On episode 7 commentary for House of the Dragon, “Driftmark”, Nate Peterson from the Dice and Desire joins the show to discuss the trajectory of the show, dragon binding and marrying 15 year olds.
It is one of the most unusual franchises in history as it is derisive among purists, yet it is also a lucrative moneymaker. I am of course talking about Transformers. A 1984 cartoon that had a massive toy line, only to be replaced by a whole new toy line by 1986’s game changing theatrical film. And then came producer Steven Spielberg, who hand picked non fan of the cartoon Michael Bay to handle a live action version of that oh so lucrative toy line from many years ago. With five films, a cartoon movie, and a brand new prequel starring Bumblebee, we tackle a franchise that is derided and molded. But how will myself, Nate, and Matt respond to it?
After Transformers The Last Knight came and went with barely a thud, Hasbro and Paramount finally decided that maybe, just maybe, it was time to move the series in a different direction. As discussed in The Last Knight podcast, producer Steven Spielberg called for a writer’s room meeting where he invited many of the most successful writers in Hollywood to discuss where to take the next chapter of the fighting robot franchise, In the end, it was Spielberg himself who not only decided to go backwards with a prequel, but also make an E.T. style film starring the most sympathetic figure of the series, Bumblebee.
Join myself, Matt, and Nate as we FINALLY get back together to discuss what we all decided was our most anticipated part of this retrospective, and decide if new director Travis Knight took the franchise in the correct direction.
It is one of the most unusual franchises in history as it is derisive among purists, yet it is also a lucrative moneymaker. I am of course talking about Transformers. A 1984 cartoon that had a massive toy line, only to be replaced by a whole new toy line by 1986’s game changing theatrical film. And then came producer Steven Spielberg, who hand picked non fan of the cartoon Michael Bay to handle a live action version of that oh so lucrative toy line from many years ago. With five films, a cartoon movie, and a brand new prequel starring Bumblebee, we tackle a franchise that is derided and molded. But how will myself, Nate, and Matt respond to it?
Finally. After four films, two of which were supposed to be his last, Michael Bay hung up his transformian metal with his fifth entry, 2017’s Transformers: The Last Knight. Feeling like he needed to go back to King Arthur after his long in the making project about the knight went to other hands, Bay, heading a writer’s room put together by himself and Steven Spielberg which included people such as Zak Pen (X-Men) and Robert Kirkman (The Walking Dead), heard the suggestion of bringing King Arthur into the Transformers cinematic universe, and put together this once again big, loud, and expensive feature starring his friend Mark Wahlberg. But how will we feel about it?
After feeling like the habit of bringing historical value into a series about punching robots was stale around the second film, myself, Matt, and Nate tackle the fifth Bayformers film and wonder how big of a chance Bumblebee has to end this retrospective in a positive light, unlike our last one Harry Potter.
Transformers The Last Knight (2017) (?/10, ?/10, ?/10)
It is one of the most unusual franchises in history as it is derisive among purists, yet it is also a lucrative moneymaker. I am of course talking about Transformers. A 1984 cartoon that had a massive toy line, only to be replaced by a whole new toy line by 1986’s game changing theatrical film. And then came producer Steven Spielberg, who hand picked non fan of the cartoon Michael Bay to handle a live action version of that oh so lucrative toy line from many years ago. With five films, a cartoon movie, and a brand new prequel starring Bumblebee, we tackle a franchise that is derided and molded. But how will myself, Nate, and Matt respond to it?
Three years following his proclamation that he was done with the Transformers franchise, director Michael Bay, armed with new leading man Mark Wahlberg, unleashed Transformers Age of Extinction. Hyped as ‘the one with the dinobots’, fans of the series once again jumped in glee at trailers for the film and when released, the film ended up crossing the $1 billion mark in worldwide box office.
Join myself, Matt, and Nate as we get into all that makes Bay’s 2014 film tick, and whether we enjoy it or not.
We appreciate your patience, as in just two more podcasts, we will have a review of the brand new Bumblebee prequel, already in theaters.
Transformers Age of Extinction (2014) (?/10, ?/10, ?/10)
It is one of the most unusual franchises in history as it is derisive among purists, yet it is also a lucrative moneymaker. I am of course talking about Transformers. A 1984 cartoon that had a massive toy line, only to be replaced by a whole new toy line by 1986’s game changing theatrical film. And then came producer Steven Spielberg, who hand picked non fan of the cartoon Michael Bay to handle a live action version of that oh so lucrative toy line from many years ago. With five films, a cartoon movie, and a brand new prequel starring Bumblebee, we tackle a franchise that is derided and molded. But how will myself, Nate, and Matt respond to it?
2007 marked 21 years since the Transformers transformed on the big screen. With Optimus Prime’s death went fans’ starvation to see their robotic heroes fight it out in the cinema. Leave it up to advances in computer graphic images (CGI) and the clout of producer Steven Spielberg to make fans’ dreams come true. After hiring director Michael Bay to helm the film, Spielberg sat back and watched as the finished film launched into the stratosphere, bringing in almost $800 million worldwide and making stars out of Shia LeBeouf and Megan Fox. Oh, not to mention spawning four sequels and the prequel for which this retrospective was started. But how do we feel about it?
