PDA

View Full Version : Transformers (2007) was on TV tonight...


Auntie Slag
2014-12-29, 10:20 PM
And its still totally ace. I think it gets better with age. Its bright, fun, tongue in cheek and zippy. Most importantly its got heart, which I don't think the others have. I appreciate that the other films are out there, but like Jurassic Park and The Matrix; the first one is far and away the best.

RotF is bonkers but watchable for a fan.

DotM is rather ponderous & overlong, despite having the incredible Sentinel Prime in it.

I haven't seen AoE yet, but I'd imagine from everything written and said that it may be the worst of them.

But the first one charges along and I wouldn't consider eating my own face at the thought of recommending it to someone else.

And in a masterstroke of programming, Film 4 decided to follow tonights showing of Transformers with Trading Places. That's just love, that is!

On Wednesday its DotM followed by 27 Dresses, just in case you thought Christmas debt was reason enough for suicide.

electro girl
2014-12-29, 10:29 PM
I know I can watch it whenever I want on DVD but I'm always disappointed if its on TV and I miss it.

Auntie Slag
2014-12-29, 10:35 PM
Yeah, see that's the mark of a good film. I have that with The Shawshank Redemption and Toy Story 2.

Knightdramon
2014-12-29, 10:46 PM
I think they each did okay things in them. Combining them all into one movie would be the best.

TFTM 2007: Thankfully best humour, not overly drawn out human story and drama, definitely best f*cking villain cadre as there are about 7 of them and each is unique and has at least one memorable scene. Still experimenting with the whole complex robot thing so fight scenes are generally more clear and less "shit is happening on the screen while gears fly by alongside random furniture and screaming people while the camera shifts around".

ROTF: Um...Jetfire?

DOTM: Sentinel Prime just wins this one, as well as Megatron. Robots are generally okay, fight scenes a tad clear but still hectic. Soundwave and Dylan were OK villains and a nice duo. The whole Skyscraper and driller fight was about 20 minutes longer than it should be. And I am veeeery sorry but the girl Sam was with was so out of the league of a normal looking unemployed guy it's beyond funny.

AoE: Best Autobot cast, as they finally did hammer on the fact that they should be individualistic and each should have at least a minute of screentime and more than 3 lines. Sadly, this is too long, makes shit up as it goes on, has got some very weird scenes and very odd product placement.

To sum up, the best of all worlds would be...

A movie where the Decepticons are not a bunch of drones, but rather a small crew of nasties, led by a memorable leader voiced by a cult sci-fi actor [lol], having the human cast of the 4th film with the light humour of the first one, the Autobots should all be very distinct from each other, the fights clear, the autobots not overpowering everything, and if possible, do not involve the human army as much as the middle two movies did.

And if it was not directed by Bay, that'd rock. :up:

Auntie Slag
2014-12-29, 10:58 PM
To my mind AoE should be as fun as the first because the human element is a Sparkplug Witwicky type mechanic. That also plays on my love of Herbie The Love Bug, where Buddy Hackett was Herbie's grease monkey.

The first film felt like it was drawing from the first four issues of the Marvel TF comic, where a boy meets Bumblebee. And it really helped that Bumblebee had a sense of humour, playing all the appropriate songs from his radio to help Sam get the girl.

Number four seems like it should have an appeal to anyone who'se ever done a bit of work under a bonnet. Maybe that isn't the case, but I like the idea of Mark Wahlberg's character.

But yeah, watching it again tonight... it felt positively sedate compared to the other films. Oh, and Sam's parents were perfect in this one. They added so much. Utterly wasted in the other films.

Cliffjumper
2015-01-04, 10:58 PM
Love the first one more each time I see it. I like the sequels but the first one is that bit better thought out and detailed, with nice stuff for fans like everyone getting to do something - the sort-of five-a-side approach works nicely. And there's still that frisson from the Big Scenes - Blackout transforming at SOCCENT, Prime taking out Bonecrusher, everyone piling on Brawl, Starscream versus the F22s; I mean, for years I'd been idly daydreaming about a live-action TF film and there's this stuff on screen and it's way better than I hoped and Oh My ****ing God This Is Actually ****ing Happening There's A Transformers Film For Real.

