Spielberg and Bay Say Konnichi-wa, Japan with New "Transformers" Trailer!

Summary

In addition to a couple of character shots not included in the US trailer, watch the Japan-only "Transformers" teaser to see Steven Spielberg and Michael Bay hurdle over the language barrier and address their Japanese audience...in Japanese! Back to Article

Comments

dagreenman18

Brian Lorenzo

so if this movie fails its another pearl harbor? DAMN YOU BAY!!! YOU JUST SENT THOUSANDS TO THIER GRAVE!!!!

Jan 3 - 01:47 PM

TitusCosminus

Cosmin Iacoban

[b]My opinion about Michael Bay!![/b]
As many of you people probably know by his movies ( Armaggedon and The Island) Mr. Bay is a more of a visual director. He does not look for substance in a story just visuals that give you a instant erection.Isn't that what we expect from a Transformers movie: I mean we have giant alien robots fighting each other, this is not fucking Dreamigirls nor Million Dollar Baby.
Don't expected a rated R movie, look at the extreamely young leads. I found the trailer sligtly frigtening for some reason...

Jan 3 - 03:19 PM

TitusCosminus

Cosmin Iacoban

[b]P.S[/b]
What Steven Spielberg says Spielberg does.....I just wet my under panties.

Jan 3 - 03:22 PM

Now it's dark

Kirby K

Too many humans. Godzilla returns.

Jan 3 - 04:18 PM

renny2077

Renny Abraham

Well, I just hope the focus of the story is on the robots and not the humans. The robots need to be driving the story. Watching the trailer, I'm not too sure that's going to happen.

Jan 3 - 09:04 PM

eastern2western

peter liu

[b]feels like jurassic park[/b]
the commercial gives a very jurassic park feeling to it. The only difference is robots replacing the dinosaurs

Jan 4 - 12:51 AM

drxym

Darius Xym

he problem with Michael Bay is his films lack pacing, a credible script, sympathetic or interesting characters, decent acting or a basic grounding in physics. All they are are one effects shot after another, often so rapidly cut that you can't even appreciate them for that. Consequently his movies are widely regarded as trash and barely enjoyable even for the effects. Some might argue that's fine, but seriously how much would it cost to hire a scriptwriter to make a script which makes sense, or contains characters you can care about and still feature the same kind of action?

Jan 4 - 02:50 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Not much considering how much they pay the hacks to throw together fluff and empty spectacle. They have the money to pay the right people. And god knows they're out there. But the question is are they interested in developing a deep story? And the answer, as all indicators so far would suggest, is a resounding no. I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material. The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve.
We have seen them courageous and we have seen them cowardly. We have seen them haunted by grief and crippled by fear. We have seen them melancholic and jovial, hopeful and browbeaten. These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?
I go to the Superman and Batman and X:Men and Spiderman forums and see deep arguments about substantial underpinnings and character depth, symbols and themes. I go to Transformers forums and get would be fans constantly dismissing them as nothing more than popular 80s toys.

Jan 4 - 07:10 AM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

[b]Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handy[/b]
If a comic book movie creates deep arguments, does it transcend the comic genre? And if it transcends the comic genre, is it then just a book movie? And why, if it's called a comic book, does it not involve comedy? And would Superman and Batman be friends, or would they just act like it?

Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough and....

Jan 4 - 09:03 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]I go to Transformers forums and get would be fans constantly dismissing them as nothing more than popular 80s toys.[/quote]

You wanna come to the Transformers forums and say that, you pompous bastard?

Jan 4 - 10:16 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

And here we go with the pointless name calling. That train is never late. I appreciate your enthusiasm, Astrozombie. But my thing is this, I tend to believe that one who loves a story, or any other form of art, will honor it with at least a modicum of respect. If that makes me pompous, well, so be it.

Jan 4 - 11:02 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]would be fans[/quote]

You started it.

Jan 4 - 11:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

That is not an example of name calling. The term "would be fans" carries neither a negative or a positive connotation. And certainly, it is in no way as inflammatory as "pompous bastard." But no matter. My goal is not to have a popular opinion, but merely to air one that is truly mine. These stories are a treasure of mythological depth, and simply deserve to be treated as such. I fail to see why a fan would be opposed to that notion.

Jan 4 - 11:56 AM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

well i would rather go with the argument: they're giant robots than your "nonsense" (i was looking for a more polite form but this word comes closests to what i think of you argumentation). it's nice that you try to find deeper meaning. (with all these things it's the same. look and you will find) but to be honest the transformers (comics and show) were created to sell toys. they then made some background story and gave all the transformers human characteristics. (also to sell more).

this is different than lets say batman or superman where the creator did write because he felt he had enough grounds to create a character that was there to make a point instead of a sale.

so all in all, it's not about the number of arguments but just see what it is. (and as a fan i loved the transformers for just that.) and if you will look for depth and meaning you will prob find it even if it isn't there on purpose.

ps take i am the walrus by the beatles, there were actual studies about the meaning and a lot of theories. until the beatles made public that it was just nonsense that sounded nice. in all your wisdom you must acknowledge the possibility that it's just a giant fighting robot.

Jan 6 - 06:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Be that as it may, gerke. And far be it from me to cry a river over impolite salutations. So bypass worry. But when it comes to the topic of stories and their substance or lack thereof, one is reminded of important truths gleaned from a study of Story with a capital "S". You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.
This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development. That, after all, is what makes a story work. Chalking it all up to a marketing scheme misses the point, and, ultimately, destroys the cathartic magic.
They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.

Jan 6 - 02:24 PM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

[b]is there really more??[/b]
You?re starting this discussion in stating that any good movie must have a good story. And that the transformers have an undiscovered (for most people) vault of story treasures but most people only come as far as:

#655263 photosuperstar on Jan 04 2007, 08:55 AM writes:
Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Those people do not understand it you say and I refute that.

The short history of the transformers start out as this after Hasbro decided to sell robots:
1){{goal and foundations of the transformers}}
Hasbro had previously worked with Marvel Comics to develop G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero for a three-pronged marketing scheme - the toyline, a tie-in comic book by Marvel, and an animated mini-series co-produced by Marvel's media arm, Marvel Productions, and the Griffin-Bacal Advertising Agency's Sunbow Productions animation studio. Given the success of that strategy, the process was repeated in 1984 when Hasbro marketing vice president Bob Prupis approached Marvel to develop their new robot series, which Jay Bacal dubbed "Transformers."

2){{general story and actualization of the marketingplan}}
Marvel?s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Jim Shooter, produced a rough story concept for the series, creating the idea of the two warring factions of alien robots ? the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. To flesh out his concept, Shooter called upon veteran editor Dennis O'Neil to create character names and profiles for the cast, but O?Neill?s work ? for whatever reason ? did not meet with Hasbro?s expectations, and they requested heavy revisions. O?Neill declined to make said revisions, and the project was turned down by several writers and editors approached by Shooter until editor Bob Budiansky accepted the task. Hastily performing the revisions over a weekend, Budiansky?s new names and profiles were a hit with Hasbro, and production began on a bi-monthly four-issue comic book miniseries, and three-part television pilot.

3{{this is where the characters emotions you describe come from}}
Japanese designer Syouhei Kohara was responsible for creating the earliest character models for the Transformers cast, greatly humanising the toy designs to create more approachable robot characters for the comic and cartoon.

Your comments on the forum strangely underscore this history and give the transformers more literary depth than there probably is:

Foundations
{{I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material.}}

Characters
{{The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve. }}

more than meets the eye?
{{These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?}}

I then replied stating it is just a clever way to sell toys and that the story of the transformers is because of that significantly different then batman or superman. That?s why those fora are different. I can give you some examples of why this is in reply to you comments on my post.

{{You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.}} ---(not the case with hasbro since they are masters of marketing, and develop more stories to sell new toys unlike for example batman where it is to study and elaborate its character. (hasbro kept strong control of the concept and changed the story to whateever they thought could sell more))

{{This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development.}} --- (okay, but who are the storytellers here?? That?s right Hasbro a marketing toy company, and they do want to sell the nuts and bolts not create depth for those respected higher and esthetic reasons.)

{{They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.}} --- (your ?nonsense" derives fr

Jan 7 - 07:15 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We don't seem that much at odds after all then. What I remember most, when I think of the Transformers, is the potential represented in an array of cartoon episodes and, in large, the depth explored in Transformers: The Movie. The cartoon, after the animated picture, carried on in that direction enough that I can look back as a thinking adult and acknowledge that there's something there, ironically, as the saying goes, "more than meets the eye." One memory that keeps popping up is one of the later episodes when the autobots stumbled upon the hall of tombs, where they saw a statue of Prime and went on to speak with his spirit. Also, beg pardon if this is not the same episode, there was this scene that showed his birth -when the robot body was built on top of his ethereal soul. That's some meaty backstory, whether is was just to sell toys or not. I too hope that Spielberg taps into the deeper potential of the mythology and fleshens it out in the projected film trilogy. But we have to want it. Stories should aspire up, not down. Never down. That's all I'm saying. But it seems I've been preaching to the choir. ;-)

Jan 7 - 05:49 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Not much considering how much they pay the hacks to throw together fluff and empty spectacle. They have the money to pay the right people. And god knows they're out there. But the question is are they interested in developing a deep story? And the answer, as all indicators so far would suggest, is a resounding no. I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material. The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve.
We have seen them courageous and we have seen them cowardly. We have seen them haunted by grief and crippled by fear. We have seen them melancholic and jovial, hopeful and browbeaten. These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?
I go to the Superman and Batman and X:Men and Spiderman forums and see deep arguments about substantial underpinnings and character depth, symbols and themes. I go to Transformers forums and get would be fans constantly dismissing them as nothing more than popular 80s toys.

Jan 4 - 07:10 AM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

[b]Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handy[/b]
If a comic book movie creates deep arguments, does it transcend the comic genre? And if it transcends the comic genre, is it then just a book movie? And why, if it's called a comic book, does it not involve comedy? And would Superman and Batman be friends, or would they just act like it?

Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough and....

Jan 4 - 09:03 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]I go to Transformers forums and get would be fans constantly dismissing them as nothing more than popular 80s toys.[/quote]

You wanna come to the Transformers forums and say that, you pompous bastard?

Jan 4 - 10:16 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

And here we go with the pointless name calling. That train is never late. I appreciate your enthusiasm, Astrozombie. But my thing is this, I tend to believe that one who loves a story, or any other form of art, will honor it with at least a modicum of respect. If that makes me pompous, well, so be it.

Jan 4 - 11:02 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]would be fans[/quote]

You started it.

Jan 4 - 11:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

That is not an example of name calling. The term "would be fans" carries neither a negative or a positive connotation. And certainly, it is in no way as inflammatory as "pompous bastard." But no matter. My goal is not to have a popular opinion, but merely to air one that is truly mine. These stories are a treasure of mythological depth, and simply deserve to be treated as such. I fail to see why a fan would be opposed to that notion.

Jan 4 - 11:56 AM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

well i would rather go with the argument: they're giant robots than your "nonsense" (i was looking for a more polite form but this word comes closests to what i think of you argumentation). it's nice that you try to find deeper meaning. (with all these things it's the same. look and you will find) but to be honest the transformers (comics and show) were created to sell toys. they then made some background story and gave all the transformers human characteristics. (also to sell more).

this is different than lets say batman or superman where the creator did write because he felt he had enough grounds to create a character that was there to make a point instead of a sale.

so all in all, it's not about the number of arguments but just see what it is. (and as a fan i loved the transformers for just that.) and if you will look for depth and meaning you will prob find it even if it isn't there on purpose.

ps take i am the walrus by the beatles, there were actual studies about the meaning and a lot of theories. until the beatles made public that it was just nonsense that sounded nice. in all your wisdom you must acknowledge the possibility that it's just a giant fighting robot.

Jan 6 - 06:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Be that as it may, gerke. And far be it from me to cry a river over impolite salutations. So bypass worry. But when it comes to the topic of stories and their substance or lack thereof, one is reminded of important truths gleaned from a study of Story with a capital "S". You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.
This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development. That, after all, is what makes a story work. Chalking it all up to a marketing scheme misses the point, and, ultimately, destroys the cathartic magic.
They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.

Jan 6 - 02:24 PM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

[b]is there really more??[/b]
You?re starting this discussion in stating that any good movie must have a good story. And that the transformers have an undiscovered (for most people) vault of story treasures but most people only come as far as:

#655263 photosuperstar on Jan 04 2007, 08:55 AM writes:
Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Those people do not understand it you say and I refute that.