Join myself, Nate, and Matt as we do our first dissection of a Bay film on the Aftertaste, and determine whether initial reactions to the huge rock ’em sock ’em robot slugfest which began the Transformers franchise is worth another look.
It is one of the most unusual franchises in history as it is derisive among purists, yet it is also a lucrative moneymaker. I am of course talking about Transformers. A 1984 cartoon that had a massive toy line, only to be replaced by a whole new toy line by 1986’s game changing theatrical film. And then came producer Steven Spielberg, who hand picked non fan of the cartoon Michael Bay to handle a live action version of that oh so lucrative toy line from many years ago. With five films, a cartoon movie, and a brand new prequel starring Bumblebee, we tackle a franchise that is derided and molded. But how will myself, Nate, and Matt respond to it?
In 1984, young boys were ready for something to replace Star Wars. Sure, we had He-Man to tide us over, but there HAD to be another thing to keep us busy, right? Enter Transformers. After two successful seasons, Hasbro felt the need to change the formula by releasing a theatrical film that would not only kill off the old line of toys, but also introduce a whole new set. Essentially, they ended up making an hour and a half toy commercial.
Join Nate, Matt, and myself as we dive into Transformers: The Movie, and wonder if the massive box office flop from the time has any redeeming qualities, and begin our journey toward this month’s Bumblebee release.
As part of our perks for Better Call Binge, donators to a certain level were given the option of joining me and Law on a commentary of their choosing. The one and only NateP gave us some film options, one of those being Guy Ritchie’s Snatch. It was just the right movie for the right guest for the right mood (we were really drunk).
So enjoy this commentary the way Bricktop enjoys hurting people, Mickey enjoys pooping and Turkish enjoys drinking milk (why).
Waiting for a good, realistic looking dinosaur movie as a kid was like waiting to grow up. It couldn’t happen soon enough. Specials and educational programs of dinosaurs, as well as books and puzzles galore decorated every little boy’s room, just waiting for that movie that didn’t look like stop motion to come sweep us off our feet. And no, dinobots do NOT count. Little did we know, five movies about these very creatures would soon roam our theaters, all overseen by the director who had already changed cinema forever the decade before.
Fourteen years after Jurassic Park III came and went with little more than a whimper, producer Steven Spielberg was ready to once again tackle the world of dinosaurs. But instead of bringing in someone known for big blockbuster entertainment like he did with Michael Bay and Transformers, he brought in Colin Trevorrow. Who the hell is Colin Trevorrow, you may ask. He was the director of a little 2012 Sundance highlight called Safety Not Guaranteed. Based off that film, which was by no means a showcase of visual effects, the gamble on Trevorrow paid off as Jurassic World ended up making over $1 billion. But how do we feel about it?
Join me, Law, and Nate as all three of us revisit Jurassic World for the first time since theaters. All of us were initially dead set against its machinations and unending nuances back in 2015. But will the three of us feel the same way now?
Download below to find out, and be sure to tune in next Tuesday as we dissect the new release Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom, and I give the Binge Aftertaste schedule for the remainder of summer.
Note: There were a few technical difficulties spread throughout this episode. Sorry about that. Please don’t make us extinct as a result.
Waiting for a good, realistic looking dinosaur movie as a kid was like waiting to grow up. It couldn’t happen soon enough. Specials and educational programs of dinosaurs, as well as books and puzzles galore decorated every little boy’s room, just waiting for that movie that didn’t look like stop motion to come sweep us off our feet. And no, dinobots do NOT count. Little did we know, five movies about these very creatures would soon roam our theaters, all overseen by the director who had already changed cinema forever the decade before.
After 1997’s The Lost World Jurassic Park came and went, the sour taste that film left in peoples’ mouths made it seem like a sequel might never reach our cinemas. But money talks, and Universal knew that a new movie would bring in some more cash. But after two films from behind the helm, Steven Spielberg decided that he was out as director. Enter his longtime behind the scenes collaborator Joe Johnston.
With a rather unimpressive directorial resume up to this point (though I would bat for 1994’s The Rocketeer), Johnston would seem to be a hack whom Spielberg threw a bone to in order to keep his franchise in the limelight. But here we stand, without Jeff Goldblum. This time with William H Macy, Tea Leoni, and a returning Sam Neill. Could the third movie in the series be the creative answer to an all podcaster on this show agreed upon dismal second film?
Join me, Jim Law, and an exhausted Nate Peterson to find out the answer, while also bearing witness to another Binge sparring match with threats of tapping out of the entire series. After all, what would a series of podcasts on this network be without at least one of those? And no, it has nothing to do with killing kids.
Listen below, and be sure to tune in next week as all of us dreadingly return to Jurassic World, and then come back the week after to review Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom.