Transformers: It's More Than Meets the Ad

[youji itami]

"To be sure, the Transformers movies aren't regarded as being particularly good. Longtime fans of the characters railed against their "butchering" in the original film at a still-legendary pitch, and the disastrously bad (largely a casualty of a Hollywood writer's strike) sequel spurred mainstream critics (who'd mainly dismissed the original with a "well, what'd you expect?" shrug) to join in on the bashfest -- which by then had grown to encompass a more general backlash against the action aesthetic of Michael Bay. And while most agreed that the third installment was some sort of improvement, a strong vein of dismissal and disdain continued to permeate."


If the 'mainstream' audience didn't like them then there financial performance would go down rather than up.

So while 'critics' don't like them saying there's a general backlash against Michael Bay's films is wrong.

-snip-

commercial success doesn't mean its any good fyi, like how its ridiculous to argue that mcdonalds serves good food based on the notion that its lucrative.

the Bay films are largely reviled by fans of the earlier transformers series which were "more then meets the eye" in various degrees.


the recent prime series was fantastic... until it was cancelled so they can make another one that is more like the Bay movies...

sometimes I fear what I would do were I to ever get superpowers...

Actually continued financial success does mean it's good at least in the majority of people's opinions as the series continues to see it's profit increase.

When the majority of people do dislike a film the next film does see a drop in how much money it makes.

The first Matrix was really popular so the second made more money but was not itself popular so the third made a lot less than the first.

The X-men is another great example

The 1st is popular.
The 2nd makes more and is also popular.
The 3rd makes even more but is not popular.
The 4th makes less money than the 3rd and is also not popular.
The 5th makes even less money but is popular.
The 6th makes a lot of money as is also popular.
The 7th makes a lot of money and is also popular.

If the majority of people dislike a film the next film in the same series will make less money.

The Transformers series does keep making more money so for the majority it is popular.

 

[-Ezio-]

sometimes I fear what I would do were I to ever get superpowers...

regardless of what you do we'd complain that they dont work exactly like they do in the comics.

 

[Joseph Alexander]

"To be sure, the Transformers movies aren't regarded as being particularly good. Longtime fans of the characters railed against their "butchering" in the original film at a still-legendary pitch, and the disastrously bad (largely a casualty of a Hollywood writer's strike) sequel spurred mainstream critics (who'd mainly dismissed the original with a "well, what'd you expect?" shrug) to join in on the bashfest -- which by then had grown to encompass a more general backlash against the action aesthetic of Michael Bay. And while most agreed that the third installment was some sort of improvement, a strong vein of dismissal and disdain continued to permeate."


If the 'mainstream' audience didn't like them then there financial performance would go down rather than up.

So while 'critics' don't like them saying there's a general backlash against Michael Bay's films is wrong.

-snip-

commercial success doesn't mean its any good fyi, like how its ridiculous to argue that mcdonalds serves good food based on the notion that its lucrative.

the Bay films are largely reviled by fans of the earlier transformers series which were "more then meets the eye" in various degrees.


the recent prime series was fantastic... until it was cancelled so they can make another one that is more like the Bay movies...

sometimes I fear what I would do were I to ever get superpowers...

Actually continued financial success does mean it's good at least in the majority of people's opinions as the series continues to see it's profit increase.

When the majority of people do dislike a film the next film does see a drop in how much money it makes.

The first Matrix was really popular so the second made more money but was not itself popular so the third made a lot less than the first.

The X-men is another great example

The 1st is popular.
The 2nd makes more and is also popular.
The 3rd makes even more but is not popular.
The 4th makes less money than the 3rd and is also not popular.
The 5th makes even less money but is popular.
The 6th makes a lot of money as is also popular.
The 7th makes a lot of money and is also popular.

If the majority of people dislike a film the next film in the same series will make less money.

The Transformers series does keep making more money so for the majority it is popular.

ok, one you are wrong if you think popularity correlates directly to quality.
it can but not just if something is good it becomes popular, something can also be so bad that it loops around and becomes popular based on being a hour and a half long Mr. Bean joke.
or inversely both ends can just not become popular, or only become popular long after their release.
as sad as it is, quality has little effect on popularity.

something can be popular entirely based on marketing, its name, and its audience.
which is the case when it comes to the Bay films, BF, and CoD.
they have an audience that will go out and turn their brains off(if they ever were actually on) to be entertained by tits, ass, violence, "realism", explosions, and fellating the U.S military.

so no, they are not and have never been good movies, if the series hardly sees a drop in quality when there writers leave then there wasn't much of it to begin with.
they will exist only as long as they are making money and coming out, after that they with vaporize from the public
conscious.

good movies people will go back and watch.
they will bother to remember, and you can't do that with your brain off.

