Transformers 4 & 5 to Film Back to Back with Jason Statham?

Don't know how I feel about this...

Ahahahahaha, let's hope this is not true. It's funny, I'm actually laughing at Michael Bay returning more than Jason Statham's rumored casting. I knew he wasn't stupid enough to walk away from the never ending gold mine that is the Transformer movie series. Would love to see another director get their hands on it, but hey, you know what they say: if it isn't broken, don't try fixing it. From an overall stand point, these movies need a complete overhaul in every category except for visuals. But hey, the fans eat it up, so why bother?

I'd personally LOVE to see more of the live-action movies.....in a few years. If they come out too soon, they run the risk of over-saturating the market with too much Transformers action and the corresponding toys. People just don't need 26 different versions of Bumblebee in such a short span of time. The DOTM line has already given us that.

If they were to come out in say....summer 2014 (or later), which is a little more than 2 1/2 years away and have a coherent plot without holes big enough to drive Optimus through...then I'd GLADLY welcome them. I'd love to see more of the war on Cybertron, maybe the entire history of Transformers on earth (which would be the only logical reason to include Dinobots) and maybe if it's really done as a two parter, then you could have Unicron at the end of the 4th movie as a cliffhanger leading into the 5th.

As far as the Jason Statham rumor...I've seen him in a few movies, and all they really required him to do was speak in a gravelly tone of voice and be badass, so it's hard to tell if he can really act or not. I'd like to have someone unknown, who can really act, be a part of the franchise- hopefully Shia won't come back as Sam unless it's a cameo. His schtick got pretty old from ROTF on.

They need a head/power/target/master type concept in the next films, human and robot working together.
This or something different because without something new the concept of just transforming robot will get stale with the normal film going public!

"MOOOoooo....!"

That's the sound of the cash cow fearing for it's life. I wouldn't mind so much if they were actually good movies. I'm with Scatman Jazz with regards everything but the visuals getting a workover.

Scatman Jazz wrote:Ahahahahaha, let's hope this is not true. It's funny, I'm actually laughing at Michael Bay returning more than Jason Statham's rumored casting. I knew he wasn't stupid enough to walk away from the never ending gold mine that is the Transformer movie series. Would love to see another director get their hands on it, but hey, you know what they say: if it isn't broken, don't try fixing it. From an overall stand point, these movies need a complete overhaul in every category except for visuals. But hey, the fans eat it up, so why bother?

Except for you, that is. Because you have an opinion and are not affraid to use it online.

Hurray for TF 4 BTW.

Oh, for the love of Primus...

The first one I really enjoyed. The second one was pretty bad. The third one was up there as one of the worst films of 2011 that I've seen (it was only pipped at the post by "Your Highness" in my opinion... and maybe "Green Lantern").

I'm an avid Transformers fan (ask my wife) - I literally grew up with Optimus Prime. I've collected every incarnation of the comics (it's how I learned to read and draw - and subsequently become an art teacher years later), watched the cartoons from G1, G2 (with it's fancy-pants digital bits), Beast Wars, Beast Machines, The Cybertron Trilogy, Animated, Prime. I collect the figures (mainly Optimus Prime but I have begun to diversify). I've bought multiple versions of the '86 film, I have the extended '86 soundtrack (which is on pretty high rotation on my iPod - I heart you Vince DiCola), I also have the soundtracks for the first and second live-action films. I have bought the various Ultimate Guides and even bought the Transformers: Vault the moment I laid eyes on it at my local comic store. Why am I telling you this? Because of what I am about to write and I KNOW people are going to accuse me of not being a "true" Transformers fan just because I dare think something that is about Transformers is (Shock! Horror!) rubbish.



Dear Bay,

I have seen some sh*t in my time but this movie almost takes the crap-frosted cake. I mean, seriously? That's the best storyline you could come up with? That's the best acting you could get out of your thespians? Nothing but over-exaggerated caricatures and lame clichés? That's what you wanted, Bay? Throughout the whole three films you have had access to some pretty good actors and you don't really give them anything to do, anything to work with. You just blow sh*t up around them and tell them to yell a lot. And if they're not yelling then they're running so you can get the right money shot on the overly well-endowed young lady with the poorly supporting bra, or they're acting like hyperactive, sugared-up kids with too much red cordial running through their systems. Oh, and did I mention the yelling?

Okay, sure, have some lighter, funnier moments. Humour is an excellent juxtaposition for the serious, dramatic parts. Unfortunately, the drama was hackneyed and played out as just filler between disjointed action pieces. I mean, really? Did you just happen to throw random scenes at a wall and then use those that stuck, in the way that they landed? Did you just mine the Transformers' history and just randomly pick which bits to incorporate with no thought about how to do it effectively to create a cohesive (and intelligent) story?

I know, Michael. You're a "big bang" type of guy and you want to give the audience as much bang-for-its-buck but sometimes having a quiet, well-acted scene without cheesy dialogue and an even cheesier sh*tty slow song can actually have more "oomph" than all of your special effects explosions combined. This isn't a new concept, it's been around for years. It's called "story" mixed in with a bit of "drama".

I'll be honest, I wasn't going to see this film at the cinema. I was going to wait until it was out on DVD. Possibly even 'new-to-weekly' DVD or (probably) just wait til it was shown on TV. Why? Because I knew that the guy who helped write the second film was writing all of the third one. And the second film sucked pretty badly. So I had accepted in myself that I was not going to see the third film on the "big screen".

Alas, against my better judgement I ended up letting a friend convince me to go. So I went in with no expectations. Anything should have impressed me. Unfortunately, even those non-existent expectations weren't met.

