What is Digg?132 Comments
- jewdiknight, on 10/11/2007, -9/+235I really don't have much of a problem with this. By recycling this one shot, he saved more money that went to awesome robot transforming scenes.
- jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -3/+79nice catch, but doesn't take away from the film
- luddep, on 10/11/2007, -2/+65It's still got big ass transforming robots.. so who cares?
- PhoenixAvatar2, on 10/11/2007, -3/+55No biggie, happens all the time. There's some recycled footage in Spider-Man, in the sequence that goes by as Peter is transformed into Spidey.
- sjbdallas, on 10/11/2007, -7/+58No problem with this at all. It makes sense to recycle footage in the digital age anyway. We recycle code and images in the computer world, why not recycle footage. It's not an exact copy anyway as he did some other stuff with it.
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -0/+50Programmers do this all the time. Why spend time and energy creating a whole new program when you can make minor changes to a similar program. Very logical and efficient way to work.
- Depthfunction, on 10/11/2007, -6/+38Meh. Isn't that what you are supposed to do with garbage--recycle it?
- BobbyMC, on 07/21/2008, -3/+34Reusing your own shot to save money on your new movie ain't *****. The striking similarities of the pictures is interesting, but it ain't got ***** on the Kimba/Simba conspiracy.
http://www.kimbawlion.com/rant2.htm - swiftekho, on 10/11/2007, -2/+33I feel bad for the guy who went back and was like... OH MY GAWD SAME SHOTS!
- otero1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+32WHOOPTY FREAKIN DOO! :)
- empressofmetal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+20Hey, I'm fine with it too, no batching Michael Bay here. I just thought it was a really cool catch. If it saves money and time, why not? They're both his films and it's not like this HAD TO BE new footage here. It's only seconds long and not a major part of the story.
With that said ... TRANSFORMERS WAS AWESOME. - Mischa, on 10/11/2007, -4/+24This movie destroys my fear of it sucking hard.
When Optimus rolls up for the for time i almost cried and yelled at the same time.
The redesigns are no where near as bad as I thought they would be. I am a hard core G1 fan, and can quote the cartoon movie from beginning to end.
Probably the greatest movie of my life (so far.) - SourWorm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15Recycling is good for the environment, mmmkay.
- AzraDarkness, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13They are recycled, look at the clouds in the sky...but who cares!
Its Transformers! Its a movie! - robdiggity, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13"Did Michael Bay Recycle Pearl Harbor Footage into Transformers?"
Answer: Yes. - razor150, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11It might be stock footage, so you could possibly see that shot in other movies as well.
- ECas123, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Sargent more Japanese fighters coming close
Thats no Japanese fighter...ITS STARSCREAM!!! - Supurcell, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12From the beginning, the epic Transformers saga has been about artfully telling a story. A story about robots from another world going incognito on the planet Earth. Why do they hide? What are they hiding from? These are the questions the series explores. Questions that we all must ask our inner robot. Maybe someday the Autobots and Decepticons will be able to shed their disguises, and so will we.
Oh yeah. It was also about selling toys. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11i should make an OS off of the xerox OS and call it OS.......... oh wai.....
- det0r, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11I have to agree with the comments, who cares if he recycled the footage, they obviously did several other things to keep the costs to a minimum (such as not using big name actors who cost $20m each). It was an amazing movie, full credit to Michael Bay.
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Yeah Pearl Harbor is definitely a movie you could go without seeing. I went in expecting an action war flick and discovered it was actually a chick flick with bombs.
- joel8x, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Are you that guy who works at Mooby's?
- GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I think the thought process that went through Michael Bay's mind was, "I'll get away with this because no one in their right mind would go back and watch Pearl Harbour".
- Arkonnan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8> I have read some bad reviews stating the plot was too shallow or outrageous, and the humans had empty roles and drab characterization.
