Michael Bay can suck a fat one.Follow

Micheal Bay will never have the same reverence for the Ninja Turtle canon as Vanilla Ice's Ninja rap.

Eastman seems to like it, while Laird seems to disagree.

Someone always has to go and ruin a good thing.

Well there is still hope that someone will get it right (the toys for the new toon look awesome, that makes me happy).

Well, it could be "Martian."

I won't see it, even a bootleg or torrent, but I had dismissed the movie all together when I found out Bay was attached to the project. More details is just more reasons I feel justified in my decision.

Even on a practical level, I'm not sure I get the move.

The whole allure of movies like this is supposed to be the nostalgia of it all. That was the initial hook of Transformers, IIRC (before it simply became spectacle). Nostalgia, at the very least, is how they drive initial interest in the project.

You don't get that boost if you change one of the main features of the story. I don't remember a ton about TMNT, but as I recall it, the mutation part wasn't just their origin, but played a major role in their characters and was a prevailing theme. This seems like a sizeable change, actually.

I guess outer-space turtles aliens provides a quicker origin. Rather than have to plausibly explain (even in movie terms) radioactive goo that turns terrapins in humanoids capable of being trained in the martial arts by a rodent who also became a humanoid and was previously trained in the martial arts (or self trained by watching a human as I recall)*, you just say "BAM! Alien turtles! Moving on..."


*Looking back, "mutant rat-man who was never formally trained but totally saw a guy do some kung-fu before back in his rat-rat days" wouldn't be my first choice for trainer in the martial arts.

80s/90s cartoon he was a human martial artist turned rat. Comics/movie he was a rat owned by a martial artist turned human.

Also, last cartoon had Shredder/Krang hybrid.

Edited, Mar 23rd 2012 12:17pm by lolgaxe

Ahhhhhhh yeah for me the cartoons are my primary source. That explains it.

Still doesn't mean an alien is any better.

What industry is that? The Hollywood sci-fi movie industry? Didn't know it was dying. Didn't know Michael Bay was considered a bad director, either. When I think of bad directors, I think of Uwe Boll. When I think of Michael Bay, I think of Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor and Transformers.

Nerd rage over the Transformers lore aside, what was so bad about those movies that you consider the director poisonous?

I didn't know who Uwe Boll was until after I'd played BloodRayne and went to rent the movie.

This mostly.

An action/sci-fi movie where the main focus is on the effects? Oh, the blasphemy! We need more psychological sci-fi thrillers taking place inside spaceships. They tend to be popular.

Guys, this smells a lot like nerd rage to me. I get that Michael Bay sort of ****** up the lore with his adaptation of Transformers, but that's why they call it an adaptation. Imagine how unbelievably cheesy and confusing a live action movie of Transformers would be to the average movie-goer if it followed the lore to the letter? I mean, how would you even go about condensing decades worth of lore into one, two or three movies?

I think he did an excellent job of adapting the franchise to the live action scene. He may have screwed up decades of lore in the process, but considering the three first movies made a $2 billion profit, I'm guessing people didn't mind it too much. And Roger Ebert may disagree with me here, but most people watch action/sci-fi movies for the action and the sci-fi, not the plot. Look at Avatar. Pocahontas in space and it still made a profit in the billions.