This pains me because I am a pretty hardcore Transformers fan and I will forgive a lot (and when I say "a lot" I mean: "Shane McArthy"). I just couldn't this time. I couldn't walk out of that cinema thinking "Well, it was worth the cost...". It just wasn't. It wasn't worth the admission and it certainly wasn't worth the (considerable) time invested.

I now hear whisperings of a Transformers 4. Please, for the love of Unicron, don't. Or, if the producers feel the need to do it then get someone else to direct. Get Spielberg himself to do it. Or James Cameron (he does "epic blockbuster" pretty well). Or the guy who did Empire Strikes Back (the best movie out of that whole series) - if he's still alive. Just get Michael Bay and Ehren Kruger away from it.

As far as this goes. Count me out. I know my opinion around the world counts for even less than whats on the bottom of my shoes, but seriously what else can you do?

You have giant robots that have mastered inter-stellar travel with advanced technology and just enough power to make huge explosions every time they fire a weapon only to be taken down by conventional bullets and fire extinguishers.

You have Autobots that are one step away from becoming shattered glass versions by killing every Decepticon, even those asking for a truce. The only cons that they left alive are the minicons that couldn't even hurt a human.

You have Decepticons that don't really hurt anyone and that take prisoners. Seriously the human Sam was taken prisoner in every movie. How many times can this happen before somebody thinks its a good idea to just stop taking him prisoner? You have the wreckers that are taken prisoner as well. WTF?

You have humans that virtually indestructible as they dangle from ropes and are slammed back and forth repeatedly into buildings.

You have physics such as bringing a planet into orbit around the earth without having an affect on tides, weather or anything else.

What is worse you have Optimus Prime keep loosing his trailer (something that appears sometimes from no where and attaches to him) and you keep killing off characters with personality and leaving Bumblebee to be a hero.

Lets do everyone a favor. We know you are going to make more movies. But instead of doing more stories with no continuity and plot holes large enough to drive a Transformer though lets try something different. Get rid of the humans. Get rid of Earth. Do 3 prequels on Cybertron. Lets learn some of the back story to some of the characters you have already established. Bah, what am I saying our only hope is that the Mayan calendar is right.

_Anshin_ wrote:Lets do everyone a favor. We know you are going to make more movies. But instead of doing more stories with no continuity and plot holes large enough to drive a Transformer though lets try something different. Get rid of the humans. Get rid of Earth. Do 3 prequels on Cybertron. Lets learn some of the back story to some of the characters you have already established. Bah, what am I saying our only hope is that the Mayan calendar is right.

I see this plea at least once a week on this website. You guys DO realize that a Transformers movie with no Earth and no humans would literally kill this franchise, right?

Do you honestly think your casual movie-goer wants to see that? No, they don't. They want to see high-stakes action that makes them gasp and think "Oh my God, what if that did happen here?" The second you take away that human element, we're back to praying for the next Beast Wars to pull the franchise out of the fire.

You want movie-verse prequels and sequels with no humans that take place on Cybertron? Go buy IDW's Movie Prequel and Reign of Starscream comics. They're fun, and they have a majority of robot action.

And as for Statham and Bay? Yeah, I'd be down for that. That would probably be amazing, actually. I would like to see Shia cameo, though.

lowman_x wrote:Just get Michael Bay and Ehren Kruger away from it.

I hope we've seen the last of Kruger, Murdermus Prime scares me.

Marcdachamp wrote:

_Anshin_ wrote:Lets do everyone a favor. We know you are going to make more movies. But instead of doing more stories with no continuity and plot holes large enough to drive a Transformer though lets try something different. Get rid of the humans. Get rid of Earth. Do 3 prequels on Cybertron. Lets learn some of the back story to some of the characters you have already established. Bah, what am I saying our only hope is that the Mayan calendar is right.

I see this plea at least once a week on this website. You guys DO realize that a Transformers movie with no Earth and no humans would literally kill this franchise, right?

Do you honestly think your casual movie-goer wants to see that? No, they don't. They want to see high-stakes action that makes them gasp and think "Oh my God, what if that did happen here?" The second you take away that human element, we're back to praying for the next Beast Wars to pull the franchise out of the fire.

You want movie-verse prequels and sequels with no humans that take place on Cybertron? Go buy IDW's Movie Prequel and Reign of Starscream comics. They're fun, and they have a majority of robot action.

And as for Statham and Bay? Yeah, I'd be down for that. That would probably be amazing, actually. I would like to see Shia cameo, though.

That's an excellent point. It's exactly why I didn't like the game Bioshock, the entire thing took place in a city under the ocean and there was no chance of it getting out. I found myself not really giving a crap about it because of that and I got bored with it really fast. The same thing would happen if they made a Transformers movie that took place on Cybertron, especially if it's a prequel. We already know the war went so there's nothing to tell there. Plus the general audience wouldn't care because they can't identify with it.

Even though I've loved the movies I think they should give it a rest for a few years. I don't want to see the market reach a saturation which will cause people to lose interest in it. Focus on Prime for now then get back to the movies in maybe 5 years.

I feel that they need to cut their loses and let the third movie end the current movie universe. The end ensured that only the Autobots were left, and trying to pull anything else into the next 2 movies would be a huge cop-out. The next movies would REALLY benefit from a reboot.

Especially if they get rid of Micheal Bay, Shia and most of the writers. While I enjoyed the first movie, I will freely admit that it wasn't a great movie, or even a 'good' movie. It was an action movie that was fun, but the characters were really flat and one dimensional. The second one was horrible and I will only ever watch it if I have the Rifftrax playing for it. It's like the literally took the first movie and turned it up to 11, especially on the major problems of the movie. I enjoyed the third one the best, and I think it was the closest to being a 'good' movie, but still with one dimensional, boring characters. Don't get me wrong, they were still an improvement over how they were characterized in the previous movies and I appreciated the jokes. My wife and I were the only ones laughing in the theater when Sam's mom pulled out the book "She Comes First", probably because we were the only ones aware of what the book was about.