ROTF and DOTM are mixed bags with lots of good bits for TF fans but they aren't going to convert people. ROTF's killed by that middle section - I didn't and still don't mind the Twins per se but they just end up carrying too much of the film while the likes of Ironhide, Ratchet, Sideswipe etc. are sidelined almost arbitrarily. DOTM takes a while to build but nails it in the end.

AOE, albeit only after three or four watches, I still find the most disappointing. ROTF is probably the poorer film but it's just a misjudged sequel. AOE was a great opportunity to clear the decks and have a soft reboot and the core concept's good but there's so, so much unnecessary jumble and flab. I also found it very low on moments of genuine wonder - I'm probably in the minority but a CGI robot riding a CGI dinosaur into another CGI robot is nowhere near as awesome as Josh Duhamel hammering the bonnet of a genuine prop pickup which then seamlessly transforms into a robot and has a conversation with him.

They completely ****ed the Autobots coming out of hiding too - great opportunity for a benign inversion of the Decepticons breaking cover in the first film (Drift suddenly accelerating out of a high-concept showroom, Crosshairs leaving some banker prick stranded, 'Bee busting out of some run-down storage garage, Hound flattening the gates of some deactivated military depot) in favour of just having them turn up in a desert after nailing Prime's radio signal and "I'M COMING FOR YOU!!!!" scanning.

inflatable dalek
2015-01-06, 09:02 PM
The first is basically the Michael Bay Transformers film people who don't like Michael Bay Transformers films grudgingly don't mind. As much as I like the others, if they'd kept up the tighter, more relatable focus of that one this might almost be a respectable franchise by now.

I was surprised to see on a list on Digital Spy that Age of Extinction was the most successful film of the year (despite box office being down in the States that Hong Kong filming did wonders for the Eastern market).

I was even more surprised considering how everyone acted as if it had underperformed to see Spider-Man was the sixth biggest film of the year in a very tough field. It actually feels like Sony should take the approach that has worked so well for Bay (and indeed The X-Men movies, Future Past was high on the list and wouldn't have been possible if Fox hadn't stuck to their guns and rebooted the franchise/let it go to Marvel because of the "Disappointing" third one and Wolverine sequels as a lot of folks were demanding) and just go "**** the haters, these films are obviously working for enough people to keep them in the green, let's build on that".

Auntie Slag
2015-01-06, 09:17 PM
Yeah, Age of Extinction cracked a $billion, which according to Wikipedia makes it the second most successful Transformers film.

I never understood the reasoning behind the very quick & dirty DOTM DVD release. The live-action '07 film had a cool, almost gatefold-like cover with Prime's Profile on the front and Megatron's on the back ( this is on the 2-disc version, & it also including a transparent hard plastic slide-over cover). The inside of the inlay had a nice montage of Mission City bits, and the second disc with some nice documentary bits & pieces that I found pretty interesting even I weren't a TF fan.

The RotF DVD was less extravagant, but did have a second disc with nice extras, but DOTM was released as nothing more than a vanilla 1-disc affair in a black case. No reverse inlay, no extras, nothing. I really would have liked, by the time of the third films release to DVD a nice booklet of some sort, or a raft of funky extras on a second disc, that's not over-the-top to expect considering the unbelievable amount of money these films have made (and their popularity) by the time of DotM?

If you compare the Jurassic Park films (not counting next year's one), they experienced quite a drop off in box office revenue, whereas the TF films haven't suffered such a fate. I honestly thought people would be sick of Prime & Co. by the third film!

Wikipedia box office data:

Jurassic Park (1993)
Budget: $63 million
Box Office: $1,029,153,882

The Lost World (1997)
Budget: $73 million
Box Office: $618,638,999

Jurassic Park III (2001)
Budget: $93 million
Box Office: $368,780,809

Transformers (2007)
Budget: $150 million
Box Office: $709,709,780

Revenge of the Fallen (2009)
Budget: $200 million
Box Office: $836,303,693

Dark of the Moon (2011)
Budget: $195 million
Box Office: $1,123,794,079

Age of Extinction (2014)
Budget: $210 million
Box Office: $1,087,289,076

The 2-disc Metrodome release of the '86 movie is quite a nice package, certainly magnitudes better than the non-effort of the DotM release. So it annoys me that the AoE DVD has been treated as poorly as its predecessor. If Metrodome can do such a nice job, why not Columbia?

