And Megatron was a hand pistol. Yeah, THAT would have gone over well.

I think you missed the points I was trying to make.

I never claimed to be a critic or a news reporter and this site prides itself that none of us writers are either of those things.

That being said, your examples of Snakes and Trek are not valid since the producers of both of those movies have the online community to thank that anyone went to see those films at all.

MUCH of the media buzz revolving around Snakes on a PLANE came from online sources. The movie would have come and gone had not the online pundits started to rave about it. The very title of Snakes on a Plane was brought about from a fan forum conversation.

Poor Micheal Bay has lost what was left of his little mind, never mind the fact how silly it is to release fake scripts in order to trick people into believing that they are the real deal, while at the same time telling people before hand that he is going to be releasing fake scripts. Masterfully played Mr. Bay.

Instead of spending so much time writing fake scripts and treatments and trying to fool a handful internet fanboys, he should focusing his efforts on delivering a better product then his dreadful first Transformers movie. I’m banking on the next leaked script to feature the Autobots facing the planet consuming threat of Micheal Bay’s Ego.

Actually how do you explain the Star Trek and Snakes on a plain kind of internet fan base and not being able to generate interest. I don’t want to discredit your work, but it’s probably more of nudge, not a push.

I think what Bay means by this, is he likes the publicity, but keep it at that, leave the negative comments on how they “should” make the movie out of it.

So it’s like reporting the news, keep it unbiased if their is such a thing. The critic should leave the criticisms ’till after they have seen the movie. Keep us informed, then once the critic has seen the film, advise to no, go or Routh.

What do you guys think?

‘I dont understand the difference…’

I liked the Transformers movie. I really did. But there were many things in it that I did not like, and through listening to directors commentary and listening to actors and people involved in making the movie, I have found that every part of the movie I didn’t like was there because of him, Michael Bay. There were even changes he was making, in which other people would tell him it was wrong and he wouldn’t listen. He can be in charge of directing the action all he wants. That’s fine by me. He is brilliant at directing action sequences. But, someone else needs to be in charge of the story elements because he seems to lack respect, depth and intelligence in the areas where such things are needed.

I could go on and pick apart the points where he failed in the first movie, but this doesn’t need to go there. The point is, he wants full control when he doesn’t have the needed talent to run it properly. Someone or someones need to make sure he doesn’t get that control. Don’t give him leeway just because the first movie succeeded. It didn’t succeed because of Michael Bay. It succeed because many people did their jobs right. Don’t let him take their jobs this time around because he’s taken/was given the credit.