Bay talks Transformers 4 and Abrams talks Star Trek Into Darkness ‘mishandling’

Bay on Transformers

OK, I know not everyone feels the same way, but i’m a big fan of both Michael Bay’s Transformers movies and JJ Abrams’ Star Trek movies. There, I said it – though I make no secret of it.

But now Michael Bay has been talking to  Yahoo about Transformers: Age Of Extinction and if it’s a reboot, remake, re-imagining and what the tone will be:

“It feels like a new chapter, this movie. But it’s not a reboot. This movie lives in the history of the ‘Transformers’ movies, and this one starts three years after the last. It feels fresh.

“This is a much more cinematic one. I focused on keeping this one slick. There won’t be any goofiness in this one. We went a bit too goofy [on the others].”

So, it’s still the same cinematic universe and it will be more cinematic (Huh?) and less ‘goofy’.

Now, one of the main criticisms of Star Trek: Into Darkness

Abrams on Into Darkness

Remember all the fuss pre-Into Darkness where the internet went into meltdown about what character Benedict Cumberbatch was playing? And the studio denied it? Then it turned out the fans were right? Well, director JJ Abrams feels that whole fiasco wasn’t handled very well.

Talking with MTV, Abrams admitted he wasn’t impressed with how it went down: “Personally, as I’ve stated before, I do think that entire matter was woefully mishandled – and may well have confounded potential viewers rather than shielding them from spoilers.

“Also, I’m a strong believer that hyper secrecy on a film project (or TV project) can often be more detrimental than constructive – for two primary reasons: 1) My personal belief (and I fully realize this opinion will not be shared by many – and may even be reviled by a few) is that…if knowledge of a ‘spoiler’ is going to diminish one’s ability to enjoy a story, then the story in question isn’t being conveyed strongly enough to begin with. Strong stories…’classic stories’…after all…are the ones we can enjoy over and over again, regardless of our foreknowledge.

“2) Too much ‘secrecy’ regarding a project often invites audiences and fans to theorize and imagine and HOPE and conjecture…which is fun enough, admittedly. On the other hand, what fans/audiences end up imagining or conjecturing or anticipating is often wilder, bolder, or more imaginative than what ends up on screen. Thus, ironically, the ‘secrecy’ being used to preserve a film or TV show’s purity may inadvertently set-up their followers for disappointment…and a dreaded ‘Oh, THAT’S all it is!?’ reaction.”

So, what do you all think? Was how the situation was handled the main problem? Let us know your thoughts in the usual ways…