They need a director with standards, and one that won't allow the bad humor and stereotypical characters to be thrown in there. I don't mind Michael Bay being involved, but make him a choreographer of the fight scenes, don't let him direct. Don't let the same writers make the same mistake. They always focus too much on the humans in the story. Yes, they are important to 'ground' the story, to make it relateable to the average movie-goer, and yes, it's cheaper to film people than making too much special effects, but it hurts the movie when it's not really supposed to be about them. For a character to be really fleshed out, they need to have screen time, and whenever they introduce a new transformer character, they fail to let them have any characterization.

I love Transformers, but I feel like the franchise gets the least amount of respect. They need a strong writer to write it like a novel, and then to adapt it into a movie. That seems like the best luck they've had in making movies based on a property (as long as it's not Stephanie Meyer... shudder). They don't need to release the novel to the public, but just to get the story and characterization down.

Marcdachamp wrote:
I see this plea at least once a week on this website. You guys DO realize that a Transformers movie with no Earth and no humans would literally kill this franchise, right?

Do you honestly think your casual movie-goer wants to see that? No, they don't. They want to see high-stakes action that makes them gasp and think "Oh my God, what if that did happen here?" The second you take away that human element, we're back to praying for the next Beast Wars to pull the franchise out of the fire.

You want movie-verse prequels and sequels with no humans that take place on Cybertron? Go buy IDW's Movie Prequel and Reign of Starscream comics. They're fun, and they have a majority of robot action.

And as for Statham and Bay? Yeah, I'd be down for that. That would probably be amazing, actually. I would like to see Shia cameo, though.

Yes, because movies that are filmed in a location other than earth such as Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Avatar, or other such no named movies were such a flop. Hell, even animated movies such as Toy Story had very little human elements in there but people enjoyed them because they were well written and not just giant explosions and lots of car chases. People are able to relate to a decent story line even if the characters are not human but display basic human traits. You see this is shown slightly with the movie Transformers and more with some of the animated stuff.

I am an avid fan. I read the comics, read the books, play the games, have the comics and the figures. Chances are if you are seeing this "plea" once a week then there is a very good chance that people actually want to see it and not just spend money watching a guy play with his toys and get paid to blow them up.

Evil_the_Nub wrote:That's an excellent point. It's exactly why I didn't like the game Bioshock, the entire thing took place in a city under the ocean and there was no chance of it getting out. I found myself not really giving a crap about it because of that and I got bored with it really fast. The same thing would happen if they made a Transformers movie that took place on Cybertron, especially if it's a prequel. We already know the war went so there's nothing to tell there. Plus the general audience wouldn't care because they can't identify with it.

Even though I've loved the movies I think they should give it a rest for a few years. I don't want to see the market reach a saturation which will cause people to lose interest in it. Focus on Prime for now then get back to the movies in maybe 5 years.

Did you ever play the game War for Cybertron? Listen, I respect your opinion even though I don't agree with it. You may be bored with learning a little back story about the characters and are happy to know that there was a war that took place, but you can't say there is nothing to tell. Hell Xmen First Class is a perfect example of that. We know that there are Xmen so why show the story of how they became? Do you know what started the war or lead up to it in this Universe? Do you know why the Primes left? Why are Megatron and Prime Brothers in the first Movie, but thats forgotten in the Second and Third?

But I do agree that they should hold off on the movies for a few years.

_Anshin_ wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:That's an excellent point. It's exactly why I didn't like the game Bioshock, the entire thing took place in a city under the ocean and there was no chance of it getting out. I found myself not really giving a crap about it because of that and I got bored with it really fast. The same thing would happen if they made a Transformers movie that took place on Cybertron, especially if it's a prequel. We already know the war went so there's nothing to tell there. Plus the general audience wouldn't care because they can't identify with it.

Even though I've loved the movies I think they should give it a rest for a few years. I don't want to see the market reach a saturation which will cause people to lose interest in it. Focus on Prime for now then get back to the movies in maybe 5 years.

Did you ever play the game War for Cybertron? Listen, I respect your opinion even though I don't agree with it. You may be bored with learning a little back story about the characters and are happy to know that there was a war that took place, but you can't say there is nothing to tell. Hell Xmen First Class is a perfect example of that. We know that there are Xmen so why show the story of how they became? Do you know what started the war or lead up to it in this Universe? Do you know why the Primes left? Why are Megatron and Prime Brothers in the first Movie, but thats forgotten in the Second and Third?

But I do agree that they should hold off on the movies for a few years.

I did play WfC and I didn't like it either. The environments were boring, the different characters all played the same except the fliers, and the controls were clunky and awkward.

I think they've already told enough back story on the war that making a movie about it would be redundant. We already know the Autobots were outnumbered and losing, we already know Sentinel made a deal with Megatron to enslave Earth, we already know they launched the Allspark into space and Megatron went after it, we already know about the Fallen and the harvester. There's not much left to tell after that.

Personally I think Transformers is best on Earth. Having Earth based alt modes gives them more character and adds variety. If it were on Cybertron they'd all be various alien vehicles that would all blend together. People are already complaining that they all look the same that would just make it worse. Put them on a planet that's entirely made of metal and it would be like looking at static on a TV.

Marcdachamp wrote:

_Anshin_ wrote:Lets do everyone a favor. We know you are going to make more movies. But instead of doing more stories with no continuity and plot holes large enough to drive a Transformer though lets try something different. Get rid of the humans. Get rid of Earth. Do 3 prequels on Cybertron. Lets learn some of the back story to some of the characters you have already established. Bah, what am I saying our only hope is that the Mayan calendar is right.

