CBR: SPINOFF: Will Audiences Believe "Transformers 3" Is Better Than TF2?

[CBR News]

Paramount is so confident that Transformers 3 is better than the (terrible) second movie that they're releasing it early. But, SPINOFF asks, will anyone really believe them?


Full article here (http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=32433).

[Arvandor]

Well it couldn't be much worse, could it?

[DarkWarriorBlake]

It has a worse main girl, I know that. Her face is ridiculous distracting and not in a good way.

[Meadow]

There is nothing on this planet that could convince me to see this film. It's been three years and I still haven't gotten over the last one. It was so fucking terrible it was practically a method of torture.

[titanfan]

Tons of people kept seeing it even after the HORRID reviews TF2 got, so why wouldn't we go see it again?

There are tons of people (like me) who could care less about the plot, I just want to see cool robots blow each other up!!!

[shamone]

I will see despite my misgivings. Transformers has a hold on me no matter how much bay craps on them. Again the trailers look good. The new actress has awful accent, distracting look and bad acting. Hope her role is limited

[Sighphi]

I dont know, the story seems stupid.

From the trailer it seems that there are a bunch of Decepticons on the moon, the US knew it but never said anything, and the Autobots werent able to tell that there were there this whole time. By this time the Autobots should have built Teletran I and this stuff shouldn't have happened.

Hell, the story should have been that THEY found the dormant Decepticons and they try to turn then into good guys. It's all good for a while but then some wake up and go back to being evil and a new war starts. At the end the humans get pissed and tell the Autobots to GTHO and the Autobots are all like, "But who is going to protect you?" And Section 8 or whatever their name is, is like "WE ARE!!!" And they pop out with a bunch of human created Autobots loyal to the U.S. THE END!

And that leads to Transformers 4: Manifest Destiny.
Where the U.S. goes to Cybertron to take stuff for the safety of the planet and to fight them over there so we dont have to fight them over here. So it's Cybertronian Transformers VS Earthican Transformers.

Copyright ME!
Dont steal it Michael BAY!!!

[DarkWarriorBlake]

I dont know, the story seems stupid.

From the trailer it seems that there are a bunch of Decepticons on the moon, the US knew it but never said anything, and the Autobots werent able to tell that there were there this whole time. By this time the Autobots should have built Teletran I and this stuff shouldn't have happened.

Hell, the story should have been that THEY found the dormant Decepticons and they try to turn then into good guys. It's all good for a while but then some wake up and go back to being evil and a new war starts. At the end the humans get pissed and tell the Autobots to GTHO and the Autobots are all like, "But who is going to protect you?" And Section 8 or whatever their name is, is like "WE ARE!!!" And they pop out with a bunch of human created Autobots loyal to the U.S. THE END!

And that leads to Transformers 4: Manifest Destiny.
Where the U.S. goes to Cybertron to take stuff for the safety of the planet and to fight them over there so we dont have to fight them over here. So it's Cybertronian Transformers VS Earthican Transformers.

Copyright ME!
Dont steal it Michael BAY!!!

Your plot here is longer than the script for T3.

It leaked a while ago, it just read: "Explosion"

[kalorama]

The real question is "Will they care?"

[Alex]

the actual questions is, do audiences actually care about the quality of their big action flick.
Evidence would suggest no.

[GRANT!]

I think it will do fine. People LOVED THE last one despite the fact it's terrible. Just like Pirates will do well even though the last two were terrible.

[1505627]

honestly, i don't get the hate for TF2. it succeeds at what it's trying to be, that being an awesome action movie

[kmeyers]

Triumph: "No no, I'm sorry, I'm very sorry, the correct answer is 'Who gives a shit?"

[titanfan]

the actual questions is, do audiences actually care about the quality of their big action flick.
Evidence would suggest no.


On the contrary, the quality of ACTION must be at a high level.

[supergirls_pal]

Your plot here is longer than the script for T3.

It leaked a while ago, it just read: "Explosion"

For the win.

[davidboring]

If its got more focus on the robots and less on the soldiers and comedy good guys, ill give it a chance.

[Legato]

If its got more focus on the robots and less on the soldiers and comedy good guys, ill give it a chance.

This. Give me a actual Transformers movie Bay.

[1505627]

i find the soldiers enjoyably badass.

[boyhangover]

Visiting the toy section at Wal-mart today I noticed that Megatron is now a Mac Truck. It just keeps getting worse for him.

[kalorama]

If its got more focus on the robots and less on the soldiers and comedy good guys, ill give it a chance.

It's always been my belief that pretty much every character in every Bay movie was a robot of one kind or another.

[the goddamn batman]

honestly, i don't get the hate for TF2. it succeeds at what it's trying to be, that being an awesome action movie

No it didn't.

[1505627]

No it didn't.

how so? it had great action scenes, and Great fighting scenes

[Jmacq1]

Given that what everyone seems to remember about TF2 can be summed up as "Optimus Prime kicked ass!" I'd say they'll have no problems getting people to come back for Part 3.

I thought Part 1 was decent but part 2 was horrifically bad (save for said moments of Prime kicking ass). Audiences, however, seemed to disagree, and truth be told, the trailers for part 3 look promising. I suspect TF3 is going to be "the movie to beat" this summer, though Pirates 4 and Harry Potter VIII may give it a run for its' money, with an outlying chance of Captain America sneaking in the big bucks since he looks to have a long stint on the premium screens mostly to himself at the end of the summer (Cowboys and Aliens opens the week after, but isn't in 3D or IMAX).

[Darrell D.]

Didn't TF2 make a shitload of money?
And better than TF2? It's a movie based on fucking TOYS from the 80s. And to be better than either 1 or 2 is setting the bar pretty low as it is.
Nostalgia aside, it's just a commercial blockbuster. It's hard to care one way or another.

