The Transformers Archive Skip to main content / Also skip section headers

[The Transformers Archive - an international fan site]
Please feel free to log in or register.

 
  • transformers toys
  • transformers comics
  • transformers cartoon
  • transformers live-action movies
  • transformers fandom
  • transformers forum

Go Back   TFARCHIVE > COMMUNITY > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-09-27, 09:29 AM   #41
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by inflatable dalek View Post
Though presumably anyone who was paying that much attention to announcements on the sequels would have fallen for the bluff he was signed up for two more films.
So suspense comes from press releases now? Good. Grief.

Quote:
Loved how they finally sodded off all the angst that made the previous two films (especially the Lee one which is just tonally all over the place) so dragged out and turned the character into something fun whilst still keeping that slightly dark edge.
Personally thought all the edges were firmly filed off long before the end. He's no longer the Hulk, unstoppable force of nature. He's now a fully paid up helpful heroic member of the Justice League of Disney Moneyspinners all nicely packaged and cleaned up. Did you see how awesome he was? And how his apparently destructive and unstoppable rages didn't result in a ****-ton of bystander casualties? God that's marketable. Wait until the focus groups see that. I think I just came in my Calvin Kleins.

Quote:
Not so here where the one scene where he got anything to do by himself with the villain saw him go up to a Loki acting blatantly as a Hitler analogy and actually saying "Hey, does this remind anyone of Hitler? Come on, see what we did here, look, there's even an old Jewish man being all defiant! It's symbolic".
Jesus that bit was stupid, wasn't it? To be fair, it was the only laugh the first hour got out of me. No, I tell a lie - Loki's early showing as the Norse God of Matrixing Around And Stabbing People With A Spear did get a giggle. To be fair Loki was well played, it was just a shame they blatantly didn't know what exactly to do with him once he'd unleashed CGI on everyone. I did like his mystical heart conditioning that was so powerful it could be undone by a bonk on the head, though.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 09:31 AM   #42
Skyquake87
One with the Matrix
 
Skyquake87's Avatar
 
Default

I suppose the upshot of my arguement is that I enjoyed Avengers more for its generally more cheerful tone. DOTM just felt like i was trapped in a washing machine on spin being hit with hammers whilst a glorious sunset shone through.And it went on far, far too long....

There's problems and flaws with Avengers, and it was simple fun which is all I was hoping for, It held its weight over its running time, and was a sprightly and energetic film.

I think with Bay, he does stamp his personality on films...but he never has anything new to bring to the table. Its all low angles, high angles, spinny angles, sunsets and so on.Its just more of the same old same old. ROTF I enjoyed more despite it being blatantly cobbled together from a half written script and a load of set peices. It was silly enough to be enjoyable nonsense. DOTM seemed to buy into its own seriousness and suddenly try and be all grown up and it justy didn't come off. The grey, bleak cinematography (is that the right word) didn't help and the human cast were just unlikeable, which I think was a big part of the problem for me. Especially as they took up most of the screen time. It's a shame Josh thingamajig wasn't given more of a role. Everyone else was just horrible.
 
Skyquake87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 09:36 AM   #43
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by inflatable dalek View Post
Knowing nothing about exercising I didn't have a problem with the multiple punching bags, in my ignorance I just assume they need to have a certain firmness (to stop the fist just sinking into them) that had been lost on the one he punched.
Highly likely, to be fair... I just assumed he was too lazy to pick the one he'd knocked across the room back up again. I did like the way it WAS his old neighbourhood gym he chooses over the SHIELD facilities in the Ultimates; the whole film should have been full of stuff like that.

I think Samuel L Jackson playing himself didn't work as well as it did in the comic because once again it was all sanded down. Like Cap he was nowhere near as nasty as an experienced soldier should have been - he should have been the guy authorising the nuke strike but instead they passed the buck to that board of directors so they can keep the decks clear for a Fury film.

