Moderator: NecronLord
I think Transformers is even worst. At least M.D. Geist all together has the decency to be only 90 minutes of footage. You will be able to watch all of M.D. Geist six times once Michael Bay has finished the third movie.Ford Prefect wrote:
Don't be absurd: nothing is that bad.
Well, fine, but if we're going to be special we shouldn't be special because of our devastatingly powerful weapons. We should be special because... hell, I don't know, anything but having more effective technology than a bunch of starfaring fifty-ton chunks of walking smart materials!McC wrote:Er, because the movie is directed at audiences comprised of us. Who the hell would go see a movie where an eons-old stalemate between transforming robots is broken by...other transforming robots.* Or something. The reason humans are often Special™ in movies and fiction generally is, gosh, the audience is comprised of humans.Simon_Jester wrote:Yes, but why US?
Because I cannot stretch my suspension of disbelief to the point where I find it credible that the Transformers' own weapons are LESS effective than the weapons we can build and deploy from platforms of comparable size. And yet Transformers show considerable resistance to each others' ranged weapons. Is this entire race supposed to be so foolhardy that they get obsessed with melee combat and just don't think of arming themselves with heavier artillery that could do more than mildly inconvenience their foes?FOG3 wrote:What is your problem with a 150mm naval gun firing a 20kg round at Mach 7.5, that can hit at target 200NM away at Mach 5? A tank sabot is significantly lighter, is doing around Mach 5 at the muzzle, and can go through thicker modern armor then any of the Tranformers had. Ignoring "we're magic to the core and thus can ignore reality" they shouldn't even be shrugging off normal tank rounds.
Why should bombs that can go up to 5,000lb have a problem, given they now know the proper warhead the defeat their shields?
Why shouldn't we have weapons that can hurt them? The fact that they're vehicles at all puts a limit on how durable / heavily armored they can be - 50t is probably an exaggeration for every single Transformer except Megatron (TF2 version) and Brawl - because they're both tanks (Brawl especially took a huge beating in the original movie before finally succumbing). Sure, you could make up some lame cheat like super-impervious-physics-defying-armor-and-shields, but I think it's awesome that these robots - which though huge and powerful, aren't invincible.Well, fine, but if we're going to be special we shouldn't be special because of our devastatingly powerful weapons. We should be special because... hell, I don't know, anything but having more effective technology than a bunch of starfaring fifty-ton chunks of walking smart materials!
Sorry. It just bothers me, is all.
Except we still clearly do. If it hadn't been for Optimus Prime, the machine at the end of TF2 would've been activated and that would've been the end of it. The Fallen wiped out the entire humanoid armored force with a gesture, after all. That they're not more awesomely powerful than say, an armored company - makes sense - how the hell could they be more powerful anyway? They're about the same, with a lot more durability for the more impressive transformers. The threat instead comes from the high-technology McGuffins that drive the plot - it's been that way since TF1 anyway, which is why so much was made of the Decepticons disabling military communications and what not. The plot has never been "Transformers are going to take over the world by military superiority"*Kane Starkiller wrote:I don't think the problem is so much how much punishment they can take but watching TF2 you get the feeling that Autobots should just move out of the way and let a few F-22s take out the Decepticons with their JDAMs and be done with it.
It kind of the defeats the whole "most have come to destroy us, some are here to protect us" idea. We don't need their protection.
That same thing could've been accomplished with a few more B-1 dropping their JDAMs or that destroyer shelling the pyramid with it's fancy railgun (as if the US military wasn't already dominant enough they had to equip it with weaponry that doesn't even exist yet).Vympel wrote:Except we still clearly do. If it hadn't been for Optimus Prime, the machine at the end of TF2 would've been activated and that would've been the end of it.
I agree. But when you have robots who are basically on foot in the middle of the desert with no air support (don't know what Starscream was up to) they better be prepared to take a JDAM in the face and live if I'm to consider them any kind of a threat.Vympel wrote:The whole thing about 'they suck at war' is absolutely irrelevant to me - we're talking about a show who's premise is utterly absurd on its face (i.e. transforming machines). I don't need military realism from such aliens.
