I also liked that the vision of the future was new schlepped on top of old. I know that's been done before, but most future movies I've seen in recent years (Minority Report, I, Robot, um, others), looked polished. Like all the old stuff got bulldozed and new stuff was built. That's fine, too, but not realistic for a short 15-50 year jump.

It was funny, also, to see a Chevy SSR, which was brand new, at the time, as an old beater, of sorts.

By the way, in regards to that Superhero Hype article, I'll laugh if those soldiers get blown back in slow-motion.

Master Ulic wrote:Oh, trust me, I have thicker skin than you can comprehend. Otherwise, I would've quit this site long ago due to your nonsense. I've suffered worse fools than you, and they were in person, not hiding behind a computer monitor.

And as for name-calling, it takes something pretty dire to drive me to that point, and you deserve it in spades, boyo. Everything I said about you is 100% accurate, and the funny thing is, you know it is. So don't even try acting defensive. Your purpose on this site is very obvious.

Yes, the term "fucking douchebag" is always used by composed people, especially when they are defending Michael Bay movies.

Me: "The characters, even the robots, in the film were weak."

Ulic: "YOU CAN'T FUCKING SAY THAT. WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SOME SORT OF DUMBASS!!!!?"

Peeing robots, walking mountain dew machines, etc are an embarrassment. They make me embarrassed to say that I grew up watching Transformers.

Don't get your panties in a wad when I point these things out, as they are, I don't know, in the actual movie.

But to get to the point of calling someone a "fucking douchebag" over Transformers? Hell, that's more silly than the film itself!

I grew up watching Transformers, just like you.

I paid my money to see Michael Bay's Transformers, just like you.

I will more than likely pay my money to see Michael Bay's second Transformers, just like you.

I reserve the right, based on the first film, to be skeptical.

If you can't handle that, then stop posting. Seriously. That post is border-line scary.

Guys, take the dick-measuring contest off the boards or go away. THE END.


As far as pissing robots and walking Mtn Dew machines go...

I thought the oil-leak scene was great...

And what do you think would happen to nearby machines affected by the allspark? You already know (assume, suspend disbelief) that living machines are on earth in the form of vehicles, and a cell-phone came to life as a murderous tiny robot, why wouldn't a drink dispenser come to life? Should they have used a toaster? Should Optimus have just said "keep this away from machines, the results could be disaterous" and never show the results?

The fact that the all spark was bringing machines to life wasn't the problem. It was just that the Mountain Dew machine seemed to be forced product placement. There's a good way to do that and a bad way, and a lot of us think that was the bad way.

I take it one step further, though...

Why did every machine that came to life start killing people? Why were there no good robots when it gave the Autobots life as well as the Decpticons? That's scary to me, that there's this object that can bring life to inanimate objects, and they instantly turn violent.

I think the creative team should've tried to flesh a lot of this out, a little more. It wouldn't have taken much to explain why all the machines-come-to-life were evil and violent.

Megatron was holding the all spark at the time (wasn't he?). So, the intent of the wielder is instilled in his creations.

There, I just did it. Get me a pen. I'm writing the second one.

The second one's already written. Here's the script in its entirety:

[SPOILER]"Megatron's fallen and he's gettin' back up to get some revenge!"[/SPOLER]

Hey, at least they are moving away from all GM in the next movie. Baby steps...

So did they let the evil mountain dew machine live or did he escape?

I need that subplot resolved, dammit!

Thankfully, I know Bay won't disappoint.

Worst product placement ever? Macy Gray in Spider-man.

Magnum wrote:Worst product placement ever? Macy Gray in Spider-man.

Randy Travis in National Treasure 2.

Darth Snoopy wrote:

Magnum wrote:Worst product placement ever? Macy Gray in Spider-man.

Randy Travis in National Treasure 2.

Aside from Mountain Dew in Transformers:

McDonald's and M&M's in Mac and Me. Coke in Leonard 6. Mario 3 in The Wizard.

Purell Hand Sanitizer and Progresso Soup in Nim's Island.

Apple Computers in pretty much every movie but Transformers and Living Free and Dying Harderest.