Cliffjumper
2015-01-06, 09:43 PM
The first is basically the Michael Bay Transformers film people who don't like Michael Bay Transformers films grudgingly don't mind. As much as I like the others, if they'd kept up the tighter, more relatable focus of that one this might almost be a respectable franchise by now.

The other big strength of the first one is that it's accessible and self-contained. All three sequels are probably near incomprehensible as standalone films -which makes the box office incredible. And I don't think it's all inflation; around here prices have actually more or less stabilised to within a pound (i.e. about 10%) over the past decade or so.

I was surprised to see on a list on Digital Spy that Age of Extinction was the most successful film of the year (despite box office being down in the States that Hong Kong filming did wonders for the Eastern market).

Yeh, Hell of a turn-up considering the buzz around all the Disney films that were out, especially with the whole 'soft reboot' ("hey, let's get rid of all the familiar stuff but keep all the continuity!")


I never understood the reasoning behind the very quick & dirty DOTM DVD release.

Sadly a sign of the times... the days when absolutely everything got a double-disc DVD are long gone :( Stuff like Gravity, Django in Chains etc. only really get basic releases now. The goodies are saved for BluRay (no idea if this is the case with DOTM), a strategy which seems to be working. Wouldn't be surprised if we're only a few years away from dual format releases taking over from DVD altogether. Add in the rise of streaming and yeh, it's sad but not really surprising.

Though that white spine fills me with rage.

Auntie Slag
2015-01-06, 11:45 PM
Oh god, really? I thought that Blu-ray had effectively stalled seeing as it never takes up that much shelf space in the local HMV, and occupies far less space than the DVD section in most supermarkets. I love the dirt-cheap ubiquity of DVD's (or at least the dirt cheapness of some of them. CeX offers the Transformers 2007 film, the fancy 2-disc transparent sleeve-over-the-top edition for 75p!!!).

They're currently offering AoE for six quid, I'm going to wait until it hits three. In the meantime Pacific Rim is 3 there, and that's got to be oodles of fun for that price!

Cliffjumper
2015-01-07, 12:24 AM
Having bit myself a week or so ago, I can confirm Pacific Rim is indeed 3 well spend. Completely different take on giant robots to Transformers (it's more influenced by Japanese mech shows) but a real treat.

TBH I think DVDs are losing out more to streaming services than BluRay, though there's definitely an attempt from manufacturers to push BR (lots of notable reissue titles are now coming out as double-play only); at the moment it's a much of a muchness because there are so many services avaliable but the success of Netflix et al seems to show a significant number of people are happy to watch films at home without physical copies, especially now some of the streaming services seem to offer films around the time the DVDs come out and that more and more people watch films on tablets, notebooks and the like.

Space-wise I think a lot of stuff's still not out on BluRay; not a lot major but the hundreds of John Wayne/Clint Eastwood vehicles that tend to pad out DVD sections, that sort of thing.

It's most likely going to be like the music industry, in that you'll probably be able to get physical media for decades but it's becoming less of a focus.

Skyquake87
2015-01-07, 01:19 AM
Aye, I still buy DVDs as they're good enough for me. I've said this before, but the removal of the extra content on DVDs in favour of including them on the Blu Ray equivalent has always felt like a sneaky back door way to get people to upgrade, if they weren't convinced by the sharper picture quality, online interactivity and all the other technological flash and bang that large corporations and excitable sections of society say we absolutely must have.

2009 seems to have been the last year of the double disc DVD. Since 2010, DVDs have just come with just one of two short extras and an UV code. The DVDs released in late 2014 now longer come with a UV code (I could never be arsed with this).

For myself, I really like the first two TF films. DOTM is just hard going, I find. For one its got into this horrible thing all films have these days, where they feel they have to be 2.5 hours long without the story to support it. There's no soul to it either and given the genuinely horrible things going on, the toilet humour seems horribly misplaced.

