Transformers (Michael Bay, 2007)

Message

Antoine Doinel · #1 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:38 am

Trailer

Ok, so who else is stoked?

toiletduck! · #2 Post by **toiletduck!** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:04 pm

This guy!

And I'm not even all that nostalgic for the 'formers, but that shit looks like it's gonna blow up real good.

-Toilet Dcuk

Antoine Doinel · #3 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:13 pm

Same here! I was actually that kid who had GoBots and M.A.S.K. toys instead of Transformers.

In terms of making big, shiny things explode real nice, I think Michael Bay is as good a go to guy as you can get.

scalesojustice · #4 Post by **scalesojustice** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:15 pm

saw it last night.

you think you know, but you have no idea.

have you ever seen people cheer for a car commercial? you will.

it's that fine line between clever and stupid. Commercialism run a muck. The action is quite exciting and as big as anything i've seen. It's the quintessential summer blockbuster, it knows it and it makes no apologies for it.

see it with a packed house, the crowd reaction makes the movie. if you wait for a lonely matinée or DVD, it's a waste of time and money.

colinr0380 · #5 Post by **colinr0380** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:21 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote: In terms of making big, shiny things explode real nice, I think Michael Bay is as good a go to guy as you can get.

Since I've been so hard on most of Bay's films, I'm surprised by tentatively agreeing with Antoine Doinel! The things that annoyed me so much in previous films was where his artifical style collided with the 'real world' (where insipid fictional couples were having supposedly meaningful relationships while real suffering was occuring such as in Pearl Harbor, but also in Armageddon where cities are destroyed but take a back seat to all the love triangle stuff) - it just didn't gel and felt at best phony and at worst downright insulting.

Hopefully by moving to a completely fantastical world (and I don't expect many will be going into Transformers expecting nuance or subtlety) he'll be able to move away from that and into the stuff he does best, blowing things up in spectacular action sequences. Just so long as we don't have an hour and a half of love story between the army guy and cute girl in the broken down car and only twenty minutes of robot action!

Cold Bishop · #6 Post by **Cold Bishop** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:42 pm

^^^For some reason, I think we will. Hopefully, Scales car-commercial reference means otherwise, but it is a Micheal Bay film.

Either way, the way I see it, Bay can't top the animated film. It has Orson Welles, Blaster "the boombox Transformer", and animated Saturday Morning cartoon characters spouting expletives. Michael Bay has Tyrese and that kid from the Disney channel. The only thing that would have got me to see this was if Bay had Megatron actually transform from gun-to-robot, but alas, it seems he's made him a jet or something now.

And I'm certain the animated film is more hard-hitting, brutal, and serious than the Bay film will be.

scalesojustice · #7 Post by **scalesojustice** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:23 pm

there is a ton of robot fighting, but that car commercial encapsulates the entire film.

i turned to my brother and said, "i can't believe the crowd just cheered for a commercial." to which my brother replied, "i can't believe i almost cheered."

mostly bizzare, but Stan Bush's soundtrack was missed.

davebert · #8 Post by **davebert** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 3:05 pm

I am real excited, but I've always been a Bay fan from the beginning. The man gives the crowd its money's worth, and I've never left wondering where all the budget went, as with so many other blockbusters. It was clear in Bad Boys II that having already basically concluded the storyline, he pushed on and actually purchased Cuba for the express purpose of making it a crater!

Then again, I never bothered seeing Pearl Harbor or more than a few minutes of The Island. I know how to keep my fandom undiluted.

Andre Jurieu · #9 Post by **Andre Jurieu** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:34 pm

Cold Bishop wrote: Either way, the way I see it, Bay can't top the animated film. It has Orson Welles, Blaster "the boombox Transformer", and animated Saturday Morning cartoon characters spouting expletives... And I'm certain the animated film is more hard-hitting, brutal, and serious than the Bay film will be.

No doubt! How can you really top Orson Welles as the gigantic, merciless, unrelenting, planet-devouring robot, with an insatiable-appetite (talk about thinly-veiled) and almost god-like omnipotence? Plus, it included the one of the tackiest soundtrack ever created. What could possibly top the animated-movie?

jbeall · #10 Post by **jbeall** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:09 pm

Andre Jurieu wrote:
Cold Bishop wrote: Either way, the way I see it, Bay can't top the animated film. It has Orson Welles, Blaster "the boombox Transformer", and animated Saturday Morning cartoon characters spouting expletives... And I'm certain the animated film is more hard-hitting, brutal, and serious than the Bay film will be.
No doubt! How can you really top Orson Welles as the gigantic, merciless, unrelenting, planet-devouring robot, with an insatiable-appetite (talk about thinly-veiled) and almost god-like omnipotence? Plus, it included the one of the tackiest soundtrack ever created. What could possibly top the animated-movie?