[boyhangover]

Given that what everyone seems to remember about TF2 can be summed up as Devastator had balls.

Seriously. http://host.trivialbeing.org/up/transformers-20090211-devastator.jpg This looked awsome then we got this http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/small/0908/transformer-testicles-transformer-balls-devastator-demotivational-poster-1251055877.jpg

[The Once And Forever]

how so? it had great action scenes, and Great fighting scenes
Yeah, but to get to that you had to suffer through high parents, two seperate sex scenes for dogs, a blender with a dick-gun, DeceptaHo(Who I enjoyed, but for all the wrong reasons), Ruckus and Sambo the minibots, and, as already noted, Devastor's balls.

Also, "Punk-ass Deceptacons?" No.

[1505627]

Yeah, but to get to that you had to suffer through high parents, two seperate sex scenes for dogs, a blender with a dick-gun, DeceptaHo(Who I enjoyed, but for all the wrong reasons), Ruckus and Sambo the minibots, and, as already noted, Devastor's balls.

Also, "Punk-ass Deceptacons?" No.

I judge action movies by the action, most other elements are secondary

[Jmacq1]

Devastator had balls.


Yeah, and you know what? Most everyone in the theater laughed at it, as they were supposed to.

The hardcore fans cry and complain about it all, but the general audience laps it up. Otherwise the movie wouldn't have hit $400+ million dollars in domestic box office.

(No, I'm not using the "box office = quality" argument, just the "box office = popularity" one.)

[jesse_custer]

I judge action movies by the action, most other elements are secondary

If you want a good action movie, watch Under Siege 2. There's no doubt the movie's main concern is action.

With Transformers, it's not so clear with all the boring dialogue and exposition.

[Astonishing X-Fan]

Visiting the toy section at Wal-mart today I noticed that Megatron is now a Mac Truck. It just keeps getting worse for him.

It's a pretty sweet toy. He's basically Dr. Doom with a big gun now.

But I really wish there would be a decent leader-class(the really big ones) toy of movie Megatron. The first movie had one that was like, blue with pink and looked ugly as hell. The second movie one had a strange, gimpy left arm that looked like a skinny tree branch. So far, the third movie toyline doesn't have one announced, just leader-class Bumblebee, Sentinel Prime, and Ironhide. I hope Doom Megatron gets the leader treatment.

[kalorama]

I like some story, character and humor with my action. I can even be okay with it being poorly done as long as it's done with a light touch that, if it goes badly, can result in unintentional humor (as was the case with the first Transformers; I haven't seen the second one). My biggest complaint is when the filmmakers get too full of themselves and try to infuse what should be a thrill ride with real "substance," thinking that the story and character are the real crux of the film and that the action is there to support it. Then when they flub the "serious" stuff badly, it tends to suck the fun out of the action as well. I thought that's what Bay did in Pearl Harbor (which, obviously, should have substance; but it should not have been directed by Bay) and The Island.

[DarkWarriorBlake]

The thing with Transformers is that you just feel insulted watching it. You feel like your intelligence is being insulted with every line of dialogue and every frame of racist robot action.

[kalorama]

It's only an insult if you go in expecting something more. And, honestly, I can't imagine why anyone who's even passingly familiar with Bay's work would go in expecting that.

[jesse_custer]

I didn't expect much from either film, yet both failed to meet my low expectations.

[kalorama]

Were you expecting something more than wooden dialogue, 1-dimensional characters, and the most threadbare excuse for a plot, all surrounded by explosions and giant robots smashing stuff and beating the crap out of each other? If so, I might suggest that your expectations were still a bit too high.

[jesse_custer]

Nope, didn't expect more than that. In fact, I didn't expect as much plot as we got.

[DarkWarriorBlake]

Hell I'd settle for being able to recognise which robot I'm looking at, at any given time.

[dumbstruck]

Didn't TF2 make a shitload of money?


This. Right here. People love to dump on TF2. They also conveniently forget TF2 was the #2 (I believe) money maker of the year, despite poor reviews. Was it a great movie? No. Was it a film about giant robots fighting each other? Absolutely. That's all the TF movies have ever been about. Expecting anything more (especially a deep, cohesive plot) seems kind of ridiculous to me.

[Karl O'Neill]

This. Right here. People love to dump on TF2. They also conveniently forget TF2 was the #2 (I believe) money maker of the year, despite poor reviews. Was it a great movie? No. Was it a film about giant robots fighting each other? Absolutely. That's all the TF movies have ever been about. Expecting anything more (especially a deep, cohesive plot) seems kind of ridiculous to me.

Those gangster twins were offensive to many people.

I doubt I'll be back for part 3. We'll see. I am known to change my mind.

[Meadow]

This. Right here. People love to dump on TF2. They also conveniently forget TF2 was the #2 (I believe) money maker of the year, despite poor reviews. Was it a great movie? No. Was it a film about giant robots fighting each other? Absolutely. That's all the TF movies have ever been about. Expecting anything more (especially a deep, cohesive plot) seems kind of ridiculous to me.

That's a pretty superficial way to look at it, to say the least. Yeah, the movie had robots fighting each other, but it's also a horribly written, arduously long mess filled with annoying, bland and stereotypical characters who do nothing but yell and argue all the time.

[dumbstruck]

Those gangster twins were offensive to many people.

I doubt I'll be back for part 3. We'll see. I am known to change my mind.

If you look hard enough, you can find something that's going to offend someone in every movie. The twins, IMO, are just the most obvious target in a film that was critically panned in almost every way. I see worse stereotypes on television dramas every night of the week.

[Jmacq1]

That's a pretty superficial way to look at it, to say the least. Yeah, the movie had robots fighting each other, but it's also a horribly written, arduously long mess filled with annoying, bland and stereotypical characters who do nothing but yell and argue all the time.