I enjoyed AOE at the cinema, but was fidgeting towards the end (too bloody long, again) and the conclusion and punch up at the end was deeply unsatisfying.

First film is definately the best and holds up well to repeat viewings.

Cliffjumper
2015-01-07, 09:40 AM
I think the trick with DVD is that it is going to be a lot harder to kill than VHS. The media doesn't degrade, it's a lot easier to semi-professionally author and the space saving side (actually took a VHS box set out of the attic a couple of days ago to bin... it's the size of Adele) has been done.

TBH I won't be switching; I rarely have time to watch extras at the moment on anything and the preposterous cheapness of the media is enticing. If they're there extras are nice for a rainy day, if not I've got something like 500 DVDs to get through and thus better things to do than find out if everyone enjoyed working together, preparing for the part was a challenge or if the CGI was complicated.

As I say, it wouldn't really surprise me if the main thing stopping BluRay is streaming, which would seem to imply that a lot of people really don't give a shit about production featurettes and the like.

Auntie Slag
2015-01-07, 05:51 PM
I guess its more of a blessing really. I fell into the habit of opting for the 2-disc versions of things, and how many of those have been worth it? How many second discs of anything does the average person watch more than once? I complain now because I feel like I'm getting short changed compared to the luxurious bits & bobs provided a few years ago, but yeah, they really are a lot of extra plastic.

Commentaries are entertaining when you're doing the ironing though, maybe they're the most valuable addition (and they're usually on disc one, hooray)!

inflatable dalek
2015-01-07, 09:12 PM
The other big strength of the first one is that it's accessible and self-contained. All three sequels are probably near incomprehensible as standalone films -which makes the box office incredible. And I don't think it's all inflation; around here prices have actually more or less stabilised to within a pound (i.e. about 10%) over the past decade or so.

I also don't think inflation would make that much of a difference over just three years (plus it's down on DOTM, but in a fairly tough summer).


As far as DVD's Vs Blu Rays go, I suspect most of the people who were likely to pick up a double DVD of a new film over the cheaper one disc are the ones most likely to have upgraded to HD, making the former redundant.

It's also worth remembering that Blu Rays are more expensive and you can fit more on a disc, they bloody well should have more in the way of features on them. Though that doesn't excuse the full space on the DVD's not being used of course.

For me, what I especially love about HD is that a whole load of classic (and not so classic, Arrow video are doing a marvellous job on obscure stuff like Killer Klowns From Outer Space) films are getting the full on spruced up remastering they deserve.

Though like Cliffy says, streaming is more and more of a thing and will only become increasingly prevalent as time goes on. Physical video will become the domain of those who insist vinyl is best and pooh pooh the idea of Ebooks.

Auntie Slag
2015-01-07, 11:11 PM
I've stuck with DVD's and I was a 2-disc enthusiast. Having upgraded some VHS copies to DVD I really don't care to go through the process again with 4K or whatever new high quality format is bound to replace that in the next few years. Its just a constant upgrade cycle of old arse.

I think I read once that Blu-rays are no more expensive to produce than DVD's, but may experience a higher failure rate as they're squeezing more data into the same size disc, so a scratch or a knick may kill a Blu-ray, but may not kill a DVD.

People opt for vinyl for multiple reasons like the artwork being bigger, the sound being appreciably warmer and valuing the imperfections of the scuffs and surface noise. Vinyl may also encourage the listener to appreciate the songs in album format, listening to the tracks in a sequence that's been laid out by the artist for a reason. I reckon people appreciate vinyl tracks in a more relaxed & thoughtful way. A digital playlist containing thousands of tracks can make people impatient. Whenever I play music using iTunes or whatever, I end up spending my time skipping tens of tracks more than actually listening, and it annoys me that I do that.


I wouldn't say physical video can achieve any of these things. Once the format; VHS, CD, DVD, Blu-Ray, 4K or whatever is dead, its dead.