"You got the touch! You got the power!!"

I like the animated film, but really in a so-bad-it's-good way. I'm stoked for the Michael Bay version, though. Again, I just hope it's The Rock Michael Bay and not Armageddon or Pearl Harbor Bay.

scalesojustice · #11 Post by **scalesojustice** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:19 pm

i think it sets a new bar for commercialism. this isn't product placement, this is "product involvement." i've never seen commercialism embraced so warmly and unappologetic as with this movie. coupled with the fact that the original cartoon from which the movie is based was meant to sell toys to kids, there is a whole other layer to the idea of commercialism in this film. it's meant to sell cars, phones, mt. dew and xboxes, but it brings back some of that good ole, summer blockbuster fun that you can't help but be entertained... by a 2 1/2 hour commercial.

it's beyond my comprehension.

i hope some forum members take the time to see it, because the transformers fans who have seen it haven't taken a step back yet to look at it as a movie.

The Elegant Dandy Fop · #12 Post by **The Elegant Dandy Fop** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:31 pm

Is anybody like me, when they hear the word "Transformers" you can't help but think about the Mattel Chocobot hour from The Simpsons?

Sorry, I could only find it in SPanish, but it's still hilarious, even if you don't understand!

malcolm1980 · #13 Post by **malcolm1980** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:59 pm

Despite my hatred for Michael Bay, I'm really interested in this one since this film DOES require lots of explosions and car crashes. Advanced word is that it's getting his best reviews since The Rock. But part of me wishes that it'll be his second straight flop after The Island.

It's actually opened here now. I'm still waffling whether or not to go see it today.

#14 Post by **Mr Sausage** » Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:28 pm

I rarely watched the cartoon in my youth, and have little nostalgia for any of it; nevertheless, the trailer makes the film seem more like a typical alien invasion movie than anything, with large, mute forces of destruction descending on the bland heroes and destroying things in the usual inefficient fashion. Well, yes, some of them are good and help the humans fight back, but isn't that one more convention of the genre? The fact that the property is Transformers appears entirely arbitrary, like someone took an existing script and dropped them in there.

No doubt stuff will blow up very well (Michael Bay has a singular talent for it, which I feel no need to deprecate), but I still feel curiously uninterested. I say curiously because, for example, there was a while when I was rather excited to see Bad Boys II (never did see it, but I caught the opening on tv and found the gun fight very boring) with its promise of rampant destruction. Transformers seems to promise much of the same, yet the trailer makes me feel more enervated than exhilarated.

I sometimes wonder if Bay is going to go anywhere with his career.

Narshty · #15 Post by **Narshty** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 3:43 am

Michael Bay has now made a movie where, for the larger part of the running time, machinery destroys itself. He must have been running around with a permanent horn for the last nine months. Surely this is going to be one of the most lip-smackingly fetishistic spectacles Hollywood has ever bankrolled.

He's still the only big-league blockbuster director who can really surprise me with wild tonal shifts or truly berserk imagery (which I suspect we'll get plenty of - Bay posted on his blog that some of the effects shots were taking 36 hours to render per frame).

Mr_sausage wrote:I was rather excited to see Bad Boys II (never did see it, but I caught the opening on tv and found the gun fight very boring)

The fact it was set at a KKK-rally did nothing for you?

abuckley89 · #16 Post by **abuckley89** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:30 am

It's interesting to see that everybody here doesn't completely pawn Bay off as completely irrelevant.

I hope this is a major disaster so he never returns to the idea of remaking the birds. However, secretly, part of me is dying to see this. teehee

colinr0380 · #17 Post by **colinr0380** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:22 am

scalesojustice wrote:I've never seen commercialism embraced so warmly and unappologetic as with this movie. coupled with the fact that the original cartoon from which the movie is based was meant to sell toys to kids, there is a whole other layer to the idea of commercialism in this film. it's meant to sell cars, phones, mt. dew and xboxes, but it brings back some of that good ole, summer blockbuster fun that you can't help but be entertained... by a 2 1/2 hour commercial.

That's one of the reasons why I think Bay has found his 'level'. He's not got pretentions to recreate a historical event or give us 'what if' scenarios about asteroids or cloning. Just a lot of robots fighting each other, which on that basis I don't find so upsetting! (If he wants to drop a metaphor or two in there I could even let that go, if it isn't done in too heavy handed a way!)

