Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: TRANSFORMERS 3

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 18/5/2010 5:19:42 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows
Damn right, it's refreshing when actors are candid about their films whether good or bad - usually most of them will just keep giving the same soundbites every time. It's a shame that he seems to feel the burden himself for Indy and ROTF though.

Shia - you're ok. Indy was fucked from the beginning because George and Steve had left it far too long to really make a decent next chapter. George is more lost than eve in his toy empire and in all fairness Steve doesn't have the same flair he used to - still love most of his films but something was really missing from Skull. ROTF was directed by Bay who as others have pointed out just tries to up the ante from a technical standpoint with every new film so there was no way you were going to get any better material to work with.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Beno)
Post #: 61
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 9:09:33 AM   
primebhoy


Posts: 942
Joined: 7/5/2008
From: Scotland
Fox no more!!

_____________________________

'Old Man your about one C**t hair away from hillbilly heaven' - Blade II

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 62
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 9:45:01 AM   
Beno


Posts: 8131
Joined: 15/2/2007
From: Sheffield
How they gonna write the Fox out ? I was looking forward to this ... but now ? I'm not coming at it from a "she's eye candy" angle . This story needed continuation and refreshing in a big way but this is like a smack in the face to the creative forces who promised to improve on the last one ...... its a major distraction for everyone .

_____________________________

"The one about the space hairdresser and the cowboy. He's got a tinfoil pal and a pedalbin. His Father's a robot and he's fucking fucked his Sister. Lego ... They're all made of fucking Lego!!"

(in reply to primebhoy)
Post #: 63
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 11:39:33 AM   
pete_traynor


Posts: 3010
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA
It really makes little to no difference no? There really is pretty much no story to speak of anyway here. And given some of the talent that is now in this (god alone knows why. Kerrrrrrching I should think) she would have come across as even more of a talentless flesh puppet than she did in the other two. Truly one of the worst actresses currently working. In fact, purging her uselessness is, if anything, a step in the right direction. Sincerely disappointed that we will not be granted an incredibly graphic death scene on film though. Oh well.

_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to Beno)
Post #: 64
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 12:11:18 PM   
Beno


Posts: 8131
Joined: 15/2/2007
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

It really makes little to no difference no? There really is pretty much no story to speak of anyway here. And given some of the talent that is now in this (god alone knows why. Kerrrrrrching I should think) she would have come across as even more of a talentless flesh puppet than she did in the other two. Truly one of the worst actresses currently working. In fact, purging her uselessness is, if anything, a step in the right direction. Sincerely disappointed that we will not be granted an incredibly graphic death scene on film though. Oh well.


You see ... i accept things for what they are . Sure Transformers is daft and silly but just take it as that and enjoy its level because there is entertainment and there is story within its blinkered scope . I mentioned continuation in my previous post and i meant Fox as a character and her role as Shia's girlfriend . In the first movie - very simply - she was the hottie who hung around with Jocks but found them shallow until she fell for Shia . In the second movie they told each other they loved each other ..... again a simple progression with no frills . Now in the next there was the chance of real love in major jeaprody due to extreme goings on with the Transformers .... be it war or whatever . But now that cycle is broken and we are to belive that the donkey that is Mr Labeouf can pull another hottie .
I'm trying to simplify what is already very simple but also very marketable . I think this movie could suffer from her loss because of the reasons stated . Sure shes not the best actress but it didnt matter .

_____________________________

"The one about the space hairdresser and the cowboy. He's got a tinfoil pal and a pedalbin. His Father's a robot and he's fucking fucked his Sister. Lego ... They're all made of fucking Lego!!"

(in reply to pete_traynor)
Post #: 65
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 12:28:49 PM   
darth silas


Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room
quote:

ORIGINAL: Beno


quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

It really makes little to no difference no? There really is pretty much no story to speak of anyway here. And given some of the talent that is now in this (god alone knows why. Kerrrrrrching I should think) she would have come across as even more of a talentless flesh puppet than she did in the other two. Truly one of the worst actresses currently working. In fact, purging her uselessness is, if anything, a step in the right direction. Sincerely disappointed that we will not be granted an incredibly graphic death scene on film though. Oh well.


