Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen Trailer & Discussion *Possible Spoiler Orgy*

Originally posted by dadudemon
No. The car wouldn't have been traveling fast enough for any of that to happen.

Also, I think they buckled up. After they got Sam back in, I could have sworn that at least Sam had a buckled up fest. I mentioned this earlier.

Besides, it's hollywood. Even the cult classic, Resivoir Dogs, has so many ****-ups similar to or worse than the front end not crumpling.

That last point is correct. I was wondering the same thing in the theater, when I saw it. I think one of us needs to sign into IMDB and write that into the goofs section.

Well all of it was, thank you, Eugene. 😛

Yes.......maybe their error then.... They ****ed up some physics! Wow! Shock! 😛 Like you say...hollywood. Not an excuse though.

Its not that great a movie to warrant that level of scrutiny in the first place, its worse when you actually do subject a flaky movie in the hope of somehow proving it likely, the like you find discrepancies and it just pisses further on the enjoyment that could otherwise still be had.
One of the times they werent buckeled. It may have been the lampost thing. (And the airbags failed then but worked inthe carfall?)
Its not a movie that stands up to scrutiny at any level other than in "Brain off" mode, basically.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Well all of it was, thank you, Eugene. 😛

lulz

Who's Eugene? (I'm missing the movie reference.)

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Yes.......maybe their error then.... They ****ed up some physics! Wow! Shock! 😛 Like you say...hollywood. Not an excuse though.

I would say it's a rather good excuse, considering:

1. The vast majority of movie watchers will not criticize that portion of the film.

2. This type of thing occurs quite often in Hollywood, making it acceptable by their own professional standards.

3. It wouldn't have made a difference as far as the car's inhabitants were concerned.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Its not that great a movie to warrant that level of scrutiny in the first place,

No-no, it really is. MILLIONS upon MILLIONS loved the film. I'd say millions will look at the IMDB article.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
its worse when you actually do subject a flaky movie in the hope of somehow proving it likely, the like you find discrepancies and it just pisses further on the enjoyment that could otherwise still be had.

What?

I didn't really understand what you were trying to say here.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
One of the times they werent buckeled. It may have been the lampost thing. (And the airbags failed then but worked inthe carfall?)

Wait...Wait. I've got it now. They didn't go off because it wasn't that hard of a collision. The front end barely crumpled. 😆

I've been in a wreck before because some drunk illegals drove out in front of me when the roads were still icy from some snowfull. The front right side got some fair damage. It was worse than what we saw in the film when they crashed into the lamp post.

However, my airbag didn't go off, and I was perfectly fine. 🙂

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Its not a movie that stands up to scrutiny at any level other than in "Brain off" mode, basically.

No, it really does. I've proven time and time again that it really does. Almost every point that people have brought up, I have shown them why the point is either wrong because they didn't remember something else from the film, or was just one perspective out of a couple.

Originally posted by stickman618
you are my new heronotworthy

😆 😆 😆

Thanks, dude.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Slightly off as it had some momentum and landed on its top, then Star Scream, I think, cut the car in half.

Originally posted by dadudemon
lulz

Who's Eugene? (I'm missing the movie reference.)

I would say it's a rather good excuse, considering:

1. The vast majority of movie watchers will not criticize that portion of the film.

2. This type of thing occurs quite often in Hollywood, making it acceptable by their own professional standards.

3. It wouldn't have made a difference as far as the car's inhabitants were concerned.

No-no, it really is. MILLIONS upon MILLIONS loved the film. I'd say millions will look at the IMDB article.

What?

I didn't really understand what you were trying to say here.

Wait...Wait. I've got it now. They didn't go off because it wasn't that hard of a collision. The front end barely crumpled. 😆

I've been in a wreck before because some drunk illegals drove out in front of me when the roads were still icy from some snowfull. The front right side got some fair damage. It was worse than what we saw in the film when they crashed into the lamp post.