I see this plea at least once a week on this website. You guys DO realize that a Transformers movie with no Earth and no humans would literally kill this franchise, right?

Do you honestly think your casual movie-goer wants to see that? No, they don't. They want to see high-stakes action that makes them gasp and think "Oh my God, what if that did happen here?" The second you take away that human element, we're back to praying for the next Beast Wars to pull the franchise out of the fire.

You want movie-verse prequels and sequels with no humans that take place on Cybertron? Go buy IDW's Movie Prequel and Reign of Starscream comics. They're fun, and they have a majority of robot action.

And as for Statham and Bay? Yeah, I'd be down for that. That would probably be amazing, actually. I would like to see Shia cameo, though.

How would it kill the franchise? There are sci-fi movies released all the time that have very little human involvement, don't take place on earth, and have a rich story going on that do well. Just cuz we were given mindless action with a thin plot doesn't mean we have to settle. If wanna see a Transformers movie that is actually about the Transformers and not about the love life adventures about some kid set to the back drop of an eons old intergalactic civil war, I shouldn't have to look else where. I liked the first one and DOTM, but they coulda been much better if they actually focused on the Transformers and not Shia the Beef's antics and love life. Is that too much to ask for?

Jason Statham? Thats f*ckin awesome. Don't even need autobots, just throw him at the decepticons

Evil_the_Nub wrote:I think they've already told enough back story on the war that making a movie about it would be redundant. We already know the Autobots were outnumbered and losing, we already know Sentinel made a deal with Megatron to enslave Earth, we already know they launched the Allspark into space and Megatron went after it, we already know about the Fallen and the harvester. There's not much left to tell after that.

Personally I think Transformers is best on Earth. Having Earth based alt modes gives them more character and adds variety. If it were on Cybertron they'd all be various alien vehicles that would all blend together. People are already complaining that they all look the same that would just make it worse. Put them on a planet that's entirely made of metal and it would be like looking at static on a TV.

See I figure this is where we can agree to disagree. We learned that the Autobots were outnumbered, but what lead up to the factions forming and why were the Autobots really outnumbered? What caused a Prime to turn really and what was said. We also don't know how Prime became Prime, what lead Megatron to become the leader of the Decepticons, there are a myriad of sub-stories going on that we just don't know. I can understand you not wanting to know, but for some of us we just want more than a simple "I'm bad things go boom, good guy kills bad guy. Bad guy no more. More Explosions!" story line.

As for another Cybertron looking like static on TV, thats your opinion. Have you ever been to Dubai or China or Australia and seen the different architecture? You can make Cybertron the same way you can make any vehicle on this planet. For example not all structures would have a shine, or be silver. There are tons of other materials you can use. I am not saying it would be all Green or organic like Pandora was in Avatar, but imagine a Cybertron that is powered, with oceans of Energon or plasma. Structures that were of both glass and metal as well as structures of carbon fiber and each when powered had a different light, glow, no effect at all.

Saying that it would all look alike is like saying you have been to New Jersey and that means that you don't need to see Paris, London, Hong Kong, and Moscow since it all looks alike because we are all humans and think or act the same way.

D-340 wrote: How would it kill the franchise? There are sci-fi movies released all the time that have very little human involvement, don't take place on earth, and have a rich story going on that do well. Just cuz we were given mindless action with a thin plot doesn't mean we have to settle.

The thing with TF, is that for the most part people (meaning general public, and even the casual fans) reconise them as cars, trucks, airplanes etc. Basicly earth vehicles that transform into giant robots. "Robots in disguise", not Robots on their home planet. And unfortunutly, i'd have to agree with this. I don't want to see a bunch of protoforms or cybertronion vehicles running around. I love seeing hopped up vehicles that i'm familuar with driving down the freeway, transform and tear shit up. Ask anyone about TF and ask them what they remeber Optimus Prime as. I bet you know one will say anyhing but a red/blue semi truck. Protoform Optimus toy from 07' was one of the worst selling toys of the movie line. So while yes, other movies have proven succesfull taking place on other planets, they were also always based on other planets and based around that setting.

As far as the story goes, we had a great story with DOTM. I truely don't see how anyone (this isn't directed at you D-340, as you did state you liked DOTM) can aurgue otherwise. If you didn't like it then fine, but you can't say that it wasn't a good story.

Bay and Co. seem to improve every movie with the story and even characters. No, not every character is developed, and no matter who takes the riegn as director, not every character is going to get the same treatment. people need to learn to deal with the fact that not everyone can be the star. (I'm not saying ther isn't room for improvment though)

I really don't know about Jason Statham... Say what you will about LaBeouf, I think his presence grounds the franchise a little bit, prevents it from becoming even more of an overblown testosterone-fest than it already is. That's pretty much what Statham is all about. I personally don't think we need 'Crank' with robots.

I am and not happy about the news about TF4 and TF5. It's great for Hasbro and it's great for the fans that had been reintroduced to Transformers because of the live action movies. I was one of those fans. I'm with kirbenvost on the whole Jason Statham thing. I don't know who he is. And I'm sure that Hasbro/Paramount will get an unknown/good looking main actor for the new TF series. Shia attracted alot of females to the fandom as much as Megan Fox did for the guys.

As far as new 'bots and 'cons, I'm sure we'll see some familiar ones but I'm also sure we'll get alot of new ones. These movies are only made to help promote their toy line. And with the sales of DOTM toys being down because they were mostly of all same characters, they may surprise us with new ones that may not even dreamed of seeing on the big screen before. It will be nice to have the three main 'cons though back. Megs always tends to come back some how in any other given series, so why not the live action ones too?