You see ... i accept things for what they are . Sure Transformers is daft and silly but just take it as that and enjoy its level because there is entertainment and there is story within its blinkered scope . I mentioned continuation in my previous post and i meant Fox as a character and her role as Shia's girlfriend . In the first movie - very simply - she was the hottie who hung around with Jocks but found them shallow until she fell for Shia . In the second movie they told each other they loved each other ..... again a simple progression with no frills . Now in the next there was the chance of real love in major jeaprody due to extreme goings on with the Transformers .... be it war or whatever . But now that cycle is broken and we are to belive that the donkey that is Mr Labeouf can pull another hottie .
I'm trying to simplify what is already very simple but also very marketable . I think this movie could suffer from her loss because of the reasons stated . Sure shes not the best actress but it didnt matter .


I just want to say Beno that your last post made me LOL when i realised you were being serious! Not a fan of these movies(only barely managed to finish watching the first one,didnt bother with the second).Glad to hear Bay has finally ditched the bitch that is Megan Fox though.They just get another hottie to play the Mikaela role(people will hardly notice anyway).


_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to Beno)
Post #: 66
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 12:48:27 PM   
Beno


Posts: 8131
Joined: 15/2/2007
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: darth silas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beno


quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

It really makes little to no difference no? There really is pretty much no story to speak of anyway here. And given some of the talent that is now in this (god alone knows why. Kerrrrrrching I should think) she would have come across as even more of a talentless flesh puppet than she did in the other two. Truly one of the worst actresses currently working. In fact, purging her uselessness is, if anything, a step in the right direction. Sincerely disappointed that we will not be granted an incredibly graphic death scene on film though. Oh well.


You see ... i accept things for what they are . Sure Transformers is daft and silly but just take it as that and enjoy its level because there is entertainment and there is story within its blinkered scope . I mentioned continuation in my previous post and i meant Fox as a character and her role as Shia's girlfriend . In the first movie - very simply - she was the hottie who hung around with Jocks but found them shallow until she fell for Shia . In the second movie they told each other they loved each other ..... again a simple progression with no frills . Now in the next there was the chance of real love in major jeaprody due to extreme goings on with the Transformers .... be it war or whatever . But now that cycle is broken and we are to belive that the donkey that is Mr Labeouf can pull another hottie .
I'm trying to simplify what is already very simple but also very marketable . I think this movie could suffer from her loss because of the reasons stated . Sure shes not the best actress but it didnt matter .


I just want to say Beno that your last post made me LOL when i realised you were being serious! Not a fan of these movies(only barely managed to finish watching the first one,didnt bother with the second).Glad to hear Bay has finally ditched the bitch that is Megan Fox though.They just get another hottie to play the Mikaela role(people will hardly notice anyway).



How can you be made to do that ?

Oh by the by i'm never serious about this kind of thang , its just entertainment but it still matters if you want the same enjoyment . I'm fussy about movies of this genre is all and i probably over egg'd the Salad .

_____________________________

"The one about the space hairdresser and the cowboy. He's got a tinfoil pal and a pedalbin. His Father's a robot and he's fucking fucked his Sister. Lego ... They're all made of fucking Lego!!"

(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 67
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 20/5/2010 4:52:39 PM   
Jeffrey


Posts: 788
Joined: 4/10/2005
From: Newport, South Wales
Odette Yustman (The Unborn) is frequently confused for Megan Fox, so they could just have her play Mikaela.

pic: http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2009/1/30/128778499961509464.jpg

_____________________________


Wong Kar-wai News:

http://wongkarwainews.wordpress.com/

Wrestling gifs tumblr:

http://ilovewrestlinggifs.tumblr.com/

(in reply to Beno)
Post #: 68
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 23/5/2010 11:43:29 AM   
Sexual Harassment Panda


Posts: 13301
Joined: 30/9/2005
As long as this one doesn't have the massive plot holes of the second I'll be watching it with great interest.

