Slashdot Mirror
Independence Day for Transformers Live Action
An anonymous reader writes "Transformers, the long-planned, live-action movie based on the robot-morphing cartoon, comic and toy franchise, will roll into theaters July 4, 2007, DreamWorks and Paramount Pictures announced Wednesday.
Michael Bay (The Island, The Rock) will direct;
Steven Spielberg will executive produce.
"
They've already got their homepage set up.
Homepage
-FL
For those who are curious about what "live" action might look like for a robot movie, start here with an intro to the Citroen commercial, and then get the commercial here.
With Spider-Man 3 (May 2007) and the Transformers (July 2007) coming out in the same summer, it looks like I'll be spending a lot of time in the theatre in 2007!
libertarianswag.com
You mean, of course, another live-action He-Man movie.
Maaaaan was it terrible.
If Dreamworks is involved with a movie, it is highly likely that Steven Spielberg will be an executive producer of it.
mbbac
And NEWSFLASH, that 56k modem ain't 56k, I have looked at over a dozen dial-ups, and the best I EVER saw was 8k a second, most are like 4k or 5k a second. If a 56K modem ever gave a consistant 35k a second, broadband never would have caught on like it did.
That is 56 kilobits per second, not 56 kilobytes. In kilobytes, a 56k modem should be able to do up to 7 kilobytes per second without compression.
Wow. This is just for your benefit. A 56k modem can and will give 56k (Actually I believe they're limited to 53k, but close enough.). The problem you are having is the inability to differentiate between the following two symbols: k K
A 56k modem is 56k (56 kilobits). The number you see on your download is 5K (5 kilobytes). One byte is eight bits. So, with a little basic math, 56k = 7K. So 5K is actually pretty good, and your 8K is impossible.
If it's not on fire, it's a software problem.
Armada was not "true to the old one" because it WASN'T the old one. It was a whole new series, set in its own continuity. Megatron was the big green tank leading the Decepticons, until he got "powered up" and turned into a big white tank. Also, Armada was preceded by Robots in Disguise (which would be the crappy 90s version you're thinking of), which was also set in its own little universe. Energon followed Armada, and was a direct "sequel" series. Both of them sucked, although Energon was by far the worse of the two. Now we have Transformers: Cybertron, which is a lot better than the previous three. The green combiner was Devastator, and was composed of 6 smaller robots. I believe Predaking was also a 6-bot combiner, and the ones who followed were 5-bots. The robot who replaced Optimus Prime was Hot Rod, who became Rodimus Prime after he took the Matrix from Galvatron and opened it during the climactic battle inside Unicron. He's not in the newer series because, again, they are not part of that continuity. Oh, and the live-action movie is (loosely) based on the 1980s Generation 1 version.
Come hear me sing!
Friend, I don't know how to break this to you, but don't see these cartoons on rerun. Keep your memories alive. They were great when we were kids, but anything with a computer in it was too. If you were forced to watch an entire episode of any of those old series, you'd need a huge shot of nostalgia to keep you from impaling yourself on your TV remote just to end the pain. Nostalgia and childhood inexperience are the two things that make those cartoons great (with the possible exception of Robotech, which I was not privvy to). Those old TV shows made Star Wars (insert your least favorite number, likely "I") sound like it had good writing.
Transformers: The Movie was the only film I have cried in. I'm nearly 30 and still to this day, when I play the Transformers sountrack (you're a fan, so you have it, too, right?), I can't help but get chills and a tear in my eye when Optimus goes to the bright UPS in the sky.
There are several new series. Not all of them have the cliche, "the world is always reset to the zero state at the end of the show so you can see it in any order". Megatron was indeed changed, as were all the characters. They went with the recent CGI fad, which presented a completely different style. Arguably, they had to mix up the characters some because the graphics were so different.
Personally, I'm learning that some remakes are acceptable. I don't know about Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and any version of A New Hope where Han doesn't shoot first is blasphemy, but the new Battlestar Galactica is clearly its own work inspired by the original. Take it beyond video for a minute, and I enjoy Leaving on a Jet Plane by either Chantel Creviazuk or Me First and the Gimme Gimmes, but not John Denver or Peter, Paul and Mary. Additionally, I can't stand Prince, but I enjoy Darling Nikki by the Foo Fighters.
I think you mean Hot Rod. Wikipedia has a better explanation than I can.
For the love of God, your only hope of success is to make this movie take place in the 80s.
The screenplay is being co-written by the moron who brought us the bombs "The Core" and "Catwoman", so my guess is that John Rogers will be the one shitting all over our childhoods, and Michael Bay will simply be sculpting it into offensive shapes and taking pictures of the result.
Does that mean we have to get Marty Kudelka to play Jazz, too?
(For anyone looking confused right now, Marty is Justin Timberlake's choreographer, and did the motion capture for the Citroen ad. Probably not the fantastic spoof though, I'm guessing...)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.