Transformers 2 to Be a Big Car Commercial, And Why That’s Not a Bad Thing

Posted by Neil Miller (neil@filmschoolrejects.com) on June 23, 2008

New Camaro for Transformers 2

In the interest of full disclosure, I feel it necessary to say that I was a huge supporter of the first Transformers film. My loyalty to director Michael Bay runs deep, so deep that I will contend to this day that The Island was a decent film. Nothing I can do about Pearl Harbor, but The Island had its merits. In the case of Transformers, I was willing to trade off the commercialized nature of having all of the robots change into GM vehicles in order to get a big, badass film that featured some of my childhood’s most cherished characters. In a sense, I was the poor Russian boy during the Cold War, who willingly gave up his free speech under communist rule for the simple fact that he knew he would be fed — it was a trade off.

Chevy Concept Cars for Transformers 2And while I realized that many others out there were not willing to make said trade off, I wasn’t aware that it was cause for such disdain for Mr. Bay’s film. It didn’t hit me until I received an email last night from a reader named Terry, who dropped me a link to a story over on Slashfilm that broke down all of the known Transformers models in the upcoming sequel Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Terry wrote simply, “Have you seen this? This is absolute bull sh*t. I will not see this movie if it is going to be one big car commercial.”

As much as I would like to be able to say that I can understand where Terry is coming from on this issue, I can’t say that I do. I suppose that I was softened to the idea of an all-GM sponsored Transformers film while watching the behind the scenes footage of the first film, upon which Michael Bay mentions at one point how the film probably would not have been possible without some of the sponsorships. You see, Transformers wasn’t always a high priority project, certainly not one that Paramount would be willing to sink $300+ million dollars of production monies into. Therefore, the sponsorships from companies like GM helped keep the production budget down under $150 million, a figure that is unbelievably low when compared to that of Spider-Man 3, which cost upwards of $260 million.

So as it stands, Transformers fans really have a choice — would you rather have a Transformers movie where the vehicles are the new Chevy Beat, the Chevy Trax, the Saab Aero-X (pictured below) and the new, upgraded Chevy Camaro (pictured above, courtesy of Jalopnik), or would you like to have no Transformers movie at all?

Saab Aero-X

Personally, I am of the belief that the commercialization of big-budget films such as Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is ok as long as it doesn’t detract from the film. And at least with the first film, it did not detract from the film one bit — and I have a feeling that round two will follow suit.

What do you think, is it okay for Transformers 2 to be a big car commercial if that means that the film will get more money to invest in better, bigger special effects and whatnot?


Read more articles by Neil Miller

Related Reading:

Your Ad Here

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

  • HERO! 261
    bigger better boom for my buck?.......well DUH!
  • Really? "My loyalty to director Michael Bay runs deep, so deep that I will contend to this day that The Island was a decent film. Nothing I can do about Pearl Harbor, but The Island had its merits." - - I actually feel just the opposite. I much prefer Pearl Harbor over The Island. - Huh! Aint life funny that way. - - Senseless Babble
  • "In a sense, I was the poor Russian boy during the Cold War, who willingly gave up his free speech under communist rule for the simple fact that he knew he would be fed"

    Neil are you actually learning to write? haha, that's a great analogy. Love it.

    I personally don't mind some commercialism in films. I think it's a good way to help along a movie and keep the budget to a minimum, but when it's blatant and in your face I can't stand it... like the mountain dew pop machine in Transformers.
  • The Island might have been a good film? Had the marketing department or whoever is in charge, didn't reveal the major plot twist in the trailer!

    Are you telling me, car companies wouldn't be lining up to have their cars in the movie. As far as the Transformers movie goes, I'd rather no movie.

    On a side note, are the going to redesign Optimus? Or will he still have those douchey flames in his vehicle mode.
  • Neil, you and I have always disagreed about things like this. And about basic hygiene.

    Of course you already realize that I despise Michael Bay for his inability to put together a coherent movie, and I didn't like the first Transformers for just that reason. However, the problem of commercialism in movies steps into a different realm altogether.

    Some people have problems with commercialism and capitalism at a core-level. I'm not one of them. I tend to think I'm level-headed to avoid protesting a movie just because it prominently features a brand. In fact, I think having brands in movies adds to the verisimilitude - the real world is made up of major brands, so when a movie has a generic, joke name for a real product it actually takes me out of the action.

    But, I'm smart enough to realize when I'm being sold to. And that's the problem. Perhaps you're too excited to get pulled out of the shiny new story whenever commercialism strikes, but I do. When Bumble Bee transforms and knocks the turret off a tank, that's awesome. When we get a close-up, steady-cam shot of the Chevy logo for 10 seconds while Bumble Bee is speeding down the road, it's disgusting.

    And I totally disagree that Transformers wouldn't have been made without corporate sponsorship. Your ultimatum to either deal with commercialism or have no movie is just silly, my friend.

    Gotta run. I'm suddenly hungry for McNuggets.
  • An odd and seemingly impossible collision of events here... I agree with some of Neil's post (minus all the 'I Heart Michael Bay' pablum) and all of Cole "I'm boycotting FSR but not really" Abaius' points.
  • Bill Brasky
    Transformers needs cool cars and great special effects! If strategically placing cool sports cars in the film to double the FX budget ... I'm sold! What does it matter, it's not like we all walked to the Chevy dealership like zombies and dropped 60K to pre-order a Camaro.
  • eastindyguy
    Cole, you can't be serious... The Transformers wasn't coherent. My lord, my 8 year old daughter is able to follow it without having to ask questions. Do you want movies that are not only spoon fed to you but also chewed and swallowed for you as well. If there is one complaint to be made about Michael Bay, it has to be that his films are entirely too simplistic at times.
  • Simplistic. Yes. Simplistic to the point of incoherency.

    And of course I'd like my movies fed to me baby-bird style. Preferably while I sit on a bunch of pillows with servants massaging me and feeding me cantaloupe.
  • sigma 6
    I feel growing up with transformers there were different makes and models of cars. I wished that they had followed the new transformers alternator line of toys for the cars. I really wanted to see a S2000 and maybe even a EVO, or even a Lancer, or even a Ferarri. Instead we get all these GMC cars, I always thought autobots are suppose to be exotic cars not everday american cars. Camero is fine even the new Mustang or corvette but Chevy Beat and Trax are freakin ugly, why not a like a TC or Xb? Paramount has made millions of the first and maybe more on a ton more on the sequel why not do it right, and use good cars! Please do it right!
blog comments powered by Disqus