So I mean no "only a prime can kill a prime" speech followed by the death of Optimus Prime by Megatron. No we'll have an ancient weapon hidden in the pyramids, and then we'll have had the key hidden away for thousands of years to stop the Decepticons getting to it when it turns out all along we could have just shot the weapon instead...

_____________________________

Ole Gunnar Solskj�r - 1996-2007

Member of the MW2 Star 69 Club
Member of the CoD4 Mile High Club

(in reply to Jeffrey)
Post #: 69
RE: - 25/6/2010 12:37:45 PM   
suleiman

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 9/12/2009
This comment hasnt got much to do with the thread but I just wanted to say I 99% agree on Bays comment that his films are Technically correct, i would go to the point of saying his films are technically amazing (usually)

One thing i really hate about reviewers and people that do awards is that they dont have a clue when it comes to technique.
The thing i hate most is when ever i go on sites to look for best looking films, or most sylised films or best technical films i keep seeing Lord of the Rings near the top, and people keep siting it as being breathtaking when you watch it but to be honest if you directly compare it to other films its pretty meh!

I dont mind if you think these films are terrible or you absolutely hate them but if were just to go by style compared to LOTR they are at least on par if not much better
300, Chronicles of Narnia: The lion the witch and the wardrobe, Transformers, Speed Racer, Star Trek, Watchmen, War of the Worlds (all speilberg films even Indiana Jones 4), TMNT, Beowulf, Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions, and some others that i cant think of right now
all of these films have a better score, better visual effects, better constumes, better compositing, better created worlds (setting, life forms), better cinematography, better choreography, better editing, better sound, better art, dialogue (some), better action yet they have nothing to show for it. Some of them got mauled critically,and i wouldnt mind however the critics didnt even bother to take them seriously like they did LOTR, they just thought fuck it its by that director. Then you see films which are probably worse in terms of story and 50x worse in terms of execution getting better ratings because the reviewer didnt have his head up his ass and actually tried to enjoy it because it wasnt by someone he detested or wasnt threatend by.

Like how on earth did Star Trek not get nominated for best art direction, cinematography, costume design, film editing or score? what the hell is the point of having these awards if your just going to give them to the wrong people. How did Tranformers not win Special Effects? How was 300 not nominated for cinematography?

Then people say that the directors are bad when they have done Everything right and noobs like James Cameron and Del Toro who only have CGI/ Costumes and NOTHING ELSE, suckish music, averagly directed action, random direction in terms of shots (avatar), the least effective action scenes ever (hell boy 2), terrible dialogue, but yet get amazing praise for thier one gimick,. if avatar and hell boy 2 had good characters, and dialogue i could understand the praise but they are both pretty average (bad) when it comes to story telling,

Basically Im happy for someone to say the lord of the rings are the best films ever, but not saying some stupidity like OOOOHHHHHH its amazing to look at OOHHH its epic OOOHHHH special effects, when there are 10x (literally) better films in that category. Say you like the story, but dont say 300 and Beowulf are dumb because the main character shouts too much, when in lord of the rings you have Frodo- NOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, and Gandalf - YOUUU SHALLLL NOT PASSSSS.

The thing I hate most though is that the films I mentioned then get grouped with other films that on top of being "bad" are not even of a decent technical quality, and the directors work which is a technical masterpeice never has anything to show for it

Micheal Bay is so right when he says at least his films are technically correct, it gives me comfort to know that at least the people that make the films know them selves that theyve done a good job, not just the director but every one involved
Post #: 70
RE: RE: - 9/7/2010 9:19:51 AM   
Sexual Harassment Panda


Posts: 13301
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: suleiman

This comment hasnt got much to do with the thread but I just wanted to say I 99% agree on Bays comment that his films are Technically correct, i would go to the point of saying his films are technically amazing (usually)

One thing i really hate about reviewers and people that do awards is that they dont have a clue when it comes to technique.
The thing i hate most is when ever i go on sites to look for best looking films, or most sylised films or best technical films i keep seeing Lord of the Rings near the top, and people keep siting it as being breathtaking when you watch it but to be honest if you directly compare it to other films its pretty meh!