Hang on, why does Fury still have his job at the end of the film? He's apparently removed from command (or was that message from Loki? Or Iron Man? Or Jesus?), he's left a bunch of superheroes running around America, the Heli-Carrier's been blown to ****ery and he's given the Allspark back to Thor...
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 10:05 AM   #44
Blackjack
Unashamed Movie Fanboy
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Smile

My biggest problem with the Avengers, for me, is that near the end it's too familiar with the Transformers in several aspects. Maybe it's just me watching the Transformers films like two dozen times, but the visual director straight-out said that they used Dark of the Moon as a baseline to do the city battle scene, which would account to that cross between Driller and the Decepticon warships. The plot device basically being the Allspark combined with the Space Bridge pillars, also fired off from a big building, doesn't help either.

And, well, we ignore it because we see Iron Man and Captain America and Thor and Hulk and Black Widow and Hawkeye, and it's grand.

I've always thought Hulk's transformation from being uncontrollable during his movie and the first half of the movie into the happy team player in the end was quite jarring. Loki's transformation from a tragic prince in Thor's movie to your generic supervillain was also quite badly handled.... Loki was the most entertaining thing in the Thor movie.

Despite it, though, I like the Avengers and the Whedon humour. I did think they overdid it with Iron Man a bit, but I like the humour as much as I like Bay's one-liners, maybe even more. I love it for being a great, great action flick. Like Transformers, I came in expecting superheroes beating the crap out of each other and random baddie mooks, so I was entertained enough by that movie, at least.
 
Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 10:38 AM   #45
tahukanuva
Human After All
 
tahukanuva's Avatar
 
Tennessee, US
Unhappy

Cliffy's opinions on things make me feel bad about myself.
 
tahukanuva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 11:13 AM   #46
Red Dave Prime
Assistant Comic Reviewer
 
Red Dave Prime's Avatar
 
Ireland
Default

We could honestly argue the toss on which film did the better job and in the end it really comes down to your own preference. For me though, I thought Avengers was the far better movie. But to each their own.

I think Cliffy, and no disrespect intended, that while you argue that so many people shit on DOTM simply because its a Michael Bay film, it seems much of your dislike for Avengers comes from you being fed up with hearing Joss Whedon getting over praised.

You've also complained when TF fanboys dont like the Bay movies because they arent what those fanboys think the movie SHOULD be (Galvatron vs Ultra Magnus while Unicron fights Primus on Cybertron with no Humans!!! YES!!!) and I think thats a more than fair point, of which I'm as guilty of as the next fan. But some of your complaints about avengers is the same - Nick Fury should be more vicous, Cap should be more like ultimates.

You've defended some of Transformers flaws many a time by claiming its a movie of a toy that is designed to make Hasbro/Paramount as much money as possible so certain considerations need to be taken into account. Again, your bang on the money (pun intended) with that, but you take issue with the fact that Avengers also had to take those considerations into account in relation to Marvel/ Disney. Of course with a movie that big either director has to make concessions but I'd wager that Bay has much more clout to get his way over Whedon (at least pre-avengers box office).

Neither film can be regarded as classic cinema and both will go down as event movies that loose some of the lustre as time goes by and better event movies come along. Both are designed as much to sell bucket loads of merchandise as well as entertain.

But there is one slight difference (for this poster anyway) - Like him or loathe him, Bay has had three movies in this franchise. In that time he hasnt tried anything new (he upped the spectacle alright). So what could he bring to the fourth film to make it interesting? Yes, it makes sense from a business position but thats not the issue I have. In Whedons case, that was his first Avengers movie. If the second and third follow the same formula (and I've a strong feeling they will) then I would have the same issues with that. The films dont need to be drastically different but if its just different backgrounds with the same characters fighting another large army (this time its in chicago!) I'll be just as bored. Whether he was successful or not, Nolan did try to give each Batman movie a different feel and I think thats the way to go. But even then, a fourth Nolan Batman would be stretching it.