And apparently "superficial" is all the general moviegoing audiences wanted from the movie.

Seriously, no one is trying to claim the movie was good (I don't think), but despite massive critical drubbing and fan venom, it made a crapload of money, which means the general audiences must have liked it. If word-of-mouth was poisonous it wouldn't have continued to make as much money as it did in the long term.

There's little reason to expect that TF3 won't be a big hit...probably one of the biggest, if not THE biggest of the year.

[dumbstruck]

That's a pretty superficial way to look at it, to say the least. Yeah, the movie had robots fighting each other, but it's also a horribly written, arduously long mess filled with annoying, bland and stereotypical characters who do nothing but yell and argue all the time.

A lot like another cash cow sci-fi movie that received critical praise; Avatar. Except I actually had fun watching TF2.

[Meadow]

A lot like another cash cow sci-fi movie that received critical praise; Avatar. Except I actually had fun watching TF2.

You were probably high.

[jesse_custer]

If you look hard enough, you can find something that's going to offend someone in every movie.

Not all things are equally offensive.


The twins, IMO, are just the most obvious target in a film that was critically panned in almost every way.

The twins weren't the most obvious target. One could argue there wasn't enough outcry over them.


I see worse stereotypes on television dramas every night of the week.

Those shows aren't marketed to children, however.

[1505627]

Was TF2 marketed to children?

[kalorama]

That's a pretty superficial way to look at it, to say the least. Yeah, the movie had robots fighting each other, but it's also a horribly written, arduously long mess filled with annoying, bland and stereotypical characters who do nothing but yell and argue all the time.

In other words . . . It's a Michael Bay movie.

[dumbstruck]

Not all things are equally offensive.

Never said they were. Just pointing out you're probably going to offend somone no matter what you do.


The twins weren't the most obvious target. One could argue there wasn't enough outcry over them.

As I recall, they were often listed as one of the first reasons the story was terrible.


Those shows aren't marketed to children, however.

Whether they are or they aren't, many of them are airing in the primetime slots, therefore are easily viewable by impressionable young minds.

[Jmacq1]

Was TF2 marketed to children?

Been in the toy aisle at Wal-Mart lately?

[1505627]

Been in the toy aisle at Wal-Mart lately?

not the toys, the movie itself

[Karl O'Neill]

How about the action was really hard to follow?

Bay's supposed to be a great actor director.

[The Batman]

That's a pretty superficial way to look at it, to say the least. Yeah, the movie had robots fighting each other, but it's also a horribly written, arduously long mess filled with annoying, bland and stereotypical characters who do nothing but yell and argue all the time.

In other words, it was Transformers.

[The Once And Forever]

Was TF2 marketed to children?
Yes.

Setting aside that Transformers has, as a property, always been marketed to kids(The War for Cybertron game may have been an exception, I suppose), they were running ads with Burger King kids' meals, selling the robots as toy prizes.

[Phil Clark]

How about the action was really hard to follow?

Bay's supposed to be a great actor director.

I think you meant that Bay is supposed to be a great action director, not actors director. And he is.

But when the action gets too over the top, no director other than maybe Spielberg can hold it together. Of course, Spielberg does it by dialing back the action to a reasonable level.

Despite what everyone here says, my personal opinion of TF2 was that it was entertaining. I didn't sit there glancing at my watch half way or three quarters of the way through it. It kept me entertained. That's all I ever ask of any movie.

And I will probably watch TF3 as well. I don't go in expecting high art. Just entertainment.

[kalorama]

How about the action was really hard to follow?

Bay's supposed to be a great actor director.

Busy, hard to follow action scenes are sort of a signature of Bay's style, I think. Now, whether that's a stylistic choice meant to mirror the random chaos engendered by the nature of the action itself or a simple byproduct of the fact that Bay is a 1-note hack is up for debate.

[Jmacq1]

not the toys, the movie itself

You do realize that all the toys are basically little plastic advertisements for the movie, right?

As others have noted, the Transformers franchise has always been marketed towards kids. Movies included.

[1505627]

You do realize that all the toys are basically little plastic advertisements for the movie, right?

As others have noted, the Transformers franchise has always been marketed towards kids. Movies included.

true. Although you kind of have it reversed

[jesse_custer]

Never said they were. Just pointing out you're probably going to offend somone no matter what you do.



As I recall, they were often listed as one of the first reasons the story was terrible.



Whether they are or they aren't, many of them are airing in the primetime slots, therefore are easily viewable by impressionable young minds.

Most people who criticize those robots simply dislike the robots and the effect they might have on culture. They are not in some larger debate about the story. Shitty characters are shitty characters. That's its own point.

And comparing any television drama to a major blockbuster is still wrong. The exposure for the former just isn't there, and kids are, on average, far more interested in Transformers than any of this stuff you're talking about.

But while we're talking about television, how about some good television dramas, like The Wire and The Shield? In other words, there's no excuse for poorly written stereotypical characters.

[The Batman]

You do realize that all the toys are basically little plastic advertisements for the movie, right?

As others have noted, the Transformers franchise has always been marketed towards kids. Movies included.

And, in turn, all the movies and tv shows are long-form advertisements for the toys. This is what we call synergy.

[jesse_custer]

I think you meant that Bay is supposed to be a great action director, not actors director. And he is.

I have to say, Bay doesn't measure up to the directors I think of in this category: Kurosawa, Peckinpah, Woo, etc. Hell, he doesn't even measure up to the guy who did Under Siege 2. Or the guy who did Bloodsport. Or a lot of other guys who directed action movies that actually kicked ass, that didn't waste time on boring exposition and bullshit dialogue.