The short history of the transformers start out as this after Hasbro decided to sell robots:
1){{goal and foundations of the transformers}}
Hasbro had previously worked with Marvel Comics to develop G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero for a three-pronged marketing scheme - the toyline, a tie-in comic book by Marvel, and an animated mini-series co-produced by Marvel's media arm, Marvel Productions, and the Griffin-Bacal Advertising Agency's Sunbow Productions animation studio. Given the success of that strategy, the process was repeated in 1984 when Hasbro marketing vice president Bob Prupis approached Marvel to develop their new robot series, which Jay Bacal dubbed "Transformers."

2){{general story and actualization of the marketingplan}}
Marvel?s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Jim Shooter, produced a rough story concept for the series, creating the idea of the two warring factions of alien robots ? the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. To flesh out his concept, Shooter called upon veteran editor Dennis O'Neil to create character names and profiles for the cast, but O?Neill?s work ? for whatever reason ? did not meet with Hasbro?s expectations, and they requested heavy revisions. O?Neill declined to make said revisions, and the project was turned down by several writers and editors approached by Shooter until editor Bob Budiansky accepted the task. Hastily performing the revisions over a weekend, Budiansky?s new names and profiles were a hit with Hasbro, and production began on a bi-monthly four-issue comic book miniseries, and three-part television pilot.

3{{this is where the characters emotions you describe come from}}
Japanese designer Syouhei Kohara was responsible for creating the earliest character models for the Transformers cast, greatly humanising the toy designs to create more approachable robot characters for the comic and cartoon.

Your comments on the forum strangely underscore this history and give the transformers more literary depth than there probably is:

Foundations
{{I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material.}}

Characters
{{The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve. }}

more than meets the eye?
{{These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?}}

I then replied stating it is just a clever way to sell toys and that the story of the transformers is because of that significantly different then batman or superman. That?s why those fora are different. I can give you some examples of why this is in reply to you comments on my post.

{{You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.}} ---(not the case with hasbro since they are masters of marketing, and develop more stories to sell new toys unlike for example batman where it is to study and elaborate its character. (hasbro kept strong control of the concept and changed the story to whateever they thought could sell more))

{{This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development.}} --- (okay, but who are the storytellers here?? That?s right Hasbro a marketing toy company, and they do want to sell the nuts and bolts not create depth for those respected higher and esthetic reasons.)

{{They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.}} --- (your ?nonsense" derives fr

Jan 7 - 07:15 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We don't seem that much at odds after all then. What I remember most, when I think of the Transformers, is the potential represented in an array of cartoon episodes and, in large, the depth explored in Transformers: The Movie. The cartoon, after the animated picture, carried on in that direction enough that I can look back as a thinking adult and acknowledge that there's something there, ironically, as the saying goes, "more than meets the eye." One memory that keeps popping up is one of the later episodes when the autobots stumbled upon the hall of tombs, where they saw a statue of Prime and went on to speak with his spirit. Also, beg pardon if this is not the same episode, there was this scene that showed his birth -when the robot body was built on top of his ethereal soul. That's some meaty backstory, whether is was just to sell toys or not. I too hope that Spielberg taps into the deeper potential of the mythology and fleshens it out in the projected film trilogy. But we have to want it. Stories should aspire up, not down. Never down. That's all I'm saying. But it seems I've been preaching to the choir. ;-)

Jan 7 - 05:49 PM

photosuperstar

Aaron Abbott

Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Jan 4 - 08:55 AM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

[b]Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handy[/b]
If a comic book movie creates deep arguments, does it transcend the comic genre? And if it transcends the comic genre, is it then just a book movie? And why, if it's called a comic book, does it not involve comedy? And would Superman and Batman be friends, or would they just act like it?

Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough and....

Jan 4 - 09:03 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Ahh yes, giant fighting robots. And yet, you've offered no actual argument to refute the things I've said. Feel free to ignore what is there. Feel free to deny the importance of subtext in story. That is, after all, your choice. But because you see nothing, does not mean that there is nothing. This lack of respect for the art of story is precisely what has poisoned so many contemporary hollywood films that started out with great potential.

Jan 4 - 09:49 AM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

I'm all for this "art of story" thing, but anything based on comic books, cartoons, etc... is not exactly great source material for the "deep thought" inspiration (at least I hope not). The usual purpose of comic books/cartoons is to deal with the black and white (the yin-yang, right/wrong, or whatever you want to call it) of the world through hyperbolic entertainment.

Sure comic books (and God knows the writers of said comic books) and now several of these comic book movies are trying to lend an illogical depth to their creations by creating transparent shades of gray.

The reason I grew up enjoying Transformers was because of the straight delineation between right and wrong (thus why Hot-Rod was/is such a detested character -- b/c he was the one they tried to lend this weighty "depth" to).

As a child, the world can be split into right and wrong and its nice to see right and wrong in such tangible form in those weekday cartoons. Obviously, it's not the real world, but its the idyllic world of childhood -- IMO, movies of this nature should preferentially try to recreate such idealism ...

Because, after all, we do it for the children... and weren't we all once children (tag-teaming GI-Joes & Star-Wars figures on the back of Optimus Prime as he went to fight the evil triumverate of The Dark Side, Cobra, and The Decepticons -- sorry, got a little nostalgic there)?

Jan 4 - 10:29 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]I go to Transformers forums and get would be fans constantly dismissing them as nothing more than popular 80s toys.[/quote]

You wanna come to the Transformers forums and say that, you pompous bastard?

Jan 4 - 10:16 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

And here we go with the pointless name calling. That train is never late. I appreciate your enthusiasm, Astrozombie. But my thing is this, I tend to believe that one who loves a story, or any other form of art, will honor it with at least a modicum of respect. If that makes me pompous, well, so be it.

Jan 4 - 11:02 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]would be fans[/quote]

You started it.

Jan 4 - 11:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

That is not an example of name calling. The term "would be fans" carries neither a negative or a positive connotation. And certainly, it is in no way as inflammatory as "pompous bastard." But no matter. My goal is not to have a popular opinion, but merely to air one that is truly mine. These stories are a treasure of mythological depth, and simply deserve to be treated as such. I fail to see why a fan would be opposed to that notion.

Jan 4 - 11:56 AM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

well i would rather go with the argument: they're giant robots than your "nonsense" (i was looking for a more polite form but this word comes closests to what i think of you argumentation). it's nice that you try to find deeper meaning. (with all these things it's the same. look and you will find) but to be honest the transformers (comics and show) were created to sell toys. they then made some background story and gave all the transformers human characteristics. (also to sell more).

this is different than lets say batman or superman where the creator did write because he felt he had enough grounds to create a character that was there to make a point instead of a sale.

so all in all, it's not about the number of arguments but just see what it is. (and as a fan i loved the transformers for just that.) and if you will look for depth and meaning you will prob find it even if it isn't there on purpose.

ps take i am the walrus by the beatles, there were actual studies about the meaning and a lot of theories. until the beatles made public that it was just nonsense that sounded nice. in all your wisdom you must acknowledge the possibility that it's just a giant fighting robot.

