ZBrushCentral

Transformers Movie Inconsistencies - anybody else notice?

Community
#1

So I finally got around to seein’ the new TRANSFORMERS movie today and was diggin’ it until I noticed some inconsistencies with the Navy ships. Ok - I have to admit - I am in the Navy so when I see a movie with stuff like this, I obviously notice when they get stuff wrong. The facts:

USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71
USS John C. Stennis CVN-74
USS Kidd DD-661
USS Preble DDG-88

Now, I don’t remember which one of the carriers was sunk, but both carriers were seen flip flopping in scenes in the end of the movie. Would have been too much to expect for something that minor to have been correct? Could they not have used a fake carrier? Also, USS Kidd was the Destroyer called upon with the “newly developed weapon” that fires upon the pyramid. Anyway, the ship shown had a hull number of 88 when it should have been 661. Five minutes on Google could have gotten this stuff right. Or, like I said earlier, they could have made a couple of ships up. Sorry for the soap box, but it really drives me nuts when stuff like this happens in movies. I was in a movie theater in a Navy town and I wasn’t the only person in there scratchin’ my head when these scenes happened. Thanks for reading. Love to hear others weigh in on this. For the record, I thought the visual effects were amazing. :smiley:

Later - Mike

P.S. If you are reading this and you were involved with the movie, I would be happy to consult on other movies with Navy stuff in them for a nominal fee :wink:

#2

personally I think those sorts of details would largely go unnoticed by an audience…especially the difference between 88 - 661.

I didn’t notice but I did notice edits which kinda felt out.
For example the tazer gag, we see that kid get tazer’d in the museum and he goes into convoltions, then he gets tazer’d in bumble bee later on while they are evading devastator, but seconds (not moments) later he’s moving about like nothing happened.

There where one or two more less obvious but that one really pulled me out of the moment.

Funny how you tend to notice the stuff that relates to you.
Overall I feel the first one was a better film, but seeing optimus kick ass was great…and of course megan fox with her gummy thumb, so hot right now :slight_smile:

#3

Yeah - I noticed that tazer thing, too, but like you said - I gravitated towards the Navy stuff because I’m in the Navy. I thought they hired technical advisors for movies so that they made things technically accurate. I understand that movies are fiction, but stuff like this should be accurate. Just my two cents…

Later - Mike

#4

maybe for legal reasons they couldn’t do what you suggest. or more likely they liked the way one thing sounded in the script, names etc and were only to get footage of certain ships. like Stennis doesn’t sound interesting at all so maybe they shot it and called it the Roosevelt.
its a popcorn movie after all though.
have to say i’m not happy with the “bible” references in this film.
those handheld tasers don’t immobilize you like that right? i swear on COPS they hit people with those a few times and you just go down out of pain and nerve electrical disruption but i think it only lasts as long as you’re getting tased right?

star trek had this moment of “external” inertial dampners and i almost flipped.

#5

I saw in the credits they used military and naval forces with advisors, but that was probly for pre-production advise and maybe on location surpervision…maybe.

However when editing mostly likely a completely differnet group of people overseeing it, of course MB would approve it all but unless a specific film about historical events those details would and have slipped through the cracks.

Shame they didn’t nail it though

#6

morph its just MB being consistent, look here at his historical film:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0213149/goofs

#7

rofl…
one of my favorite Hollywood goofs is from the sound of music (not that i’m into that sort of thing) when they ‘‘escape’’ geographically they are actually running into Germany…why let the truth get in the way of profit:lol:

#8

also I agree, the biblical ref seemed a tad cheesy.
why not just set the whole freakin film in cybertron, a back story to their arrival on earth…damn them to heck!

#9

haha i was amazed at how easily it was to get to cybertron. but i think they showed it to us that little bit because it will be a big thing in the next film, if they make it.
did you get the feeling that they shouldve just made the army guys be gijoe? there were a few comic crossovers. i guess they could still do that, sigh.
devestator was such a let down. could go on and on but its not worth it.
anyway michael bay is no stanley kubrick.

