Master Index of Archived Threads


transformers

0001

0 votes

0010

0 votes

0011

0 votes

0100

0 votes

0101

0 votes

0110

1 votes

0111

0 votes

1000

2 votes

1001

1 votes

1010

1 votes

m.e.t.b.o.t. Jul 03 2007 09:27 AM

more than meets the eye? m.e.t.b.o.t. was able to make time in m.e.t.b.o.t.'s busy day to attend a showing of the new transformers movie last night. m.e.t.b.o.t. was very much wound up by the technological advancement displayed on the screen and experienced what might be described by humans as excitement in watching the action. m.e.t.b.o.t. was also not turned off by the brief moments of human interest that all too often permeate michael bay's films. m.e.t.b.o.t. wonders what it would be like to be able to transform into different shapes, particularly those which incorporate large energy blasters, or vocalization circuitry, as those could both be of interest should m.e.t.b.o.t ever meet human poster stevejrogers. m.e.t.b.o.t. also appreciates the visual upgrades that the transformers received in the new movie. the autobots were quite new, but optimus prime and bumblebee are quite recognizable, and faithful to the original designs. the decepticons were, as human movie viewers say, badass. there were surprisingly few moments where m.e.t.b.o.t.'s finely tuned bovine waste detectors - an admittedly odd feature to have been installed in a springwound contraption specifically designed for schaeffer vote tabulation - were activated, specifically in the area of secret military facilities, overly capable man-portable human military weapons, a very poorly secured military computer network containing widespread "above top secret" data files, and finally a disposal technique guaranteed to ensure a flurry of sequels. many human moviegoers were observed to be appropriately amused by comedic elements of the movie, and while m.e.t.b.o.t. considers that the casting was skewed heavily in favor of humans, which far outnumbered the superior mechanical actors, those humans did not detract from the film. improbably, for a summer blockbuster film, the human constituents of the film performed rather well. m.e.t.b.o.t. would have appreciated more interplay between starscream and megatron, and more exposure in general to the decepticons, but on the whole, m.e.t.b.o.t. evaluates the movie favorably, and would recommend it to any mechanical viewers, as well as most human male viewers. humans who are unlikely to appreciate highly advanced robots doing battle for the fate of mankind may not fully appreciate the movie; however such closed-minded humans may still enjoy the organic components.

metirish Jul 03 2007 09:35 AM

You would like this,wouldn't you,this is a wind up right?

metsmarathon Jul 03 2007 09:41 AM

i liked it too. its not a movie a grown man should feel embarrassed to see. it really was quite good. fine cinema, no. best blockbuster i've seen in a long time - yeah. honestly, when i heard michael bay was doing the transoformers movie, i cried a little inside. i was afraid of a cross between bad boys 2 and T3. but my fears were certainly allayed. i'd easily slot this somewhere on the blockbuster scale as better than independence day, but a tad bit below T2.

Johnny Dickshot Jul 03 2007 10:51 AM

I promise you I'll never see this movie but that review gets a 1010 from me. Don't quote me on this but I believe my dad was the original pencil and/or ink guy in the Marvel comic series and for a while had a studio full of transformer toys as models (I was too old for toys at that point). He also did GI Joe when it was a comic book -- that unfortunately was well beyond the years I spent playing with GI Joe and also well beyond Joe's shark-jumping transformation from 12-incher action figure to 6 incher.

Edgy MD Jul 03 2007 11:23 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 03 2007 11:58 AM

The jump from 12-inch to six-inch was so depressing that you had to pay attention to see that it also switched GI Joe from a character to a brand, under which many shrunken characters conducted operations for GI Joe Company, or something. GI Joe works best a the guy Barbie's looking over Ken's shoulder at, as Ken obliviously embraces her. I promise you I'll never see this movie but that review gets a 1010 from me. Uh-huh.