However, my airbag didn't go off, and I was perfectly fine. 🙂

No, it really does. I've proven time and time again that it really does. Almost every point that people have brought up, I have shown them why the point is either wrong because they didn't remember something else from the film, or was just one perspective out of a couple.

You panicked defense of this as one of the best movies ever is the shark jumping.

Think what you like of the movie, box office means nothing in terms of assessing the true greatness of a film..

I think that once youve calmed down about this (in 3 yrs) we'll be ableto partake in a non-MB fanboyic way,and there will be a conversation rather than lots of "Its the greatest, and I'll start trying to talking down to you if you disagree." stuff, as you will then be able to see the film objectively.

And MILIIONS and MILLIONS didnt like it.

6.4 on IMDB.

Now check Empire strikes back, Godfather II and other actual great films.

A few people I know casually enjoyed the film, along with me. It was enjoyable, I don't consider my friends and I MB fanboys, I just loved the action sequences and never get led by movie reviews or ticket sales. I like to be surprised or disappointed when I see a movie.

I don't think you can really have "actually great" creative projects. Actual implies there's some kind of concrete criteria and since the only judgment is opinions..

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Attack of the nerds, Grease, etc.
(Anything where the Eugene in question is a nerd, basically)

Oh. Yeah, I get it now.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
You panicked defense of this as one of the best movies ever is the shark jumping.

WHAAAAT??!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Think what you like of the movie, box office means nothing in terms of assessing the true greatness of a film..

In your opinion. However, that's exactly what the majority of Hollywood does not think. You have more of an "indy" type of mind.

My opinion is a combination of both big numbers and quality everything. (Effects, story, character development, etc.)

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I think that once youve calmed down about this (in 3 yrs) we'll be ableto partake in a non-MB fanboyic way,and there will be a conversation rather than lots of "Its the greatest, and I'll start trying to talking down to you if you disagree." stuff, as you will then be able to see the film objectively.

You a**hole. 😐

*punches in the taint*

You could be right; but, I highly doubt it. 😄

I am faily sure that I will still keep it at an 8 for the rest of my life. I still have Hulk as a 9. (a five star on netflix)

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
And MILIIONS and MILLIONS didnt like it.

6.4 on IMDB.

That's better than average, newb. And it's only 48,776 votes. You rated it above average, as well. 😐

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Now check Empire strikes back, Godfather II and other actual great films.

No need to. Those are excellent films not great films. Get it right. lol

Originally posted by dadudemon
No need to. Those are excellent films not great films. Get it right. lol

excellent? you mean UBER!!!!!!

Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh. Yeah, I get it now.

WHAAAAT??!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?

In your opinion. However, that's exactly what the majority of Hollywood does not think. You have more of an "indy" type of mind.

My opinion is a combination of both big numbers and quality everything. (Effects, story, character development, etc.)

You a**hole. 😐

*punches in the taint*

You could be right; but, I highly doubt it. 😄

I am faily sure that I will still keep it at an 8 for the rest of my life. I still have Hulk as a 9. (a five star on netflix)

That's better than average, newb. And it's only 48,776 votes. You rated it above average, as well. 😐

No need to. Those are excellent films not great films. Get it right. lol

Great IS excellent in my book. Semantics, perhaps...? 🙂

I did think that it was above average effects wise.

But Ive just seen Watchmen.

So TFs, rightly, is relegated to average now.

i gave this movie a 5/10

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Great IS excellent in my book. Semantics, perhaps...? 🙂

Great is not excellent. Excellent is like...bigger than excellent.

I'm sure polls given to English speakers would agree.

But, yes, semantics. I already put up my 10 point scale for you and on my scale, excellent ranks above great.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I did think that it was above average effects wise.

But you rated it a 6, which is an overall, above average.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
But Ive just seen Watchmen.

So TFs, rightly, is relegated to average now.

I have a question....did you like Watchmen? Do not pay attention to what others have said, good or bad....what is YOUR personal take on Watchmen?

I rarely ever pay attention to others, when formulating my own opinion. What a strange thing to say.

And how do you mean...as a concept overall..? Of the graphic novel, Or what did I think of the movie...?