Jan 6 - 06:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Be that as it may, gerke. And far be it from me to cry a river over impolite salutations. So bypass worry. But when it comes to the topic of stories and their substance or lack thereof, one is reminded of important truths gleaned from a study of Story with a capital "S". You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.
This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development. That, after all, is what makes a story work. Chalking it all up to a marketing scheme misses the point, and, ultimately, destroys the cathartic magic.
They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.

Jan 6 - 02:24 PM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

[b]is there really more??[/b]
You?re starting this discussion in stating that any good movie must have a good story. And that the transformers have an undiscovered (for most people) vault of story treasures but most people only come as far as:

#655263 photosuperstar on Jan 04 2007, 08:55 AM writes:
Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Those people do not understand it you say and I refute that.

The short history of the transformers start out as this after Hasbro decided to sell robots:
1){{goal and foundations of the transformers}}
Hasbro had previously worked with Marvel Comics to develop G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero for a three-pronged marketing scheme - the toyline, a tie-in comic book by Marvel, and an animated mini-series co-produced by Marvel's media arm, Marvel Productions, and the Griffin-Bacal Advertising Agency's Sunbow Productions animation studio. Given the success of that strategy, the process was repeated in 1984 when Hasbro marketing vice president Bob Prupis approached Marvel to develop their new robot series, which Jay Bacal dubbed "Transformers."

2){{general story and actualization of the marketingplan}}
Marvel?s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Jim Shooter, produced a rough story concept for the series, creating the idea of the two warring factions of alien robots ? the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. To flesh out his concept, Shooter called upon veteran editor Dennis O'Neil to create character names and profiles for the cast, but O?Neill?s work ? for whatever reason ? did not meet with Hasbro?s expectations, and they requested heavy revisions. O?Neill declined to make said revisions, and the project was turned down by several writers and editors approached by Shooter until editor Bob Budiansky accepted the task. Hastily performing the revisions over a weekend, Budiansky?s new names and profiles were a hit with Hasbro, and production began on a bi-monthly four-issue comic book miniseries, and three-part television pilot.

3{{this is where the characters emotions you describe come from}}
Japanese designer Syouhei Kohara was responsible for creating the earliest character models for the Transformers cast, greatly humanising the toy designs to create more approachable robot characters for the comic and cartoon.

Your comments on the forum strangely underscore this history and give the transformers more literary depth than there probably is:

Foundations
{{I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material.}}

Characters
{{The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve. }}

more than meets the eye?
{{These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?}}

I then replied stating it is just a clever way to sell toys and that the story of the transformers is because of that significantly different then batman or superman. That?s why those fora are different. I can give you some examples of why this is in reply to you comments on my post.

{{You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.}} ---(not the case with hasbro since they are masters of marketing, and develop more stories to sell new toys unlike for example batman where it is to study and elaborate its character. (hasbro kept strong control of the concept and changed the story to whateever they thought could sell more))

{{This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development.}} --- (okay, but who are the storytellers here?? That?s right Hasbro a marketing toy company, and they do want to sell the nuts and bolts not create depth for those respected higher and esthetic reasons.)

{{They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.}} --- (your ?nonsense" derives fr

Jan 7 - 07:15 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We don't seem that much at odds after all then. What I remember most, when I think of the Transformers, is the potential represented in an array of cartoon episodes and, in large, the depth explored in Transformers: The Movie. The cartoon, after the animated picture, carried on in that direction enough that I can look back as a thinking adult and acknowledge that there's something there, ironically, as the saying goes, "more than meets the eye." One memory that keeps popping up is one of the later episodes when the autobots stumbled upon the hall of tombs, where they saw a statue of Prime and went on to speak with his spirit. Also, beg pardon if this is not the same episode, there was this scene that showed his birth -when the robot body was built on top of his ethereal soul. That's some meaty backstory, whether is was just to sell toys or not. I too hope that Spielberg taps into the deeper potential of the mythology and fleshens it out in the projected film trilogy. But we have to want it. Stories should aspire up, not down. Never down. That's all I'm saying. But it seems I've been preaching to the choir. ;-)

Jan 7 - 05:49 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

I'm all for this "art of story" thing, but anything based on comic books, cartoons, etc... is not exactly great source material for the "deep thought" inspiration (at least I hope not). The usual purpose of comic books/cartoons is to deal with the black and white (the yin-yang, right/wrong, or whatever you want to call it) of the world through hyperbolic entertainment.

Sure comic books (and God knows the writers of said comic books) and now several of these comic book movies are trying to lend an illogical depth to their creations by creating transparent shades of gray.

The reason I grew up enjoying Transformers was because of the straight delineation between right and wrong (thus why Hot-Rod was/is such a detested character -- b/c he was the one they tried to lend this weighty "depth" to).

As a child, the world can be split into right and wrong and its nice to see right and wrong in such tangible form in those weekday cartoons. Obviously, it's not the real world, but its the idyllic world of childhood -- IMO, movies of this nature should preferentially try to recreate such idealism ...

Because, after all, we do it for the children... and weren't we all once children (tag-teaming GI-Joes & Star-Wars figures on the back of Optimus Prime as he went to fight the evil triumverate of The Dark Side, Cobra, and The Decepticons -- sorry, got a little nostalgic there)?

Jan 4 - 10:29 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

And here we go with the pointless name calling. That train is never late. I appreciate your enthusiasm, Astrozombie. But my thing is this, I tend to believe that one who loves a story, or any other form of art, will honor it with at least a modicum of respect. If that makes me pompous, well, so be it.

Jan 4 - 11:02 AM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]would be fans[/quote]

You started it.

Jan 4 - 11:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

That is not an example of name calling. The term "would be fans" carries neither a negative or a positive connotation. And certainly, it is in no way as inflammatory as "pompous bastard." But no matter. My goal is not to have a popular opinion, but merely to air one that is truly mine. These stories are a treasure of mythological depth, and simply deserve to be treated as such. I fail to see why a fan would be opposed to that notion.