It will be interesting to hear what Transformers fans have to say about the film. I have a feeling that they might be a little disappointed if they want it to take up themes from the series (I had one of the toys and watched a couple of episodes as a kid but didn't follow them closely - wasn't the series often focused more on the interactions between the Autobots and the humans rather than the war with the Decepticons, although that was usually rumbling along in the background?). I'd agree with MrSausage that from the trailer it looks like it has less of that and more of a style of a film made post-Spielberg's War of the Worlds.

Narshty wrote:He's still the only big-league blockbuster director who can really surprise me with wild tonal shifts or truly berserk imagery (which I suspect we'll get plenty of - Bay posted on his blog that some of the effects shots were taking 36 hours to render per frame).

It could be interesting, but then they might only last one frame! Armageddon was incredibly detailed but impossible to appreciate on that level because it was so hyper-edited!

malcolm1980 · #18 Post by **malcolm1980** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:52 am

I've seen it.

Good news: This is Michael Bay's best film since The Rock. Bad news: Well, he still hasn't learned the meaning of the word 'subtlety'. This is a material that best serves his strengths: kickass action but Bay's penchant for going way over the top and undisciplined stylistic flourishes mar what could've been a pretty good escapist summer movie. The action way, way overstays it's welcome in the last act. On the bright side, the film doesn't take itself too seriously with the actors pretty much game. Recent Tony winner Julie White in her few minutes as LaBeouf's mother gives probably the best performance in a Michael Bay movie ever.

Andre Jurieu · #19 Post by **Andre Jurieu** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:21 pm

scalesojustice wrote:i think it sets a new bar for commercialism. this isn't product placement, this is "product involvement." i've never seen commercialism embraced so warmly and unappologetic as with this movie. coupled with the fact that the original cartoon from which the movie is based was meant to sell toys to kids ... but it brings back some of that good ole, summer blockbuster fun that you can't help but be entertained... by a 2 1/2 hour commercial.

The Elegant Dandy Fop wrote:Is anybody like me, when they hear the word "Transformers" you can't help but think about the Mattel Chocobot hour from The Simpsons?

Yeah, first I think of the TV-cartoon, then I think of the Simpsons parody (though the show looked more like the GoBots than Transformers). The names that they came up with alone are genius:

TV Announcer: The new, improved Kidz Newz...has been canceled! Stay tuned for the Mattel and Mars Bar Quick Energy Choc-O-Bot Hour!

Choc-O-Bot: You can count on us, Mr. President. Major Nougat! Gooey! Cocoa! Put down those entertaining Mattel products! Colonel Kataffy is up to his old tricks!

Cocoa: Let's power up!

Lisa: I can't believe they canceled us for this s...
Bart: [interrupting] Shut up! I'm trying to watch this!

#20 Post by **Mr Sausage** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:37 pm

Narshty wrote:
Mr_sausage wrote:I was rather excited to see Bad Boys II (never did see it, but I caught the opening on tv and found the gun fight very boring)
The fact it was set at a KKK-rally did nothing for you?

I think I got all my chuckles out of that with the trailer. Outrageous as it was, it wasn't sublimely outrageous. I might still be convinced to rent the movie some time, tho'.

margot · #21 Post by **margot** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 9:16 pm

I'm excited. I love a good Michael Bay movie.

One thing is confusing me though, the begining of the trailer when LeBouf's dad takes him to the Porsche dealership made it look like (to me anyway) that it was set in the 70s or something, but later on in the trailer there's all kinds of modern looking things. So when does this movie take place?

malcolm1980 · #22 Post by **malcolm1980** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:43 pm

Raoul Duke wrote:I'm excited. I love a good Michael Bay movie.

Too bad such a thing does not exist yet. 8-) Zing!

margot · #23 Post by **margot** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:04 pm

malcolm1980 wrote:
Raoul Duke wrote:I'm excited. I love a good Michael Bay movie.
Too bad such a thing does not exist yet. 8-) Zing!

Heh. As far as action films go though, He's great. If he wasn't directing this I doubt I'd see it.

malcolm1980 · #24 Post by **malcolm1980** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:10 pm

Raoul Duke wrote:
malcolm1980 wrote:
Raoul Duke wrote:I'm excited. I love a good Michael Bay movie.
Too bad such a thing does not exist yet. 8-) Zing!
Heh. As far as action films go though, He's great. If he wasn't directing this I doubt I'd see it.

I think Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Joe Dante, Paul Verhoeven, Sam Raimi, Bryan Singer and Christopher Nolan could've made something more interesting out of the material.

Antoine Doinel · #25 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:15 pm

malcolm1980 wrote:I think Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Joe Dante, Paul Verhoeven, Sam Raimi, Bryan Singer and Christopher Nolan could've made something more interesting out of the material.

Steve Spielberg executive produced so he did presumably have some input into the film.