Yes, the above average graphics alone do not a great movie make.
So naturally the 6 is the result of the negative aspects weight dragging down the score. There is no contradiction.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I rarely ever pay attention to others, when formulating my own opinion. What a strange thing to say.

Since we are talking about relative terms and the common uses of those terms, I'd think it would be rather important to pay attention, wouldn't you?

But nice try on the strawman. I might have fallen for it on another day...not.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
And how do you mean...as a concept overall..? Of the graphic novel, Or what did I think of the movie...?

Yes. What do you think of the damn movie.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Yes, the above average graphics alone do not a great movie make.
So naturally the 6 is the result of the negative aspects weight dragging down the score. There is no contradiction.

So what things, other than the effects, raised it to be a 6? If it wasn't the effects....what could it possibly be?

Strawman..?
lolz Lay off the drugs. They aren't doing you any good. 😛
(I think you werejust looking to see that wherever you looked.)
I was paying attention, you knob.
I can always just ignore you, if you want to see what Im like when I really arent paying attention...

I damn well thought it was a damned good attempt to fit a damned 6-7 hour movie into 2 and a three quarter hour running time.
Mostly damned amazing. But I think that aspects are heavy handedly dealt with. Ozzymandias seemed a bit over painted toward the end villainousness wise, and much of the damn plot depth is sacrificed.

Damnit! Jim! Im a doctor, not a man of straw!

Youre not getting it. I think the effects were just that damned good that along with a few fight sequences I liked, to garner the 6.

If the plot and characterisation worked as well as they did, we'd be talking a damn ten.
But it wasn't so we're not.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Strawman..?

Yes. Strawman.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
lolz Lay off the drugs. They aren't doing you any good. 😛
(I think you werejust looking to see that wherever you looked.)
I was paying attention, you knob.
I can always just ignore you, if you want to see what Im like when I really arent paying attention...

No. You've got it backwards. I'm referring to MYSELF "paying attention", meaning, you can pull off a strawman argument and expect it to go over my head. My question is to bring to your attention that your strawman argument did not go over my head and that I AM paying attention.

Leave it to you to interpret something in as negative of a way a possible.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I damn well thought it was a damned good attempt to fit a damned 6-7 hour movie into 2 and a three quarter hour running time.
Mostly damned amazing. But I think that aspects are heavy handedly dealt with. Ozzymandias seemed a bit over painted toward the end villainousness wise, and much of the damn plot depth is sacrificed.

Cool.

I actually liked the damn movie more than I liked the damn comic.

I like the story better and all of the stuff they cut out.

It was REALLY nice seeing the movie hit the big screen and the personalities of the characters seemed even more real and diverse than what I had imagined...which should always be the case. I don't know if you've noticed, but whenever I read a book, all of the characters have this "personality" essence from the writer. You can tell they all come from the same author. They are just different flavors of the same person...I really don't know how to describe it.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Damnit! Jim! Im a doctor, not a man of straw!

😆

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Youre not getting it. I think the effects were just that damned good that along with a few fight sequences I liked, to garner the 6.

No, I'm not getting it. I could have sworn you said the effects were above average...which would be a 6. So how did a 6 in effects net you an average of 6?

Could it be that you gave the effects a 9 and the story a 4 and the character development a 5? (Averages out to 6)

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
If the plot and characterisation worked as well as they did, we'd be talking a damn ten.
But it wasn't so we're not.

Understand. I thought the movie could have done better, which is why I gave it a 7-8, originally. Once I saw it a second time, I realized that there was less plot holes.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Strawman..?

Yes. Strawman.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
lolz Lay off the drugs. They aren't doing you any good. 😛
(I think you werejust looking to see that wherever you looked.)
I was paying attention, you knob.
I can always just ignore you, if you want to see what Im like when I really arent paying attention...

No. You've got it backwards. I'm referring to MYSELF "paying attention", meaning, you can pull off a strawman argument and expect it to go over my head. My question is to bring to your attention that your strawman argument did not go over my head and that I AM paying attention.