Jan 4 - 11:56 AM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

well i would rather go with the argument: they're giant robots than your "nonsense" (i was looking for a more polite form but this word comes closests to what i think of you argumentation). it's nice that you try to find deeper meaning. (with all these things it's the same. look and you will find) but to be honest the transformers (comics and show) were created to sell toys. they then made some background story and gave all the transformers human characteristics. (also to sell more).

this is different than lets say batman or superman where the creator did write because he felt he had enough grounds to create a character that was there to make a point instead of a sale.

so all in all, it's not about the number of arguments but just see what it is. (and as a fan i loved the transformers for just that.) and if you will look for depth and meaning you will prob find it even if it isn't there on purpose.

ps take i am the walrus by the beatles, there were actual studies about the meaning and a lot of theories. until the beatles made public that it was just nonsense that sounded nice. in all your wisdom you must acknowledge the possibility that it's just a giant fighting robot.

Jan 6 - 06:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Be that as it may, gerke. And far be it from me to cry a river over impolite salutations. So bypass worry. But when it comes to the topic of stories and their substance or lack thereof, one is reminded of important truths gleaned from a study of Story with a capital "S". You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.
This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development. That, after all, is what makes a story work. Chalking it all up to a marketing scheme misses the point, and, ultimately, destroys the cathartic magic.
They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.

Jan 6 - 02:24 PM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

[b]is there really more??[/b]
You?re starting this discussion in stating that any good movie must have a good story. And that the transformers have an undiscovered (for most people) vault of story treasures but most people only come as far as:

#655263 photosuperstar on Jan 04 2007, 08:55 AM writes:
Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Those people do not understand it you say and I refute that.

The short history of the transformers start out as this after Hasbro decided to sell robots:
1){{goal and foundations of the transformers}}
Hasbro had previously worked with Marvel Comics to develop G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero for a three-pronged marketing scheme - the toyline, a tie-in comic book by Marvel, and an animated mini-series co-produced by Marvel's media arm, Marvel Productions, and the Griffin-Bacal Advertising Agency's Sunbow Productions animation studio. Given the success of that strategy, the process was repeated in 1984 when Hasbro marketing vice president Bob Prupis approached Marvel to develop their new robot series, which Jay Bacal dubbed "Transformers."

2){{general story and actualization of the marketingplan}}
Marvel?s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Jim Shooter, produced a rough story concept for the series, creating the idea of the two warring factions of alien robots ? the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. To flesh out his concept, Shooter called upon veteran editor Dennis O'Neil to create character names and profiles for the cast, but O?Neill?s work ? for whatever reason ? did not meet with Hasbro?s expectations, and they requested heavy revisions. O?Neill declined to make said revisions, and the project was turned down by several writers and editors approached by Shooter until editor Bob Budiansky accepted the task. Hastily performing the revisions over a weekend, Budiansky?s new names and profiles were a hit with Hasbro, and production began on a bi-monthly four-issue comic book miniseries, and three-part television pilot.

3{{this is where the characters emotions you describe come from}}
Japanese designer Syouhei Kohara was responsible for creating the earliest character models for the Transformers cast, greatly humanising the toy designs to create more approachable robot characters for the comic and cartoon.

Your comments on the forum strangely underscore this history and give the transformers more literary depth than there probably is:

Foundations
{{I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material.}}

Characters
{{The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve. }}

more than meets the eye?
{{These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?}}

I then replied stating it is just a clever way to sell toys and that the story of the transformers is because of that significantly different then batman or superman. That?s why those fora are different. I can give you some examples of why this is in reply to you comments on my post.

{{You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.}} ---(not the case with hasbro since they are masters of marketing, and develop more stories to sell new toys unlike for example batman where it is to study and elaborate its character. (hasbro kept strong control of the concept and changed the story to whateever they thought could sell more))

{{This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development.}} --- (okay, but who are the storytellers here?? That?s right Hasbro a marketing toy company, and they do want to sell the nuts and bolts not create depth for those respected higher and esthetic reasons.)

{{They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.}} --- (your ?nonsense" derives fr

Jan 7 - 07:15 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We don't seem that much at odds after all then. What I remember most, when I think of the Transformers, is the potential represented in an array of cartoon episodes and, in large, the depth explored in Transformers: The Movie. The cartoon, after the animated picture, carried on in that direction enough that I can look back as a thinking adult and acknowledge that there's something there, ironically, as the saying goes, "more than meets the eye." One memory that keeps popping up is one of the later episodes when the autobots stumbled upon the hall of tombs, where they saw a statue of Prime and went on to speak with his spirit. Also, beg pardon if this is not the same episode, there was this scene that showed his birth -when the robot body was built on top of his ethereal soul. That's some meaty backstory, whether is was just to sell toys or not. I too hope that Spielberg taps into the deeper potential of the mythology and fleshens it out in the projected film trilogy. But we have to want it. Stories should aspire up, not down. Never down. That's all I'm saying. But it seems I've been preaching to the choir. ;-)

Jan 7 - 05:49 PM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]would be fans[/quote]

You started it.

Jan 4 - 11:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

That is not an example of name calling. The term "would be fans" carries neither a negative or a positive connotation. And certainly, it is in no way as inflammatory as "pompous bastard." But no matter. My goal is not to have a popular opinion, but merely to air one that is truly mine. These stories are a treasure of mythological depth, and simply deserve to be treated as such. I fail to see why a fan would be opposed to that notion.

Jan 4 - 11:56 AM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

well i would rather go with the argument: they're giant robots than your "nonsense" (i was looking for a more polite form but this word comes closests to what i think of you argumentation). it's nice that you try to find deeper meaning. (with all these things it's the same. look and you will find) but to be honest the transformers (comics and show) were created to sell toys. they then made some background story and gave all the transformers human characteristics. (also to sell more).

this is different than lets say batman or superman where the creator did write because he felt he had enough grounds to create a character that was there to make a point instead of a sale.

so all in all, it's not about the number of arguments but just see what it is. (and as a fan i loved the transformers for just that.) and if you will look for depth and meaning you will prob find it even if it isn't there on purpose.

ps take i am the walrus by the beatles, there were actual studies about the meaning and a lot of theories. until the beatles made public that it was just nonsense that sounded nice. in all your wisdom you must acknowledge the possibility that it's just a giant fighting robot.

Jan 6 - 06:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Be that as it may, gerke. And far be it from me to cry a river over impolite salutations. So bypass worry. But when it comes to the topic of stories and their substance or lack thereof, one is reminded of important truths gleaned from a study of Story with a capital "S". You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.
This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development. That, after all, is what makes a story work. Chalking it all up to a marketing scheme misses the point, and, ultimately, destroys the cathartic magic.
They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.