A lot of people, especially old school fans, have unrealistic expectations of what the movie should be. They forget that this is based on a child's cartoon. It's the same problem the Star Wars fanatics had when the prequels came out. They grew up, expecting their favourite childhood movie to grow up with them. They forgot that the franchise was always meant to appeal to a younger audience and sell toys.
I mean, c'mon. This is a Michael Bay film. He's not exactly known for his engaging character development. It's not meant to provoke deep philosophical discussion. It's about big robots blowing ***** up. Going into it with those expectations, I had a great time. You and I both seem to have enjoyed the movie for what it is, not for what we might have wanted it to be. - CurlyHayami, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Nonetheless man, that film was the best thing I've seen in theaters since Episode III-WHOO! Epic.
- studge, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7That's a bit of a different concept. The Spidey scenes are flashbacks - which Sam Raimi employs in a lot of his movies (as do most directors when working with sequels), see: Evil Dead 2 & 3 and the Darkman movies.
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -4/+10No, "by recycling this one shot" he saved more money for the studio. There's nothing that says the money he saved went back into the film. Michael bay is the director AND producer, so at times he might choose to save money at the sake of artistic value (wait, I forgot this is Transformers... artistic value.. lol).
- bebop717, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Oh this is a slippery slope for directors. First this, and next they will be shooting in non sequential order. We must stop them now!
- ssjdoob, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Yeah, best movie I've seen in a LONG time. I kept saying, "It was so good" the whole way home. As far as reusing that little bit of film. Who cares? I used to watch Voltron when I was little and I think about half of the show was identical to every other show! I still watched it.
- macamatition, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5And Megan Fox with a nice ass.
- marathonguy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Maybe when you are old enough to drive you can get out and see some more movies.
- hockachu, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Wordpress dies again.
http://duggmirror.com/movies/Did_Michael_Bay_Recycle_Pearl_Harbor_Footage_into_Transformers/ - CompIsMyRx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Doesn't matter. All of Transformers the series was basically recycled footage.
- biosonic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7There seems to be a common response and I agree with it, big deal. I have read some bad reviews stating the plot was too shallow or outrageous, and the humans had empty roles and drab characterization. I think the plot and characters are just fine, and if you are looking for something else, don't bash Michael Bay for not making transformers into it. It was supposed to be transforming robot action non-stop and that's what we got. My new all time favorite movie to date. *daydreams*
- ayeroxor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Is he related to Zoidberg?
- blacklilyninja, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4who cares
- o0adam0o, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6*mental note: dont browse any transformers related articles on digg, too many spoilers*
- duccodude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4No.
- schmik07, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4wow - that is an interesting article!
Good find. - gbro, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Similarly:
If a michael bay movie is shown in a cinema and no-one is there to watch it is it still terrible? - colincsl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3RTFA
- plankman, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6I loved the scene where the aircraft carrier transformed into a giant robot and started swatting the Japanese planes from the sky. Awesomeness!
- BelXul, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3The technical term for what we've just witnessed is "Stock Footage". You use it to save money on filming scenes in movies. Why go get footage of an aircraft carrier if you've already got boatloads of it in the film storage somewhere? I congratulate the guy who spotted it for having a keen eye and good memory, but it's one of those cheap tricks directors use all the time, so I'm not horrified about it.
- SpongeBad, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Is it really recycling if nobody ever saw the footage in the first place?
- Flashman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3hockachu posts same comment again.
- Gramage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Gotta feel sorry for Japan. Seems every three days a giant *something* is ruining their *****.
- crichton101, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Interesting, but film makers do this all the time. Every time you see a movie, all those establishing shots of cities or mountains, or really any sort of location establishing shots are usually stock footage.
- Traiklin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2that was the first thing that came to mind.
he used already made scenes from one of his earlier movies for this one to save time, money & energy....so what? the movie still kicked ass and was paced about as good as it could be for the setup. - skellener, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Bay = Hack
- AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -0/+2Bay needs to catch hell for the ***** ad placement in Transformers too.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is