And thats the way I see Bay doing a fourth TF movies - stretching his formula to the point where even the fans of his other films start to wane. Transformers is a franchise that could produce several different takes, each with their own trilogys. I'd like to see that. I liked how the new spiderman has decided to take the ultimates direction with the peter parker story. Its not completely different to start but it gives them much more room to be different for the next film. I'd like to see Hasbro and Paramount try that.

And for the record, if Bay does produce a cracker of a fourth movie that takes the franchise onto to another trilogy I'll be the first on to say "Cliff J, you were right about Bay getting that fourth shot."
 
Red Dave Prime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 11:32 AM   #47
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dave Prime View Post
You've also complained when TF fanboys dont like the Bay movies because they arent what those fanboys think the movie SHOULD be (Galvatron vs Ultra Magnus while Unicron fights Primus on Cybertron with no Humans!!! YES!!!) and I think thats a more than fair point, of which I'm as guilty of as the next fan. But some of your complaints about avengers is the same - Nick Fury should be more vicous, Cap should be more like ultimates.
The problem is the Avengers movie drops good material. The Transformers films drop bad material. Unicron would not improve any of the previous three films unless they do something very different like Prime did. Cap being something other than a gently baffled emoticon for the running time - say, an experienced super soldier with a tactical brain - would have given the film some serious drive rather than having the Avengers themselves as confused bystanders for 95% of the film.

The problem is that the changes to Avengers have a negative impact on the storytelling, have the studio's grubby fingerprints all over them and generally leave us with a weaker film as a result.

Quote:
You've defended some of Transformers flaws many a time by claiming its a movie of a toy that is designed to make Hasbro/Paramount as much money as possible so certain considerations need to be taken into account. Again, your bang on the money (pun intended) with that, but you take issue with the fact that Avengers also had to take those considerations into account in relation to Marvel/ Disney. Of course with a movie that big either director has to make concessions but I'd wager that Bay has much more clout to get his way over Whedon (at least pre-avengers box office).
My main argument with the Transformers films is that the films have been successful and popular and that's why they're the way there are. There aren't many changes I feel need to be made for them for any other reasons either; the last two scripts could have done with a rewrite to solve a couple of plot conveniences but that's about it. The commercial needs dovetail well with the end result - they need to make a lot of money and they do and the end result is fun to watch.

Avengers was too obviously written by the execs - something I don't think affected Transformers badly, especially considering the more overt product placement. Transformers is juggling car and toy manufacturers. Avengers is only selling us the stars of the films - they don't have to make a Camaro look awesome, just Captain America. And yet Transformers hangs together better and feels more like the work of a filmmaker than some machine in a Disney office. The commercial needs constrict the end result.

Whedon is a hired hand; very obviously a hired hand. Anyone - Stephen Sommer, McQ, whoever - could have directed that film. I'm sure Whedon will be back for The Kang Scuffle or whatever because he obviously sucked the right cocks and licked the right arses, but the film lacks identity and soul. It's assembled, quite obviously and badly in places (Thor being neutered because he's obviously got the power level to render the others redundant, for example). As for it being Whedon's first film with the franchise, the first Transformers film flat-out annihilates it.

I am quite tired of Whedon being mindlessly praised, though, you're right. He's done a lot of good stuff, a hell of a lot (though arguably his best is now several years in the past) but he gets a free ride from too many people and the rabid acclaim heaped on this turd simply because his name's attached to it is sickening. If Michael Bay had directed this film would it get so many get out of jail free cards? No, no it wouldn't.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:04 PM   #48
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Interesting quote from Erick Weber Rotten Tomatoes:
"Without Robert Downey Jr. delivering his witty quips in patented rat-a-tat-tat fashion, The Avengers would largely be a soulless shell of a movie that could be mistaken for a Michael Bay production."