[dumbstruck]

Most people who criticize those robots simply dislike the robots and the effect they might have on culture. They are not in some larger debate about the story. Shitty characters are shitty characters. That's its own point.

And comparing any television drama to a major blockbuster is still wrong. The exposure for the former just isn't there, and kids are, on average, far more interested in Transformers than any of this stuff you're talking about.

But while we're talking about television, how about some good television dramas, like The Wire and The Shield? In other words, there's no excuse for poorly written stereotypical characters.

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to dispute. Yes, bad characters are bad characters. All I'm saying is holding up the twins from TF2 as a prime example of stereotypes is slightly ridiculous to me, especially when there are worse examples in popular entertainment. You can try to justify it all you want; that the show is better written, or it's not a kids show; but they're out there and kids can see them just as easily as TF. Heck, Apu from Simpsons is out there, and millions of kids have seen him over the past 20+ years. Apu is a charicature no more and no less than the TF2 twins. Personally, I find the black character who grew up poor and angry in the hood/the projects/the streets and is either a criminal or the tough cop from the streets, or the young latino who's a street racing gang member to be infinitely more offensive than the TF2 twins, and those particular stereotypes are all over the place in popular entertainment.

I agree with your sentiment, just not that the twins are a shining example of "evil stereotypes".

[jesse_custer]

I didn't say anything about a shining example or evil. But the fact is that they are blatantly negative stereotypes in a movie targeted toward children. It's a valid criticism, and I don't think it's anything someone needs to reel in, so to speak. If only we had more negative reactions to shitty characters, perhaps fewer of them would be around.

[Wenatchee the Hatchet]

Bay is a good director of explosions when they're big enough.

The twins weren't the worst part of TF2 but they are the distillation of the badness of the films. It's as though in addition to the implausible romance and the not entirely coherent backstory and the magical cube that can kill Megatron in whole but of which a shard can revive him and the rest, the twins were just that one extra bit of badness thrown in that suggested to some of us that Michael Bay was almost saying something. That something--amidst this sea of badness that constitutes the core characters you're supposed to care about and the plot I can throw on the flotsam and jetsam of characters who do virtually nothing to drive the story who are ethnic stereotypes who will get to help the US Navy punk Devastator by the end of the film.

Just about the only stereotype that didn't show up was the American Indian shaman but, hey, at least we didn't get that one and by now post-production is taken care of so here's hoping Michael Bay hasn't worked in that stereotype into Transformers 3. I don't dispute that black stereotypes in cinema are offensive but American Indians can't say that they have a Denzel Washington or a Samuel Jackson or Sidney Poitier, can they? If Avatar proved anything to me it's that a whole James Cameron movie can be built around this stereotype and it will cause only some mild disagreement about whether that stereotype is okay because the blue people don't literally look like every American Indian cliche shoved into a single race.

The twins were bad but they're so bad that in some ways it's easier to cite them than Na'vi because somewhere someone will say the stereotype isn't a stereotype because they don't choose to recognize it or somehow don't recognize it. Perhaps more pernicious ethnic stereotypes are the ones that aren't getting complained about. And complaining about a stereotype, of course, isn't the same as making a film that subverts or sidesteps it. Not that such a film will come from Bay in any event ...

[shamone]

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to dispute. Yes, bad characters are bad characters. All I'm saying is holding up the twins from TF2 as a prime example of stereotypes is slightly ridiculous to me, especially when there are worse examples in popular entertainment. You can try to justify it all you want; that the show is better written, or it's not a kids show; but they're out there and kids can see them just as easily as TF. Heck, Apu from Simpsons is out there, and millions of kids have seen him over the past 20+ years. Apu is a charicature no more and no less than the TF2 twins. Personally, I find the black character who grew up poor and angry in the hood/the projects/the streets and is either a criminal or the tough cop from the streets, or the young latino who's a street racing gang member to be infinitely more offensive than the TF2 twins, and those particular stereotypes are all over the place in popular entertainment. I agree with your sentiment, just not that the twins are a shining example of "evil stereotypes".
they are an insidious despicable stereotype, using the worst bugaloo step in fetch it characteratures. I mean u can even see similarities to that coal black cartoon. And thats before u touch on the xenophobia, antisemitism, and casual homophobia. Great msg to kids, everything is fair game exceqt rich white americans

[dumbstruck]

I didn't say anything about a shining example or evil. But the fact is that they are blatantly negative stereotypes in a movie targeted toward children. It's a valid criticism, and I don't think it's anything someone needs to reel in, so to speak. If only we had more negative reactions to shitty characters, perhaps fewer of them would be around.

Are they blatant? Sure. Would they have received the same reception if their stereotype had been a latino? Why didn't Wheelie garner the same outrage for his Joe Pesci-ish angry New Yorker?

I find it funny that certain stereotypes seem to garner more outrage than others.

[shamone]

Are they blatant? Sure. Would they have received the same reception if their stereotype had been a latino? Why didn't Wheelie garner the same outrage for his Joe Pesci-ish angry New Yorker? I find it funny that certain stereotypes seem to garner more outrage than others.
for one thing the twins were given designs which resembled crude offensive racial stereotypes to go with the ebonics they spouted. Then there is historical context where hollywood only ever depicted african americans as jivin jerkin nincampoops

[dumbstruck]

for one thing the twins were given designs which resembled crude offensive racial stereotypes to go with the ebonics they spouted. Then there is historical context where hollywood only ever depicted african americans as jivin jerkin nincampoops

You can stop trying to convince me. I'm not arguing they're stereotypes. My question is would they have received similar treatment if they had been a different stereotype.

[jesse_custer]

Are they blatant? Sure. Would they have received the same reception if their stereotype had been a latino? Why didn't Wheelie garner the same outrage for his Joe Pesci-ish angry New Yorker?