I think I win. Do I win?

I yeild, you win Mr. McQ!

I made an addition.

What do I win?

Does it float?

Will I still like it if it doesn't?

And in all the excitement, I somehow forgot to add Mariah Carey in Glitter and Britney Spears in Crossroads.

Mario 3 in The Wizard was BAD??? Wasn't that the first time anyone, in those pre-Internet daze, outside of Japan got to see the damn thing?

I love that movie...

Ipsilon wrote:Mario 3 in The Wizard was BAD??? Wasn't that the first time anyone, in those pre-Internet daze, outside of Japan got to see the damn thing?

I love that movie...

Yes, I Splooged myself in the theater when I saw it!

Ipsilon wrote:Mario 3 in The Wizard was BAD???

It taught everyone one of the bigger warp secrets. It made knowing where the warp was less special.

I'm still bitter about it.

I'll give you that, I guess... but still. Wow.

Plus, there was a Nintendo Power cheat book... so it was an inevitability, anyway.

You're right, I think.

I am probably unnecessarily bitter. After all, The Wizard is where I learned where the warp was, too.

* * *

I think Black Jack gum gets a strong recommendation from the writer of Pump Up the Volume.

And I'm not sure I would consider it *bad* . . . but the White Castle promotion in Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle is--at the very least--amusingly shameless.

New 'bot (with image) revealed for Transformers 2!

Spoiler-y?























































End spoiler-y?

Well, I know which of those two designs is going to keep me up late at night.

ANOTHER new robot has been leaked.

Spoiler-y:





































End spoiler-y.

I hear this robot plays a key role in the film. I also hear he is best friends with the motorcycle robot.

Heh-heh-heh :

Bay to Fox: "Just Look Hot"

Source: MTV
June 19, 2008


MTV talked to Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen star Megan Fox, who says that the sequel is "is 10 times as big, 10 times as many set pieces, explosions, and acrobatic stunts."

She added that "Shia and I make out a little bit; I don't know if anyone wants to see that."

Fox says that they have been reworking the script as it was written fast because of the writers strike, mainly to add character "stuff" for her and Shia amongst the giant robots.

And what is Michael Bay's main directorial input to Megan? "His main note to me is just to look hot; so I try my best."

There are at least three things that made me chuckle in that article.

Can you guess what they are?

By the way, I saw Megan Fox in an old episode of Two and a Half Men the other day. YOWZA.

I was going to respond that the article had it all wrong, since Transformers was a Paramount--rather than a Fox--property.

Then I read a line or two and felt dumb.

Paramount to Bay:

Just have someone bring you the script to the first one and a goddamn Sharpie.

Now that the writers' strike has ended, Transformers 2 cowriter Roberto Orci sets the record straight. Michael Bay told Rotten Tomatoes that he continued writing during the strike, but, as it turns out, that isn't the whole truth.

"He just turned out treatment and transferred it to screenplay format. He picked a few characters from Hasbro and wrote what kind of things he needed in production, but he didn't write a script. We were involved up until the strike, and then shortly thereafter. Of course, it's a continuation of the first movie. It's the characters that we selected from the first movie, in addition to some of the ones we wanted to see that we couldn't put in the first one, and some of them were even in our original drafts."

Set two years later, the sequel has no need to introduce the Transformers. "Yeah, the first movie was very much structured as a mystery, such that the Transformers are revealed at sort of the midpoint. This time, this is a different structure, it's a different movie, it's a different story. The Transformers are there from minute one, and that's something that now we actually felt confident we could get away with, because we saw that it could work and that you could have these sentient robots and you're happy when they're onscreen."

Still, there will be opportunities for intimate comedy scenes, like the backyard sequence from the original. "It's still a continuation of these characters. Tonally, it's similar, if you liked the first one, you're still going to get that intimate story of who Sam is and what he's doing, but if you're a sci-fi fan, because we can start the movie much more Transformer-centric, it's a more balanced story with higher stakes -- as many sequels tend to be."


http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/transfo ... d_straight

Oh good, another formula movie that will make me "happy" whenever I see robots on screen.