Quote:
My main argument with the Transformers films is that the films have been successful and popular and that's why they're the way there are. There aren't many changes I feel need to be made for them for any other reasons either; the last two scripts could have done with a rewrite to solve a couple of plot conveniences but that's about it. The commercial needs dovetail well with the end result - they need to make a lot of money and they do and the end result is fun to watch.
My take on the Transformers movies is that I love the first, hate the second and don't mind the third. But I'd disagree that either the second or third are fun to watch. I skipped the third in the cinema and saw it on DVD and even then I was bored watching it. There was a lot going on on the screen but none of it was interesting or involving and I didn't feel involved or emotionally invested in the plot. The only one I still like is the first.

Personally, I love the Avengers movie. It was the most fun I'd had in a cinema in a long time and my wife loved it to. Sure, the plot is light and predictable but what sells it for me is the characters and their interactions. Watching RDJ doing his thing (and yes he is funny) and the gradual assembling of the group despite the fact that none of them want to is entertaining. And Joss was the main reason it worked so well.

Another quote from RT, this time Matt Looker:
"It really is an astounding achievement - a film that juggles an unenviable number of elements; combining what we've seen before, slotting them together and then adding enough depth, action and humour to make this a remarkable standalone film."

The fact that you could watch this without having seen any of the previous movies but if you had it only added to the experience was great. Were there problems with it? Sure. The lack of deaths of bystanders stood out to me when I was watching it but it wasn't enough to prevent me enjoying the movie.

Overall, Avengers was one of my favourite movies of the summer, a blockbuster done well and something I look forward to rewatching. That it got 92% on RT is quite an accomplishment and I'm glad Joss is signed on for the second. I just hope they don't mess up Thor 2 and Cap 2 like they did Iron Man 2.
 
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:04 PM   #49
Red Dave Prime
Assistant Comic Reviewer
 
Red Dave Prime's Avatar
 
Ireland
Default

I promised myself I wouldnt respond but....

Quote:
Unicron would not improve any of the previous three films unless they do something very different like Prime did
I agree, was just using that as an example but why would they need to do something different? Most of the movie going public wouldnt have had much of a clue about Unicron and Kids who watched Energon would probably have gotten a kick out of seeing the biggest bad on screen. (was energon a successful cartoon?)

Quote:
The problem is that the changes to Avengers have a negative impact on the storytelling, have the studio's grubby fingerprints all over them and generally leave us with a weaker film as a result.
Dont know if I can agree with that as Avengers felt an awful lot like a Whedon film. I'm sure there was a fair bit of comment from execs and like any movie, some was applied but it didnt fell out of place from his other work like Serentiy, Buffy etc. Whether it had a negative impact is down to perception as well - I know flip all about those characters comics, but I got each of the movie versions.

Quote:
My main argument with the Transformers films is that the films have been successful and popular and that's why they're the way there are. There aren't many changes I feel need to be made for them for any other reasons either; the last two scripts could have done with a rewrite to solve a couple of plot conveniences but that's about it. The commercial needs dovetail well with the end result - they need to make a lot of money and they do and the end result is fun to watch.
The same can be said of Avengers surely?

Quote:
Avengers is only selling us the stars of the films - they don't have to make a Camaro look awesome, just Captain America. And yet Transformers hangs together better and feels more like the work of a filmmaker than some machine in a Disney office. The commercial needs constrict the end result.
No, but they clearly had to set up not just a sequel but get fans invested in each character individually - and the best example is Hulk. Fans are now looking for a new Hulk film after Whedons movie rebooted him.

