Who are actually transformers movie fans ?

Have you ever meet anyone that likes Transformers ? Someone Who thinks they are excellent movies and so fourth ...
I know they are "dumb " people like that , but really box office shows that there is A LOT of them which makes me confused .

Yes, my friend Dave. He's an idiot.

They are fun movies.

I can't stand most each movie but when the action starts I'm on the edge of my seat.

Such as this part



I would love to see a purely Transformer action movie but I know it would be incredibly expensive.

Originally Posted by Gen. Chris

I can't stand most each movie but when the action starts I'm on the edge of my seat.

Such as this part

God, I hope that occured in Detroit.

Originally Posted by Captain Arrrgh!

God, I hope that occured in Detroit.

That happening in Detroit would be an improvement for the city...

Wait till The Dude sees this thread...


They're somewhat fun in a completely brainless way, though they get boring pretty fast. Especially the long-winded action scenes, which isn't really a good sign

Originally Posted by Manco

Wait till The Dude sees this thread...


They're somewhat fun in a completely brainless way, though they get boring pretty fast. Especially the long-winded action scenes, which isn't really a good sign

Just did, haha.

I just don't get why anyone would object to these films. Within their genre they're stellar examples of how these types of movies work. I mean, it's pure entertainment.

If explosions and fighting robots do not excite you, then sure. But I don't see why people insist on ragging on these movies for lacking elements they were never supposed to have in the first place.

Originally Posted by The Dude

Just did, haha.

I just don't get why anyone would object to these films. Within their genre they're stellar examples of how these types of movies work. I mean, it's pure entertainment.

If explosions and fighting robots do not excite you, then sure. But I don't see why people insist on ragging on these movies for lacking elements they were never supposed to have in the first place.

Within the genre of bad action movies, the Transformers franchise is the most successful. Within the genre of action movies in general, the franchise is severely lacking.

There's a reason why criticism of the Transformers films lacking in x, y, and z is common. The movies lacks interesting or convincing characters, a well-conceived or interesting story, or any sort of message to make you think - it's brainless. I guess you could argue that movies don't necessarily need all of those. Dumb & Dumber doesn't have an interesting story or philosophical message but it's still a very enjoyable movie. But to me it's more about what the Transformers movies do poorly or just plain wrong rather than what it doesn't have.

As I stated previously, basically all of the characters are farcical. That's not necessarily a bad thing. In The Cabin in the Woods all of the characters were all very comical, but it worked because it was making fun of the stereotypical characters that frequent horror movies. In 2001: A Space Odyssey the characters are hardly interesting, except for HAL. I'd say that Shia LaBeouf actually does a pretty good job of playing his part, and I'd also say it's a shame the only movies he seems to get noticed don't give him very good characters to play, but basically everyone else is pretty damn bad. I haven't seen the 3rd Transformers movie, and I don't think I'll ever see it, but Megan Fox... I understand that she's attractive but she can't act worth a crap. It doesn't help her with her laughable backstory where she was in trouble with the law early in her life. I remember laughing out loud when I first saw Transformers (the first one) and that scene came up. The writers, Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman - who went on to write 2009's Star Trek, just had to come up with some sort of conflict between LaBeouf's and Fox's characters and somehow they came up with that backstory. LaBeouf's parents are insane stereotypes of overprotective parents, and I know that was done purposefully, but the jokes that come from them, as well as the rest of the movie pretty much, aren't clever or that funny. You've got the quirky computer nerds. Not much needs to be said about them. They fulfill a role and provide more forced humor. Then you've got Turturro's character who goes from bad to worse in the first two movies. I guess the soldiers aren't really poor characters but they don't really do anything that necessitates character.

And really, who cares about the robots? The Decepticons are all evil but uninteresting. Good action movies have good villains and the Decepticons are certainly not that. They're definitely no Hans Gruber, Stansfield, Howard Payne (Dennis Hopper in Speed), or Boddicker (Kurtwood Smith RoboCop). Good antagonists don't even have to be well-acted or complex. You've got the xenomorph in Aliens, the T-101 in The Terminator and the T-1000 in Terminator 2. With the Autobots you have Optimus Prime who is the obvious hero robot. The rest are just there to be there pretty much. Bumblebee can't talk so the audience feels sorry for him, especially when he is so determined on saving LaBeouf and co. There's that gun happy bot. The worst are those two bots they have that are supposed to be representations of African-Americans. I mean, honestly, those are so incredibly racist. I couldn't believe it when I saw it the first time I watched the first movie. And they don't even need to be in the movie! They serve no purpose other than added comedy, and face palm worthy comedy at that.