Given the Fallen wiped out an entire armored company, I doubt he would've had much concern with a few bombs or aircraft. He could've plowed them into the ground as easily as he lifted up multiple armored vehicles / crashed the F-22s.Kane Starkiller wrote: That same thing could've been accomplished with a few more B-1 dropping their JDAMs or that destroyer shelling the pyramid with it's fancy railgun (as if the US military wasn't already dominant enough they had to equip it with weaponry that doesn't even exist yet).
So, what, Autobots should be able to fly now? Who cares, really? There's so much wrong with the premise from a logic point of view I don't see how anyone can take it seriously.So it was more of Optimus being in the right place at the right time than humans being helpless. Which brings me to another point: Autobots are dependent on sealift capabilities of US military. I don't care which way you slice it that's just lame.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember those JDAMs actually visibly blowing any Decepticons up? There was a lot going on though so I might've missed something.I agree. But when you have robots who are basically on foot in the middle of the desert with no air support (don't know what Starscream was up to) they better be prepared to take a JDAM in the face and live if I'm to consider them any kind of a threat.
That scene where JDAM drops on their hapless asses and blows them to shit had me thinking about scenes of Vietnam villagers getting obliterated by napalm bombs. Not exactly the image I'd want to associate with mighty Decepticons.
In movies the "monsters/aliens" are usually dumb but strong which is bad in itself but when they are dumb and weak that just isn't any fun.
Fair enough - I on the other hand don't have any preconceived notions about how durable a walking robot (that he turns into a tank is pretty irrelevant given he wasn't a tank in the scene) is 'supposed' to be- those notions certainly don't come from the film, there's nothing in any of the films that establish the notion that Transformers are invulnerable, at all. It seems to be an entirely fanon invention. Either way, the grenades didn't really do much more than make him flinch/ stumble.Stark wrote:Are you saying handheld nade launchers should be able to damage alien space tanks? Because that makes the alien space tank pretty lame.
I think the writers - the same guys who did Nu-Trek, are probably more responsible than Bay. I think the script in TF2 was just plain bloated compared to the original, which was tight, relatively speaking. Hopefully they don't think 'more is better' for the third movie, because TF2 could really have been cut down and it likely would've gotten better reviews for it (the Pretender Decepticon sub-plot being the prime offender).Simon_Jester wrote:What I'd really like is something between the movie we got (where it seems like we barely even need good-guy Transformers on our side) and the extreme "Aaaah our weapons are useless" state you describe (like the classic War of the Worlds movie). Something where if we want to stop Decepticons using only Earth technology we really have to WORK for it, sort of the way that sword/jezail-armed natives really had to WORK to stop a Victorian-era European expeditionary force. They could do it sometimes; it happened at places like Isandhlwana. But it was never easy, even when the enemy wasn't fighting smart, and when it happened you had to admire the guys who managed to pull it off, even if they were the enemy.
That is something I would like to sea.
Making it work credibly would probably be beyond Michael Bay, though, come to think of it.
Holy Shit.Darth Wong wrote:Oh come on, if we're talking about shitty action movies with pointless explosions there's no way you can beat MegaForce.
Feathered hair flowing in the wind ... on a flying motorcycle, bitches. The awfulness is legendary. You can't even get this turkey on DVD. You have to be old enough to remember it.
The most incredible thing is that the flying motorcycle feature is actually a deux ex machina. I don't recall the film even hinting before that their motorcycles were capable of this, and they didn't use the capability earlier in the battles. It's just at the end when the plane is taking off and poor Ace Hunter is left behind on the tarmac because he had to heroically make sure the others could get away. The plane is already airborne, so he guns his engine, roars down the runway after it on his motorcycle, and ... surprise! The motorcycle sprouts wings and begins to fly! With Ace Hunter heroically perched on top, and eighties hair band music accompanying his heroic soaring flight to safety!Vympel wrote:Holy Shit.Darth Wong wrote:Oh come on, if we're talking about shitty action movies with pointless explosions there's no way you can beat MegaForce.