Quote:
Whedon is a hired hand; very obviously a hired hand. Anyone - Stephen Sommer, McQ, whoever -
Hang on there - to quote from his wiki page

"Whedon wrote Astonishing X-Men in Marvel Comics' popular line of comics about the X-Men but finished his 24 issue run in 2008 and handed over the writing reins to Warren Ellis. The title, recreated specifically for Whedon, has been one of Marvel's best-selling comics as of 2006 and was nominated for several Eisner Awards including Best Serialized Story, Best Continuing Series, Best New Series and Best Writer, winning the Best Continuing Series award in 2006"

That surely puts him as a pretty important writer for Marvel who has shown he has an affinity not just with the marvel universe but, judging by the success, the fans as well.

With the exception of Iron Man 2, none of marvels movies have broken the 100 million mark so Avengers was definitely not a sure thing. Whedons movie is the 3rd or 4th highest grosser of all time. If youre saying thats not in some way down to his direction than the argument for keeping Bay on for a fourth transformers because the other 3 were successful is moot.

And if I'm not mistaken hasn't Marvel now appointed the Guy to oversee creatively the next few years of Movie and TV production?

Sorry, but when it comes to taking comic book to screen I dont think you can call him a hack.

Quote:
I am quite tired of Whedon being mindlessly praised, though, you're right. He's done a lot of good stuff, a hell of a lot (though arguably his best is now several years in the past) but he gets a free ride from too many people and the rabid acclaim heaped on this turd simply because his name's attached to it is sickening. If Michael Bay had directed this film would it get so many get out of jail free cards? No, no it wouldn't.
I'll agree with you on this. If his name is attached I'll give it a look alright but some of his stuff is very much over rated and wouldnt have gotten near the amount of praise without his name attached. Dollhouse and cabin in the woods are both alright but not near the 5 star level some people rate them. Actually, Dollhouse isnt even alright.

The end this debate with pure science:

The Avengers > Transformers > Iron Man > Dark of the Moon > Revenge of the Fallen > Bad Boyz

There, conclusive proof with pure science fact.
 
Red Dave Prime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:26 PM   #50
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dave Prime
Hang on there - to quote from his wiki page

"Whedon wrote Astonishing X-Men in Marvel Comics' popular line of comics about the X-Men but finished his 24 issue run in 2008 and handed over the writing reins to Warren Ellis. The title, recreated specifically for Whedon, has been one of Marvel's best-selling comics as of 2006 and was nominated for several Eisner Awards including Best Serialized Story, Best Continuing Series, Best New Series and Best Writer, winning the Best Continuing Series award in 2006"

That surely puts him as a pretty important writer for Marvel who has shown he has an affinity not just with the marvel universe but, judging by the success, the fans as well.
Astonishing is great, one of the best comic runs of the last decade and so instantly recognisable as Joss' work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dave Prime
I'll agree with you on this. If his name is attached I'll give it a look alright but some of his stuff is very much over rated and wouldnt have gotten near the amount of praise without his name attached. Dollhouse and cabin in the woods are both alright but not near the 5 star level some people rate them. Actually, Dollhouse isnt even alright.
I expect most Joss fans feel like this. They'll give his work a go on the hope it's as good as expected. And yeah, Dollhouse isn't very good. I really need to rewatch that soon. As for Cabin in the Woods, it was Drew Goddards movie as much as it was Joss'. Joss was co-writer and producer whereas Goddard was co-writer and director. Oh, and it's excellent.

And to get the thread back on topic:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dave Prime
For the record - I went to see the first movie in the cinema and enjoyed it enough to pick up the blue ray once it dropped in price. Saw the second movie in the cinema but was so put off that I didnt bother with DOTM. I finally got round to seeing that after picking it up using gift vouchers as part of a 2 for 25 (also, many of the people on here seemed to enjoy it which I took as a good sign. Yourself included). I regret that purchase. I wont be bothering with the fourth bar some amazing reviews.
Sounds like a similar experience to mine and I won't be bothering with the fourth barring some great reviews either. Actually, I'm disappointed by the news of Bay joining the fourth movie. I was looking forward to something fresh and the reboot sounded like a good idea. If it's just going to be more of the same then I'm really not interested.
 