Jan 6 - 02:24 PM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

[b]is there really more??[/b]
You?re starting this discussion in stating that any good movie must have a good story. And that the transformers have an undiscovered (for most people) vault of story treasures but most people only come as far as:

#655263 photosuperstar on Jan 04 2007, 08:55 AM writes:
Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Those people do not understand it you say and I refute that.

The short history of the transformers start out as this after Hasbro decided to sell robots:
1){{goal and foundations of the transformers}}
Hasbro had previously worked with Marvel Comics to develop G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero for a three-pronged marketing scheme - the toyline, a tie-in comic book by Marvel, and an animated mini-series co-produced by Marvel's media arm, Marvel Productions, and the Griffin-Bacal Advertising Agency's Sunbow Productions animation studio. Given the success of that strategy, the process was repeated in 1984 when Hasbro marketing vice president Bob Prupis approached Marvel to develop their new robot series, which Jay Bacal dubbed "Transformers."

2){{general story and actualization of the marketingplan}}
Marvel?s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Jim Shooter, produced a rough story concept for the series, creating the idea of the two warring factions of alien robots ? the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. To flesh out his concept, Shooter called upon veteran editor Dennis O'Neil to create character names and profiles for the cast, but O?Neill?s work ? for whatever reason ? did not meet with Hasbro?s expectations, and they requested heavy revisions. O?Neill declined to make said revisions, and the project was turned down by several writers and editors approached by Shooter until editor Bob Budiansky accepted the task. Hastily performing the revisions over a weekend, Budiansky?s new names and profiles were a hit with Hasbro, and production began on a bi-monthly four-issue comic book miniseries, and three-part television pilot.

3{{this is where the characters emotions you describe come from}}
Japanese designer Syouhei Kohara was responsible for creating the earliest character models for the Transformers cast, greatly humanising the toy designs to create more approachable robot characters for the comic and cartoon.

Your comments on the forum strangely underscore this history and give the transformers more literary depth than there probably is:

Foundations
{{I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material.}}

Characters
{{The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve. }}

more than meets the eye?
{{These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?}}

I then replied stating it is just a clever way to sell toys and that the story of the transformers is because of that significantly different then batman or superman. That?s why those fora are different. I can give you some examples of why this is in reply to you comments on my post.

{{You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.}} ---(not the case with hasbro since they are masters of marketing, and develop more stories to sell new toys unlike for example batman where it is to study and elaborate its character. (hasbro kept strong control of the concept and changed the story to whateever they thought could sell more))

{{This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development.}} --- (okay, but who are the storytellers here?? That?s right Hasbro a marketing toy company, and they do want to sell the nuts and bolts not create depth for those respected higher and esthetic reasons.)

{{They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.}} --- (your ?nonsense" derives fr

Jan 7 - 07:15 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We don't seem that much at odds after all then. What I remember most, when I think of the Transformers, is the potential represented in an array of cartoon episodes and, in large, the depth explored in Transformers: The Movie. The cartoon, after the animated picture, carried on in that direction enough that I can look back as a thinking adult and acknowledge that there's something there, ironically, as the saying goes, "more than meets the eye." One memory that keeps popping up is one of the later episodes when the autobots stumbled upon the hall of tombs, where they saw a statue of Prime and went on to speak with his spirit. Also, beg pardon if this is not the same episode, there was this scene that showed his birth -when the robot body was built on top of his ethereal soul. That's some meaty backstory, whether is was just to sell toys or not. I too hope that Spielberg taps into the deeper potential of the mythology and fleshens it out in the projected film trilogy. But we have to want it. Stories should aspire up, not down. Never down. That's all I'm saying. But it seems I've been preaching to the choir. ;-)

Jan 7 - 05:49 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

That is not an example of name calling. The term "would be fans" carries neither a negative or a positive connotation. And certainly, it is in no way as inflammatory as "pompous bastard." But no matter. My goal is not to have a popular opinion, but merely to air one that is truly mine. These stories are a treasure of mythological depth, and simply deserve to be treated as such. I fail to see why a fan would be opposed to that notion.

Jan 4 - 11:56 AM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

well i would rather go with the argument: they're giant robots than your "nonsense" (i was looking for a more polite form but this word comes closests to what i think of you argumentation). it's nice that you try to find deeper meaning. (with all these things it's the same. look and you will find) but to be honest the transformers (comics and show) were created to sell toys. they then made some background story and gave all the transformers human characteristics. (also to sell more).

this is different than lets say batman or superman where the creator did write because he felt he had enough grounds to create a character that was there to make a point instead of a sale.

so all in all, it's not about the number of arguments but just see what it is. (and as a fan i loved the transformers for just that.) and if you will look for depth and meaning you will prob find it even if it isn't there on purpose.

ps take i am the walrus by the beatles, there were actual studies about the meaning and a lot of theories. until the beatles made public that it was just nonsense that sounded nice. in all your wisdom you must acknowledge the possibility that it's just a giant fighting robot.

Jan 6 - 06:28 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Be that as it may, gerke. And far be it from me to cry a river over impolite salutations. So bypass worry. But when it comes to the topic of stories and their substance or lack thereof, one is reminded of important truths gleaned from a study of Story with a capital "S". You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.
This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development. That, after all, is what makes a story work. Chalking it all up to a marketing scheme misses the point, and, ultimately, destroys the cathartic magic.
They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.

Jan 6 - 02:24 PM

gerke

gerke kleinsmit

[b]is there really more??[/b]
You?re starting this discussion in stating that any good movie must have a good story. And that the transformers have an undiscovered (for most people) vault of story treasures but most people only come as far as:

#655263 photosuperstar on Jan 04 2007, 08:55 AM writes:
Oh good God, they're giant fighting robots! Come on!!

Those people do not understand it you say and I refute that.

The short history of the transformers start out as this after Hasbro decided to sell robots:
1){{goal and foundations of the transformers}}
Hasbro had previously worked with Marvel Comics to develop G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero for a three-pronged marketing scheme - the toyline, a tie-in comic book by Marvel, and an animated mini-series co-produced by Marvel's media arm, Marvel Productions, and the Griffin-Bacal Advertising Agency's Sunbow Productions animation studio. Given the success of that strategy, the process was repeated in 1984 when Hasbro marketing vice president Bob Prupis approached Marvel to develop their new robot series, which Jay Bacal dubbed "Transformers."

