Next Transformers movie name?

[GoktimusPrime]

From wikipedia:
"The term "dark side of the moon" is commonly used poetically to refer to the far side" <--so from a poetic or literary perspective I can accept "dark side" as meaning the far side of the moon, even if it may not be astronomically correct.

But as you said, all moon missions occured on the near side; and the Ark's crash site is shown to be close to Tranquility Base, located on the near side of the moon. So yeah... still don't get why the 3rd Bay film is called "Dark of the Moon."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_side_of_the_Moon

[Cat]

This is an outrage.

[GL-Sideswipe]

Isn't it still called the dark side since its the side that doesn't face earth? Even if it isn't actually 'dark'.

[GL-Sideswipe]

So yeah... still don't get why the 3rd Bay film is called "Dark of the Moon."

I still don't get why you can't just accept it has to do with them losing video contact with the people watching on earth, hence being dark on the moon, maybe the term dark of the moon also refers to the secrets of the moon, ie the ark and sentinel prime.

[griffin]

"Jettison some weigh or we'll never get back to Cybertron" - something I picked up last night while watching the Original Transformers movie.
A movie intended mostly for kids & teens, isn't going to follow all the laws of physics or science if scientifically accurate elements are going to get in the way of its (mere) entertainment value. Who here even questioned Astrotrain's statement, when watching the original movie for the first time, or refused to accept the plausibility of it or the entire movie over it?

The "Dark" element here (and the element of weight in space in the 1986 movie) is a small, insignificant element of their respective movies - obsessing on it will just be petty and spoil your own fun (and others) of the other 99% of the Movie.
Enjoy the majority of the movie that makes sense, and ignore the elements that are there for marketing purposes (a foreboding title) or for the purpose of a single plot device.

[GoktimusPrime]

Isn't it still called the dark side since its the side that doesn't face earth? Even if it isn't actually 'dark'.

Yet Mare Tranquilitatis and the Ark's crash site are on the near side and facing Earth. You can even see Earth from where they are in the movie - in fact, Earth is closer to the moon's horizon than it should be IRL.

I still don't get why you can't just accept it has to do with them losing video contact with the people watching on earth, hence being dark on the moon,

"of" =/= "on"

"Care for a cup on tea?"
"I left the book of top of the dining table."

maybe the term dark of the moon also refers to the secrets of the moon, ie the ark and sentinel prime.

The real secret is that entire army of Decepticons who just happened to be lying buried there for decades (centuries?)!! What luck!! I can't remember if the comics or any expanded universe material have explained _why_ there just happened to be an entire army of Decepticons living on the moon (and we never saw them before during the first two films), but when I saw DotM for the second time with some non-Transfan friends, one of my mates sitting next to me kept laughing and going, "What?!? Why are there Decepticons on the moon?!? Where did they come from??!" -- he looked at me demanding an answer from me... I had none.

"Jettison some weigh or we'll never get back to Cybertron" - something I picked up last night while watching the Original Transformers movie.
A movie intended mostly for kids & teens, isn't going to follow all the laws of physics or science if scientifically accurate elements are going to get in the way of its (mere) entertainment value. Who here even questioned Astrotrain's statement, when watching the original movie for the first time, or refused to accept the plausibility of it or the entire movie over it?

*raises.hand* Okay, I didn't question it when I saw it in the cinema, but I did question it when I saw it again on VHS 2 years later.

Anyway, the Bay trilogy seems to be targetted at a more adult audience - hence the greater use of coarse language, sexual references/lewd humour, ample use of... erm... fan service shots (cough), and not to mention a massive budget. Also, Transformers The Movie was essentially an extended toy commercial, whereas the Michael Bay movies were made as movies. Transformers The Movie was part of G1 which was primarily a toy franchise first, movie second. The Bayverse movies were developed as a movie franchise first, toys and other merchandising franchise second. So considering that these M rated movies that appear to be aimed at a more adult audience with big blockbuster budgets (as opposed to children's animated cartoon movie aimed at selling toys), I can't help but hold higher standards. Also Transformers The Movie came out in 1986, when most of us were in primary school... Dark of the Moon came out in 2011 were most of us original Transfans are now adults.

Both movies were created and released under different contexts and I don't find it an adequate comparison.

The "Dark" element here (and the element of weight in space in the 1986 movie) is a small, insignificant element of their respective movies - obsessing on it will just be petty and spoil your own fun (and others) of the other 99% of the Movie.
Enjoy the majority of the movie that makes sense,

Like Decepticons on the moon?

"Decepticons on the moon
We carry a harpoon
But there ain't no whales
So we tell tall tales
And sing our whaling tune."



I'm just ribbin' ya. I know what you mean. As David Wise says, "Engage the Balonium drive!"

---------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, getting back to the original intention of this thread, I hope that the any future Transformer movies will have less ambiguous sounding titles.

[Cat]

It's NOT ambiguous at all to the vast majority of people. I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the title, other than you.

Let's hope they keep it up with these titles, as they're at least interesting and catchy.

[crankcase76]

I agree with Cat, the title of the movie is not what the majority of people care about. It would have to be the actual movie it self.

[SkyWarp91]

Transformers : Light of the Sun

[Robzy]

The "Dark" element here (and the element of weight in space in the 1986 movie) is a small, insignificant element of their respective movies

To be fair, I don't think you can compare the two. I don't consider it a plot hole, I think it's a "title hole"! It really doesn't make sense.

And don't get me started on plot holes in DOTM...

the Bay trilogy seems to be targetted at a more adult audience - hence the greater use of coarse language, sexual references/lewd humour, ample use of... erm... fan service shots (cough), and not to mention a massive budget.

So considering that these M rated movies that appear to be aimed at a more adult audience with big blockbuster budgets (as opposed to children's animated cartoon movie aimed at selling toys), I can't help but hold higher standards.

Both movies were created and released under different contexts and I don't find it an adequate comparison.

I actually totally agree with you!

It's NOT ambiguous at all to the vast majority of people. I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about the title, other than you.

Really? Here's a few just for starters... this one, and this one, and here, and here and another, and so on... In fact, the title's relevance was even discussed at the last Ozformers Meet-up I attended.

And to be fair, I also think the title is VERY "ambiguous" as it stands. I honestly think it was originally supposed to be called "Dark SIDE of the Moon" but for legal reasons they had to change it somehow. DOTM is just plain bad English, no matter how you slice it. So this seems like the obvious answer... ie, it has nothing to do with the plot at all, it's just a way of avoiding a law suit!