dont get to comfortable watching from the sidelines,it'll reside soon enough.

---

Added on July 9, 2009, 11:38 amyea and you cant even understand a simple phrase like this:

"space bridge wasnt made up its a cybertronian technology which can be seen on the following adaptations, TF: Defiance,TF: All Hail Megatron, TF: The Reign of Starscream, TF: G1 and TF: War Within"

i was just merely expounding the fact it was in those adaptations,examples of it, so now its wrong to say where did those scriptwriters get their source from,wait your first post you were arguing about why it didnt follow g1 conventions and even when i noted that in my list,you havent had enough eh? wait nah dont bother,you are just striving to get on my nerves. nice try,nice try.

This post has been edited by nimrod323: Jul 9 2009, 11:46 AM

Not really.

The Fallen was introduced at the beginning of this movie. And if he have "teleportation" ability that audience cant accept, its the audience problem themselves with acceptance level like "Ooh its a robot movie, with ancient robot, fine. ..... but I refuse to accept he can teleport " . The prior readings in other materials are to supplement , and its not necessary.

In Titanic, we see Jack painted a potrait of Rose. Do audience question Jack's artistry skills like "Ohh how come the movie doesn't explain how Jack came to learn to paint, who taught him? which art school did he gone to?". Is a prequel novel required to tell of Jack's origin and his younger self, to explain all the unexplained skills he had that was highlited in the movie?

I bet the audience would gladly accept Jack's ability because as humans do ,its NOT REALLY A BIG DEAL how/where he learnt to paint prior to events in titanic movie. But this thinking is constraint within an earth-ly view.

Back to transformers, why cant an even wider view on other alien beings and their abilities be accepted? because "teleportation" is not native to humans ability (unlike painting)? because transforming robots with "unexplained" infinite amount of ammunition is absurd? Because humans judge aliens with same level (or lower) level of technological advances as them? Eg.

- If we can't have teleport technology in 2009, I WILL NEVER accept (movie on ) aliens having it in 17000BC or now.
- Our own weapons technology needs to be recharged (takes time) , refilled (with bullets etc), I find it simply "insults my intelligence" knowing of movie about aliens having BETTER AND UNEXPLAINED technology than ours. I am insulted by knowing their bullets came from thin air!! LOL

If so, I've said again, Just stick to watching earth-ly movie better. All Aliens movies are (meant to be) mind boggling and "insults" our human superiority/intelligence.

This post has been edited by alanyuppie: Jul 9 2009, 11:51 AM

Oh my, we could go on and on and on.

Why don't you guys agree to disagree?

Because poking ugly things with sticks is fun.

---

Added on July 9, 2009, 12:00 pmAh! Now I see your problem. You have clearly not watched Alien, Aliens, Terminator 2, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Back to the Future, or any number of really good sci-fi films that do not insult the audience's intelligence.

No wonder lah you love this movie so much. You think shit is delicious, because you've never eaten anything other than shit.



This post has been edited by n00b13: Jul 9 2009, 12:00 PM

One or two-liners provocation again? Thats the best you can do to respond? Pitiful..

If you liked Twilight (books or movie), then you really can't bash robot porn.

nope thats his way of getting you angry and irked at him,amuses him much. He'd even go to great lengths to twist facts so that you'd notice him.

Or Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, for that matter.

Yup, no point discussing since you made yourself an airhead when you watched the movie. Where you yourself has posted previously that only airheads would contribute to the movie. Validating you as one of them regardless any explaination given. Keep the explainations to yourself, i am done replying you since all you wanted is to bash and not discuss.

Not the related to movie but heck,

In IDWverse TF, Space Bridge technology was originally created by cybertronion scientis Jhiaxus during that Benzuli Expanse invasion lead by Nova Prime aka Nemesis Prime. (TF:Revelations)

In sometime after invasion ended , Sixshot (who was capture by Galvatron in IDW TF:Devastation and reprogram to guard Moon of Brul) somehow enquire the data of Space Bridge from Jhiaxus and give it to Megatron in exchange failsave overrides program in case he goes amok (in IDW TF, he's a living weapon lol). [TF Spotlight: Metroplex]

This post has been edited by karasawamk2: Jul 9 2009, 12:40 PM

When I watch transformers, I don't really care how come it travel so fast. I can accept all this. Only
nitpicker like you will nitpick over such small matter.

