everybody I know fukk it. Even me
Wait what, nikkas don't like like the transformers?
Guess it's 1 of those Internet things
Um Transofrmers is a BILLION dollar industry...and was one LONG before Michael Bay got into the business of fukkin up their movies
LOL@ anyone giving Michael Bay credit for the movie selling.
"Transformers" (i.e. the cartoon, the Toys, video games, etc) sold the film; they had nearly 30 years of successful advertising through those mediums before the movie was even thought of...
Anyone who had a lobotomy could have sold that film.
Pacific Rim is not Billion dollar industry....that's not a worthy comparison by any stretch.
GI Joe for example made 300 milli on their first film (dope movie btw) and their second movie sold 400 mill (garbage)...that's over 700 mill in two films...we gonna start giving credit to Michael Sommers and John Chu for having a high gross for those films?
The Transformers franchise wasn't Star Wars before the films, it was a niche franchise, the cinema does not consist of Transformers fans, in order for a film to be successful you have to sell the product, Bay did that in the teaser trailer to the first film(sold the concept of them transforming, sold their looks how they arrive, etc), then gave the audience a human element in the second(the whole stuff with Shia getting his first car, Fox being his girlfriend, his relationship with Bumblebee) with some action and mystery sprinkled in, if you look at both trailers they revolve around selling the concept of The Transformers because people will not just go and watch robots fighting each other, that's why Pacific Rim flopped in just about every market. The first GI:Joe film flopped that's why they semi-rebooted it in the second and got rid of all the actors from the first bar Tatum, they also reduced the budget by $40M. If it was about the "brand" then why did Dungeons and Dragons flop?, why did Battleship flop?, why did GI: Joe flop?, why did Bratz flop? but Transformers succeed under Bay .
Take the L.
. It certainly WAS NOT the story line nor was anyone stacking the movie lines to see the stellar acting of Megan Fox and and some deep relationship between Bumble Bee and whoever else. The very idea is so backwards and insulting that I don't know how much more I can go on about this with someone who as absolutely no idea of what they are talking about. Now that I think about the ridiculousness of your opinion , maybe it's just the 90s babies who found this so entertaining because they were infants when it came out? 
Wrong. It was a billion dollar industry before the films. The toys, the cartoons,the comics the games and other items were a part of mainstream popular culture and a streamlined form of advertising that successfully lasted nearly 25 years before the films were even "conceptualized." You minimizing the significance of that by calling it a "niche" culture is nonsense. Anyone born BEFORE 1990 would know that
For some odd reason, your brain has it minced that the "concept of the Transformers" was sold and marketed on the leg work of Michael Bay (also nonsense). And YES anyone would have seen the movie to "watch robots fighting each other" that's basically what the premise of any action film duh! A drunk monkey on a tricycle with one arm could have directed and written a story just as compelling as anything Bay did
And NO..let's go over this again, GI Joe didn't "flop", it grossed over 300 mill on the first film, and 400 mill on the second film leading to over 700 mill in total sales. There WILL be a 3rd film and it's pretty safe to say that the film will consistently rake in enough to pass the 1 Billi threshold. But I guess according to your logic directors Stephan Sommers and Jon Chu were the leading reasons of their success; not the inadvertant marketing campaign of the GI Joe industry that precluded it for the past 30 years.
The Smurfs 1& 2 raked in over 800 milli (combined); Garfield 1& 2 raked in over 400 milli combined; Casper raked in 300 milli; Scooby Doo sold over 500 milli combined, and Yogi Bear did over 200 milli
I guess according to your birdbrained logic, it was the brilliance and hard work of it's directors that made those films gross inordinate amounts of revenue...and not the history and the name brand of the product itself, right?
@ the room, and this is the poster (Jazzy B) that yall sent to defend this? LOL.
You've got to be the dumbest poster here by far..Wrong. It was a billion dollar industry before the films. The toys, the cartoons,the comics the games and other items were a part of mainstream popular culture and a streamlined form of advertising that successfully lasted nearly 25 years before the films were even "conceptualized." You minimizing the significance of that by calling it a "niche" culture is nonsense. Anyone born BEFORE 1990 would know that
For some odd reason, your brain has it minced that the "concept of the Transformers" was sold and marketed on the leg work of Michael Bay (also nonsense). And YES anyone would have seen the movie to "watch robots fighting each other" that's basically what the premise of any action film duh! A drunk monkey on a tricycle with one arm could have directed and written a story just as compelling as anything Bay did
All of my nikkas who grew up on G1 Transformers thought the movie was just a bunch of tin foil and lasers
You quite clearly don't know films are made, marketed and why others succeed over the others, not even at the most basic level. This statement "And YES anyone would have seen the movie to "watch robots fighting each other" that's basically what the premise of any action film" says it all, you've nonsensically stated this despite me telling you that Pacific Rim, a movie that only presented "robots(mechs) fighting" in it's first 3 trailers and subsequent promotional material until the poor tracking numbers came in as people weren't interested, flopped in almost every market bar about 2. But yes the audience are only going for the action.
, instead of having a percentage drop like most films do in their second week of release, because that clearly shows that people went back to watch it again. Why wasn't it front loaded?.
Take the L.