Enough of the Transformer Movie bashing. Sheesh. I have been a transformer fan longer than all of you put together. Take them for what they are. They have mainstreamed Transformers and made it "cool" for people to openly support the franchise. Let's be honest, Transformers were drek between G1 and Beast Wars. They are finally coming around again, espically with the Generations figure line. The first movie was great. The second movie was filmed during the writer's strike and the plot had to be constructed and tied together in the editing room. Oh, but all you cyber-nerds fail to mention that. The third movie was a BLOCK-BUSTER!

It does not matter who they cast for Movie 4 & 5. If you are a true fan, go support the Transformers. Otherwise, how are we to ensure they remain around, besides just cheesy comics. So quite your whinning booger-eaters and stop being so judemental. I seriously doubt and complainers (lowman_x) would have done a better job.

What works for one, does not work for all. I only ask you show a little perspective. Until all are one...

More movies sound good to me. I'm a little burned out on them right now but I'm sure in a year or so I'll be ready for more. IMO the first movie was the best, but I enjoyed DOTM after the first 30 minutes of job interviews. I'd also like to see Megs, Soundwave, and Starscream return somehow and actually become a threat (I noticed in the first movie Megs and SS seemed pretty unstoppable for the Autobots, then in the subsequent ones they just got weaker and became cannon fodder). Gavatron would be cool as a separate character with a new, unique backstory. My only fear is that if released too soon, another movie would get TF: Prime cancelled (I never really watched but from what I understand ROTF caused Animated to come to an early end). TF: Prime has become my favorite show/"universe" in Transformers and I feel like we could get a lot more out of it.

its discussions and situations like these that make me wonder...
what would happen if the label "Transformers" was owned by Marvel and not hasbro?
would the movies be better? would the toys suck? or do we just not care...


but ya i say let the movie series rest for 2 years+ for now then get the guy who directed the batman begins and dark knight movies or someone else like the guy who directed some other movies that are all at least respectable in value to direct the new movies. and introduce unicron a long w/ the chracters that come after the g1 movie except Rodimus prime( hot rod i am okay with). and let the movie take place all over the universe like the g1 movie did. a battle on earth, a search in space or two, some drama between the species here or there. HUGE BATTLE IN SPACE IN AND OUT OF UNICRON! and most importantly..
DINOBOTS, GALVATRON, AND THE INSECTICONS(i like them)!
...maybe thunderwing in the 5th movie w/ sixshot

just say'n.

only way these wont suck is if they decide to make movies instead of 3 hour long car commercials. Heres some ideas, More robot story less humans, decepticons are characters too not just cannon fodder, if a car company gives you a vehicle try and make it a character that actually fits the vehicle just dont slap a name on it cause you have the trademark, more realism less "cause it looks good", explain things just dont do, sit the writers down in front of a tv and make them watch the various TF series so they know what the franchise is really about(other than selling toys), steven spielburg or james cameron to direct, restaff rest of production crew, redesign the bots keeping in mind that they are ROBTOS in disguise not cars that turn into robots. At least LaBeouf will be gone.

_Anshin_ wrote:

Marcdachamp wrote:
I see this plea at least once a week on this website. You guys DO realize that a Transformers movie with no Earth and no humans would literally kill this franchise, right?

Do you honestly think your casual movie-goer wants to see that? No, they don't. They want to see high-stakes action that makes them gasp and think "Oh my God, what if that did happen here?" The second you take away that human element, we're back to praying for the next Beast Wars to pull the franchise out of the fire.

You want movie-verse prequels and sequels with no humans that take place on Cybertron? Go buy IDW's Movie Prequel and Reign of Starscream comics. They're fun, and they have a majority of robot action.

And as for Statham and Bay? Yeah, I'd be down for that. That would probably be amazing, actually. I would like to see Shia cameo, though.

Yes, because movies that are filmed in a location other than earth such as Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Avatar, or other such no named movies were such a flop. Hell, even animated movies such as Toy Story had very little human elements in there but people enjoyed them...

Respectfully, I have to disagree with most of your comparisons there. Toy Story is the only one that's not trully human, but you can't say there weren't human elements. Everything else, they are humans. Whether it's Corusant, Madison, Los Angles, or Mission City, we relate to Humans. And as far as Toy Story, they not only have humans elements, but we held them as family at one time. You can't tell me you never had some kind of doll or teddy bear in your childhood, and the vast majorityy of us had them as companions, venting listeners, and friends we could hide from the world with. That's the relation.

Could a Human/TF movie in space work? I think so. But would Avatar have been as good if we humans weren't the aggresors? Would pople have understood the morale to that story if it were blue people versus some green dudes? Not likely. No matter where the setting is, the audience just can't relate to a story as easily if the characters aren't like them. Do you talk to your truck? Have yo had a tea party with your Hatchback? Probably not, so odds are your Hatchback getting shot by somebody's Lamborghini isn't going to draw tears from Joe Blow.

starwarrior1227 wrote:its discussions and situations like these that make me wonder...
what would happen if the label "Transformers" was owned by Marvel and not hasbro?
would the movies be better? would the toys suck? or do we just not care...

Seeing as how I'm more of a TF comic fan than a TF toy/cartoon fan I'd be inclined to like that idea.

Make more movies
Make more toys
Everybody Happy

acchillyaout wrote:Enough of the Transformer Movie bashing. Sheesh. I have been a transformer fan longer than all of you put together. Take them for what they are. They have mainstreamed Transformers and made it "cool" for people to openly support the franchise. Let's be honest, Transformers were drek between G1 and Beast Wars. They are finally coming around again, espically with the Generations figure line. The first movie was great. The second movie was filmed during the writer's strike and the plot had to be constructed and tied together in the editing room. Oh, but all you cyber-nerds fail to mention that. The third movie was a BLOCK-BUSTER!

