Sequel/Transformers 2: we're in trouble

[Rackon]

We're getting more Trek, so I'm happy.

Yes, but will it be 'good' Trek? I don't think these duo writers have a grasp on what makes for good character development.

Yes, I think there's every possibility it will be good Trek.

I loved XI, just so you know. I happen to think they got the characters mostly right, kept Kirk/Spock as the spine of the story, respected the characters and relationships. Trek is for me first and foremost (if not ONLY) about the realtionships among the characters, especially K/S, and to a lesser extent K/S/McC. I'm guessing you found these elements lacking in XI. I did not, therefoer I am looking forward to more adventures with the NuCrew.

Transformers and Trek are two entirely different properties requiring entirely different approaches aimed at different audiences and fufilling two quite different functions.

That I dislike one doesn't mean that I'll dislike the other. I don't care for Transformers, but it doesn't follow therefore that Trek XII will therefore be bad. Trek XI was good and lots of fun IMO, therefore I look forward to more of the same - or even - better.

What will be will be.

I knew there was a reason I kept outa this thread before.

 

[Chensams]

All I know is that I've been a life long Trek fan and liked the latest movie and haven't seen either Transformer movie. Just because the Transformer sequel sucked doesn't mean a Trek sequel will suck. HOWEVER, the noveltly of seeing new actors throwing out Bones quips or Scotty quips won't work for the next movie. They have a tough road ahead. Again, I loved the movie, especially Bones. But the times I laughed during the first movie with Bones will turn into groans with the next one. So here's hoping there is a good story out there that they are working on.

 

[FailedLurker]

Oh right, because it's a popularity contest.

I forgot Trek was all about being popular.

To a certain extent, Trek, like any commercial venture, is a popularity contest. If a TV show gets high ratings, it will stay on the air. If a movie sells a lot of tickets, then the people perceived to be responsible for that success (be it the director, the writer(s), the star(s), the studio executive who greenlit the production, etc.) will get to make more movies, and in many cases, the movie will get a sequel. OTOH, if a TV show gets ENT-like ratings, it will be taken off the air. If a movie has NEM-like ticket sales, then there will be no more sequels.

And really, "A lot of people like it," is hardly a devastating criticism.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Transformers is basically a movie about alien robots beating the shit out of each other so it's going for different things than Trek is. It's like comparing apples and oranges. Bay has different things he wants to include than Abram's does. Plus they had a co-writer on Transformers 2 though I do believe that on Star Trek 2 they'll have Damon Lindelof as the third writer and he's a better writer than the third guy on Transformers.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Transformers is basically a movie about alien robots beating the shit out of each other

Finally someone says it, especailly after all that complaining that this isn't some deep intellectual movie. I mean what is so hard to understand about that basic concept people?

 

[Franklin]

Transformers is basically a movie about alien robots beating the shit out of each other

Finally someone says it, especailly after all that complaining that this isn't some deep intellectual movie. I mean what is so hard to understand about that basic concept people?

And it has great appeal. It looks like it will need only about one week to top ST09's entire domestic box take office so far.

Not a bad year for Orci and Kurtzman, really.

 

[Jeri]

Not a bad year for Orci and Kurtzman, really.

I know it; I have been thinking this for a while.

Those guys must be swimming in dough, like Donald Duck's millionaire uncle, whose mansion has a pool filled with dollar bills.

 

[narius]

I saw Transformers 2 last night it IMAX. It sucked -- and I mean inexplicable, head-scratching, why-for-the-love-of-god-was-this-film-made sucked.

Because it makes tons of money? It gross >$200M in 5 days, ALMOST as much as the Dark Knight. It has already made back the production costs ($200) by the first weekend (world wide gross is like ~$380M already).

If i am a studio exec, is there any reason why I should NOT fund this movie?

BTW, while you need to check your brain at the theater door, it is a fun summer spectacle movie. Lots and lots of robot on robot action, and US military on robot action. That is quite enough to be enjoyable.

 

[Ptrope]

Given how disappointed I was with their writing in Star Trek, I'm pretty darn wary about giving these guys the chance to write the sequel.

QFT

 

[SonicRanger]

Michael Bay and his team of cronies who won't say no to him are the ones to blame for the Transformers films.

 

[Phily B]

My problem with Transformers comes from the whole "ITS GIANT ROBOTS FIGHTING" that is fine if it is a one and a half hour film of just that. BUT IT WASN'T!

 

[Ovation]

Given how disappointed I was with their writing in Star Trek, I'm pretty darn wary about giving these guys the chance to write the sequel.