Feathered hair flowing in the wind ... on a flying motorcycle, bitches. The awfulness is legendary. You can't even get this turkey on DVD. You have to be old enough to remember it.
http://www.surfindead.com/megaforce.html
Wow. The final screencapture is just ....
Wow. That is BAD.
And this differs from real life where even the US has historically backed down when an airliner is hijacked by a bunch of ragheads, because? The 9/11 hijackers weren't exactly Rambo or armed with super weapons. If they're grabbing civies the politicians at least are historically a little edgy, because they want to avoid collateral damage.Anguirus wrote:^ They weren't fighting anyone in their "take over" montage, unfortunately, that's the whole point. They just announce their presence on every telecom system in existence courtesy of Soundwave, show up in robot form, and start kicking over flags and kidnapping parents in at the very least both coasts of the US and France. And instead of once trying to fight them, world governments all seem more interested in handing Sam over than trying to fight the alien menace.
Then we find out that an M1 tank will take out a typical Decepticon 1-v-1, and there are only a few dozen Decepticons.
...Anguirus wrote:The only real advantage the 'cons have, like in the first movie, is that they can effortlessly kill all enemy communications while retaining their own. They pretty much run around through the ruins like they are playing laser tag with the Autobots, and when they get through they are stopped cold by the line 'o tanks and then they are all wiped out by a B1. I can see why that's fun for military buffs, but it's narratively weak because you start wondering what the big screaming deal was about the Decepticons. Even Megatron runs away from those tanks.
I don't mind the 'cons losing to US forces, I just want it to be fun when they do, and consistent with the earlier threat they seemed to present.
SoD my big toe, fanboy. You're just throwing a tantrum because you can't setup your delusions of superiority. Comparable size?Simon_Jester wrote:Because I cannot stretch my suspension of disbelief to the point where I find it credible that the Transformers' own weapons are LESS effective than the weapons we can build and deploy from platforms of comparable size. And yet Transformers show considerable resistance to each others' ranged weapons. Is this entire race supposed to be so foolhardy that they get obsessed with melee combat and just don't think of arming themselves with heavier artillery that could do more than mildly inconvenience their foes?
Go to the archives and look up why mechs<<<<tanks. Nevermind most of them aren't even in a tanks tonnage range.Simon_Jester wrote:R(1) bothers me more than (2); if something like a 105 to 120mm tank gun can blow a baseline Transformer's brains out with one well placed shot, why don't we see more Transformers carrying such guns? They'd be the equivalent of rifles for human infantry; no sane soldier would leave home without one. It's not as if that kind of weapon is beyond their capability; they have those weird arm-mounted gun/blaster/whatevers, after all.
Because the, ahem, "ragheads" had not just declared military supremacy over the entire planet by hijacking every television on Earth and saying essentially, "we might let you live if you give us this innocent kid to do with as we please." (Which might be an interesting moral issue but naturally the movie instead treats it as a plot complication.)And this differs from real life where even the US has historically backed down when an airliner is hijacked by a bunch of ragheads, because?
Which is why planes were scrambled to try to shoot down the airliners on 9/11?The 9/11 hijackers weren't exactly Rambo or armed with super weapons. If they're grabbing civies the politicians at least are historically a little edgy, because they want to avoid collateral damage.
I'm not sure you're actually responding to me. I'm not one of the people arguing that the Autobots should logically be much, much better at killing Decepticons than the military. I'm just saying it's narratively weak to have the bad big alien robots be an inconsequential threat, and for the good big robots to be somewhat useful fire support.The laid out history only goes as far as that they've been bitch slapping each other in a stalemate for a long time, which implies nothing of the sort.