It does not matter who they cast for Movie 4 & 5. If you are a true fan, go support the Transformers. Otherwise, how are we to ensure they remain around, besides just cheesy comics. So quite your whinning booger-eaters and stop being so judemental. I seriously doubt and complainers (lowman_x) would have done a better job.

What works for one, does not work for all. I only ask you show a little perspective. Until all are one...

I never said I would have "done a better job". I'm saying (as others here have too) that we don't have to settle for badly written material, poor direction of everything but the action scenes, massive plot holes, and terrible characterisation. I teach film-making so I would hope I'm able to sniff out a badly written film seeing as how I have a (more-than-passing) interest in the industry. Seeing as how the 2nd and 3rd ones stunk pretty badly it wasn't hard to sniff out. What I did say was that there are plenty of other directors and writers out there who COULD do a better job than Bay and co.

As to its "blockbuster" status: yes, they all were blockbusters. They were all popcorn-munching, visually stunning (visually confusing and hard to follow in a lot of respects), summer-time blockbusters. I don't disagree with you. I'm saying, as the movie-going public and fans of the franchise that we should expect a slightly higher standard of story.

acchillyaout wrote:I have been a transformer fan longer than all of you put together.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... that's funny. Do you make a living as a comedian?

Statham + Bay + Transformers = Fail. (IMO of course)

maybe they meant transporter 4 and 5

Oh boy... more cgi, less epic G1 that started it all... I more of that...

From an action figure stand point, filming back to back would do wonders for the toyline. At least for the 5th film as Hasbro will have a huge leadtime in getting product developed.

I have been coming to this site for several years and never posted. I sat back and watched Michael Bay's abortion of a movie he called the transformers. I think we all agree why the moves blatantly sucked and I'm not going into detail about that. I want to ask everyone a question. I bet most of you guys are Star Wars fans and all enjoyed the 1985 movie. With that said why the F*&! wouldn't they just do a live action version of that. It was a Star Wars style space drama that made you feel for the characters. I challenge anyone here to tell me the Michael bay movies are better than the 1985 animated movie.

Just like the first time around, the Jason Statham rumor has been put to rest. This time by Statham himself. MTV recently asked the action star about his possible involvement in the future of the Transformers movie franchise, and this is what he had to say:

"You know, I don't know how those things start. You read them. Someone told me about it. [But] the internet is a dangerous place," he laughed. "There's a lot of stuff out there."

Not to say that Statham would be completely opposed to a "Transformers" movie: "I've got a lot of stuff in front of me, but Michael Bay is a talented man. This last one just made a billion dollars around the world, so people like his films. He's a talented man."

Click here to view the original article on MTV Movie Blog, which includes video of Statham debunking the rumor.

Director Michael Bay also dropped by his Shoot for the Edit forums to address the rumors that have been circulating around the internet:

Originally Posted by michaelbay
I am currently not talking to Paramount on T4 and T5 despite reports. I'm looking at a lot of possibilities coming my way right now weighing options. Most likely going to be doing the low budget Pain and Gain, a true story crime thriller. It's a very quick shoot and quite funny. Also just finishing the 3 disc set of the Transformer trilogy.

Michael

adiprizio829 wrote:I challenge anyone here to tell me the Michael bay movies are better than the 1985 animated movie.

I challenge you to go read all the other threads where the movies have been debated endlessly instead of cluttering up ANOTHER news thread.

P.S. Welcome to the forums, enjoying catching up on the differences of opinion.

Here we go again.

Definitely not interested in a TF 4 or 5 if its going to be anything like the first 3.
I just want to say, that for those who seem to think that the movies have done so much for the franchise, and brought in more fans, and more revenue... does that really matter? I get wanting cool toys, thats a given... but if its at the cost of hording in average joes and dullards to a fandom who don't really care about what Transformers are really about (Safely say every other TF fiction other than the movies), then screw the revenue, screw the extended franchise life. If TF magically somehow died tomorrow and all I was left with was everything we had up till now and no more movies. Give it to me.

RhA wrote:

Scatman Jazz wrote:Ahahahahaha, let's hope this is not true. It's funny, I'm actually laughing at Michael Bay returning more than Jason Statham's rumored casting. I knew he wasn't stupid enough to walk away from the never ending gold mine that is the Transformer movie series. Would love to see another director get their hands on it, but hey, you know what they say: if it isn't broken, don't try fixing it. From an overall stand point, these movies need a complete overhaul in every category except for visuals. But hey, the fans eat it up, so why bother?

Except for you, that is. Because you have an opinion and are not affraid to use it online.

Hurray for TF 4 BTW.

I think TF 4 & 5 are great. but please let TF 4 be in theathres in 2015.
this way we get 3 years for the TF Prime & generations toys to be as awesome as possible with tons of new molds.

I Think any live action TF movie without shia le barf will be awesome.
as he was a bad actor & could only do comedy. thus the TF movie scripts & dialogue were taiored around shia le barf's talentless skills.

I think A TF 4 & 5 with a whole brand new team of deceticons can work. we can get galvatron,cyclonus,scourge,blitzwing,overlord,all 5 1986 predacons that combine to form predaking.

I think to make things interesting some of the autobots from TF3 can get new alt modes. we can get newer characters like all 5 g-1 dinobots that combine to for a combiner. hotrod that powers up into rodimus prime,tripple changer springer,double dealer that's loyal to the autobots,metrolex.

I'd like a time jump travel movie. where transformers from the future travel to the past to cause trouble or to protect it.

I can't help it... lol

adiprizio829 wrote:I challenge anyone here to tell me the Michael bay movies are better than the 1985 animated movie.

Challenge accepted. The Bayverse movies are better than the Animated movie. The critics, box office and general consensus all prove it to be so. Those are facts. On a personal level? The original movie stunk.