I dont mind if you think these films are terrible or you absolutely hate them but if were just to go by style compared to LOTR they are at least on par if not much better
300, Chronicles of Narnia: The lion the witch and the wardrobe, Transformers, Speed Racer, Star Trek, Watchmen, War of the Worlds (all speilberg films even Indiana Jones 4), TMNT, Beowulf, Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions, and some others that i cant think of right now
all of these films have a better score, better visual effects, better constumes, better compositing, better created worlds (setting, life forms), better cinematography, better choreography, better editing, better sound, better art, dialogue (some), better action yet they have nothing to show for it. Some of them got mauled critically,and i wouldnt mind however the critics didnt even bother to take them seriously like they did LOTR, they just thought fuck it its by that director. Then you see films which are probably worse in terms of story and 50x worse in terms of execution getting better ratings because the reviewer didnt have his head up his ass and actually tried to enjoy it because it wasnt by someone he detested or wasnt threatend by.

Like how on earth did Star Trek not get nominated for best art direction, cinematography, costume design, film editing or score? what the hell is the point of having these awards if your just going to give them to the wrong people. How did Tranformers not win Special Effects? How was 300 not nominated for cinematography?

Then people say that the directors are bad when they have done Everything right and noobs like James Cameron and Del Toro who only have CGI/ Costumes and NOTHING ELSE, suckish music, averagly directed action, random direction in terms of shots (avatar), the least effective action scenes ever (hell boy 2), terrible dialogue, but yet get amazing praise for thier one gimick,. if avatar and hell boy 2 had good characters, and dialogue i could understand the praise but they are both pretty average (bad) when it comes to story telling,

Basically Im happy for someone to say the lord of the rings are the best films ever, but not saying some stupidity like OOOOHHHHHH its amazing to look at OOHHH its epic OOOHHHH special effects, when there are 10x (literally) better films in that category. Say you like the story, but dont say 300 and Beowulf are dumb because the main character shouts too much, when in lord of the rings you have Frodo- NOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, and Gandalf - YOUUU SHALLLL NOT PASSSSS.

The thing I hate most though is that the films I mentioned then get grouped with other films that on top of being "bad" are not even of a decent technical quality, and the directors work which is a technical masterpeice never has anything to show for it

Micheal Bay is so right when he says at least his films are technically correct, it gives me comfort to know that at least the people that make the films know them selves that theyve done a good job, not just the director but every one involved


Wow. Just... Wow.

Is your fanboy rant over yet? Transformers and it's sequel both got ignored because they were technically rather poor. The CGI in the first was actually quite cagey, the plots were full of holes, they strayed too far from the source material and they introduced crap like the twins. They're enjoyable enough as popcorn flicks, nothing more, nothing less.

Getting rid of Megan Fox is a good idea and a step in the right direction, but how they're going to explain that I don't know.

_____________________________

Ole Gunnar Solskj�r - 1996-2007

Member of the MW2 Star 69 Club
Member of the CoD4 Mile High Club

(in reply to suleiman)
Post #: 71
RE: RE: - 9/7/2010 11:38:51 AM   
pete_traynor


Posts: 3010
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sexual Harassment Panda


quote:

ORIGINAL: suleiman

This comment hasnt got much to do with the thread but I just wanted to say I 99% agree on Bays comment that his films are Technically correct, i would go to the point of saying his films are technically amazing (usually)

One thing i really hate about reviewers and people that do awards is that they dont have a clue when it comes to technique.
The thing i hate most is when ever i go on sites to look for best looking films, or most sylised films or best technical films i keep seeing Lord of the Rings near the top, and people keep siting it as being breathtaking when you watch it but to be honest if you directly compare it to other films its pretty meh!