 

[youji itami]

ok, one you are wrong if you think popularity correlates directly to quality.
it can but not just if something is good it becomes popular, something can also be so bad that it loops around and becomes popular based on being a hour and a half long Mr. Bean joke.
or inversely both ends can just not become popular, or only become popular long after their release.
as sad as it is, quality has little effect on popularity.

something can be popular entirely based on marketing, its name, and its audience.
which is the case when it comes to the Bay films, BF, and CoD.
they have an audience that will go out and turn their brains off(if they ever were actually on) to be entertained by tits, ass, violence, "realism", explosions, and fellating the U.S military.

so no, they are not and have never been good movies, if the series hardly sees a drop in quality when there writers leave then there wasn't much of it to begin with.
they will exist only as long as they are making money and coming out, after that they with vaporize from the public
conscious.

good movies people will go back and watch.
they will bother to remember, and you can't do that with your brain off.

Quality is subjective, you don't like the transformers films fine but enough people do that every film makes more money than the last so far.

Stop being a #@^* with the whole 'I don't like it so it's shit and anyone who disagrees is a retard'

As I have pointed out in other posts films that were disliked or more precisely disappointed people saw there sequels make less and I've already pointed 5 film franchises were this is true.

There are plenty of films and games were tits, ass, violence, "realism", explosions, and fellating the U.S military are all there is to them and they still fail.

 

[VVThoughtBox]

I really don't understand what was so good about the Original Transformers series. I was born in the 90's and grew up watching Beast Wars, Transformers Armada, Animated, and more recently Prime when they aired on television. I already had my fill of complex story arcs, well rounded characters, engaging story, and world building. (Except for Armada, it got worse each season). When I saw the original Transformers movie, I didn't see any of that. I saw a movie designed to sell children of the time merchandise. Think about it: Why did the writers kill off Optimus Prime early in the movie and made Rodimus the Prime at the end of it? To sell merchandise! Why did Unicorn turn the damaged Megatron into Galvatron? To sell merchandise!

I also don't think that most cartoons of the 80's or the 90's were that good. If the cartoons didn't try to push a product, then they'll most likely push a moral into the story. I remember things getting really awkward when shows like Captain Planet tried to tell children that drugs are bad, and polluting the environment is wrong.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

Adding to Bob's observations, I really liked the characters in Transformers. Bumblebee was the audience surrogate even more than the human cast members were, and he wasn't some dorky mascot with an annoying voice who caused trouble because he was a klutz. He was just as brave and heroic as Optimus Prime, his inexperience and small size (obvious implications of youth) were his only flaws. Ironhide was a tough-talking brawler itching for a fight (think TMNT's Raphael before the 90's got to him). Grimlock was Grimlock. If he doesn't say "me Grimlock" in the upcoming film a good percentage of the fanbase are prepared to slap Michael Bay upside his flag-waving head with a deli slab of beryllim baloney. Optimus Prime was the perfect leader, an amalgam of heroic traits. The wise mentor, the weary veteran, the idealist ready to fight for his dream, the brave soldier prepared to sacrifice himself to save others. That he actually spent more time leading from the front and Getting Shit Done made him even more awesome.

Guys like Yahtzee have whined about how people can feel so strongly about a bunch of robots smashing each other in a cartoon designed to sell toys. Well, yes they were designed to sell toys. They sold GOOD toys. But we, WE, made Transformers what it is today. Popular culture embraced The Transformers as the ultimate expression of our generation. It's a toy, it's a TV show, it's cheesy but played strait, it's about a simple concept played out like fucking Shakespeare because a lot of what Shakespeare wrote--however well-written--was about the same concepts Transformers tackles: tragedy. It's about a devastating war fought over resources that results in an entire world being destroyed, yet they still keep fighting over the ashes. And then they just move to another world and start all over again, repeating a pattern of destruction and loss where no one wins. That IS Shakespeare, man. Prime dying in the animated film was like the Third Act of Hamlet. Everyone dies. They don't see victory, they don't win, some of them don't even die bravely. Prime's death is literally a phyrric victory: he came to save the day but there's only a handful of Autobots left and the city is in ruins. And it's one of the best fights in any movie, too. They throw down. They smash each other up, and its ends with a fantastic dramatic sting.

Plus did anyone find it hilarious how easily a weary, battle-damaged Megatron just tossed Hot Rod aside like a punk? Next leader of the Autobots my shiny metal ass.

 

[Darth_Payn]

Bob, I hope you do a Big Picture about the Transformers comic book, as those really show how COMICS! ARE! WEIRD! The original Marvel series and the current IDW one are incredible and are full of mythology and big ideas in a series ostensibly about alien robots shooting the crap out of each other.