LOST Cybertronian wrote:From an action figure stand point, filming back to back would do wonders for the toyline. At least for the 5th film as Hasbro will have a huge leadtime in getting product developed.

I agree, however, I think there would be a lot of bad blood between fans and between fans and Hasbro. Some do love 'em, some are downright sick of them. With the way they put things on the back burner, you'd be hard pressed to see Generations for at least a year or more.

El Duque wrote:Just like the first time around, the Jason Statham rumor has been put to rest. This time by Statham himself. MTV recently asked the action star about his possible involvement in the future of the Transformers movie franchise, and this is what he had to say:

"You know, I don't know how those things start. You read them. Someone told me about it. [But] the internet is a dangerous place," he laughed. "There's a lot of stuff out there."

Not to say that Statham would be completely opposed to a "Transformers" movie: "I've got a lot of stuff in front of me, but Michael Bay is a talented man. This last one just made a billion dollars around the world, so people like his films. He's a talented man."

Click here to view the original article on MTV Movie Blog, which includes video of Statham debunking the rumor.

Director Michael Bay also dropped by his Shoot for the Edit forums to address the rumors that have been circulating around the internet:

Originally Posted by michaelbay
I am currently not talking to Paramount on T4 and T5 despite reports. I'm looking at a lot of possibilities coming my way right now weighing options. Most likely going to be doing the low budget Pain and Gain, a true story crime thriller. It's a very quick shoot and quite funny. Also just finishing the 3 disc set of the Transformer trilogy.

Michael

Statham didn't directly say yes or no. That was well worded, but danced around the issue.
As for Bay, he's outright lied to us countless times. When both Variety and The Hollywood Reporter mention this, there's something to it. If nothing else, they're at least talking. Contrary to what he claims.

MINDVVIPE wrote:Here we go again.

Definitely not interested in a TF 4 or 5 if its going to be anything like the first 3.
I just want to say, that for those who seem to think that the movies have done so much for the franchise, and brought in more fans, and more revenue... does that really matter? I get wanting cool toys, thats a given... but if its at the cost of hording in average joes and dullards to a fandom who don't really care about what Transformers are really about (Safely say every other TF fiction other than the movies), then screw the revenue, screw the extended franchise life. If TF magically somehow died tomorrow and all I was left with was everything we had up till now and no more movies. Give it to me.

Yes, it does really matter. Average Joes, I can't comment on, but I can tell you that you're outright wrong on some of the converts being dullards. Just because they're n00b fans doesn't mean their desire is any less powerful than any of our's.

You act like the fandom belongs only to you. It doesn't. The doors are open to people of all ages and we should welcome them, not shun them.

If it wasn't for the increased revenue and popularity, we'd probably be facing a Power Rangers situation. The media sucked, except for RPM, the toys were stripped of their Japanese awesomeness and downsized along with entire features gutted, just to make them cheap enough to produce and sell. I remember what the original Power Rangers toys were like. Today's don't even compare. Trust me, you do not want that to happen to TransFormers. The movies pretty much saved the entire franchise when it was in danger of going stagnant. Proven fact? The movies and toyline did over a billion in 2007. The AEC trilogy pulled in about $75 mill. Google it, it's out there.

The movies were fun and breathtaking. Somewhat stupid, I admit, but it's a small price to pay to get what we want, and we do get what we want.

Here we go again.

I cannot understand why Bay would want to do another TF movie. He's rich, let him do Bad Boys III or something.

As for Statham, he's like Vin Diesel/Arnold/Sylvester. Would you really want a Die Hard movie with transforming cars?

Shia played the "Spike" character, G1 didn't have an action hero with a robot sidekick. The Transformers are the fighters, not the humans. And Josh Duhamel was a side character. I don't think it would work if the main human character is a fighter-like dude.

My opinion: "Leave the trilogy alone, wait a few years and start fresh with new writers, director, actors etc."

A Transformers movie with say Bryan Singer (directing) would have less "pretty action shots" but it would have story and the characters would have... character.

+ All the designs need to be new/fresh.

So they both neither deny nor confirm the rumors. But both don't seem to be in the talks on the project. Personally, I think Jason Statham became a part of this rumor only because of his relationship w/ Rosey Huntington-Whiteley. It seems people want to see them both in a movie together. Rather than fuel rumors, I'll just wait to see what really happens.

I apologise as this is slightly off topic, but a couple of people's comments stood out at me a bit. I remember seeing similar comments when Linkin Park released Iridescent. I won't mention names (partly because I can't be arsed to go back and check who said what) but can we avoid assuming that we are a bigger fan of Transformers than others because of what we believe?

Is there a rule that states how a true fan should feel about certain aspects of whatever they follow? Is a true fan someone who loves the subject unconditionally no matter what they do? Or is it someone who has the courage to say "hang on a second, I don't like where you're going with this"? The only right answer to this question is that there is no right answer. We can only answer for ourselves, and I'm sure we all have damn good reasons for feeling that way. It's these differences that lead to constructive debates, but some seem to insinuate that they are automatically right and others are wrong.

I'm certain that the Statham rumours only started because of his relationship with Rosie and his 'Death Race' co-star Tyrese...

Hmm...Why yes, I do believe I'm Captain Obvious! ^^

Well, I don't see the point in placing Shia as lead. He can't play the quirky boy and his (pet)car role because he's an adult. I was amused by his comedic antics, but I've had enough. I can say the same about Bay's insistance on humor. Someone mentioned they'd like to see JJ Abrams be the director. I think that would be excellent.

As far as a movie set on Cybertron.. wow some people really think that would work? Lifeless dark grey shifting steel structures as backgrounds, and grey protoform robots that won't "disguise?" Shhyeah.. that would work.

I think they should have both a human and a bot without voice issues lead.