Perhaps you should actually watch the second movie? Since that's the one we're talking about? In movie 2 the primary threat is clearly the Decepticon army, since there's no Allspark anymore. Sure, there is a plot with a MacGuffin that is going to be used to DESTROY the world, but there is a heavy implication in the middle of the flick that the 'cons are essentially declaring themselves rulers of the world.Heck the plot of the first one was based around Megatron using our machines to create an Army, not that the 'Con squad was uber badasses.
I'll freely admit that I'm more of a Transformers fanboy than a US military equipment fanboy. However, again considering that you haven't seen the movie that we're talking about, you seem a bit confused.Are you referring to the Blackout intro raid type stuff, where he literally gets in their perimeter and has the drop on them, should be continued by making the US incompetent so you can get your fanboy jollies?
You show no comprehension whatsoever of my biggest objections.I'm finding it entertaining that your biggest objections boil down to bitching that the cheap hamstringing of military forces and other stupid, so poorly conceived crap can be a threat to them, is being thrown out in favor of them having to actually deal with it. That would be an advancement in these things.
I thought the 'fight' (ps poorly connected shots of shooting) was boring and I actually forgot it was happening with other more important things going on.Vympel wrote:Fair enough - I on the other hand don't have any preconceived notions about how durable a walking robot (that he turns into a tank is pretty irrelevant given he wasn't a tank in the scene) is 'supposed' to be- those notions certainly don't come from the film, there's nothing in any of the films that establish the notion that Transformers are invulnerable, at all. It seems to be an entirely fanon invention. Either way, the grenades didn't really do much more than make him flinch/ stumble.
As for the Brawl fight, I thought it was beautifully put together - the shot where Ironhide, Jazz and Ratchet all attack him at the same time was wicked, as was the way Bumblebee finished him off. The humans weren't really a focus there.
In any event, how is a movie where the alien enemy robots are all invulnerable against nothing but the good guy robots going to be remotely interesting? I hate to play the nerd card (since I'm a huge fucking nerd), but I can't imagine this is something mainscreen audiences are terribly interesting in seeing (run away, run away, our weapons are useless, we suck, run away, run away, yay the Autobots saved us), just like they wouldn't be interested in seeing nothing but robots for 2 hours- frankly I think if the movie wasn't called Transformers no nerd would give a shit about this either - it's all tied up with sub-conscious/ conscious irrational deference to The Way Transformers Are In The (Crappy, Badly Aged) Cartoon, I reckon.
If the robots were supposed to be shit, it was consistent and they acted sensibly, it would be fine (which is largely how they operated in the first movie). I just can't get excited about zomg robots... that suck... when it's supposed to be an action movie and the robots constantly engage in combat. Seriously, the whole 'Brawl sits in a corner and fires once or twice' thing is quite jarring compared to the rest of the 'bang you're dead' combat. Good thing he bought those fifteen turrets he never fired, really. 
You can't blame me for superhot sabot you know. I think you sound way more bitter than I do - I'm the one who likes the movies. You're Stark, remember?Your hilarious bitterness aside, I have no problem with the robots being shit. You can't routinely dismiss all opposing opinions by saying 'omg 80s cartoon'.
The idea that a movie involving robots where only other robots can kill them would be boring is fucking hilarious.
*Dies of concentrated suck*The glory of youtube:
Who is saying that? People are just saying that they're non-threatening and yet clearly supposed to be a threat. A lot of that is Bay, but I'm not aware anyone has said 'robots must be incredibly tough'. Your villains just have to be threatening, and half the first movie successfully sold the Decepticons as 'sinister', which is good because they were rubbish in combat.Vympel wrote:As for dismissing opinions from 'omg 80s cartoon' - that is probably where any serious "zomg that sucks!" opinion about the robots vulnerability must be derived. Consistency wise, there's absolutely nothing in either movie that implies these robots are meant to be invulnerable to human weapons, at any point. It's something that people have made up entirely in their heads as How It's Supposed To Be, and it's got nothing to do with anything in the movies.