I dont mind if you think these films are terrible or you absolutely hate them but if were just to go by style compared to LOTR they are at least on par if not much better
300, Chronicles of Narnia: The lion the witch and the wardrobe, Transformers, Speed Racer, Star Trek, Watchmen, War of the Worlds (all speilberg films even Indiana Jones 4), TMNT, Beowulf, Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions, and some others that i cant think of right now
all of these films have a better score, better visual effects, better constumes, better compositing, better created worlds (setting, life forms), better cinematography, better choreography, better editing, better sound, better art, dialogue (some), better action yet they have nothing to show for it. Some of them got mauled critically,and i wouldnt mind however the critics didnt even bother to take them seriously like they did LOTR, they just thought fuck it its by that director. Then you see films which are probably worse in terms of story and 50x worse in terms of execution getting better ratings because the reviewer didnt have his head up his ass and actually tried to enjoy it because it wasnt by someone he detested or wasnt threatend by.

Like how on earth did Star Trek not get nominated for best art direction, cinematography, costume design, film editing or score? what the hell is the point of having these awards if your just going to give them to the wrong people. How did Tranformers not win Special Effects? How was 300 not nominated for cinematography?

Then people say that the directors are bad when they have done Everything right and noobs like James Cameron and Del Toro who only have CGI/ Costumes and NOTHING ELSE, suckish music, averagly directed action, random direction in terms of shots (avatar), the least effective action scenes ever (hell boy 2), terrible dialogue, but yet get amazing praise for thier one gimick,. if avatar and hell boy 2 had good characters, and dialogue i could understand the praise but they are both pretty average (bad) when it comes to story telling,

Basically Im happy for someone to say the lord of the rings are the best films ever, but not saying some stupidity like OOOOHHHHHH its amazing to look at OOHHH its epic OOOHHHH special effects, when there are 10x (literally) better films in that category. Say you like the story, but dont say 300 and Beowulf are dumb because the main character shouts too much, when in lord of the rings you have Frodo- NOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, and Gandalf - YOUUU SHALLLL NOT PASSSSS.

The thing I hate most though is that the films I mentioned then get grouped with other films that on top of being "bad" are not even of a decent technical quality, and the directors work which is a technical masterpeice never has anything to show for it

Micheal Bay is so right when he says at least his films are technically correct, it gives me comfort to know that at least the people that make the films know them selves that theyve done a good job, not just the director but every one involved


Wow. Just... Wow.

Is your fanboy rant over yet? Transformers and it's sequel both got ignored because they were technically rather poor. The CGI in the first was actually quite cagey, the plots were full of holes, they strayed too far from the source material and they introduced crap like the twins. They're enjoyable enough as popcorn flicks, nothing more, nothing less.

Getting rid of Megan Fox is a good idea and a step in the right direction, but how they're going to explain that I don't know.


Technically correct? Not always. The second has those utterly atrocious IMAX scenes were you couldnt make a single thing out for about 5 minutes! Thats the textbook definition of Technically Incorrect in my book. By all accounts a major character dies in that woodland scene that was news to me. Other than the blood seeping from my retinas I couldnt see a sodding thing! Kind of has a point about Hell Boy though. Rate Del Toro highly and the books are my favourite graphic novels but he got them utterly utterly wrong. Simply cannot get drawn into these comments about LOTR though. Someone once told me that Fellowship of the Ring was the best film of the last 10 years!!! Turns out he was right.

_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to Sexual Harassment Panda)
Post #: 72
RE: RE: - 9/7/2010 7:42:40 PM   
JoeyPottr


Posts: 2066
Joined: 10/2/2009
Hopefully they'll concentrate more on the human element and less on robots fighting each other every five seconds. The robot fights were cool in the first one because they weren't happening every five minutes and they were between the main bots Optimus and Megatron pretty much. There were no sidekicks either, the Leo character bugged me in the last film I didn't feel he was needed for any of the scenes and I laughed my ass off when Jon Turturro's character tasered his ass to get him to shut up. No more Mikaela either, so the story can concentrate on Sam again.

