese warriors the image immediately provokes images of honour, discipline and a deep, rich culture. When you ask a TF fan what words would describe Grimlock you'd get things like simple, brutal and dumb. He is the shirtless berserker, not the honourable samurai.
It'd be like portraying Prime- a person deeply committed to freedom and peace- as the kind of person who executes political dissidents...
Now if Bay wants to create a whole new transformer, some dragon like Asian influenced thing (instead of putting Asian trim on a t-rex) I have nothing against that at all. Big Asian dragon who embodies those ancient philosophies and looks? No problem at all- great idea.But there's something dishonest though with claiming 'we've got Grimlock' when what you really have is something so loosely resembling Grimlock that a name change would protect from a lawsuit. The films would have been better (but still bad) as their own franchise but then you wouldn't have the draw of calling it Transformers. GoBots would have been just as appropriate.
Note that Bay refers to him as 'a 15ft reinforced steel Tyranosaurus Rex' which isn't an unreasonable height for a t-rex, but it is less than half the height of Optimus (32 feet). This Grimlock must be over 100ft in robot mode at least. It also illustrates that either Bay has no idea of the scale of things in his movie or they simply changed it because they thought it'd be cool (along with numerous other changes), which is half the problem. Bay could make a 40k film and make space marines into US marines in space with shoulder pads and people would just say 'Stop insisting it look like the source material!'
Note that Bay refers to him as 'a 15ft reinforced steel Tyranosaurus Rex' which isn't an unreasonable height for a t-rex, but it is less than half the height of Optimus (32 feet). This Grimlock must be over 100ft in robot mode at least. It also illustrates that either Bay has no idea of the scale of things in his movie or they simply changed it because they thought it'd be cool (along with numerous other changes), which is half the problem. Bay could make a 40k film and make space marines into US marines in space with shoulder pads and people would just say 'Stop insisting it look like the source material!'
Maybe, maybe not. 15tf is the first answer you get if you google t-rex height so while the context was a joke (where you'd see a metal t-rex) the scale is clearly out. Bay is clearly aware of the size Grimlock *should* be but again, change for the sake of change (or in Bay's case 'MORE EXPLOSIONS!).
up on screen. We all know that, you want plot and story go see a Spielberg move [I am not knocking Steven at all].
