Top reasons why ROTF is maybe not an "epic movie".

[Grimlock99]

There seems to be a debate on whether or not ROTF should be seen as an "epic movie".Let's find the reasons why it shouldn't be:

-A Michael Bay film
-"I am directly below enemy scrotum"
-Animal sex
-"Hey, Professor, I'd do anything for an A"
-Humping robot
-"We don't really do much reading. Not so much."
-2 movie ,2 characters,one actor.

[Retro Man]

Um...OK?

[Grimlock99]

-A farting robot
-Some ridiculously confusing battle scenes
-A semi is faster than a Camaro and Corvette

[Aesir]

Where is there a debate about if the movie is epic or not?

[Retro Man]

Originally Posted by Aesir

Where is there a debate about if the movie is epic or not?

Umm...right?

[Aesir]

Originally Posted by Retro Man

Umm...right?

um...what?

[Firefalcon]

Originally Posted by Grimlock99

There seems to be a debate on whether or not ROTF should be seen as an "epic movie".Let's find the reasons why it shouldn't be:

-A Michael Bay film
-"I am directly below enemy scrotum"
-Animal sex
-"Hey, Professor, I'd do anything for an A"
-Humping robot
-"We don't really do much reading. Not so much."
-2 movie ,2 characters,one actor.

-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011

Personally, I have nothing against Bay; and I thought the "Hey, Professor, I'd do anything for an A" joke was great. The reading thing was not a problem for me and I really have no idea what is being gotten at with the 2movie 2character thing...

[Grimlock99]

Originally Posted by Firefalcon

-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011
-The movie still made Domestic: $402,111,870 and Worldwide: $833,229,011

Personally, I have nothing against Bay; and I thought the "Hey, Professor, I'd do anything for an A" joke was great. The reading thing was not a problem for me and I really have no idea what is being gotten at with the 2movie 2character thing...

I'm happy to see how people got inflamed so quickly with this thread that i was expecting to die after 3 posts.I downloaded a good DVDrip and after watching the movie again in fast foward i remembered why i stormed out of the theater when the end credits started.Independence Day (1996) is a masterpiece compare to this movie.But again this is my opinion and i stick to it.
As for the one actor 2 character thing ,i'm talking about Glenn Morshower who plays "Colonel Sharp" who dies in the beginning of the first movie and come back in ROTF as "General Morshower".

[Wishful Thinking]

Originally Posted by Grimlock99

As for the one actor 2 character thing ,i'm talking about Glenn Morshower who plays "Colonel Sharp" who dies in the beginning of the first movie and come back in ROTF as "General Morshower".

Not sure why anyone would care about that. The BBC is hellbent on recycling actors within one TV series for multitudes of parts, Doctor Who being a prime example.

Even John Rys-Davies was approached to play a dwarf in The Hobbit after playing Gimli in LotR. He said no, BTW.

[Grimlock99]

Originally Posted by Wishful Thinking

Not sure why anyone would care about that. The BBC is hellbent on recycling actors within one TV series for multitudes of parts, Doctor Who being a prime example.

Even John Rys-Davies was approached to play a dwarf in The Hobbit after playing Gimli in LotR. He said no, BTW.

An actor can play many roles in the same movie that's not the problem.Frank Morgan played 5 roles in "The Wizard of Oz (1939)".But in the case of Glenn Morshower,he plays a role very similar as the one who dies in the first movie.I'm surprised they didnt kill him too in ROTF,to bring him back as another officer in the third movie.

[Wishful Thinking]

Originally Posted by Grimlock99

An actor can play many roles in the same movie that's not the problem.Frank Morgan played 5 roles in "The Wizard of Oz (1939)".But in the case of Glenn Morshower,he plays a role very similar as the one who dies in the first movie.I'm surprised they didnt kill him too in ROTF,to bring him back as another officer in the third movie.

Did you not see my comment that they wanted to bring JRD back as adwarf? Would that have made The Hobbit less "epic" had he said "yes"?

[Aesir]

Originally Posted by Grimlock99

An actor can play many roles in the same movie that's not the problem.Frank Morgan played 5 roles in "The Wizard of Oz (1939)".But in the case of Glenn Morshower,he plays a role very similar as the one who dies in the first movie.I'm surprised they didnt kill him too in ROTF,to bring him back as another officer in the third movie.

technically, we didn't see him die in the first movie though

[Firefalcon]

Originally Posted by Grimlock99

I'm happy to see how people got inflamed so quickly with this thread that i was expecting to die after 3 posts.I downloaded a good DVDrip and after watching the movie again in fast foward i remembered why i stormed out of the theater when the end credits started.Independence Day (1996) is a masterpiece compare to this movie.But again this is my opinion and i stick to it.
As for the one actor 2 character thing ,i'm talking about Glenn Morshower who plays "Colonel Sharp" who dies in the beginning of the first movie and come back in ROTF as "General Morshower".

My thing is that if people want to flame, they should do it for the right reasons. Not liking a movie soley because of who the director was, is a lame reason to not like a movie at best. The potty humor about seeing dogs getting it on is understandable. I mean really "I didn't like that movie because so-and-so directed it" is obsurd. Now, "I didn't like the movie because they had too many sexually explicit jokes", I can dig.

Flaming just to flame calls out to me to issue a retort. Filing a valid complaint though, you will not hear a word from me.

[Grimlock99]

Originally Posted by Firefalcon

My thing is that if people want to flame, they should do it for the right reasons. Not liking a movie soley because of who the director was, is a lame reason to not like a movie at best. The potty humor about seeing dogs getting it on is understandable. I mean really "I didn't like that movie because so-and-so directed it" is obsurd. Now, "I didn't like the movie because they had too many sexually explicit jokes", I can dig.

Flaming just to flame calls out to me to issue a retort. Filing a valid complaint though, you will not hear a word from me.

The director is not the only reason why the movie shouldnt be epic or good.But the only Bay movie that should have been was "Pearl Harbour",but he totally missed the boat on that one.

[Grimlock99]

Let's make a few details very clear.

I dont hate ROTF because of Michael Bay!I liked most of the first movie.saw it twice in theater and twice on DVD.And after that stopped counting how many times i watched the scenes "Blackout vs Qatar","The arrival of the Autobots" and "Prime vs Bonecrusher",that are extremely well made.

I dont hate ROTF because it's not geeonie enough!The poor story and editing were enough to make us forget that detail.And anyway ,we couldnt expect more G1 content after the first movie had set the pace for the trilogy.

I dont hate ROTF because Rotten Tomatoes and the rest of the critics hates it.I do enjoy some good bad movies.I personally think that "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" was underated.I enjoy watching movie like "Independence Day","The Chronicles of Riddick " and even "Armageddon" once in a while.

So why do i hate ROTF?Because it's bad.It's start not too bad,and then it die and we already loose interest in most characters that we barely see again.The battle scenes are overcrowded and the editing is horrible and we barely know what's going on.Prime is as serious and violent as "Leonidas" in "300" while the rest of the characters are goofing around with bad jokes!The fact that the movie made as much money is a mystery and a tragedy.Some seem to be happy that the franchise doing well,but with the poor content of this movie ,expect a very hard crash after the third one.I hate Michael Bay and the studios ,for releasing an half-a... movie.With all the money involved, postponing the release wouldnt have been a bad decision.They were lucky to make money with this,and now they think that people will swallow everything they serve.
If you liked the movie it's fine ,but dont tell me it's good because of the box-office numbers.