However I'm surprised, and really really happy that DVD is still plugging away. I'd imagine the industry wanted us to turn our backs on it at least five years ago & upgrade all our films but it hasn't happened. To that end I can imagine Blu-Ray dying well before DVD. The latter are just too cheap and prolific, I agree with Cliffjumper that Blu-Ray's REAL competition must be streaming.

Cliffjumper
2015-01-07, 11:28 PM
DVD I'm planning to stick with, TBH. It's not only the cost of updating ~400 + titles but it does the job for me and unlike VHS it'll continue to do so as long as there's functional equipment out there as the discs won't wear out; even if I manage to scratch Brazil in ten years time there'll still be a multitude of used copies avaliable. DVD has achieved a much higher saturation than VHS ever did.

Even dual format won't put me off completely as I'll do what I've done for several films so far - custom sleeve for the DVD, sell the BluRay on ebay (as I figure anyone with a BR player will have limited interest in the DVD) and recoup a bit of the outlay.

When DVD is discontinued I'll switch to digital download of some form and burn to disc while doing a custom sleeve (one of my little side hobbies). The other thing that's more of an option if the inevitable comes is foreign markets - BluRay is likely to take even longer to take hold in, bluntly, poorer economies, so there's always going to be the option of getting TF8 from Russia and turning the subtitles off.

As for vinyl, for me personally I've had a record player since I was 7. The whole thing is more fun and it's still the best format for appreciating sleeve art and the whole bundling of lyric sheets and the like. Naturally I have everything digital for portable listening but there's nothing quite like putting a record on in your living room. And the whole vinyl hipster thing at least means I can get things like Taylor Swift, La Roux, Ladyhawke, Little Boots, the Drive soundtrack, the Italians Do It Better back catalogue and so on in the format; it's just a shame there's a 20-25 year hole in the format, though limited run reissues seem to be gaining credence.

And yeh, my IPod has about forty songs on it and about 30 of those are usually skipped looking for the other ten.

Auntie Slag
2015-01-07, 11:49 PM
I love the ease of digital copies (of music), but my god it makes me an intolerant bastard. I don’t have a record player, but I do enjoy buying CD’s and I find its more relaxing to let an album play, even the duff tracks (though I get the twitch to skip them). But it slows me down and that gives me the time to appreciate the layers, and subtle effects dotted throughout the music (a Peter Gabriel album, for instance)

Also, I can hear the difference these days between CD and Mp3. The latter on a good set of speakers feels like the music is being forced to walk down a corridor, whereas a CD is a bit more like an open field. More of a soundscape, like. Whether classical or electronic. Jean Michel Jarre’s Oxygene, Justice or Daft Punks' Tron Legacy soundtrack are just superb set free of Mp3 limitations.

ADORE the soundtrack of that film, love the look of it... and don’t really care for the film itself.

Denyer
2015-01-08, 12:20 AM
I can hear the difference these days between CD and Mp3. The latter on a good set of speakers feels like the music is being forced to walk down a corridor,
What bitrate and encoder? Mind you, I've got foobar running through vlevel into a pair of Philips SPA2210V speakers, so audiophile I'm not. Did snag a bargain Sonoro Cubo a while back for listening to new albums before ripping, but it's barely been used; discs are a worthwhile built-in backup, but even a load of 100 spindles take up a lot of space.

Definitely listen to albums more these day, plus occasionally small handfuls of tracks on repeat.

And yeah, DVD for the forseeable future... it's only being streamed to a tablet anyway, and I'm never going to bother ripping and encoding hundreds of those.

On-topic... ROTF is the only one I might occasionally watch, really. And the '86 movie, although it always feels a bit pointless re-watching something that's that ingrained in memory.

Cliffjumper
2015-01-08, 01:07 AM
I genuinely cannot remember the last time I watched past Starscream dying. The DVD could be fuzz past that, I'll probably never know. I don't actually rewatch the Paramount films that much, mainly because I watched each a preposterous amount of times when they were new. I've still only watched AoE about three times now, though.

ADORE the soundtrack of that film, love the look of it... and don’t really care for the film itself.I bought the coat. Twice.