As for the story, I honestly don't remember enough about the stories to criticize them in detail...but I think we can all agree that the story really doesn't matter in the Transformers trilogy except for Transformers fanboys. Anyone and everyone who went to see the movies did so to watch big robots blow up (or else they should have) and not to care about the story.

Like I said, if you like the movies because of the robots blowing up then that's fine. However, if you actually think the movies are good you aren't thinking straight. They're obviously bad. Entertainment is entertainment but it can't be all shameless entertainment.

Originally Posted by Lord Rahl

Within the genre of bad action movies, the Transformers franchise is the most successful. Within the genre of action movies in general, the franchise is severely lacking.

There's a reason why criticism of the Transformers films lacking in x, y, and z is common. The movies lacks interesting or convincing characters, a well-conceived or interesting story, or any sort of message to make you think - it's brainless. I guess you could argue that movies don't necessarily need all of those. Dumb & Dumber doesn't have an interesting story or philosophical message but it's still a very enjoyable movie. But to me it's more about what the Transformers movies do poorly or just plain wrong rather than what it doesn't have.

As I stated previously, basically all of the characters are farcical. That's not necessarily a bad thing. In The Cabin in the Woods all of the characters were all very comical, but it worked because it was making fun of the stereotypical characters that frequent horror movies. In 2001: A Space Odyssey the characters are hardly interesting, except for HAL. I'd say that Shia LaBeouf actually does a pretty good job of playing his part, and I'd also say it's a shame the only movies he seems to get noticed don't give him very good characters to play, but basically everyone else is pretty damn bad. I haven't seen the 3rd Transformers movie, and I don't think I'll ever see it, but Megan Fox... I understand that she's attractive but she can't act worth a crap. It doesn't help her with her laughable backstory where she was in trouble with the law early in her life. I remember laughing out loud when I first saw Transformers (the first one) and that scene came up. The writers, Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman - who went on to write 2009's Star Trek, just had to come up with some sort of conflict between LaBeouf's and Fox's characters and somehow they came up with that backstory. LaBeouf's parents are insane stereotypes of overprotective parents, and I know that was done purposefully, but the jokes that come from them, as well as the rest of the movie pretty much, aren't clever or that funny. You've got the quirky computer nerds. Not much needs to be said about them. They fulfill a role and provide more forced humor. Then you've got Turturro's character who goes from bad to worse in the first two movies. I guess the soldiers aren't really poor characters but they don't really do anything that necessitates character.

And really, who cares about the robots? The Decepticons are all evil but uninteresting. Good action movies have good villains and the Decepticons are certainly not that. They're definitely no Hans Gruber, Stansfield, Howard Payne (Dennis Hopper in Speed), or Boddicker (Kurtwood Smith RoboCop). Good antagonists don't even have to be well-acted or complex. You've got the xenomorph in Aliens, the T-101 in The Terminator and the T-1000 in Terminator 2. With the Autobots you have Optimus Prime who is the obvious hero robot. The rest are just there to be there pretty much. Bumblebee can't talk so the audience feels sorry for him, especially when he is so determined on saving LaBeouf and co. There's that gun happy bot. The worst are those two bots they have that are supposed to be representations of African-Americans. I mean, honestly, those are so incredibly racist. I couldn't believe it when I saw it the first time I watched the first movie. And they don't even need to be in the movie! They serve no purpose other than added comedy, and face palm worthy comedy at that.

As for the story, I honestly don't remember enough about the stories to criticize them in detail...but I think we can all agree that the story really doesn't matter in the Transformers trilogy except for Transformers fanboys. Anyone and everyone who went to see the movies did so to watch big robots blow up (or else they should have) and not to care about the story.

Like I said, if you like the movies because of the robots blowing up then that's fine. However, if you actually think the movies are good you aren't thinking straight. They're obviously bad. Entertainment is entertainment but it can't be all shameless entertainment.

This entire post is comparing apples to oranges. I class Transformers as entertainment on the same level as movies like Battleship or the Tomb Raider films (and in those cases Transformer movies come out on top). Not on the same level as some of the classics you're naming above. I know what I'm paying for and my expectations don't exceed that.

I don't get why anyone would go on about whether or not Megatron is a convincing villain. Really, who gives a hoot? I do not. I can get my convincing villains from other franchises. I get exploding robots from Transformers. All it needs to do is give a barebone story to give all the action some meaning, and it does, so I'm content.

Originally Posted by The Dude

This entire post is comparing apples to oranges.