#10

yeah…there were so many characters that could of gotten more story.
Personally I think MB will ride/finger bang it to retirement…I mean there’s still Cybertron, GIJOE warriors and malnutrition baby Deceptacons.
Heres to many popcorn worthy sequels…:+1:small_orange_diamond:+1:small_orange_diamond:+1:

#11

Screw the details… bahhh plot?? Who needs that…
It’s all about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRS90V8BQGo

#12

The movie was full of errors and inconsistencies. I’ve seen huge lists pointed out. One of the biggest I’ve seen mentioned, which I had to slap myself around for not noticing when I saw it myself, was that they go into the Smithsonian to find that crotchety old decepticon. Then they open this hangar door and all of a sudden there’s this airfield seemingly in the desert with no sign of a city around them.

But whatever… I honestly don’t care so much about that stuff. I watch movies for fun, which means I allow myself suspension of disbelief and don’t scrutinize until it’s over. I’m able to enjoy lots of movies that other people can’t just because I’m not anal. I can even accept a movie with no substance for the sake of a good special effects show, and there were some awesome special effects in Transformers 2.

But I do believe in good taste, and that movie had none. It was hours of humping, testicle references, Megan Fox worship, Sam’s mom getting stoned, and those twin bots who were the most crudely stereotyped ghetto trash personalities I’ve ever seen. The first movie had some juvenile humor as well, but it was better timed and kept on a tight leash.

#13

WOW!! ROFLOL! LOLs haven’t laughed that hard in a while
The short video made-up for all miss-haps in TF2

#14

i totally agree spacecowboy :lol: i even posted this several times on a separate forum and apparently i was the only one there who made the connection.
to be honest inspite of all the bad reviews people give TF1-2(and now 3, whenver that is released) the few scenes with josh and tyrese and their military unit is the closest thing we will ever get to as a “TF vs JOE”
because GOD knows if hollywood gets their hands on the *JAE LEE Transformers Vs GIJOE * ; which is the good version , they will butcher it and make it PC. kind of like the “heroes reborn -NO NAZI on the cover captain america item”

my buddy Darque, basicly called it when he said they made Autobot Perceptor a bad guy aka THE DOCTOR .
me personally i like the flick and only watch it to support the original Megatron who makes a cameo as his other voice “SOUNDWAVE the satalite raping machine” /ravage , aka PREDALIEN (i loved so much i have G1 ravage detailed on my car as well as have his cassette hanging DOGTAG-style from my RVM ) i did not shed one Effing tear when he got into that fight with bumblebee.

since the GIJOE flick sucks [[ATLEAST WE WILL HAVE THE TROOPERS FROM THE FIRST ONE to do a decent job]]
roadblock / tyrese, josh / flint, gung-ho /the gator guy , mainfraim[ goggles, nickname] / the tech guy, and the medic soldier/first aid 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and to continue the hatred of GIJOE ....
i gave that film the benifit of the doubt , i honestly did i paid my hard earned cash and sat thru it praying to the almighty GOLOBULUS that the story would get better ... it didnt .
i walked out of the theater when duke /baroness / rex aka CC got intertwined 
25 minits into the movie if i am correct.
i read officially sienna miller complained that she had to put on fake boobs for the role. well here is a word of advice to casting  YOU DONT HIRE A FLATCHESTED ACTRESS to Effing play a legendary well endowed psychopath. 
1. jessica beil  - sexy as hell as well as a good fighter
2.Garcelle Beauvais - cute amazing actressl, just for a change of pace lets have 2 black actors in a movie .;) . with no romantic interest at all.
3.charisma carpenter - 
 
all of these actresses have the skills to be her vocally . and the fact that they have the body to be the baroness  pisses me off by casting a flatchested one to be such an iconic figure. 
if you dont believe me , just google sienna miller topless .
#15

yes, I agree there were a lot of inconsistencies. I figured since this film was based on a cartoon, I wouldn’t expect it to go into much detail about the crafts, gears etc.