Oh sure, give them some eye candy, explosions, FX, and Meagan Fox, and it's a 
winner. I think the writers--Orci and Kurtzman--are uniquely skilled at giving 
action that's heart pumping, then putting a thin layer of script on top of 
it.  They write more intelligent action than most, and they're stuff is fun. 
But I always find myself coming away feeling a bit dissatisfied, as if 
something's missing, or some key plot points don't quite make sense. I got this 
feeling with aspects of MI-3. Lots of good action, good characters,but felt a 
bit spare in overall writing. Of course, I have huge issues with the rewrite of 
the Star Trek universe in the move. Good stuff in many ways, but some elements 
added here and there that felt a bit too light in tone and touch. They're not 
exactly hacks,and they're certainly sincere, and better writers than a Michael 
Bay, but there's something I feel they're missing. It's hard to define, but 
it's like comparing "American Idol" singers to really talented singers like 
Marvin Gaye, Aretha, Whitney Houston in her prime. The "Idol" folks are okay, 
but other give you a much more fulfilling experience.  


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mr. Worf" <[email protected]> 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 8:28:17 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] LaBeouf Says Third "Transformers" Movie Will Be  
Better 

  




I think its because they wanted a "feel good" movie all the way through. I 
dunno. In thinking back on the series, there is something that just doesn't 
work on a lot of levels for me. There seems to be a general lack of caring 
about the writing of movies like this. You can almost hear the voice of that 
stereotyped movie exec chomping on a cigar while he takes a brilliant idea and 
turns it into garbage. 


On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Keith Johnson < [email protected] > 
wrote: 






Yeah, the age old problem in America: intelligent writing has no place in 
"blockbusters" that kids might  see. I don't see why it couldn't have more 
complex emotional writing? 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mr. Worf" < [email protected] > 
To: [email protected] 



Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 7:48:29 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] LaBeouf Says Third "Transformers" Movie Will Be  
Better 

  







I think movies like Transformers was a difficult situation to resolve. Mainly 
because they knew that the movie would attract the under 13 set so they 
couldn't make it too violent or have complex emotional situations. (although 
Japanese anime hasn't had a problem with that, but they also do not have crazy 
lawsuits either.) 


On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Keith Johnson < [email protected] > 
wrote: 






The first one is good only for the phenomenal CGI of the robots. It's truly 
amazing. Other than that, the movie is too focused on the humans. LeBeouf's 
character is ultimately the hero, in a way that makes no sense. They create 
some thing called the "Lifespark" that can turn any machine (such as a radio or 
Coke dispenser) into a sentient Transformer.  There's no mention of the Matrix 
of Leadership. All the cars are GMs because the studio struck a deal, which 
rankled me.   Ebay is referenced a bazillion times (another financial deal). 
The Autobots are curiously relegated to support characters, making the humans 
too central. At the end of the movie, Optimus says "you humans are truly more 
than meets the eye", singing *humanity's* praises even though that catch phrase 
should apply to *his* people. 
It was weakly written, changed canon unnecessarily, and had a juvenile tone 
overall. It is only redeemed by the CGI and some of the fight scenes.  Oh--and 
the "black" robot (the one that was a "ghetto blaster" in canon) is punked like 
you wouldn't believe. 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Baxter" < [email protected] > 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 6:50:35 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] LaBeouf Says Third "Transformers" Movie Will Be  
Better 

  





Keith, I haven't seen the first one. This isn't much in the way of inspiration 
to invest. LaBoeuf is a good actor. He's gotta be getting better offers than 
this. I HOPE. 


On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Keith Johnson < [email protected] > 
wrote: 



  





Interesting. I still haven't seen the second one. The bloated action trailers, 
the long snippets I've seen on TVs at  electronic stores, those stereotyped 
ghetto robots--all kept me away from the sequel. Didn't help I wasn't too 
impressed with the first flick past the FX. The way the Transformers were 
minimized in favor of the stupid humans didn't appeal to me, nor did the change 
to lore (the "Lifespark"? Megatron the source for most of our tech? Blah!) If 
LeBeouf himself is saying the second one was worse? I may never see it... 

********************* 
LaBeouf promises better 'Transformers' next time 

By DAVID GERMAIN 


The Associated Press 





CANNES, France — Shia LaBeouf says the second "Transformers" movie got too big 
for its own good — but the third one brings the heart back to the franchise. 
LaBeouf, who starts work on the next "Transformers" sequel Tuesday, said the 
third installment will be the best one yet. The new script restores a human 
element that got lost in the second movie, LaBeouf said. 




"When I saw the second movie, I wasn't impressed with what we did," LaBeouf 
said in an interview Thursday at the Cannes Film Festival, where his finance 
drama "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" is premiering. "There were some really 
wild stunts in it, but the heart was gone." 




"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" was a runaway commercial success but was 
drubbed by critics. 

Michael Bay returns for the third time as director of the science-fiction 
franchise, which centers on dueling races of giant robots that bring their war 
to Earth. The next movie will have what the last one lacked — a sense of human 
consequences, LaBeouf said. 




On the second movie, "we got lost. We tried to get bigger. It's what happens to 
sequels. It's like, how do you top the first one? You've got to go bigger," 
LaBeouf said. "Mike went so big that it became too big, and I think you lost 
the anchor of the movie. ... You lost a bit of the relationships. Unless you 
have those relationships, then the movie doesn't matter. Then it's just a bunch 
of robots fighting each other." 

With "Transformers 3," the toll of the robot war will be grave for our planet, 
LaBeouf said. 




"There's going to be a lot of death, human death. This time, they're targeting 
humans," LaBeouf said. "It's going to be the craziest action movie ever made, 
or we failed." 




-- 
"If all the world's a stage and we are merely players, who the bloody hell 
wrote the script?" -- Charles E Grant 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik 










-- 
Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! 
Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ 









-- 
Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! 
Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ 



 S

Reply via email to