But real critics will talk about how some lame joke/unnecessary plot spoil the overall experience
of the film.

After so many things being said, I really disappointed at you for not able to give a proper rebuttal to support such a shitty film.

Here's my own opinion. Actually from TF1 and TF2 i do think that all the transformers look ugly to me. Maybe i am used to the comics and cartoon type of design. Anyone thinks the same ?

Yes. But its alright since Bay want to portray Transformers as alien. I'm not sure how would it turn out if
TF1/TF2 robot looks like the one in G1. Erm

Cardboard box//... xD

From reading reviews by critics on various movies, these "professional" critics have limited range of "measurement" in terms of movie's final "opinion":

shit/junk ----------- oscar-material

And we audience might have bigger range, for eg:

shit/junk -------- poor --------- average flick -------- could be better --------- must-watch ------- epic/oscar-material


WHat I found out it... some viewers join in the professional critics measurement method and directly label movies as shit. Is it really that bad until its shit-like to the lowest level? Not a single redeeming value? not even "poor" ? Or its just a "join bandwagon" thingy coz of "we wanted to be in the hip group" or "the critics have spoken. so shit it shall be" ?

I personally think the TF2 entertains (me), but not till the must-watch level. just "could be better". I do nitpick on its plotholes, among others. But throughout the course of discussion, the word "shit" and lowest level of movie rating denomination are posted, some without even elaborating much. If elaborate also , its always the few gripping items that seemingly spoil the rating. It like judging a hot supermodel as "shit" because she has a few obvious moles on her arms and legs, without paying regard to her face/body/posture. its like -90% on moles, and 5% point each on the rest.

The CGI and action for TF2 looks good though (not exceptional), maybe I didnt "watch" the movie inspecting each and every frame to see which CGI renders didnt match the real life background.

Whats most saddening is .... those who opined the movie as shitty, started to insults the rest with personal attacks.

Lol, must admit G1 is too boxy to be in the films but the newer reincarnations from Unicron Trilogy looks good though. Look at Ironhide, his head looks like a tiger imo lol ...

You got it wrong. We don't join the measurement method that you've mentioned. For example, TF1 is not worthy of oscar material.
But we didn't say TF1 is shitty. As a matter of fact, we love TF1 to a must watch measurement.

To be in shitty material, TF2 is part of it. I love the CGI in TF2. I'm fan of brainless flick. But some part of the TF2 is not suitable to
be there. This causing TF2 to be shitty movie. For example, if you put such lame joke in Matrix, what happened? You get the drift?
Its just not suitable in Transformers movie.

Conclusion: TF2 is a shitty brainless action flick

Yes. I nitpick the stuff that matters to me, which doesnt matter to you. Same goes vice-versa. You think its shitty because some plot doesnt make sense with lame jokes. It matters to me too, but NOT that much. I still enjoy it in a different angle like the battling robots. You're not wrong, and Im not either.

You shudn't be dissapointed. ANy kind of rebuttal wont satisfy critics, coz its mere personal opinion by me, which is DEFINITELY wont be accepted by all.

Critics are adult humans. They're mislead by the huge marketing campaign and think its a "serious epic movie" . but we all know its still a movie is based on Toys and with the blessing of the toy company, which in the end, wanted the movie as a vehicle to sell more toys rather than win an oscar for it. To do so, it has to appeal to kids, not adult critics .

Are you saying you're kid? If you're adult, you should have the same thinking like adult human right? If you're still kid, sorry that
I reply you in such matter. Haha... because I thought you're adult..

FYI, as adult, we don't laugh at lame/unnecessary joke unless you deserve lame joke. Which means, low quality audience deserve low
quality film.

what the.... they are aliens,its a known fact since the Takara toy making days,even before the Americans bought the whole franchise under Hasbro. They wouldnt follow G1 designs because its 2D,thats why its all boxy and stuff, If you want it to be relaistic,take prime for example you can see where the parts of the peterbilt truck is especially the engine block,tyres,exhaust pipes among other things, you cant hide all the this pipes and stuff it has to be realistic.

---

Added on July 9, 2009, 1:24 pmi see alot of people(adults) laughing at Russel Peters and other comedians who base their material on lame stuffs, by your convention that by being adults means no laughing at lame/unnecessary joke, what should they laugh at then? even laughing also got guideline one meh or did you made that up just like this one:



This post has been edited by nimrod323: Jul 9 2009, 01:27 PM