Actually, and I know this will be a huge shock to everyone who reads this, I'd say it's more like comparing cheap macrobrewery beer with quality microbrewery beer. You can be satisfied by both but the quality microbrewery beers are obviously better. Let's say I go and get myself some Schlitz.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Now, I do enjoy Schlitz (Review here), especially the more recently released version that uses the original 60s recipe (and thus tastes better because it does not use adjuncts), and I'm not ashamed to say I do. It's refreshing and decently tasty but I'll be damned if I said it's actually a good beer.

Now let's say I go and get myself a Deschutes The Abyss 2010 (Review here) (2009 pictured and I actually think that year got infected).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I enjoy that beer too...and oh my goodness was it the best beer I've ever drank. It's got everything I love about it. It might not be a refreshing beer (for the palate) but it looks so lovely, smells so heavenly, and tastes to wonderful. It's complex and to me was a truly revelatory beer since it opened my eyes to just how good beer can be.

So, while I enjoy both beers, one is obviously superior to the other. There are some good characteristics to Schlitz like how refreshing it is and its higher hoppiness compared to most other macro lagers, however, The Abyss far surpasses Schlitz in basically any qualitative category (and therefore quantitative). It looks better, smells better, tastes better, has a better mouthfeel, is much more complex, etc. There are flaws with the Schlitz too. Without going into specifics, it could be better in every characteristic. With The Abyss, I can't really say it's perfect but at the same time I can't really say it could be better.

Or I could relate it to cheeseburgers. I could go to Whataburger right now and get myself a cheeseburger. Would it satisfy my hunger? Yes. Would it be tasty? It'd be alright. I could also make myself a burger with 80-20 chuck beef, fresh lettuce and tomato, cook the patty to medium on a griddle and use just the right amount and type of seasoning, crisp up some bacon, and toast the bun. Would it satisfy my hunger? Yes. Would it be tasty? Oh hell yes! There are clear differences between the two. One is cheap, quick to make, and made to give basic satisfaction. It's not really about quality. The other is cheap too (buying and making your own food is always cheaper), takes some time to make, and is made to give me a lot of satisfaction. It's ok to like both, but it's obvious that one is better and there are obvious reasons why. It's also ok to admit that one isn't as good as the other and in fact has flaws.

I've said this twice already, I know that some things I like aren't that good and I know some thing I like are really good. This goes for beer and burgers as well as for movies. It's alright to like things that are of low quality as long as you know it. Like I said, I love Bay's The Rock but for very specific reasons. The cast is amazing while the rest of it is pretty awful. I could go on and on about everything that's bad and wrong with The Rock but I still like the movie, mostly because of Cage and Connery. What I don't understand is why you like the Transformers trilogy and yet don't seem to understand why there are glaring reasons why the trilogy is criticized. You like robots going around, transforming, flying, shooting, and cutting each other up. Fine, I get that. I'll admit that I thought some of the scenes where the robots got ripped up were kind of "cool" (although I can never get used to the lighting or the camerawork). But so far I don't see you at least acknowledging any sort of criticism as correct. If you can only name one reason why the movie is good in your opinion then that fails to be a proper refutation to multiple criticisms I have, as well as others. Perhaps you believe the idea of the movie, robots blowing up, means everything else in the movie doesn't matter. I hope you don't believe that.

I class Transformers as entertainment on the same level as movies like Battleship or the Tomb Raider films (and in those cases Transformer movies come out on top). Not on the same level as some of the classics you're naming above. I know what I'm paying for and my expectations don't exceed that.

I haven't seen Battleship and I'm certain you haven't either since it's not out yet. No doubt it interests you because the same SFX companies that did the Transformers trilogy are doing the SFX for Battleship and it's another movie with robots blowing up. For me, I'd only see it simply because Liam Neeson is in it and he's elevated himself in the badass pantheon of actors in recent years that he's got to be close to or even with Chuck Norris. Basically, the only reason I saw The Grey (Long-winded review here) was because Neeson was in it. However, I don't think it's any stretch of the imagination in predicting Battleship as a pretty awful film. I watched a video (Seen here) that was an attempt of the writers and director of Battleship to explain the "why" of the movie's story. I found it hilarious that they'd actually put out that kind of video, like anyone cares. The Tomb Raider movies? Christ, those are your average big budget bad action movies too. Just get Angelina Jolie in tight and revealing outfits, have some cool locations and gunfights and you've got yourself a movie people will go see. There's nothing clever about that.

Ah, so you admit that I've named classic action movies. Action movies that all others can and probably should be judged by. This means you understand that some movies are better than others for certain reasons. Then why can't or don't you admit there are certain reasons why the Transformers movies are lacking? If I can legitimately criticize action movie classics - for example, I don't understand at all why the Colonial Marines in Aliens are so undisciplined - then I can definitely legitimately criticize action movies I find many flaws in like those in the Transformers trilogy.