The 'lack of choice/skip' is something I quite like on vinyl; I've rediscovered a lot of tracks on albums I like that I didn't really appreciate before and always skipped on other formats and it's always helped me work out the difference between albums I like and albums that have three songs I like on them. It's also really nice to have the things restricted to 43 minutes or whatever, no crappy 'bonus tracks' or any of that rubbish. I'm not actually much of a fan of 45s, though, because you have to get up every three minutes or whatever. A jukebox is on my lottery win list.

Vinyl's also surprisingly cheap for the most part; media in general is very much a buyer's market and with records especially ebay's taken them out of the hands of stores that'd price stuff how they liked because where the Hell else were you going to get a record from. Car boot sales and charity shops remain surprisingly fruitful considering most people must've stopped buying the things twenty, thirty years ago.

Auntie Slag
2015-01-08, 05:55 PM
What bitrate and encoder?

Two rates; 160 and 192Kps using iTunes as the encoder (all my digital stuff was done on old Macs). I've about 2,000 songs digital which may not seem like many to some people, but I shudder at the thought of doing them all again in VBR or... what would you suggest, Ogg or Flacc? Run mine through Harman Kardon soundsticks (god bless Gumtree for that one), or some small Edifiers I use to get decent sound out of a flatscreen TV.

I keep all my discs (CD & DVD) in those material cases full of sleeves to save space, and a few months ago resorted to removing the DVD insert and binning the plastic DVD cases.

@Cliffjumper: A Tron Legacy coat? How cool, I presume its got that Tron-style red or blue piping? They are making another film, apparently. Although its probably around 2017 or so. By which point the original fans may no longer care and funding will be (perhaps rightly) pulled.

Brendocon 2.0
2015-01-08, 06:22 PM
I was even more surprised considering how everyone acted as if it had underperformed to see Spider-Man was the sixth biggest film of the year in a very tough field.

Unfortunately it's also the lowest grossing of all five Spidey films, a position previously held by the preceding one.

As per the Slag's post, Age of Extinction was the first TF film where the Box Office dipped below the prior instalment. Spidey 3 is the only one of its franchise where the take is higher than the previous one.

It's not that ASM2 didn't make a profit, but when you're looking to use it as a springboard for a dozen spin-offs you really don't want to be told that, not only is the downward trend continuing, but that it grossed $170m less than the one that prompted you wait five years and reboot the entire thing in the first place.

It's a sad state of affairs when a metric shitload of money is an underperformance, but it's all relative to expectation. Sony don't want to be seeing downward slides. But then maybe it's their own fault for not bothering to have anybody proofread the script.

... er, yeah. Back to whatever you were talking about. I'll go back under my rock.

Denyer
2015-01-08, 07:31 PM
Two rates; 160 and 192Kps using iTunes as the encoder (all my digital stuff was done on old Macs). I've about 2,000 songs digital which may not seem like many to some people, but I shudder at the thought of doing them all again in VBR or... what would you suggest, Ogg or Flac

I just use the normal LAME preset (i.e. -V 2 or --preset standard) with Exact Audio Copy. There's a big difference between lower rate CBR and VBR with the type of stuff I mostly listen to and the encoder very often allows itself more than the 190 it nominally targets. It was hitting 256 on the poppy stuff I had on when I started typing, and a rockier track from First And Last And Always hasn't dipped below 256. I suspect that if you don't max it out, CBR is always going to have a noticeable cut-off in places. I've got stuff that's 128 or lower that I do listen to and enjoy, though; better simply wasn't available when the recordings were being passed around.

For archiving -- something that hasn't been released on CD and I've bought -- I'll go for FLAC if it's on offer, but I'm not pretending that's scientific; the folk behind LAME grok the maths of lossy compression and have gone through the kind of blind testing you'd expect. Plus MP3 works just about anywhere and is pretty cheap computationally to decode, even if not the most efficient compression.

If it's only a few hundred discs I'd re-rip (can't really remember how many I'd done when I switched years ago). Might be worth snagging a disposable optical drive, if you're worried. With nice speakers and reasonably intact hearing it should be worthwhile.