Dre Merc wrote:As far as a movie set on Cybertron.. wow some people really think that would work? Lifeless dark grey shifting steel structures as backgrounds, and grey protoform robots that won't "disguise?" Shhyeah.. that would work.

If Tron: Legacy can create a world in CGI; I'm sure that they will have no problem with making Cybertron. And I think it would be awesome if we get a prequel that is based on Cybertron, but I think that we won't get to see it in a live action is because they are doing all of this Cybertron based stuff with the Prime universe + War for Cybertron/Exodus/Exiles continuities.

Challenge accepted. The Bayverse movies are better than the Animated movie. The critics, box office and general consensus all prove it to be so. Those are facts. On a personal level? The original movie stunk.

Thats a bad Bayformer! Bad! Get off the internetz!

Anyhow, in regards to the news: I think it would be need to see Jason Stratham as the lead in the future TF movies and also think it would be just mighty swell i Paramount didn't bring Micheal Bay back to Transformers. Keep the CGI guys, but lets bump this director and get someone a bit better.

Sodan-1 wrote:I apologise as this is slightly off topic, but a couple of people's comments stood out at me a bit. I remember seeing similar comments when Linkin Park released Iridescent. I won't mention names (partly because I can't be arsed to go back and check who said what) but can we avoid assuming that we are a bigger fan of Transformers than others because of what we believe?

Is there a rule that states how a true fan should feel about certain aspects of whatever they follow? Is a true fan someone who loves the subject unconditionally no matter what they do? Or is it someone who has the courage to say "hang on a second, I don't like where you're going with this"? The only right answer to this question is that there is no right answer. We can only answer for ourselves, and I'm sure we all have damn good reasons for feeling that way. It's these differences that lead to constructive debates, but some seem to insinuate that they are automatically right and others are wrong.

You will find that there are generally two types of Transformer fans: Generation 1 fans and Bayformer fans.

Gen1 fans are the 30 somethings of today that grew up play with the original Tranformers back in the early to mid 80s and actually loved watching the 80s cartoons.

Bayformers are fans under 30 that either grew up in the 2000s or were teenyboppers when the first Bayformer movie came out. Bayformer fans love the Micheal Bay Transformer movies because really, that was their first exposure to intellectual property.

Most Gen1 fans just get along and except the Bayformer fans because Bayformer fans are usually the retards in the room that we all take pity on and graciously thank them for spending money on an IP that we grew up with. If it wasn't for them and Micheal Bay, we wouldn't have all this great Gen1 revival stuf that Hasbro keeps making.

Bayformer fans have something to prove. They generally hate the history of Transformers and believe that the true continuity is that of what Micheal Bay and Co have produced on the silver screen. To them Micheal Bay is the god of all Transformerdom.

Kinda retarded all around, but it is what it is. I stopped posting here as much because quite frankly, I rarely have the patience for the Bayformer fans. I just want them to kee0p watching the movies and buying the crap Bayformer stuff that comes out so we G1 fans keep getting the good Gen1 stuff.

So as my good friend John would say "Proooooceeed wit da bullshit!" lol

_Anshin_ wrote:Yes, because movies that are filmed in a location other than earth such as Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Avatar, or other such no named movies were such a flop. Hell, even animated movies such as Toy Story had very little human elements in there but people enjoyed them because they were well written and not just giant explosions and lots of car chases. People are able to relate to a decent story line even if the characters are not human but display basic human traits. You see this is shown slightly with the movie Transformers and more with some of the animated stuff.

I am an avid fan. I read the comics, read the books, play the games, have the comics and the figures. Chances are if you are seeing this "plea" once a week then there is a very good chance that people actually want to see it and not just spend money watching a guy play with his toys and get paid to blow them up.

Flashwave wrote:Respectfully, I have to disagree with most of your comparisons there. Toy Story is the only one that's not trully human, but you can't say there weren't human elements. Everything else, they are humans. Whether it's Corusant, Madison, Los Angles, or Mission City, we relate to Humans. And as far as Toy Story, they not only have humans elements, but we held them as family at one time. You can't tell me you never had some kind of doll or teddy bear in your childhood, and the vast majorityy of us had them as companions, venting listeners, and friends we could hide from the world with. That's the relation.

Could a Human/TF movie in space work? I think so. But would Avatar have been as good if we humans weren't the aggresors? Would pople have understood the morale to that story if it were blue people versus some green dudes? Not likely. No matter where the setting is, the audience just can't relate to a story as easily if the characters aren't like them. Do you talk to your truck? Have yo had a tea party with your Hatchback? Probably not, so odds are your Hatchback getting shot by somebody's Lamborghini isn't going to draw tears from Joe Blow.

Flashwave just summed it up much better than I could. Could humans/TFs in space work? Yes. It would be a tougher sell, and I still think you'd be better off putting at least some of it on Earth, but I never said TFs and humans in space wouldn't work. TFs in space without humans? That WOULD fail. Anshin, every movie you listed there has humans in it. Your aruduement doesn't work.

Also, let's keep in mind that the TF movie with the least amount of humans in it is also the one that performed the worst at the box office.

Autobot032 wrote:I can't help it... lol

adiprizio829 wrote:I challenge anyone here to tell me the Michael bay movies are better than the 1985 animated movie.

Challenge accepted. The Bayverse movies are better than the Animated movie. The critics, box office and general consensus all prove it to be so. Those are facts. On a personal level? The original movie stunk.

While I won't argue your opinion, the only thing the live action movies have over the animated movie from '86 is the box office. Critically, all the movies have been torn to shreds. And the general consensus, I'm pretty sure there are just as many fans of the animated movie as the live action movies. That's why a 20th anniversary edition of the animated movie was released back in '06.

acchillyaout wrote: I have been a transformer fan longer than all of you put together.

Lol, yeah, I doubt that.