What's your point? Regardless, any shitty stereotypical character should be criticized. And I never took Pesci as THE New Yorker. Pesci is not a stereotype. Pesci is obviously on a completely different level. He's a fucking entity. George Carlin said he prayed to Pesci.


I find it funny that certain stereotypes seem to garner more outrage than others.

Why? As I said earlier, not everything is equally offensive.

[dumbstruck]

What's your point? Regardless, any shitty stereotypical character should be criticized. And I never took Pesci as THE New Yorker. Pesci is not a stereotype. Pesci is obviously on a completely different level. He's a fucking entity. George Carlin said he prayed to Pesci.



Why? As I said earlier, not everything is equally offensive.

Like I said, justify all you want.

I'm sorry, but you're not making a lot of sense. Any stereotypical character should be criticised, but apparently some should be criticised more than others? You're essentially saying if someone finds something offensive that you deem to be unequal in offensiveness, it matters less. Explain to me then, a stereotype that is less offensive than the TF2 twins? Please provide examples.

[shamone]

You can stop trying to convince me. I'm not arguing they're stereotypes. My question is would they have received similar treatment if they had been a different stereotype.
if the stereotype was as offensive as the twins maybe. The fact that in a movie so slapdash and lazily researched (the geography ffs) that the depiction of the twins was so deliberate and accurate and meticulous of the offensive racial stereotypes of the past could lead people to question the motives of those responsible

[jesse_custer]

You sure are feisty. When I said everything isn't equally offensive, I'm talking about from the perspective of a general population. I'm not justifying anything. It sounds like you're trying to brush aside a legitimate criticism of a shitty-ass movie, though. Which is fine. I just don't know why you'd waste your time.

[dumbstruck]

You sure are feisty. When I said everything isn't equally offensive, I'm talking about from the perspective of a general population. I'm not justifying anything. It sounds like you're trying to brush aside a legitimate criticism of a shitty-ass movie, though. Which is fine. I just don't know why you'd waste your time.

I'm not brushing aside the criticism. I'm questioning your assertion that it's apparently somehow worse than what can be seen in other movies or tv shows.

I also understood your point about it being from the perspective of the general population. I just question it. Again, why is a black stereotype worse than an asian one, or a latino one, or a jewish one, or an italian one, or a russian one? IMO, they can all be equally offensive if taken to extremes. I don't see how one can be more offensive than any other.

[shamone]

Like I said, justify all you want.
I'm sorry, but you're not making a lot of sense. Any stereotypical character should be criticised, but apparently some should be criticised more than others? You're essentially saying if someone finds something offensive that you deem to be unequal in offensiveness, it matters less. Explain to me then, a stereotype that is less offensive than the TF2 twins? Please provide examples.
well take the new yawker 4 example. Its not race specific, nyc is multi cultural, the robot has no stereotypical visual features. Then historically ny residents have not really faced institutionalised prejudice 4 being new yorkers. Wheelie was generic nyc characterture, twins were a bigots interpretation of how african americans look and act. U can relate wheelie to pecsi, u associate song of the south with twins, big difference

[jesse_custer]

I'm not brushing aside the criticism. I'm questioning your assertion that it's apparently somehow worse than what can be seen in other movies or tv shows.

You say you're not brushing aside anything, then you go ahead and do it. You're the one who brought up the television shows; it's a separate issue! Again, comparing a television drama to a blockbuster marketed to children is absolutely silly.

[shamone]

No one said asian, latino, etc stereotypes are less offensive, but in rotf, the twins were deplorable non existent at times(bigots excepted) african american stereotypes so thats whats being discussed. If mickey rooney rocked up with bucked teeth and squinty eyes we could discuss that. Maybe that will be in dotm

[Toonimator]

Didn't Bay--or someone else involved in the production--put out the (IMO even more offensive) explanation that the twins weren't meant to be an offensive black stereotype, but an offensive WHITE (AND black) stereotype, aka 'wiggas' (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wigga)?

I remember that being thrown around back then, and I even cited it in some discussions about TF2 in the last year or so, pointing out how it's such a crap idea because THEY'RE FRAKKIN' ROBOTS. You can't have robot 'wiggas' because there's nothing to point to them being 'white guys acting like a bad stereotype of black guys'... well, maybe with the right script & acting you could, but not the way it was portrayed in TF2.

Now I'm wondering if that was just some fan theory!

[shamone]

Didn't Bay--or someone else involved in the production--put out the (IMO even more offensive) explanation that the twins weren't meant to be an offensive black stereotype, but an offensive WHITE (AND black) stereotype, aka 'wiggas' (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wigga)?
I remember that being thrown around back then, and I even cited it in some discussions about TF2 in the last year or so, pointing out how it's such a crap idea because THEY'RE FRAKKIN' ROBOTS. You can't have robot 'wiggas' because there's nothing to point to them being 'white guys acting like a bad stereotype of black guys'... well, maybe with the right script & acting you could, but not the way it was portrayed in TF2. Now I'm wondering if that was just some fan theory!
wouldnt that make em Tiggas, yknow transformers who wanted to be black guys. Bay said that twins were immature bots who aped behavior from tv

[Legato]

Dont care what they are. Hope they get killed in the opening credits

[kmeyers]

I'm sure if they even get a mention it will be instant death, or the Jar Jar Binks treatment.

[Wenatchee the Hatchet]

The twins are more likely to be the ones who kill Shockwave or Megatron if Bay stays close to usual form.

[dumbstruck]

You say you're not brushing aside anything, then you go ahead and do it. You're the one who brought up the television shows; it's a separate issue! Again, comparing a television drama to a blockbuster marketed to children is absolutely silly.