I don't get why anyone would go on about whether or not Megatron is a convincing villain. Really, who gives a hoot? I do not. I can get my convincing villains from other franchises. I get exploding robots from Transformers. All it needs to do is give a barebone story to give all the action some meaning, and it does, so I'm content.

I was pointing out that the best action movies have great and memorable villains. I do accept that in movies like the Transformers trilogy the need for a complex and interesting villain is not really necessary, but there's still the fact that the movie could have been "more", and by "more" I mean more good. I also accept that the movies don't need a great story. Most action movies do not have fantastic stories, however, you still understand that there are action movies out there that are superior to others. Because you understand this you should deduce that there are problems with the Transformers movies, something you do not seem to understand or ignore. I'd also like to point out that even though good villains or good story (or whatever) might not really be necessary, the fact remains that all those movie aspects that are in every movie are there in the Transformers movies, and if they're there then they can and should be criticized whether or not they're important to the movies' enjoyment value. It just so happens that many of those aspects (characters, story, plot, cinematography, music, etc.) in the Transformers trilogy are bad, in my opinion. Just because you don't think a good story matters for the movies does not negate the argument that the story is bad. You've chosen to disregard the poor writing and characterizations because you don't care, not because the opposite is true.

I was going to go to bed much earlier but then Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country was on HBO Family and I had to watch it.

Originally Posted by The Dude

Just did, haha.

I just don't get why anyone would object to these films. Within their genre they're stellar examples of how these types of movies work. I mean, it's pure entertainment.

If explosions and fighting robots do not excite you, then sure. But I don't see why people insist on ragging on these movies for lacking elements they were never supposed to have in the first place.

I disagree. They are bad movies even within their genre. I can name some pure action flicks that are mindless action but at least have a more cohesive line of action, with better dialogues, better scripting overall, better plot, better direction, better taste.

Originally Posted by paradamed

better taste.

Is subjective.

They're somewhat fun in a completely brainless way, though they get boring pretty fast.

I agree but that's not enough to pay a ticket .

Personally, I think if the movies had had two directors, one for the plot (Spielberg) and one for the action (Bay) the movies would have been a lot better.

But that's just me.

I like the first movie and only the first movie, and i detest megan fox

I enjoyed them for the mindless action and robot fights. The human parts were not so fun.

I enjoyed them for the mindless action and robot fights. The human parts were not so fun.

I actually thought that the robot fights were to short .Especially in the second part Prime vs The fallen was incredibly disappointing .

I can sort of respect what Bay tries to do. He wants to make big budget action movies, but the final products that make it to the big screen are stuff that I can hardly stand. The Transformers movies are the epitome of his style of directing. They're loud, fast, and busy.

It's not that I dislike brainless action movies. I do. I enjoyed Taken immensely, The Expendables was decent, and there's no shortage of terrible Nicolas Cage-starred action movies that I will watch (simply because I'm obsessed with him). However, when I watch the Transformers movies there is just so much brainlessness I can take - and this is not to say Bay's movies are exclusive to this. It gets to a point where there's so much bad or wrong in a movie that I can't understand why anyone would think they're good movies. There's a big difference in liking a bad movie but knowing it's bad and liking a bad movie but not knowing it's bad or why it is.

The latter seems to be the standard for Transformers movies lovers and that's not really surprising. They want to go watch something "cool" and in a way the Transformers movies give them that with huge robots going around blowing stuff up. It's really more of a credit to Digital Domain, the SFX company for the movies, for what the movies are. When you have almost farcical characters and a story that's pretty much meaningless, all you're left with is the visuals pretty much and Digital Doman certainly knows how to make them...even if Bay swings the camera around so much you can't tell what the hell is happening.

For me, my criticism is about more than just Michael Bay or the Transformers movies. It's about people accepting this sort of "junk food" movie whether it's in the action, comedy, drama, or rom-com genre. It's not that people just accept it. It's that so many people accept it and genuinely like it. So, I guess it's more of a criticism of society. /rant

But there is one Michael Bay movie that I would watch repeatedly every day of my life. That movie is The Rock but it really has more to do with the cast being awesome than Bay being a good director. Any movie with Nicolas Cage, Sean Connery, Ed Harris, and Michael Biehn is going to be awesome.

The Transformers movies are like say choclate or candy. No real substance,but appealing and sweet. They look cool and provide mindless entertainment. These movies serve a purpose,however we cna't let them be the only thing on the market of course.