Wrong. It was a billion dollar industry before the films. The toys, the cartoons,the comics the games and other items were a part of mainstream popular culture and a streamlined form of advertising that successfully lasted nearly 25 years before the films were even "conceptualized." You minimizing the significance of that by calling it a "niche" culture is nonsense. Anyone born BEFORE 1990 would know that
For some odd reason, your brain has it minced that the "concept of the Transformers" was sold and marketed on the leg work of Michael Bay (also nonsense). And YES anyone would have seen the movie to "watch robots fighting each other" that's basically what the premise of any action film duh! A drunk monkey on a tricycle with one arm could have directed and written a story just as compelling as anything Bay did
All of my nikkas who grew up on G1 Transformers thought the movie was just a bunch of tin foil and lasers
And NO..let's go over this again, GI Joe didn't "flop", it grossed over 300 mill on the first film, and 400 mill on the second film leading to over 700 mill in total sales. There WILL be a 3rd film and it's pretty safe to say that the film will consistently rake in enough to pass the 1 Billi threshold. But I guess according to your logic directors Stephan Sommers and Jon Chu were the leading reasons of their success; not the inadvertant marketing campaign of the GI Joe industry that precluded it for the past 30 years.
The Smurfs 1& 2 raked in over 800 milli (combined); Garfield 1& 2 raked in over 400 milli combined; Casper raked in 300 milli; Scooby Doo sold over 500 milli combined, and Yogi Bear did over 200 milli
I guess according to your birdbrained logic, it was the brilliance and hard work of it's directors "selling the concept of" those films that made those movies gross inordinate amounts of revenue...and not the history and the name brand of the product itself, right?
@ the room, and this is the poster (Jazzy B) that yall sent to defend this? LOL.
You keep saying that GI:Joe The Rise of Cobra didn't flop and that it did $300M despite it's budget being a whopping $175M discounting marketing costs. If it didn't flop why wasn't the 99% of the main cast from the former retained, why was it semi-rebooted?, why did it go from "kiddie" and over the top to "gritty" and "dark", why was the budget slashed from $175M to around $130M, why so many drastic changes if it was a success?, do you want to know the answer? don't worry i'll give you it, it flopped. But yes keep saying that it was a success despite the film barely breaking even
http://web.archive.org/web/20070713035101/http://www.latinoreview.com/news.php?id=1501
You see these movies don't just consist of fanboys, toy collectors or just preadolescent boys, in order to be successful and justify their large budgets, they need to appeal to a broad and wide range of people, from adults, elderly, teens, young kids, males, females etc(that's why these movies are almost never above PG-13) to do this, one of the thing you need to present is a storyline that has a human element as you know it can't just be for Adrenaline junkies, you need to tell a story. The first Transformers film appealed to young girls through the hinted romance in the trailer along with the presence of young female character in fox , the film appealed to adults through it's blatant homage to E.T. a movie that just about everyone has seen and the story, boys/teen Shia's first car story, interaction with The Transformers, action etc. I bet that you didn't even know that Transformers 2 audience was 46% female. There's a reason why Shia and Fox were thrown into "big" roles post the first film.
"It certainly WAS NOT the story line nor was anyone stacking the movie lines to see the stellar acting of Megan Fox and and some deep relationship between Bumble Bee and whoever else."
Then why did the film have a 20%+ increase in it's second week
It's funny that you brought up G1, because it links in well with my point about Bay successfully selling the concept. Notice how the live action Transformers barely look like their mega block G1 counterparts and are instead "alien" in design, with overtly humanoid features, to get them to emote, you see how their designs are "grounded" we don't have Megatron turning into a gun and being fired by another deception but instead have the Decepticons as military/enforcement vehicles and presented them as a legitimate threat to the world to the audience, you see how The Transfomers used protoforms to travel, you see how their parts move into place when they transform, how soldiers fought against The Decepticons, how Transformers weren't "kiddie" etc that's how Bay sold the concept.
You see I'm sure if you were in charge you would have had a direct adaptation of the 80's toons with the Transfomers looking as silly as The Hulk did in the 2003 film, with their outdated designs with no human element whatsoever which would have seen it flop hard.
Just take the L.
i can't believe there's so many dudes in here that actually like that fakkit. And i don't give a fukk if his movies make money that doesn't mean they're good. They are shyt. Deal with it.
!n the og comic that was leo got taken out.... shredder gave h!s ass that work personally then threw h!m !nto apr!ls w!ndow l!ke a b!tch.... when they went to the ranch raph was the v!g!lant guard!an & was casey joes best fr!end.... so much sh!t raph did they rewr!te to the other turtles...You have to understand what a Crumpet' is before you understand Crickett'
Ralph, a.k.a Raphael the Magnificent from the Streets. The foot were wise to take him out first, for he would be the last to die for his brethren.
!
Yeah it's real, from Power Rangers In Space. Episode's titled "Shell Shocked" :tmntskip:
You
as if anyone cares what YOU think is "dumb" I've logically embarrassed you throughout this "discussion"...I'm even impressed that I've gone this far to entertain it..You keep saying that GI:Joe The Rise of Cobra didn't flop and that it did $300M despite it's budget being a whopping $175M discounting marketing costs. If it didn't flop why wasn't the 99% of the main cast from the former retained, why was it semi-rebooted?, why did it go from "kiddie" and over the top to "gritty" and "dark", why was the budget slashed from $175M to around $130M, why so many drastic changes if it was a success?, do you want to know the answer? don't worry i'll give you it, it flopped. But yes keep saying that it was a success despite the film barely breaking even
...these 90s babies
http://web.archive.org/web/20070713035101/http://www.latinoreview.com/news.php?id=1501
Even he will tell you that himself."It certainly WAS NOT the story line nor was anyone stacking the movie lines to see the stellar acting of Megan Fox and and some deep relationship between Bumble Bee and whoever else."
Then why did the film have a 20%+ increase in it's second week
You can point to numbers all DAY and I'll point right along with you that the "Transformers" success over the past 25 years is what makes the film popular. I myself believe that the movies are hot garbage, But i will go to see the 4th one because I am a fan of the Transformers franchise.