_____________________________

wandering through the tall grass of life

(in reply to pete_traynor)
Post #: 73
RE: RE: - 9/7/2010 9:54:36 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: JoeyPottr

Hopefully they'll concentrate more on the human element and less on robots fighting each other every five seconds. The robot fights were cool in the first one because they weren't happening every five minutes and they were between the main bots Optimus and Megatron pretty much. There were no sidekicks either, the Leo character bugged me in the last film I didn't feel he was needed for any of the scenes and I laughed my ass off when Jon Turturro's character tasered his ass to get him to shut up. No more Mikaela either, so the story can concentrate on Sam again.


I wouldn't count on it, Bay never really learns from his mistakes even if he publicly acknowledges them - they'll talk up TF3 as being "better" but I'll put money on it being even worse than ROTF. On the plus side Bay seems to indicate this is the last in his trilogy so if the studio move ahead with a TF4 without him they could try a more serious take...or at least ditch the Bay touches of crass humour and borderline racism. Please.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to JoeyPottr)
Post #: 74
RE: RE: - 11/7/2010 2:58:27 PM   
suleiman

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 9/12/2009
I didnt say the second one is good in anyway, I hate that film. I also didnt say the film was technically good. I also think megan fox needs to go. I always love how tools try and make it look like you said things you didnt even mention.
On a side note I could tell every single transformer apart from each other, its not that hard.
I also think LOTR are the best films ever but dont bs about other films when the same shit happen in LOTR too.
The CG in transformers is 100x better than lotr I tried watching the second one the other day and I nearly died of imbarrasment at the costumes and CGI.
The first one was not ignored it made 700 million dollars worldwide in the same year as spiderman 3, pirates 3, shrek 3, it won all the visual effects awards at the visual effects society, its rated 309th greatest film ever on empire higher than any marvel film and one of the highest sci fi action films. It was rated peoples top 20 favourite films on MSN and it was on 100 favourite dvds.
Also if you hadn't noticed every single transformer series after the original one strayed from G1. G1 would not work as a live action film it would be retarded.

Ill reiterate I think LOTR are the best fantasy films ever but dont say shit about other films when the same shit happens in LOTR.
I dont care if you disagree with me at least state points. (you probably dont have any)

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 75
RE: RE: - 19/7/2010 1:19:41 PM   
Beno


Posts: 8131
Joined: 15/2/2007
From: Sheffield
Set pics from T3 featuring the usual carnage , running - minus a Fox - and a video segmant

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/104129-new-transformers-3-set-pics

I'm still optimistic this one will be great

_____________________________

"The one about the space hairdresser and the cowboy. He's got a tinfoil pal and a pedalbin. His Father's a robot and he's fucking fucked his Sister. Lego ... They're all made of fucking Lego!!"

(in reply to suleiman)
Post #: 76
RE: RE: - 19/7/2010 1:48:02 PM   
Edward Nygma

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 28/12/2005
Here are three things which I am POSITIVE will be in TF3:

1/ Racially insensitive (read Racist) Asian robots who, of course, know Karate.
2/ Female Transformer (not the Decepticon human chick from TF2, an actual Transforgirl)
3/ Robot on Robot ACTION. And I don't mean fighting. I mean robots getting jiggy with it, sharing fluids (oil?) etc.

If all three end up being in the film...not only will it prove once and for all that I am a human GOD but also that Bay is actually 5 years old because I had to mentally regress 20 years to come up with these three potential scenes.


_____________________________

Ben. Affleck.