You're missing the point. Whether it's a movie or a TV show, the point is stereotypes are available for children to see. By discounting that, you're implying the stereotype of TF2 in and of itself is somehow worse than others.

[dumbstruck]

No one said asian, latino, etc stereotypes are less offensive, but in rotf, the twins were deplorable non existent at times(bigots excepted) african american stereotypes so thats whats being discussed. If mickey rooney rocked up with bucked teeth and squinty eyes we could discuss that. Maybe that will be in dotm

What I'm questioning is Jesse Custer's point about not all stereotypes being equal. I'm asking for an example of a stereotype that is not as offensive as what was in TF2. Nobody seems to be able to provide that.

[Karl O'Neill]

I didn't think Jar Jar Binks was supposed to look and sound like Bob Marley or someone from that country until it was pointed out to me.
I just thought Jar Jar was harmless and not as lame as people made him out to be.

Maybe I am the VOICE OF REASON on the internet?:biggrin:

[dumbstruck]

I didn't think Jar Jar Binks was supposed to look and sound like Bob Marley or someone from that country until it was pointed out to me.
I just thought Jar Jar was harmless and not as lame as people made him out to be.

Maybe I am the VOICE OF REASON on the internet?:biggrin:

You're not alone. I failed to see the "stereotype" of Jar Jar as well. I just thought he was really annoying.

[Karl O'Neill]

What about the Trade federation guys talking like sleazY asian businessmen?

AHA, WE MUST CONTACT DARTH SIDIOUS, HE WILL TELL US WHAT TO DO.

[shamone]

What I'm questioning is Jesse Custer's point about not all stereotypes being equal. I'm asking for an example of a stereotype that is not as offensive as what was in TF2. Nobody seems to be able to provide that.
i did give you one. Wheelie having a pecsi espue noo yawk accent, and the reasons why. Outside of rotf, the stereotypes in the south park are accepted as there are no holy cows and all are open to ridicule.

[jesse_custer]

You're missing the point. Whether it's a movie or a TV show, the point is stereotypes are available for children to see. By discounting that, you're implying the stereotype of TF2 in and of itself is somehow worse than others.

I haven't implied that. You're just babbling about irrelevant bullshit.

[dumbstruck]

I haven't implied that. You're just babbling about irrelevant bullshit.

What you're saying is other stereotypes have less relevance simply because they're not in a Transformers movie. That's a pretty strong implication.

[dumbstruck]

i did give you one. Wheelie having a pecsi espue noo yawk accent, and the reasons why. Outside of rotf, the stereotypes in the south park are accepted as there are no holy cows and all are open to ridicule.

No. You haven't. You're discounting another example I used.

[jesse_custer]

What you said was it didn't matter because it's not a Transformers movie. That's a pretty strong implication.

A pretty strong implication that I don't find anything you say relevant or interesting.

[dumbstruck]

A pretty strong implication that I don't find anything you say relevant or interesting.

Meh. Whatever.

[shamone]

No. You haven't. You're discounting another example I used.
u asked for an example which was less offensive and why. I said wheelie and why it was less offensive, or any stereotype in south park. I may be missing something but what are you asking since i answered what u asked !

[shamone]

No. You haven't. You're discounting another example I used.
u asked 4 a less offensive stereotype and why it was, i said wheelie and south park as samples. Why doesnt that answer ur question. What are u asking if not that. Im confused

[Darrell D.]

That's a pretty superficial way to look at it, to say the least. Yeah, the movie had robots fighting each other, but it's also a horribly written, arduously long mess filled with annoying, bland and stereotypical characters who do nothing but yell and argue all the time.

It's a two hour toy commercial. All three of them.
No one is going to be using these films as critical study in any film school anytime soon, and if they do, get your tuition back.
Robots beating the shit out of each other, I remember that when I was a kid, weee, explosions.

[dumbstruck]

u asked 4 a less offensive stereotype and why it was, i said wheelie and south park as samples. Why doesnt that answer ur question. What are u asking if not that. Im confused

An offensive stereotype is an offensive stereotype. Whether it's the Twins in TF2, virtually every Arab character as a terrorist, the Chinese laundry asian character, the vodka drinking Russian bear, the tomahawk toting Indian, the mafioso Italian, the angry, ignorant New Yawker, Jar Jar Binks, or Speedy Gonzales. They are all stereotypes that are seen in movies or TV by children. They all can be perceived as offensive by someone. I don't see any of them as being more offensive than any other. And so far, nobody has successfully explained how that could possibly be so. Heck, even Disney has been accused of stereotypes. That's why we will never see Song of the South on DVD, and more recently, they came under fire for The Princess and the Frog.

[shamone]

An offensive stereotype is an offensive stereotype. Whether it's the Twins in TF2, virtually every Arab character as a terrorist, the Chinese laundry asian character, the vodka drinking Russian bear, the tomahawk toting Indian, the mafioso Italian, the angry, ignorant New Yawker, Jar Jar Binks, or Speedy Gonzales. They are all stereotypes that are seen in movies or TV by children. They all can be perceived as offensive by someone. I don't see any of them as being more offensive than any other. And so far, nobody has successfully explained how that could possibly be so. Heck, even Disney has been accused of stereotypes. That's why we will never see Song of the South on DVD, and more recently, they came under fire for The Princess and the Frog.

What is your point though. Why TF stereotypes are more offensive. Because they are more offensive, a mexican stereotype saying hondelay, is more offensive than black face minstrel robots. If there was a character called wetback who turned into a lawnmower, and who exuded all the worst and inaccurate stereotypes that white people have about mexicans then it would be equally as offensive.