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:31 PM   #51
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dave Prime View Post
I agree, was just using that as an example but why would they need to do something different? Most of the movie going public wouldnt have had much of a clue about Unicron and Kids who watched Energon would probably have gotten a kick out of seeing the biggest bad on screen. (was energon a successful cartoon?)
I don't think Unicron would work solely for mechanical reasons. In live action they can't cheat with his size as in comics and cartoons and in order for him to interact with basically anything else you'd have to shrink him down to the point where there's no point in him being Unicron. As I say, Prime (which with computer animation faces broadly similar challenges) did find a pretty good solution.

Quote:
No, but they clearly had to set up not just a sequel but get fans invested in each character individually - and the best example is Hulk. Fans are now looking for a new Hulk film after Whedons movie rebooted him.
And that completely and utterly compromised the film. The Transformers brand, if you like, is bigger than all but two characters - Optimus Prime and Bumblebee. Everyone else is a possible target, DotM even taking out directors' favourite Ironhide. Jetfire doesn't get indestructible status because he's midway through a trilogy of films for the studio. Obviously in summer action films the good guys always win and often it's with minimal sacrifice but I don't think I've ever seen a film where the survival of every major heroic character was quite such a foregone conclusion for simple commercial reasons (maybe the Star Trek films, but even they managed to kill Spock for a little while).


Quote:
That surely puts him as a pretty important writer for Marvel who has shown he has an affinity not just with the marvel universe but, judging by the success, the fans as well.
So does Mark Millar, it doesn't mean he's given free reign to direct films.

It's worth noting the comics industry is small enough for his zealots to make a notable impact as well, which is why his sub-fanfic Buffy Season 8 crap juddered along for so long while his shows were getting cancelled left, right and centre.

Quote:
If youre saying thats not in some way down to his direction than the argument for keeping Bay on for a fourth transformers because the other 3 were successful is moot.
You honestly think the merging of four successful action franchises had less to do with the film's success than it being directed by the guy who made ratings dud Firefly? How many of those tickets were sold to people who knew who Whedon was?

The arguments for Bay from a commercial point of view have been made above. There are other arguments in his favour too. He's got a proven track record of delivering films that work for studios and audiences. Now I guess Whedon has a track record for box office too, but he didn't before this film (last genuine ghetto-transcending widespread success: Buffy, surely?).

And for commercial reasons Marvel/Disney will keep him on for the next two, sure. If it isn't broken for them why would they want to fix it? It's just a shame it means the franchise will be saddled with such "will this do?" films as a result as the Avengers is a concept with serious cinematic potential. There's too much pressure from all directions in the franchise for him to do much else, but that doesn't make the sub-par nature of the film any more easy to digest.

Quote:
And if I'm not mistaken hasn't Marvel now appointed the Guy to oversee creatively the next few years of Movie and TV production?
The Marvel with a long record of self-defeating political appointments like Bill Jenas and Jeph Loeb? There's a seal of approval.

Quote:
Sorry, but when it comes to taking comic book to screen I dont think you can call him a hack.
I can and will. He was obviously told a lot of what to put in the Avengers and he just bent over and took it, resulting in a genetically engineered final product. That he's written some comics for money doesn't change that.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:42 PM   #52
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
Avengers was too obviously written by the execs - something I don't think affected Transformers badly, especially considering the more overt product placement. Transformers is juggling car and toy manufacturers. Avengers is only selling us the stars of the films - they don't have to make a Camaro look awesome, just Captain America. And yet Transformers hangs together better and feels more like the work of a filmmaker than some machine in a Disney office. The commercial needs constrict the end result.
My feeling is the movie was written the way it needed to be but that Joss wrote it and due to that it feels like a Joss movie. Sure the execs wanted the movie to go a certain way and the principle character death was mandated by the studio, not by Joss. I felt that Iron Man 2 suffered from studio interference far more than Avengers did and the result was a truly terrible movie, which IMO Avengers is not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
As for it being Whedon's first film with the franchise, the first Transformers film flat-out annihilates it.
Disagree. While I really like the first Transformers movie I've heard criticisms that it was overly childish and silly with the hiding around the house and peeing on humans specifically cited. In the Avengers I thought the humour, especially the Hulk, was very well judged. Actually, I've never heard a theatre laugh louder than when Hulk was onscreen.