(in reply to Beno)
Post #: 77
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 27/7/2010 10:45:44 AM   
Timon


Posts: 14588
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
http://vimeo.com/13506393

So much destruction

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 78
RE: RE: - 27/7/2010 12:56:01 PM   
darth silas


Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edward Nygma

Here are three things which I am POSITIVE will be in TF3:

1/ Racially insensitive (read Racist) Asian robots who, of course, know Karate.
2/ Female Transformer (not the Decepticon human chick from TF2, an actual Transforgirl)
3/ Robot on Robot ACTION. And I don't mean fighting. I mean robots getting jiggy with it, sharing fluids (oil?) etc.

If all three end up being in the film...not only will it prove once and for all that I am a human GOD but also that Bay is actually 5 years old because I had to mentally regress 20 years to come up with these three potential scenes.



You forgot to add in fat black people who shout a lot which Bay no doubt finds to be hilarious.


_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to Edward Nygma)
Post #: 79
RE: RE: - 27/7/2010 3:13:16 PM   
Emyr Thy King


Posts: 2179
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edward Nygma
..I am a human GOD


We're all on a path to apotheosis, son.

The new actress they've hired: Rosie Huntington-Whiteley; yes a great name but she seems too much of a supdermodel for me. As Sam is/was in college it would make sense that he meets a girl who's quirky like he and one who possesses an intelligence quotient far higher than her bust size. I thought a red-head with pale-skin and blue eyes would be perfect. Perhaps someone who appears 'dorky' for want of a better expression but as soon as she lets her hair down and takes off her non-flattering pair of spectacles; she looks stunning.

I found this article:

Lorenzo di Bonaventura

Which featured comments by the aforementioned producer in the hyperlink. Comments such as "Their chemistry (Whiteley and LaBeouf) is proving to work out. You never really know. That's the biggest risk Megan and Shia had very good chemistry. Fortunately for us, these two have good chemistry"

The on-screen chemistry needs to work for Sam Witwicky and the new female love-interest. If not, she'll just seem like a last-minute addition and it'll be distracting from the film.

There seems to be a bit of a cock-up on the IMDB page in regards to the cast list:

Rosie Huntington-Whiteley  -     Mikaela Banes

Shia LaBeouf            -    Sam Witwicky

Josh Duhamel           -    Major Lennox

Micaela Johnson            -    Sam's Girl

IMDB

So Rosie ad infinitum is playing Mikaela Banes yet there's a Micaela Johnson playing a character named "Sam's girl"? I've seen the name Carly being bandied around the place. Does she have any history in the Transformers comics and/or animated series or film?

< Message edited by Emyr Thy King -- 27/7/2010 3:44:05 PM >


_____________________________

"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self

(in reply to Edward Nygma)
Post #: 80
RE: RE: - 24/8/2010 12:12:02 PM   
mystra


Posts: 106
Joined: 9/5/2006
From: Newcastle-under-Lyme
quote:

ORIGINAL: Emyr Thy King




So Rosie ad infinitum is playing Mikaela Banes yet there's a Micaela Johnson playing a character named "Sam's girl"? I've seen the name Carly being bandied around the place. Does she have any history in the Transformers comics and/or animated series or film?



yep...Carly was the girl in the g1 cartoons http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Carly_%28G1%29 ... i think she was Spike's girlfriend, then in the later series his wife and spawned that annoying Daniel kid from the G1 movie and later series.... but she was meant to be smart, sciencey etc etc not some airhead...can't see Bay going for that lol

(in reply to Emyr Thy King)
Post #: 81
RE: RE: - 25/8/2010 9:03:36 AM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows
Ah yes Carly; when she came on the scene was about the time the Autobots started battling more human enemies and the show jumped the shark imo.

Rosie herself will just be the same kind of eye candy that Bay likes to dress his explosions with; she's just a stand in so I see her and Fox as pretty interchangable in this series. Emyr you made a good point about the new love interest being someone quirky and a more natural fit for Sam - we could have had a cute girl then who's got some comedy skills like Emma Stone but hiring a model is more Bay's style.