The fact is that the bases iof the twins visually and personality wise are based on outmoded and inaccurate and ignorant depictions based on white prejudice

see this linkl for a good explanation

http://www.oafe.net/yo/tfm2_skidflap.php

[shamone]

An offensive stereotype is an offensive stereotype. Whether it's the Twins in TF2, virtually every Arab character as a terrorist, the Chinese laundry asian character, the vodka drinking Russian bear, the tomahawk toting Indian, the mafioso Italian, the angry, ignorant New Yawker, Jar Jar Binks, or Speedy Gonzales. They are all stereotypes that are seen in movies or TV by children. They all can be perceived as offensive by someone. I don't see any of them as being more offensive than any other. And so far, nobody has successfully explained how that could possibly be so. Heck, even Disney has been accused of stereotypes. That's why we will never see Song of the South on DVD, and more recently, they came under fire for The Princess and the Frog.

What is your point though. Why TF stereotypes are more offensive. Because they are more offensive, a mexican stereotype saying hondelay, is more offensive than black face minstrel robots. If there was a character called wetback who turned into a lawnmower, and who exuded all the worst and inaccurate stereotypes that white people have about mexicans then it would be equally as offensive.

The fact is that the bases iof the twins visually and personality wise are based on outmoded and inaccurate and ignorant depictions based on white prejudice

see this linkl for a good explanation

http://www.oafe.net/yo/tfm2_skidflap.php

[dumbstruck]

What is your point though. Why TF stereotypes are more offensive. Because they are more offensive, a mexican stereotype saying hondelay, is more offensive than black face minstrel robots. If there was a character called wetback who turned into a lawnmower, and who exuded all the worst and inaccurate stereotypes that white people have about mexicans then it would be equally as offensive.

The fact is that the bases iof the twins visually and personality wise are based on outmoded and inaccurate and ignorant depictions based on white prejudice

Isn't that what a stereotype is?

Again, I'm not disputing the fact they're a stereotype. All you seem to want to do is try to convince me they are. I agree they are. I'm disputing the assertion that they are somehow worse than others.

What it seems to me is stereotypes seem to get something of a free pass. Unless you're stereotyping black culture. That seem to be a no-no. But the entertainment industry seems perfectly fine in continuing portrayals of arab terrorists, mexican gang-bangers and day-labourers, and poor chinese launderers, and Hindu taxi cab/convenience store owners, and the general population seems perfectly fine with that.

I'm saying it's not perfectly fine, and a bad stereotype is a bad stereotype is a bad stereotype. You can't tell me one is worse than the other since any stereotype is going to offend someone. Nor can you tell me stereotypes are less offensive simply because they're not depicted in a child-specific film/TV show.

[shamone]

Isn't that what a stereotype is?

Again, I'm not disputing the fact they're a stereotype. All you seem to want to do is try to convince me they are. I agree they are. I'm disputing the assertion that they are somehow worse than others.

What it seems to me is stereotypes seem to get something of a free pass. Unless you're stereotyping black culture. That seem to be a no-no. But the entertainment industry seems perfectly fine in continuing portrayals of arab terrorists, mexican gang-bangers and day-labourers, and poor chinese launderers, and Hindu taxi cab/convenience store owners, and the general population seems perfectly fine with that.

I'm saying it's not perfectly fine, and a bad stereotype is a bad stereotype is a bad stereotype. You can't tell me one is worse than the other since any stereotype is going to offend someone. Nor can you tell me stereotypes are less offensive simply because they're not depicted in a child-specific film/TV show.

A stereotype is not always a derogatory one, thats inaccurate there.

The fact is that the stereotype isnt even accurate. its based on racist depictions from old hollywood cartoons and movies. Thats the point.


Yes i can tell you why its worse on a movie/tv show orientated to children

Childrens minds are developing, they have not got the experience to recognise a srtereotype for what it is and may assume its accurate. Adults, for the msot part, have experienced the world and other cultures, can recognise stereotypyes and tropes for what they are. Children are not so discerning.

So when you ahve a movie feeding them the message that it is funny to make fun of homosexuals, blacks, jews, etcs, and that whites are free of cultural stereotyping and abuise then that is not a strong message for developing minds.

The sheer needlessness for the twins to be depicted and act in the way is the most questioning part of the whole scenario

[dumbstruck]

A stereotype is not always a derogatory one, thats inaccurate there.

The fact is that the stereotype isnt even accurate. its based on racist depictions from old hollywood cartoons and movies. Thats the point.

Which is why I said a "bad stereotype."


Yes i can tell you why its worse on a movie/tv show orientated to children

Childrens minds are developing, they have not got the experience to recognise a srtereotype for what it is and may assume its accurate. Adults, for the msot part, have experienced the world and other cultures, can recognise stereotypyes and tropes for what they are. Children are not so discerning.

So when you ahve a movie feeding them the message that it is funny to make fun of homosexuals, blacks, jews, etcs, and that whites are free of cultural stereotyping and abuise then that is not a strong message for developing minds.

There are just as outrageous stereotypes for whites, albeit they're more directed towards a regional level, rather than all whites. The poorly educated, roadkill eating redneck. The gun-toting, cowboy hat wearing Texan. The strange, creole speaking, Bayou dwelling Louisianite. The previously mentioned angry and ignorant New Yawker. The educationally challenged teenaged football/chearleading star.


The sheer needlessness for the twins to be depicted and act in the way is the most questioning part of the whole scenario

Except to a five year old, the Twins were not visually depicted with black skin. We can recognize it, sure. But I think it's a bit of a stretch a five year old would make the connection and think to themselves "Wow. Skids and Mudflap really remind me of that black guy down the street. That must be how all black people are." Just the same way they didn't really make the connection about Jar Jar Binks.

And considering worse stereotypes can be seen in TV shows, TV commercials, other films that children are exposed to either by watching it themselves, or when Mom and Dad are watching, it's ridiculous to me to hold up TF2 as a clear and present danger to the social development of children when there is a lot worse children can and do see on a daily basis.

