Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 12:16 am**

In an interview today with The Hollywood News, Lorenzo Di Bonaventura, producer of Transformers: Age of Extinction, made it clear that the fourth installment will not be a reboot. While he was mainly chatting about upcoming film Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, Di Bonaventura was asked if he could share anything about the upcoming Transformers film. Specifically, if it will be a completely different story line, or if it would share past events with the other films.

Di Bonaventura states that while the film does have a whole new cast, and none of the human characters from the previous movies, it is a continuation. A continuation of an existing story line, in an existing story universe, just with fresh faces and a new story.

The Hollywood News]

See the full excerpt below:

It’s definitely not a reboot. It’s an interesting question about what you should call it. On a certain level it’s a continuation of the previous stories, in the fact that it acknowledges what has transpired before it. It acknowledges in the last movie, the destruction of Chicago, it’s actually something that carries through the sort of emotional repercussions of that, not unlike 9/11 has emotional repercussions in the real world. In a fantasy world there are repercussions to what occurred.

That plays into the movie, moving forwards with a totally different human cast, who doesn’t know anything about the other humans, it’s not a reboot, but a continuation, yet you’re continuing with a new cast and group of characters. It was a big decision to do that.
We miss our friends that we did the first three with, and they were great, and they probably could’ve done more. But the advantage of doing it this way is that it feels almost like a first movie. It’s a very different dynamic than I’ve seen in a movie, I’m very curious. I guess Star Wars did that a little bit, but not so close together, the way we’re doing it.’

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 12:40 am**

Sounds pretty hype. Even if it is basically just the same thing we've heard before. I think this just puts it more in perspective. :michaelbay:

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 12:56 am**

There are folks who still think it's a reboot? It taken place in the aftermath of Chicago's destruction from the last movie. Of course it's not a reboot.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:10 am**

ok we get it its not a reboot, it should be a reboot though

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:11 am**

Do the Cybertronians really not count anymore? I'm so tired of hearing it's with no returning characters, yet we have at least Prime and 'Bee returning.
:BANG_HEAD:

Smelt it, I'm going to bed.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 5:28 am**

Sabrblade wrote:There are folks who still think it's a reboot? It taken place in the aftermath of Chicago's destruction from the last movie. Of course it's not a reboot.

I think it's less a case of "thinking" and more a case of "in denial and hoping".

'cause you know, they actually believe they're going to get what they want if they continue to complain about the movies.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:06 am**

Burn wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:There are folks who still think it's a reboot? It taken place in the aftermath of Chicago's destruction from the last movie. Of course it's not a reboot.

I think it's less a case of "thinking" and more a case of "in denial and hoping".

'cause you know, they actually believe they're going to get what they want if they continue to complain about the movies.

Sad, but true.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:47 am**

I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:33 am**

MINDVVIPE wrote:I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

So you have no issue with the fictional war, but you draw the line at 9/11?

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:33 am**

MINDVVIPE wrote:I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

So you have no issue with the fictional war, but you draw the line at 9/11?

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:38 am**

In other recent news, President Lincoln has been shot.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:38 am**

Seriously though, I think we get it now. This movie is almost like part one.....yet, its part four in the franchise. I have compared it to Star Wars sense the continuity has been discussed. Its a whole new start, yet the past matters. Lets just hope that this movie doesn't ruin a new trilogy..... :michaelbay:

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:03 pm**

njb902 wrote:
MINDVVIPE wrote:I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

So you have no issue with the fictional war, but you draw the line at 9/11?

I didn't draw any lines, I just think it's lame to compare a fake event intended to entertain with a real event that cost real lives, all because they need to try so hard to impose emotion into a fantasy movie.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:11 pm**

MINDVVIPE wrote:
njb902 wrote:
MINDVVIPE wrote:I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

So you have no issue with the fictional war, but you draw the line at 9/11?

I didn't draw any lines, I just think it's lame to compare a fake event intended to entertain with a real event that cost real lives, all because they need to try so hard to impose emotion into a fantasy movie.

So things that cost lives, like wars.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:47 pm**

njb902 wrote:
MINDVVIPE wrote:
njb902 wrote:
MINDVVIPE wrote:I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

So you have no issue with the fictional war, but you draw the line at 9/11?

I didn't draw any lines, I just think it's lame to compare a fake event intended to entertain with a real event that cost real lives, all because they need to try so hard to impose emotion into a fantasy movie.

So things that cost lives, like wars.

Too bad you don't understand me, I thought you were capable. Forget I said anything.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:01 pm**

MINDVVIPE wrote:
njb902 wrote:
MINDVVIPE wrote:
njb902 wrote:
MINDVVIPE wrote:I find the comparison of a fictional event with 9/11 kind of... gross. Maybe its an apt analogy, but I don't like the fact that he had to go there to make his point. And I'm far from an american or fan of america.

So you have no issue with the fictional war, but you draw the line at 9/11?

I didn't draw any lines, I just think it's lame to compare a fake event intended to entertain with a real event that cost real lives, all because they need to try so hard to impose emotion into a fantasy movie.

So things that cost lives, like wars.

Too bad you don't understand me, I thought you were capable. Forget I said anything.

No I understand what you're saying perfectly. 9/11 was a particular incident that generates a image for people of the one time event that killed upwards of 3, 000 people. So the comparison in or with fiction bothers you.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:24 pm**

Autobot Megatron wrote:Do the Cybertronians really not count anymore? I'm so tired of hearing it's with no returning characters, yet we have at least Prime and 'Bee returning.

Smelt it, I'm going to bed.

I think the fact that the robots are not considered returning characters speaks volumes about how these movies were written and conceived. The Transformers are about as relevant as characters as the asteroid in Deep Impact.

Transfans seriously need to stop supporting these travesties.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:30 pm**

TheForgottenTaxi wrote:Transfans seriously need to stop supporting these travesties.

I should stop being entertained because YOU'RE not entertained?

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:38 pm**

No matter how much we fans wish it weren't so, the Transformers in these movies are considered mere special effects products rather than starring role characters. They're non-human, nonexistent objects created by computer animation in a live action work that does feature real human stars, so they aren't looked on as being the stars of the films.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 6:28 pm**

Burn wrote:
TheForgottenTaxi wrote:Transfans seriously need to stop supporting these travesties.

I should stop being entertained because YOU'RE not entertained?

I mean, if you enjoyed the last two ... uh, go nuts I guess?

My comment was more aimed at fans who find the movies are terrible, but keep seeing them either out of a misplaced hope they'll improve or a weird sense of obligation. Which has been my experience. It's clear that the people making these movies don't care about the characters we care about. Actually, it's pretty clear that they don't care about any characters, period, but they especially don't care about the Transformers.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2014 6:38 pm**

I guess the way it seems to a lot of people is that, with an entirely new cast of people, that it must be a reboot. Folks who are interested in seeing the movies, but not necessarily interested in Transformers, see the Cybertronians as special effects because they aren't people. Unfortunate, but true.

Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer

Re: Transformers: Age of Extinction Not a Reboot, Says Producer