Ah well, maybe the inevitable reboot will overhaul how the humans in the series are handled.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to mystra)
Post #: 82
RE: RE: - 26/8/2010 1:29:42 PM   
hpmoviefan777


Posts: 53
Joined: 4/1/2010
From: south carolina
i saw both of the transformers movies and liked them but i enjoyed the first one more,the no. 2 was .....good.but i dont see a BIG plot point opining for a third.

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 83
RE: RE: - 26/8/2010 10:36:46 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: hpmoviefan777

i saw both of the transformers movies and liked them but i enjoyed the first one more,the no. 2 was .....good.but i dont see a BIG plot point opining for a third.


I wouldn't worry about the plot if I were you; Michal Bay and the screenwriters clearly didn't for the second one and I can't see that the third will be any different except for a change of leading lady and John Malkovich & Frances McDormand trying a spot of paycheque chasing.

After how bad the second one was I'm curious to see if Bay has learnt anything from it but think I'll wait until it's on Lovefilm; not getting burnt again at Cineworld for this.

....he said knowing full well that on bargain Tuesday one of his friends would suggest it and he'd have nothing better to do

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to hpmoviefan777)
Post #: 84
RE: RE: - 26/8/2010 10:43:45 PM   
ArtDepartmentAlbert

 

Posts: 109
Joined: 26/2/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: hpmoviefan777

i saw both of the transformers movies and liked them but i enjoyed the first one more,the no. 2 was .....good.but i dont see a BIG plot point opining for a third.



errr hello?

The opening line of #1 was:


"Before time began, there was the Cube"

(in reply to hpmoviefan777)
Post #: 85
RE: RE: - 27/8/2010 2:08:48 PM   
mystra


Posts: 106
Joined: 9/5/2006
From: Newcastle-under-Lyme
well a few of the online rags are saying Rosie furnley whittingstall or whatever she's called is playing Carly, a lot of pics of her in giant stillettos and tiny frocks. I hope they are being as unreliable sources as usual.

Carly was pretty yes, but not a bimbo who teetered around in heels. More like the Australian girl in the 1st film, pretty, but not dressed like a skank and a smart (as Bay would ever let a girl be) character.. i'm pretty sure Carly in the cartoons spent most of her time in a lovely 80's jumpsuit lol

Just kinda sucks to be a girl who likes these sorta things having to watch them turn into a 2 hour chat line advert with a few robots thrown in... over all i didn't mind the second film but the treatment of Mikaela character sucked big time. Yes let her look hot, but she did nothing but whine and scream like a boring girl... in the first one she did stuff!!! Ho hum...

(in reply to ArtDepartmentAlbert)
Post #: 86
RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 - 30/8/2010 1:51:30 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8590
Joined: 13/4/2006
I won't do it again, but you get my point

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 87
THE DARK OF THE MOON...? - 7/10/2010 10:30:50 AM   
Snake-Eyes


Posts: 9970
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: ZONE 2
yeah. And what're the odds that there will be an EMPIRE article cheerily entitled 'Walking on the Moon'?

_____________________________

"When you have to shoot, shoot don't talk."

http://www.expendablespremiere.com/index.html

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 88
RE: THE DARK OF THE MOON...? - 7/10/2010 12:18:59 PM   
darth silas


Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room
This will suck every bit as much as the first two movies and you all know it.

_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to Snake-Eyes)
Post #: 89
RE: THE DARK OF THE MOON...? - 7/10/2010 1:00:42 PM   
Snake-Eyes


Posts: 9970
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: ZONE 2

quote:

ORIGINAL: darth silas

This will suck every bit as much as the first two movies and you all know it.



I don't mind the first but even that is pretty average. I sat through REVENGE OF THE FALLEN (in IMAX no less) once and that was enough.


_____________________________

"When you have to shoot, shoot don't talk."

http://www.expendablespremiere.com/index.html

(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: TRANSFORMERS 3 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Movie News|Empire Blog|Movie Reviews|Future Films|Features|Video Interviews|Image Gallery|Competitions|Forum|Magazine|Resources
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.188