Not all blacks are poor, from the projects, and speak in ebonics. Some are middle class, some are upper class, some speak without resorting to ebonics, and not all are decked out in all kinds of bling.

Not all mexicans are poor, illegal immigrants who run with gangs. Some are legitmate residents with good jobs and have never had anything to do with criminal activity.

Not all Russians are fat and drink Vodka with everything, nor are they all part of the KGB.

Not all Muslims are terrorists.

Not every Texan carries five guns, drives a pick-up truck, and believes in the death penalty.

Not every New Yorker is constantly short tempered or ignorant.

Not every asian works in a laundry, is part of Chinese organized crime, or says "Flied Lice".

Not every resident of Arkansas is a moonshine brewing, gator rasslin' redneck.

At the end of the day, these stereotypes are seen by children. Although I've never met a child who has learned their worldview of ethnic tolerance from movies, it they do believe this is what all Blacks, or Asians, or Mexicans, or Muslims, or Texans are like, it's up to their parents to set them straight. That's their job.

Here endeth the conversation.

[jesse_custer]

I'm disputing the assertion that they are somehow worse than others.

No one made the claim you're disputing. That's what you don't seem to get.

[dumbstruck]

No one made the claim you're disputing. That's what you don't seem to get.

You did. Remember this?


Not all things are equally offensive.

[shamone]

I have no idea if you even know what you are saying anymore. All depictions of stereotypes are not equally offensive. Look at south park, you dont look at it and say its offensive the joke is on cartman and his ignorance. There is no point in rotf where u could say this is parody of what white bigoted americans think of germans, french people or african americans, rather this is what they are like.

[dumbstruck]

I have no idea if you even know what you are saying anymore. All depictions of stereotypes are not equally offensive. Look at south park, you dont look at it and say its offensive the joke is on cartman and his ignorance. There is no point in rotf where u could say this is parody of what white bigoted americans think of germans, french people or african americans, rather this is what they are like.

"Bad stereotypes"? I think I made that clear.

That being said, you're essentially giving a pass on stereotypes when they're done in a satyrical way. And there is merit in that since that type of thing is more a comment on society rather than a perception of society.

But we're not really talking about situations where a stereotype is acceptable as a comment on society. We're talking about portrayals of a stereotype as an individual character. And in that situation, a bad stereotype is a bad stereotype. One is not more offensive than another.

[jesse_custer]

You did. Remember this?

Yes, and as I already stated, I was speaking about general perceptions. It's pretty much a fact that not all things are equally offensive in the public eye. I'm sorry it's this way, but you need to accept it and stop putting words in people's mouths. I don't necessarily agree with the public, but I at least know how the public is.

Really, your willful ignorance is so extreme that I wouldn't be surprised if you're a troll, sitting in your parents' living room laughing at the screen and eating Cheetos.

[shamone]

"Bad stereotypes"? I think I made that clear.
That being said, you're essentially giving a pass on stereotypes when they're done in a satyrical way. And there is merit in that since that type of thing is more a comment on society rather than a perception of society. But we're not really talking about situations where a stereotype is acceptable as a comment on society. We're talking about portrayals of a stereotype as an individual character. And in that situation, a bad stereotype is a bad stereotype. One is not more offensive than another.
u have lost me again. The stereotypes in south park dont count because they dont fit your argument ? I agree that all stereotypes can be offensive, to someone, but some are more offensive than others

[dumbstruck]

u have lost me again. The stereotypes in south park dont count because they dont fit your argument ? I agree that all stereotypes can be offensive, to someone, but some are more offensive than others

Nope. You said it.


Look at south park, you dont look at it and say its offensive the joke is on cartman and his ignorance.

It's not offensive because the joke isn't the stereotype itself. I'm agreeing with you.

The problem is when the stereotype is there just for the sake of having said stereotype. That's what I'm talking about and what I've been talking about all along.

[dumbstruck]

Yes, and as I already stated, I was speaking about general perceptions. It's pretty much a fact that not all things are equally offensive in the public eye. I'm sorry it's this way, but you need to accept it and stop putting words in people's mouths. I don't necessarily agree with the public, but I at least know how the public is.

Really, your willful ignorance is so extreme that I wouldn't be surprised if you're a troll, sitting in your parents' living room laughing at the screen and eating Cheetos.

And as I already stated


I find it funny that certain stereotypes seem to garner more outrage than others.

I'm well aware stereotypes aren't treated equally by the gen-pop. Acceptance doesn't mean "not offensive". Racism is accepted by a bigot, that doesn't make it inoffensive.

If you want to argue from the POV of the general public, that's fine. But when elaboration or examples are asked for, it might help your point to provide them. I asked you to provide an example of what would be less offensive. You haven't done so. I asked you how a stereotype in a movie marketed to kids is intrinsically worse than one in another medium a child is exposed to. You haven't done so. All you've really done is continue on about how I'm wrong and the perceived inequality of stereotypes that has yet to be successfully elaborated on. And when challenged, you resort to thinly veiled insults.

[shamone]

Nope. You said it.
It's not offensive because the joke isn't the stereotype itself. I'm agreeing with you.
The problem is when the stereotype is there just for the sake of having said stereotype. That's what I'm talking about and what I've been talking about all along.
so if i understand you, you have an issue with rotf because of all the stereotypes in it which are there just for the sake of it. Cool i agree

[shamone]

Nope. You said it.
It's not offensive because the joke isn't the stereotype itself. I'm agreeing with you.
The problem is when the stereotype is there just for the sake of having said stereotype. That's what I'm talking about and what I've been talking about all along.
oh so if i understand you, you have an issue with rotf because it employs stereotypes just for the sake of it. Cool i agree