2){{general story and actualization of the marketingplan}}
Marvel?s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Jim Shooter, produced a rough story concept for the series, creating the idea of the two warring factions of alien robots ? the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. To flesh out his concept, Shooter called upon veteran editor Dennis O'Neil to create character names and profiles for the cast, but O?Neill?s work ? for whatever reason ? did not meet with Hasbro?s expectations, and they requested heavy revisions. O?Neill declined to make said revisions, and the project was turned down by several writers and editors approached by Shooter until editor Bob Budiansky accepted the task. Hastily performing the revisions over a weekend, Budiansky?s new names and profiles were a hit with Hasbro, and production began on a bi-monthly four-issue comic book miniseries, and three-part television pilot.

3{{this is where the characters emotions you describe come from}}
Japanese designer Syouhei Kohara was responsible for creating the earliest character models for the Transformers cast, greatly humanising the toy designs to create more approachable robot characters for the comic and cartoon.

Your comments on the forum strangely underscore this history and give the transformers more literary depth than there probably is:

Foundations
{{I keep hearing people justify this by saying, "oh, well what do you expect (?), it's a movie about giant robots." But this is coming from those who simply do not know the foundation of the source material.}}

Characters
{{The Transformers, as anyone who paid close attention to the cartoons would know, are spiritual beings. They have souls, ideology, and a homeland to which they are devoted in spirit. The Autobots have traditions based in the tenets of a strict honor code. They are self-sacrificial warriors who fight with bravado and who mourn the loss of their fallen. The Matrix of leadership that Optimus holds in his chest plate is a diefic heirloom passed from one chosen leader to the next. The Transformers have a humanity, for loss of a better word. Even the Decepticons, though malevolent, have a strong sense of camaraderie and a duty to serve. }}

more than meets the eye?
{{These are not just robots! Where are all the true fans of this mythology?}}

I then replied stating it is just a clever way to sell toys and that the story of the transformers is because of that significantly different then batman or superman. That?s why those fora are different. I can give you some examples of why this is in reply to you comments on my post.

{{You see, friend, oftentimes -as is the goal really- the material takes on a life beyond even the creator. In which case, the creator, having set her baby loose on the world, is ill advised to go back and try to curtail its evolution.}} ---(not the case with hasbro since they are masters of marketing, and develop more stories to sell new toys unlike for example batman where it is to study and elaborate its character. (hasbro kept strong control of the concept and changed the story to whateever they thought could sell more))

{{This was common knowledge once upon a time, when storytellers knew that what mattered most was the story itself, and that it grow and have life in the hearts and minds of its subjects that reaches beyond the nuts and bolts of technical development.}} --- (okay, but who are the storytellers here?? That?s right Hasbro a marketing toy company, and they do want to sell the nuts and bolts not create depth for those respected higher and esthetic reasons.)

{{They wanted to sell more toys, you say. Fine. My "nonsense" does not come into conflict with that. But their irrelevent corporate interests pale in the face of their more noteworthy achievement, which was come up with a pretty decent story.}} --- (your ?nonsense" derives fr

Jan 7 - 07:15 AM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We don't seem that much at odds after all then. What I remember most, when I think of the Transformers, is the potential represented in an array of cartoon episodes and, in large, the depth explored in Transformers: The Movie. The cartoon, after the animated picture, carried on in that direction enough that I can look back as a thinking adult and acknowledge that there's something there, ironically, as the saying goes, "more than meets the eye." One memory that keeps popping up is one of the later episodes when the autobots stumbled upon the hall of tombs, where they saw a statue of Prime and went on to speak with his spirit. Also, beg pardon if this is not the same episode, there was this scene that showed his birth -when the robot body was built on top of his ethereal soul. That's some meaty backstory, whether is was just to sell toys or not. I too hope that Spielberg taps into the deeper potential of the mythology and fleshens it out in the projected film trilogy. But we have to want it. Stories should aspire up, not down. Never down. That's all I'm saying. But it seems I've been preaching to the choir. ;-)

Jan 7 - 05:49 PM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

would-be:
?adjective
1. wishing or pretending to be: a would-be wit.
2. intended to be: a would-be kindness.

Oh, I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood your "connotation." I thought you were accusing some of us who've been posting on the TF forum of pretending to be fans. Perhaps your bigwordiness was too much for my smallmindiness. Oh my, I certainly jumped on the ol' name-calling train in a hurry! How silly of me!

Jan 4 - 01:00 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Oh good grief. Get over yourself and get back to talking about the movie already. So touchy. What's the point in you being hung up on semantics all day? Say something relevant. You may take issue with my wording. Fine. But you are yet to interact with anything in regards to the true topic. You accomplish absolutely nothing in making this about you and me.

Jan 4 - 01:09 PM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]Oh good grief. Get over yourself and get back to talking about the movie already. So touchy. What's the point in you being hung up on semantics all day? Say something relevant. You may take issue with my wording. Fine. But you are yet to interact with anything in regards to the true topic. You accomplish absolutely nothing in making this about you and me.[/quote]

Y'know, when you're right, you're right. I was being a bit antagonistic. Rough day. I will now ever-so-humbly attempt to add some relevant repartee.

"The trailer for this film, however, looks as though the main emotional core of the story is the human element, not the Transformers."

Keep in mind that all we've seen thus far are teaser trailers, in which we barely glimpse the Transformers themselves, let alone hear them speak. I'm not kidding myself here; I'm well aware that this movie could suck. I'm just not condemning it prematurely based on a couple brief teasers (awesome) and Michael Bay's track record (eh).

Jan 4 - 07:10 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Me neither. But unless the rumors of an updated script are true, they're working from a script in which the Transformers are little more than gigantic props that the humans are running from. I just can't stand the idea of the humans being the stars of the film. I can't stand it. But I have, of course, no choice but to accept it. And, ultimately, my skepticism is not without the yeild of hope. I have said it time and time again; I want to be totally made an ass out of by this film sneaking up on me and being a truly great live action Transformers experience.

Jan 4 - 07:33 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Oh good grief. Get over yourself and get back to talking about the movie already. So touchy. What's the point in you being hung up on semantics all day? Say something relevant. You may take issue with my wording. Fine. But you are yet to interact with anything in regards to the true topic. You accomplish absolutely nothing in making this about you and me.

Jan 4 - 01:09 PM

AstroZombie138

Travis G

[quote=Matanuki]Oh good grief. Get over yourself and get back to talking about the movie already. So touchy. What's the point in you being hung up on semantics all day? Say something relevant. You may take issue with my wording. Fine. But you are yet to interact with anything in regards to the true topic. You accomplish absolutely nothing in making this about you and me.[/quote]

Y'know, when you're right, you're right. I was being a bit antagonistic. Rough day. I will now ever-so-humbly attempt to add some relevant repartee.