Cliffjumper
2015-01-08, 08:27 PM
@Cliffjumper: A Tron Legacy coat? How cool, I presume its got that Tron-style red or blue piping? They are making another film, apparently. Although its probably around 2017 or so. By which point the original fans may no longer care and funding will be (perhaps rightly) pulled.


Sorry, thought you were talking about Drive.

Did largely enjoy Tron Legacy, Michael Sheen aside. It's just a feature-length Daft Punk video, which is a good thing to me.

Auntie Slag
2015-01-08, 08:35 PM
Yes, Amazon do a nice Samsung DVD-RW external for about 20 (last time I checked), that appears nice and unobtrusive, and powered entirely off a USB port. Normally I'd worry about that, but with the buffer underrun tech being well established and a torrent of good reviews for the device it would be a cool thing to get.

I fell in love with the Daft Punk video, just seemed to channel effortlessly into my soul. I can't remember if the track was called 'End of Line' or something else, but it pulsed, felt alive with electronics...like Kraftwerk were looking over their shoulders as they made it.

Denyer
2015-01-08, 09:22 PM
Front mounted USB ports often don't deliver the 5V they're supposed to, but back ones tend to be better. And for laptops with dodgier outputs you can get USB cables that go 2-into-1 to use the power from two ports but in which only the one side is cabled for data.

If you can find a donor drive from an old laptop the external cases are about five quid. No optical drive in the ThinkCentre (M92p) I'm using as a desktop. Works great with one cable either in a USB 3.0 port or a USB 2.0 port in a powered hub. (The hub's one of these (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Manhattan-161022-13-Port-USB-2-0-Desktop-Hub-Hi-Speed-Plug-Play-/311215402102) style; sold under various other brands including Nikkai and Unitek, I think. Maplin used to stock them.)

Red Dave Prime
2015-01-08, 10:03 PM
Unfortunately it's also the lowest grossing of all five Spidey films, a position previously held by the preceding one.

As per the Slag's post, Age of Extinction was the first TF film where the Box Office dipped below the prior instalment. Spidey 3 is the only one of its franchise where the take is higher than the previous one.

It's not that ASM2 didn't make a profit, but when you're looking to use it as a springboard for a dozen spin-offs you really don't want to be told that, not only is the downward trend continuing, but that it grossed $170m less than the one that prompted you wait five years and reboot the entire thing in the first place.

It's a sad state of affairs when a metric shitload of money is an underperformance, but it's all relative to expectation. Sony don't want to be seeing downward slides. But then maybe it's their own fault for not bothering to have anybody proofread the script.

... er, yeah. Back to whatever you were talking about. I'll go back under my rock.

Yeah, but most of the Spidey films are massively over-rated. I'm no fan of Bayformers but I would rate them as an overall more entertaining series.

Spidey 1 is good and 2 is better (but not nearly as good as its made out to be). 3 Is crap. Amazing Spidey 1 is ok, a good spiderman but a weaker film than the first Rami. Spidey 2 is terrible. Honestly, far worse than any of the Trans formers. And while I may not like them, most kids who have seen the Transformers enjoyed them. Going by my two nephews, Amazing Spidey 1 & 2 didnt go down well at all with the junior cinema goers either.

Cliffjumper
2015-01-08, 10:36 PM
Spider-Man just doesn't suit films IMO, or at least mainstream superhero films. He's a small-time character-driven hero who really doesn't fit the big 'event' storylines films need and Sony haven't handled this at all well.

Christ it's going to be messy when the oversaturated superhero bubble bursts in two, three years and Disney dropkick the Marvel properties into touch. Watch for if there's a Namor film; whenever Marvel get overconfident enough to put Namor out on his own it's usually a signal of a hubristic collapse.

A big part of TF's box office longevity has to be down to it being the only Western mech franchise; Hasbro's butchery of the competition has paid off long-term nicely.

Skyquake87
2015-01-08, 11:54 PM
Christ it's going to be messy when the oversaturated superhero bubble bursts in two, three years and Disney dropkick the Marvel properties into touch. Watch for if there's a Namor film; whenever Marvel get overconfident enough to put Namor out on his own it's usually a signal of a hubristic collapse.