Leave it to you to interpret something in as negative of a way a possible.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I damn well thought it was a damned good attempt to fit a damned 6-7 hour movie into 2 and a three quarter hour running time.
Mostly damned amazing. But I think that aspects are heavy handedly dealt with. Ozzymandias seemed a bit over painted toward the end villainousness wise, and much of the damn plot depth is sacrificed.

Cool.

I actually liked the damn movie more than I liked the damn comic.

I like the story better and all of the stuff they cut out.

It was REALLY nice seeing the movie hit the big screen and the personalities of the characters seemed even more real and diverse than what I had imagined...which should always be the case. I don't know if you've noticed, but whenever I read a book, all of the characters have this "personality" essence from the writer. You can tell they all come from the same author. They are just different flavors of the same person...I really don't know how to describe it.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Damnit! Jim! Im a doctor, not a man of straw!

😆

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Youre not getting it. I think the effects were just that damned good that along with a few fight sequences I liked, to garner the 6.

No, I'm not getting it. I could have sworn you said the effects were above average...which would be a 6. So how did a 6 in effects net you an average of 6?

Could it be that you gave the effects a 9 and the story a 4 and the character development a 5? (Averages out to 6)

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
If the plot and characterisation worked as well as they did, we'd be talking a damn ten.
But it wasn't so we're not.

Understand. I thought the movie could have done better, which is why I gave it a 7-8, originally. Once I saw it a second time, I realized that there was less plot holes.

I regard it like a 9 on pure visual spectacle, reducing it by 3 to 6.

Yeah I know what you mean, in general with the "Different facets of the writer" thing, but the distinct difference in the characters in this were a strength of the series.

Well, you are a self professed troll....It pays to interpret such a preempitve debating position as meaning the negative, as usually it is. 😛

Understand? Its hard to when one minute you say that, then in other instances you used the descriptives "Great" and "Excellent" to describe it.

Films that could have been so much better dont get that title with me.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I regard it like a 9 on pure visual spectacle, reducing it by 3 to 6.

Cool. Yeah. So I was right in my master estimation! Mwahahaha. MWhahaha. Beware women of whom age guessing is taboo. MWAHAHHAHAHAHAA!

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Yeah I know what you mean, in general with the "Different facets of the writer" thing, but the distinct difference in the characters in this were a strength of the series.

Really? I felt a little different about it. The characters having that "uniform personality" was not nearly as bad as other stories, such as the Harry Potter books. It seems like every character in those books have anger management problems and all of them have shouting problems.

And, I'm glad someone else out there knows what I'm talking about.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Well, you are a self professed troll....It pays to interpret such a preempitve debating position as meaning the negative, as usually it is. 😛

I hope you're joking about that troll thing. You are, right? 😐

If you're referring to that troll Genesis putting up a PM of me trying to trick him into admitting he was a troll, then, no, that was not me confessing to be a troll at all. That was me trying to trick him into admitting he was a troll so I could get him banned. He was trolling myself, Mairuzu, Robtar, Blax Hydralisk, and nemebro, in a movie thread, so I figured I'd help the mods by getting him to admit he was a troll by posing as a troll and pretending that I wanted to help him troll. It didn't work and it almost back fired on me because the mod looking at what I was doing thought it was silly and borederline backseat modding. (Which is probably true...but I was getting tired of the troll and thought I'd speed the process up.)

And, yes, I can see what you mean. I'm not direct in my posts all of the time and I have setup world trraps in the past. But I usually try to stay direct with you.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Understand? Its hard to when one minute you say that, then in other instances you used the descriptives "Great" and "Excellent" to describe it.

Films that could have been so much better dont get that title with me.

I was supposed to read, "I understand." I'm not sure what happened there. Bare with me; sometimes, I'm an idiot.

One thing I do a lot is typing "and" when I mean just to type "an." I don't know why I do it, and it's out of habit. I HATE it when I do that, though.

Fair enough. Nobodys perfect.