Frayed Knot Jul 03 2007 11:39 AM

What happened to GI Joe was that the anti-war crowd got after him (or, more accurately, his makers) forcing them to turn him from a soldier into an "action figure". So gone were the more blatant instruments of war accesories to be replaced by; Joe as Scuba Diver; Joe on Safari; Joe the big game hunter (PETA wasn't well organized yet), etc. I don't remember (I never had any) if the changing roles specifically coincided with the shrunken figure.

Johnny Dickshot Jul 03 2007 11:50 AM

Joe quit the armed forces for the Adventure Team(R) long before he shrunk. The Adventure Team GIJ's were the sweet spot of my collecting time. edit - according to Wikipedia GIJ shrunk form 12 to 8.5 inches in 1977, then to 3.75 inches in 1982. His "adventure team" lasted from 1970-77.

Edgy MD Jul 03 2007 11:57 AM

GI Joe: metaphor for the gradual but systematic emasculation of the American male.

Johnny Dickshot Jul 03 2007 12:10 PM

There were subtle changes before Joe shrunk too. His body changed from removable parts attached with male-to-female pastic tabs (i.e.: you could "take off" his hanmds, or his arm at the elbow, etc) to an interconnected body parts attached by internal elastic. That newer body style accompanied a more muscular body and blue undies but was prone to break. My neighbor Steven D. once dropped his GI Joe from our willow tree and as it hit the ground its internal elastic broke and sent his arms and legs shooting off him, as if he exploded.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 03 2007 12:18 PM

I'm surprised to learn that he got as small as 3.75 inches.

Frayed Knot Jul 03 2007 01:21 PM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: I'm surprised to learn that he got as small as 3.75 inches. So were Joe's lady friends. Surprised, AND disappointed.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 03 2007 01:43 PM

What? Is three inches bad? I... Oops! Never mind!

Nymr83 Jul 03 2007 07:36 PM

particularly those which incorporate large energy blasters, or vocalization circuitry, as those could both be of interest should m.e.t.b.o.t ever meet human poster stevejrogers. i laughed out loud when i read that.

Vic Sage Jul 05 2007 09:51 AM

Michael Bay movies are loud, stupid and obnoxious. Though many are entertained by his brand of action movie, i think he sucks BHMC. Bad Boys (1995) The Rock (1996) Armageddon (1998) Pearl Harbor (2001) Bad Boys II (2003) The Island (2005) "The Rock" is the best of this excerable bunch, made watchable by virtue of the presence of Mr. Connery. Furthermore, TRANSFORMERS was a phenomenon well after my time, so it has no emotional resonance for me. All that being said, my son has indicated a desire to see it, so i may end up seeing it any way. I'm hoping to stall him until its out on DVD.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 05 2007 10:44 AM

I know I saw The Rock, and seem to remember thinking it was okay. I'm not sure about Armageddon. Is that one of the two killer asteroid movies that came out around the same time? All I remember is that one had Bruce Willis and one didn't. One involved astronauts landing on an asteroid, and one didn't. I saw one of the two, but don't know which one. All I remember is that the one I saw had Tea Leoni in it. I don't even remember if I liked it! (I guess that means I was lukewarm towards it.)

metsmarathon Jul 05 2007 01:27 PM

bad boys and the rock entertain me. bad boys 2 was trying too hard, which is quite a statement for a michael bay flick. armageddon had about two entertaining moments - the opening meteor shower, and the two shuttles taking off at the same time. the rest of it was a suck-fest.

Nymr83 Jul 08 2007 11:02 AM

The Rock was good, though probably because of the aforementioned Connery. Armageddon was passable, Pearl Harbor was horrible, I never heard of "The Island."

seawolf17 May 14 2008 09:52 AM

I finally saw this, after all the anticipation, and was horribly, horribly disappointed. Visually, it was awesome; the transformations were excellent, and all the explosions were top-notch Michael Bay. But the story was insipid, full of holes, and the characters -- including the Transformers -- were just awful. The only great part was getting Optimus Prime's original voice, which was frigging awesome. Other than that, I'd rather watch the 1986 movie than this one again.

Centerfield May 14 2008 10:47 AM

What wolf said. Girl was hot though.