QFT

The "truth" is usually less reliant on opinion. But carry on.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Transformers is basically a movie about alien robots beating the shit out of each other

Finally someone says it, especailly after all that complaining that this isn't some deep intellectual movie. I mean what is so hard to understand about that basic concept people?

Nothing. It's not hard at all. I went to see it expecting my avatar boy, loads of robots and cgi and a cool soundtrack. I got what I expected, and I liked it. Maybe that's the secret.

 

[narius]

Michael Bay and his team of cronies who won't say no to him are the ones to blame for the Transformers films.

Blame for what? Offending your sensibilities???

Movies which entertain millions and raked up hundred of millions of dollars have a place, no matter how silly they are.

No one forces you to watch it, you know.

 

[God Magnus]

Because it makes tons of money? It gross >$200M in 5 days, ALMOST as much as the Dark Knight. It has already made back the production costs ($200) by the first weekend (world wide gross is like ~$380M already).

If i am a studio exec, is there any reason why I should NOT fund this movie?

Yeah, I have to agree here. I may not have agreed with Bay's humor and some of his directing choices, but the man produces results. There are studios that could only WISH their films would open to half what "Revenge" has made so far. The film may not be an artistic success, but it's a financial one, and I think studio execs will pay attention to that - especially when we're in a recession and all you hear about are stories of people losing their jobs and barely being able to afford to eat. Frankly, the numbers astound me given the state of the economy, but I guess seeing a film is infinitely cheaper than a full blown vacation.

 

[Lumen]

I saw Transformers 2 last night it IMAX. It sucked -- and I mean inexplicable, head-scratching, why-for-the-love-of-god-was-this-film-made sucked.

Because it makes tons of money? It gross >$200M in 5 days, ALMOST as much as the Dark Knight. It has already made back the production costs ($200) by the first weekend (world wide gross is like ~$380M already).

If i am a studio exec, is there any reason why I should NOT fund this movie?

BTW, while you need to check your brain at the theater door, it is a fun summer spectacle movie. Lots and lots of robot on robot action, and US military on robot action. That is quite enough to be enjoyable.

There were almost no robots. There was just Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox staring at each other. For two and a half hours. The robots mostly fought off-screen, or they fought beside the two leads, who just stared at each other stupidly.

 

[Borgminister]

I saw Transformers 2 last night it IMAX. It sucked -- and I mean inexplicable, head-scratching, why-for-the-love-of-god-was-this-film-made sucked.

Because it makes tons of money? It gross >$200M in 5 days, ALMOST as much as the Dark Knight. It has already made back the production costs ($200) by the first weekend (world wide gross is like ~$380M already).

If i am a studio exec, is there any reason why I should NOT fund this movie?

BTW, while you need to check your brain at the theater door, it is a fun summer spectacle movie. Lots and lots of robot on robot action, and US military on robot action. That is quite enough to be enjoyable.

There were almost no robots. There was just Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox staring at each other. For two and a half hours. The robots mostly fought off-screen, or they fought beside the two leads, who just stared at each other stupidly.

Lumen... the people... have spoken...

Now let's see if they continue to speak.

 

[Jeri]

There were almost no robots. There was just Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox staring at each other. For two and a half hours. The robots mostly fought off-screen, or they fought beside the two leads, who just stared at each other stupidly.

I have only seen the trailer -- is this sarcasm?

 

[Tom Riley]

There were almost no robots. There was just Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox staring at each other. For two and a half hours. The robots mostly fought off-screen, or they fought beside the two leads, who just stared at each other stupidly.

I have only seen the trailer -- is this sarcasm?

I hope so, because that is certainly NOT an accurate description of the movie. The fight scenes were EPIC and they were most definitely not offscreen. I only recall all of two scenes where Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox were staring at each other... and they both fit what was happening in the movie.

 

[MvRojo]

There were almost no robots. There was just Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox staring at each other. For two and a half hours. The robots mostly fought off-screen, or they fought beside the two leads, who just stared at each other stupidly.

I have only seen the trailer -- is this sarcasm?

I hope so, because that is certainly NOT an accurate description of the movie. The fight scenes were EPIC and they were most definitely not offscreen. I only recall all of two scenes where Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox were staring at each other... and they both fit what was happening in the movie.

Yeah, I'm not the biggest fan of the movie (I give it a C+), but it gets an A+ for the action and FX. I agree that the battles were EPIC especially the opening scene and the forest scene.