For me the thing that works well in both movies is the characters, something the sequels neglected and I don't think Transformers is a better film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
I am quite tired of Whedon being mindlessly praised, though, you're right. He's done a lot of good stuff, a hell of a lot (though arguably his best is now several years in the past) but he gets a free ride from too many people and the rabid acclaim heaped on this turd simply because his name's attached to it is sickening. If Michael Bay had directed this film would it get so many get out of jail free cards? No, no it wouldn't.
Really didn't like it, huh?
 

Last edited by Neuronutter; 2012-09-27 at 02:36 PM.
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:54 PM   #53
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuronutter View Post
My feeling is the movie was written the way it needed to be but that Joss wrote it and thus it feels like a Joss movie. Sure the execs wanted the movie to go a certain way and the principle character death was mandated by the studio, not by Joss. I felt that Iron Man 2 suffered from studio interference far more than Avengers did and the result was a truly terrible movie, which IMO Avengers is not.
Joss? Joss Stone? Joss Ackland? Jos Verstappen? FFS, he's a film/TV director, not your ****ing mate or a religious leader. Nice to see you treated it like any other film rather than an easily led cultist anyway.

What's a Joss movie? Is it like a Lynch movie or a Leone movie, with a series of familiar and/or developing motifs in the mise-en-scene signifying you're seeing the work of a cinematic artist? Or do you mean that there are some jokes about pop culture in the dialogue?

Quote:
Actually, I've never heard a theatre laugh louder than when Hulk was onscreen.
Yeh, I laughed pretty hard when he was onscreen too - it's quite easy to see him as fun and family free when the character's been sanitised that much, isn't it? Because it's not like the whole point of the Hulk is that he's a loose cannon or anything. I found myself laughing quite a lot, but strangely not in the big gaps left in the voice track after every one-liner.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:54 PM   #54
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
You honestly think the merging of four successful action franchises had less to do with the film's success than it being directed by the guy who made ratings dud Firefly? How many of those tickets were sold to people who knew who Whedon was?
Firefly may have tanked in the ratings, partly due to the treatment by the studio, partly due to the difficulty in selling something so unusual, but the DVD sales were good and Serenity did well, though not as well as hoped.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
The arguments for Bay from a commercial point of view have been made above. There are other arguments in his favour too. He's got a proven track record of delivering films that work for studios and audiences. Now I guess Whedon has a track record for box office too, but he didn't before this film (last genuine ghetto-transcending widespread success: Buffy, surely?).
I'd question Bay's record of delivering movies that work for the audiences. In his last nine movies I'd say only three of them, TF, the Rock and Bad Boys, were any good. The rest may have made money but they were bad movies.

I'd like to know what the DVD sales were for the TF series. I bought the DVD for the first, then avoided the next two and won't be buying them at all. I think the Avengers will do very well on DVD as well as in the cinema, an indication of how well the audience enjoyed the movie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
I can and will. He was obviously told a lot of what to put in the Avengers and he just bent over and took it, resulting in a genetically engineered final product. That he's written some comics for money doesn't change that.
I doubt the movie could have been made any other way than how the studio wanted and I think it's to Joss' credit that it's as enjoyable as it is.
 
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 12:58 PM   #55
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
Joss? Joss Stone? Joss Ackland? Jos Verstappen? FFS, he's a film/TV director, not your ****ing mate or a religious leader. Nice to see you treated it like any other film rather than an easily led cultist anyway.
Getting a little riled up are we?
 