...I wondered if we'd got there already when Ant Man was announced (now hovering in limbo after Edgar Wright left the project). Mind you, I though Guardians Of The Galaxy was an odd choice, and that's a great little film.


Also, I has that Samsung drive what Auntie Slag was talking about for my little netbook, and its mega :)

Just wandering back to DVD extras a moment, as I although I do like them, I did catch myself on with 'The Making of Hellboy' on the second DVD of the 2004 film 2 set. The Making Of documentary is longer than the film and just never ends...I was quite interested to start with, but then I realised 3 hours had already sailed by and thought it was a bit much. That did turn me off 2 disc sets a bit. I like this stuff, but that was just OTT. I think my favourite extras are the ones on the Back To The Future box set - neat Making of Docs and featurettes (best of all these are all contemporary in the main), plus Trailers and that - and on Robocop (the superior '87 original) which is just brilliant because of Paul Verhoven.

Brendocon 2.0
2015-01-09, 08:56 AM
...I wondered if we'd got there already when Ant Man was announced (now hovering in limbo after Edgar Wright left the project).

Odd term to use for a film whose first trailer was released two days ago.

inflatable dalek
2015-01-09, 02:37 PM
I haven't watched the Ant Man trailer myself yet (I'm a busy man), but it does seem to have softened a lot of the fears people had for the film as a result of Wright's departure.

The Back to the Future extras are lovely, I'm not sure if it made it onto any of the DVD's but the recreation of the original nuclear testing site ending (as bizarrely homaged in the last Indiana Jones film) on the Blu Ray is especially fantastic.

I also love the Bond series extras, that was the first classic film series to really go to town on making sure all the movies got a good deal (more usually you'd have the first film have a decent amount and then less and less with each sequel), all the documentaries are well made and don't shy away from the various issues over the years. It's also nice that for a chunk of the blu rays they went back and re-edited them to be widescreen HD, a small touch they didn't need to make (and indeed, I don't believe they bothered with for the films that debuted in the format in the Bond 50 set, just doing a straightforward SD port) but which was really nice.

It's just a shame the Brosnan onwards films- with the honourable exception of the Script to Screen feature on Die Another Day (Brosnan's commentary on that is heartbreaking in retrospect as well because he's so enthusiastic and clearly up for his next one, talking about reshooting the gun barrel as he doesn't think he got it right and so on)- haven't been as well treated.

In terms of formats, it's all down to what you enjoy really isn't it (usually based on what you grew up with). It's more snobs of one format or another that really annoy me, especially people who come out with things like "Ebooks won't last 200 years like a physical book will!". Which is stupid on two levels: First it's a claim no one is going to live long enough to see proven right, and secondly the reason old books are valuable is that most of them don't survive 200 years anyway. I suspect people were the same about books being ruined when the printing press was introduced.

Mind, with vinyl I've never understood the claim I've seen by many people over the years, including Slag up thread, that it's better because the sound quality isn't as good. How does that work? "I like my scratches and cackles!".

With HD, if you're a mad film nut (and have space for a decent sized TV), it's well worth it. If you're not (and you don't), it's not. Though of course, eventually the bulk of tellies in the UK are going to be HD (if they're not already. What's the average life expectancy of a set? Ten years if you really treat it well?), so not going HD with films and TV (via either a cheap Blu Ray player or this fancy streaming stuff) is going to wind up akin to having a colour TV but only watching black and white on it.

I'm actually annoyed how many TV shows made in HD don't get a British blu ray release. Especially when they do get one abroad (hello my Spanish Poirot collection!).

Skyquake87
2015-01-10, 08:51 PM
Hmm. Vinyl's a curious beast, the heavyweight stuff used for some albums (usually fancy reissues and the like) trumps is frickin' awesome and gives a much richer sound. It does boil down to your sound system a bit though.

There is something a bit more involving with vinyl just from handling it to putting the needle on and all that. I like the feel of it and all the packaging and whatnot.

7" singles are also fun. I love them, sitting around swapping them about and whatnot. Cliffy's right though, more sensible people will invest in a jukebox. Or a digital file.

I've been listening to some cassettes recently too! (Have a couple of NME/ Select cover mounts that are brill that I love).