"The trailer for this film, however, looks as though the main emotional core of the story is the human element, not the Transformers."

Keep in mind that all we've seen thus far are teaser trailers, in which we barely glimpse the Transformers themselves, let alone hear them speak. I'm not kidding myself here; I'm well aware that this movie could suck. I'm just not condemning it prematurely based on a couple brief teasers (awesome) and Michael Bay's track record (eh).

Jan 4 - 07:10 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

Me neither. But unless the rumors of an updated script are true, they're working from a script in which the Transformers are little more than gigantic props that the humans are running from. I just can't stand the idea of the humans being the stars of the film. I can't stand it. But I have, of course, no choice but to accept it. And, ultimately, my skepticism is not without the yeild of hope. I have said it time and time again; I want to be totally made an ass out of by this film sneaking up on me and being a truly great live action Transformers experience.

Jan 4 - 07:33 PM

FluxCapacitor

Matthew Packer

[b]A positive viewpoint[/b]
The reservation that fans have over this film is that they think it'll be nothing like the Marvel comics or cartoons, but because so many characters, timelines and situations were allowed to proliferate back then - in the name of advertising - fans have very divergent ideas about what the best elements were in the first place. Added to that, one of the strangest things about TFs is that when their 80's popularity waned, there were just more and more versions of the mythos pumped out (Energon, Beast Wars, etc.)

Visitors to donmurphy.net will know that it was one of the reasons Murphy gave for a fresh start... that not enough fans appeared to agree on what the basic tenets should be, so the film might as well establish new groundrules because most of the people it'll be trying to rope in won't know the history anyway.

Initially, I thought that sucked. My view was, wherever there's large-scale disagreement, just go with whatever's considered canon. For many, that would be the Marvel set-up: the Cybertronian war, the Autobot launch of the Ark, the Decepticon ambush, the crash-landing on Earth, the four-million-year slumber in a volcano and the reawakening and adaptation to Earth vehicles. Compared to that origin tale, Spider-Man has got off very lightly indeed in Raimi's hands in terms of tinkering - the TF film appears to have changed lots of characters and situations.

And yet... I like what I've seen. I can't pretend I don't like the designs when all the ones I've found have impressed me (apart from Starscream, the one seriously duff effort, who looks clunky when he should be sleek). I can't pretend I don't like the new teaser when I really, really do. And I can't help thinking along the lines of what R Lee Ermey's drill instructor said to Private Pile in Full Metal Jacket after Pile's first crack at marksmanship: maybe Spielberg has finally found something that Michael Bay is good at?

Jan 4 - 01:40 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We will see. I suppose what everyone here can agree on is that they don't want this movie to suck. A strong foundation will make for a strong franchise. That's why this first film is so important. They have to set up the groundrules, but they have to do it in a way that leaves more to be explored in future outings. That's probably why most of the skeptics are concerned. The teaser, while having "cool" looks, also seems to suggest that depth is squandered for style. Again, we won't know until later. Here's hoping for the best.

Jan 4 - 01:47 PM

TitusCosminus

Cosmin Iacoban

[b]My eloquent freind...[/b]
You claim you are a true fan of the Transformers cartoon, but I do not believe you are. Why the giant shape-shifting robots have a strong mythology surrounding their foundation? Why are they personified?

The answer is simple: so it can captivate us, give them more depth and a more human feel and we do see that in the trailer....example:

-most will come to destroy us, some will come to protect us( this means that the robots made a choice)
- also they came to Earth for a reason: not for pleasure

Most of the X-Men, Superman and Potter fans expect the books/comics they read to be fully incorporated into movies:1) that's not possible 2) that would be cliche and very laim( why would you pay to see something you practically already know. What happened to originality?

Bay will give you the visuals Spielberg shall give you the depth...I look forward to it.

Jan 4 - 03:26 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

You don't think I'm a true fan because.... I want the film to capture the depth of the mythology? You probably didn't read my earlier posts. My points as earlier illustrated are in sync with the ones you just made almost to the letter. Of course there is a strong mythology. Of course the characters are personified to give them relatability. That's exactly what I said. That, anyway, is what the cartoon represents. The trailer for this film, however, looks as though the main emotional core of the story is the human element, not the Transformers. Are you sure your reply was meant for me?

Jan 4 - 04:23 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

We will see. I suppose what everyone here can agree on is that they don't want this movie to suck. A strong foundation will make for a strong franchise. That's why this first film is so important. They have to set up the groundrules, but they have to do it in a way that leaves more to be explored in future outings. That's probably why most of the skeptics are concerned. The teaser, while having "cool" looks, also seems to suggest that depth is squandered for style. Again, we won't know until later. Here's hoping for the best.

Jan 4 - 01:47 PM

TitusCosminus

Cosmin Iacoban

[b]My eloquent freind...[/b]
You claim you are a true fan of the Transformers cartoon, but I do not believe you are. Why the giant shape-shifting robots have a strong mythology surrounding their foundation? Why are they personified?

The answer is simple: so it can captivate us, give them more depth and a more human feel and we do see that in the trailer....example:

-most will come to destroy us, some will come to protect us( this means that the robots made a choice)
- also they came to Earth for a reason: not for pleasure

Most of the X-Men, Superman and Potter fans expect the books/comics they read to be fully incorporated into movies:1) that's not possible 2) that would be cliche and very laim( why would you pay to see something you practically already know. What happened to originality?

Bay will give you the visuals Spielberg shall give you the depth...I look forward to it.

Jan 4 - 03:26 PM

Matanuki

Matanuki .

You don't think I'm a true fan because.... I want the film to capture the depth of the mythology? You probably didn't read my earlier posts. My points as earlier illustrated are in sync with the ones you just made almost to the letter. Of course there is a strong mythology. Of course the characters are personified to give them relatability. That's exactly what I said. That, anyway, is what the cartoon represents. The trailer for this film, however, looks as though the main emotional core of the story is the human element, not the Transformers. Are you sure your reply was meant for me?

Jan 4 - 04:23 PM

What's Hot On RT

Cosplay Gallery
Cosplay Gallery

See over 250 Comic-Con Costumes!

<em>Let's Be Cops</em>
Let's Be Cops

Video: Riggle, Key, and Wayans Jr.

Box Office
Box Office

Lucy's brains beat...

Weekly Ketchup
Weekly Ketchup

Idris Elba joins King Arthur

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile