The Most Ridiculous Movie-Related Thing You've Heard

[Invisible NanoGhost]

I'm less forgiving of fans who hated the movie than those who didn't have any previous connection to the franchise and hated it for reasons other than personalized expectations.

I suspect the part I put in bold is not really what you meant to say.  So, it's fine if someone hates it due to pre-conceived expectations, but unforgivable if they watched the movie with an open mind, and hated it simply because they found it to be an awful movie?

I didn't see the movie until the rifftrax for it came out.  I had avoided it, because the trailers made it seem like it was just pointlessly loud and obnoxious.  I have no prior connection to the Transformers world.  I know it's something about vehicles which transform into large fighting machines, but not much than that.

And given all that, I really hated the movie even more than I thought I would.  It's a crap movie.  There is no story.  Just a lot of noise and stupid bits strung together.  Maybe that is Michael Bay's strength, but that does not make it a good movie.

Obviously, just my opinion...   

[daltysmilth]

  So, it's fine if someone hates it due to pre-conceived expectations, but unforgivable if they watched the movie with an open mind, and hated it simply because they found it to be an awful movie?

No, I think she meant the exact opposite, that it's okay if they don't like it just as a movie, but not so much if they dislike it because they were a fan of the franchise and they didn't get every single detail of every character exactly right.

[Courtney]

Besides McG really hasn't done anything in a while -

Producing Chuck and Supernatural wins him a lot of points from me.

Yeah, love Chuck.  I got tired of Supernatural, but it was good for a while.  The first season of The OC was pretty awesome too.

Chuck and The OC have earned McG life-points forever as far as I'm concerned.

[Piobman]

  So, it's fine if someone hates it due to pre-conceived expectations, but unforgivable if they watched the movie with an open mind, and hated it simply because they found it to be an awful movie?

No, I think she meant the exact opposite, that it's okay if they don't like it just as a movie, but not so much if they dislike it because they were a fan of the franchise and they didn't get every single detail of every character exactly right.

I don't know about you, but I really don't see a difference. They make movies based on expectations that people want to see them. So part of the draw of some movies (especially transformers) is to touch on something people already know. Otherwise they would have named the movie something different and not pay any royalties for the trademark name. If they failed in that respect... then its pretty obvious they will be excluding the very audience they were trying to target. Take lord of the rings for example.It may not be exact at all times with the books, but Jackson captured the essence of the books. I don't think you could blame any LOTR fans for being upset had Michael Bay created it and changed it as much as he has done with transformers.

[gbeenie]

  So, it's fine if someone hates it due to pre-conceived expectations, but unforgivable if they watched the movie with an open mind, and hated it simply because they found it to be an awful movie?

No, I think she meant the exact opposite, that it's okay if they don't like it just as a movie, but not so much if they dislike it because they were a fan of the franchise and they didn't get every single detail of every character exactly right.

Yeah. What you said.

[gbeenie]

  So, it's fine if someone hates it due to pre-conceived expectations, but unforgivable if they watched the movie with an open mind, and hated it simply because they found it to be an awful movie?

No, I think she meant the exact opposite, that it's okay if they don't like it just as a movie, but not so much if they dislike it because they were a fan of the franchise and they didn't get every single detail of every character exactly right.

I don't know about you, but I really don't see a difference. They make movies based on expectations that people want to see them. So part of the draw of some movies (especially transformers) is to touch on something people already know. Otherwise they would have named the movie something different and not pay any royalties for the trademark name. If they failed in that respect... then its pretty obvious they will be excluding the very audience they were trying to target. Take lord of the rings for example.It may not be exact at all times with the books, but Jackson captured the essence of the books. I don't think you could blame any LOTR fans for being upset had Michael Bay created it and changed it as much as he has done with transformers.

Like I said: Emotional investment FAR out of proportion with the weight of the concept.

[bratpop]

You guys are arguing about a movie based on a cartoon based on toy cars that transform into robots.

(Or the other way around. I don't know. I could never afford them.)

[Darth Geek]

  I still say that it doesn't matter that the show was a "toy commercial". It doesn't matter whether the characters come first or the toys did. They are characters, it's what you choose to do with them that matters. The original show may not be high art, it may be rediculous looking back at it now, but they did have distinct personalities and character traits. And the whole show was centered around the robots. They were the primary characters (no one chared about that stupid kid that hung around with them). The new movie didn't get those aspect of it right, which means that it is a crappy adaptation of Transformers.
  That means that the only way to enjoy the movie was strictly on a base blockbuster action movie level, which is where I think the majority of us differ. I did not go into the theater expecting anything more than that, and because of the overcomplicated robot designs, I couldn't even enjoy it on that level. That is why I find this movie so frustrating, because there isn't even that last shred of enjoyment to gloss over the major plot, editing, casting, etc. problems.
  If you were able to enjoy the action parts of this movie, fine. But don't think that just because I'm a fan of the original cartoon that I went in with unrealistic expectations or wanted some slavish note for note copy of the original.

[Piobman]

I agree with you completely Darth Geek.  The movie industry built these expectations to get your money, so people have a right to be upset for misrepresenting the movie with something that bears little resemblance. I went in thinking they are going to muck this one up... I just did not realize how badly they in fact did.

[daltysmilth]

Okay, answer me this, did Transformers the movie feature giant robots that can transform into vehicles fighting other giant robots that can transform into vehicles, or did it not?

[Piobman]

Okay, answer me this, did Transformers the movie feature giant robots that can transform into vehicles fighting other giant robots that can transform into vehicles, or did it not?

Answer: no. It featured shia labuff masterbating and megan fox strutting around.

... wait a second, there was action... I think robots...  but the camera was shaking so violently I couldn't tell what was going on.

[Darth Geek]

Okay, answer me this, did Transformers the movie feature giant robots that can transform into vehicles fighting other giant robots that can transform into vehicles, or did it not?

Answer: no. It featured shia labuff masterbating and megan fox strutting around.

... wait a second, there was action... I think robots...  but the camera was shaking so violently I couldn't tell what was going on.

Don't forget it had John Voigt embarrassing himself for his grandchildren.

The robots were cameos in their own movie.

[RobtheBarbarian]

Was it the Bumblebee/Barricade fight in the beginning where we are forced to watch a pantsless Shia LaBouff flailing at that little robot instead of the two giant machines clobbering each other in the background?

[Darth Geek]

Was it the Bumblebee/Barricade fight in the beginning where we are forced to watch a pantsless Shia LaBouff flailing at that little robot instead of the two giant machines clobbering each other in the background?

Yes, flailing like an idiot while a robot that looks like a scissors sculpture tried to kill him, yet he doesn't get scratched.

[daltysmilth]

Okay, obviously you guys are absolutely 100% correct.  Your flat out denial of something which could be easily proven has convinced me.  Perhaps I would have been more steadfast in my argument if only there were some way of digitally capturing still images from films, so I could have done so and presented an image which would back up my argument.  But until such technology becomes available, my argument looks extremely foolish and is therefore without merit, so I must believe your side. 

...Oh wait, that technology does exist!  Here you go: