July 16, 200719 yr They may be flashy but no 1 movie is going to please everyone. I thought there were good fight scenes and when I said a good story line I just meant in general. I know how movies go and almost every plot in today's movies are predictable. I knew from before even watching the movie that it was a good guys against bad guys movie. It's a given, but once again to each their own! If someone doesn't know this in just about every film then they don't deserve to be called human beings. It is RARE, and I mean RARE in American film for it to actually be anything but good guys against bad guys. The American public, for the most part, does not like grey areas in the dividing line between good and evil. How exactly do you mean in general? Because frankly there wasn't much plot to worry about. Regarding the action, I felt as though it was largely designed to wow people with so much "flashy and pretty colors" that it didn't matter whether it was in depth or cool or not. But it takes more than a few bright lights to really entertain me. I did not hate it which, as a huge fan of the originals, says a whole lot about the movie. Michael Bay makes mainstream, mass market crap. I would not go too far off base to call this the best of his film endavours. I would actually give credit to it not being terrible like the films Homeless Camel mentioned to Speilberg being one of the Executive Producers on this film.
July 16, 200719 yr Author If someone doesn't know this in just about every film then they don't deserve to be called human beings. It is RARE, and I mean RARE in American film for it to actually be anything but good guys against bad guys. The American public, for the most part, does not like grey areas in the dividing line between good and evil. How exactly do you mean in general? Because frankly there wasn't much plot to worry about. Regarding the action, I felt as though it was largely designed to wow people with so much "flashy and pretty colors" that it didn't matter whether it was in depth or cool or not. But it takes more than a few bright lights to really entertain me. I did not hate it which, as a huge fan of the originals, says a whole lot about the movie. Michael Bay makes mainstream, mass market crap. I would not go too far off base to call this the best of his film endavours. I would actually give credit to it not being terrible like the films Homeless Camel mentioned to Speilberg being one of the Executive Producers on this film. When I meant in general I just meant about everything from acting, to the scene locations to it all. Like in the cartoons wasn't bumble-bee really a volkswagon? I mean not all of the story is going to be the same and for what was done I liked it. I didn't think the acting was horrible, wasn't the best but I enjoyed it. I dunno I'm just not a huge movie critic, I enjoy a lot of movies. I understand where your coming from though. A fine line from a movie being done just right, with the right amount of special effects to go along with a good story line, and from a movie being overdone with it being lopsided on either special effects or something else.
July 16, 200719 yr When I meant in general I just meant about everything from acting, to the scene locations to it all. Like in the cartoons wasn't bumble-bee really a volkswagon? I mean not all of the story is going to be the same and for what was done I liked it. I didn't think the acting was horrible, wasn't the best but I enjoyed it. I dunno I'm just not a huge movie critic, I enjoy a lot of movies. I understand where your coming from though. A fine line from a movie being done just right, with the right amount of special effects to go along with a good story line, and from a movie being overdone with it being lopsided on either special effects or something else. He was originally a yellow VW Bug. Which is why they had one right next to him at the car lot. An homage to the original. :thumb:
July 16, 200719 yr Author He was originally a yellow VW Bug. Which is why they had one right next to him at the car lot. An homage to the original. :thumb: Yeah I noticed that in the movie. At least that gave some notice to the bug!
July 16, 200719 yr The missus and I went and watched it opening night and enjoyed it. As has been said, lots of flash, not much substance. Good for what it was which is cinematic fluff. Was anybody else bothered by them bringing up "self pleasure" in this? IWhen we saw it, there was a family with young kids sitting next to us and I couldn't help but wonder what that conversation was going to be like. We have friends with a 9 year old son who is very much at the age where he asks questions about everything, they were set to go see it too until we warned them about that particular scene. They have decided they are going to have to preview it before taking the kids. There was NO need for that whatsoever and did nothing for plot development or anything. It's a shame they felt the need to include it and I'm sure a shock to many parents taking there youngsters to see what I'm sure they felt would be a kid friendly film.
July 16, 200719 yr Was anybody else bothered by them bringing up "self pleasure" in this? I was STUNNED when I heard the line. No need for it in the movie at all, especially considering the audience they were targeting for this film.
July 17, 200719 yr I personally liked the movie alot, never thought I'd want to cry over the demise of a friendly robot.:cry:
July 17, 200719 yr I saw it twice in the first week. I don't usually do that. As for the "self pleasure" reference... come on, guys. The target audience for this movie was 17 - same age as the main character. Not little kids. The movie was rated PG-13, and if you think a 13 year old is unaware of that then you're kidding yourselves.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.