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 01:13 PM   #56
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Smile

TF was the biggest seller of 2007 - 13.74m units. ROTF was the best-selling DVD of 2009 - 7.5m on DVD, 1.2m in the first week of Blu-Ray. DotM seems not to have done so well with about 4m combined on both formats (though IIRC overall DVD sales have been falling the past 2-3 years; consumers have largely cottoned on to just how quickly and drastically prices fall, how soon special editions come out after vanilla releases, rise of Netflix and LoveFilm; will try to find the stuff I was reading on this).

I'm not entirely sure what home media has to do with it either way - there are a whole variety of different audience dynamics at play in that arena.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 01:14 PM   #57
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuronutter View Post
Getting a little riled up are we?
Takes more than a Joss fanboy to get me riled. It's just amusing that you'd invalidate your argument is such a simplistic fashion.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 01:21 PM   #58
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
TF was the biggest seller of 2007 - 13.74m units. ROTF was the best-selling DVD of 2009 - 7.5m on DVD, 1.2m in the first week of Blu-Ray. DotM seems not to have done so well with about 4m combined on both formats (though IIRC overall DVD sales have been falling the past 2-3 years; consumers have largely cottoned on to just how quickly and drastically prices fall, how soon special editions come out after vanilla releases, rise of Netflix and LoveFilm; will try to find the stuff I was reading on this).

I'm not entirely sure what home media has to do with it either way - there are a whole variety of different audience dynamics at play in that arena.
Are there any figure that combine all the various outlets? I'm curious as to how many people who saw each of the TF films in the cinema then went and bought it in some form or other. A drop of 46% from the first to the second (not counting blu-ray) is quite a lot and 75% by the time you get to DotM. I suspect a lot of people, like myself, are now bored of this franchise which is why I was hoping for the reboot. Still, TF4 will make a sh*t load of money in the theatre if Bay directs it.

Any numbers on trilogy sales? Might explain some of the drop off by TF3.

I'll be curious to see the numbers for the Avengers when they come out. Best selling DVD of the year, probably. Either that or TDKR.
 
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 01:24 PM   #59
Neuronutter
Gestalt
 
Neuronutter's Avatar
 
Halifax, NS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffjumper View Post
Takes more than a Joss fanboy to get me riled. It's just amusing that you'd invalidate your argument is such a simplistic fashion.
Don't really see the need for his full name in an Avengers discussion. And anyone who has seen Buffy, or any of his works, knows what his dialogue sounds like. It's easy enough to pick out the Buffy episodes he's written by ear.

Plus I'm amused you included mise-en-scene in a discussion on here! Heh!

EDIT: Wouldn't really class myself as a Joss fanboy. More of an appreciator of his work.
 
Neuronutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-27, 01:31 PM   #60
Cliffjumper
Cellar Door
 
Cliffjumper's Avatar
 
Default

Can't find any combined figures. The escalating box office speaks louder than DVD sales as it's the closest thing to a level playing field - no special features, no loss leading offers, no store exclusives leading to doubling up, films are shown in their intended format with their intended apparatus, 'event' developments are still mysteries (The Crying Game was - regrettably, IMO - marketed on the strength of a plot twist, meaning a big cinema hit but poor home media sales as everyone knew about Dil by then) and so on.

3D exhibition has also hit DVD sales heavily market-wide - people aren't buying as many DVDs of films they saw in 3D as they realise they won't be able to create anywhere near the spectacle on their TVs at home.
 
Cliffjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
 
 
[the-hub.co.uk]
[transfans.co.uk]
[oneshallstand]
[unicron.com]
[counter-x.net]
[ntfa.net]
[allspark.com]
[transformertoys.co.uk]
[tfu.info]
[botchthecrab.com]
[obscure_tf]
[tfradio.net]
 

[TFArchive button]
Link graphics...

BOOKMARK US
Or in FF, hit Ctrl+D.