Another fargin' Transformers movie?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shannow

Staff member
Well, it was better than the last one. I will give it that. And actually, the 3d was quite good throughout, which was surprising.
 
A friend of mine went to see it last night, apparently she and her friends enjoyed it quite a bit. I will probably see it next weekend.
 
Easily the best of the 3 movies.

Good popcorn movie and surprising a REALLY GOOD score. Gonna have to check out the OST.
 
I just got back from it.

It's better than the first two. Though I know for the Eberts and Charlies among us, that's not saying much.

It feels like the film makers took into account some of the criticisms of the first two movies. There are no annoying ebonics robots, and there's much less focus on Shia Leboeuf's angst and much more focus on robots beating the crap out of each other. The plot holes are smaller this time (though that's sort of saying a sperm whale is smaller than a blue whale; they're still big). And generally speaking when something's happening on screen, you can actually make out what's happening, instead of the robot-shaped blurs we got before.

Having said that though, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley is a horrible actress and she should be banned from ever acting again. And if Wheelie from the second movie annoyed you, there's another robot in the third movie who you will hate with the heat of a thousand burning suns.

Finally...

NOOOOO!!!! IRONHIDE!!!!!
 

Shannow

Staff member
Filled..completely filled with Bay-isms. I am not saying I did not enjoy it, and it was defintiely better than the last two, but there were a lot of faults with this movie. A lot. I thought that the camera was going to get a sexual harassment suit against it by the end of the movie, the way it constantly and slowly went over the girl friend.
 
Best of the three, but 30 minutes too long. I second that the robots are easier to make out in the fights. The girl in the movie is better looking than Megan Fox (IMHO) and is a better actress, which isn't saying much. I actually hated the whole girlfriend angle...could have been a stronger movie without it.
 
My husband is gone to see this right now. I wish could have gone so I could record what probably would have been a very annoyed video rant.

As it is, I'll save the money for Harry Potter.
 
Okay, all you guys who think it was better than the last two.... I have no idea what movie you watched but it wasn't the one I did.

I mean, I understood what kind of movie I was getting into. I'm okay with it not being deep, or amazingly acted, or being a profound statement about the role of humanity in the greater cosmos. I liked the first movie okay. I thought the second movie was two hours of decent film wrapped in about twenty minutes of suck. I was genuinely hoping for this to be a fun action flick, my source of explosions for this fourth of July.

This movie was twenty of minutes of decent action movie wrapped in two hours of awfulness. There were two forty-minute segments where I literally did not care at all what was going on or why. I reasonably cared about Sam at first, until it became clear that he really has zero useful skills in the event of an alien invasion apocalypse, and his primary motivation was rescuing a girl who makes Megan Fox look like a dazzling oscar winner. (Seriously, how did they find someone who felt MORE fake and exploited than Megan Fox did?)

I liked Optimus' little character arc when he found out his mentor betrayed everything he believed in. If the movie had actually been about him, or if Sam had somehow been relevant to anything ever, I might have cared about the explosions going on all over the place. Without that, even the explosions managed to be bland and meaningless.
 
Filled..completely filled with Bay-isms. I am not saying I did not enjoy it, and it was defintiely better than the last two, but there were a lot of faults with this movie. A lot. I thought that the camera was going to get a sexual harassment suit against it by the end of the movie, the way it constantly and slowly went over the girl friend.
Bay seems to do that a lot, I was trying to notice shots that didn't include a panning/tracking shot. He loves the camera-orbiting-character shots.

I could have done without Optimus channeling Bull Pullman's Independence Day speech style in every line read.
 
Oh that explains it. The one I watched as "Transformers: Dark of the Moon."

Anyone know where "Transformers 3" is playing?
Added at: 15:17
I could have done without Optimus channeling Bull Pullman's Independence Day speech style in every line read.
I didn't mind that so much, although I did find myself quoting the speech word for word somewhere towards the end of the movie. It was ridiculous but in a fun way.
 
The movie lost me at the beginning when Michael Bay tried to play off the moon landing as a real event and not the national hoax it actually was. Does anyone believe that, with the technology we had at that time, on our first try successfully shoot a rocket into space, have it land gingerly on the moon, let the astronauts get out and walk around while broadcasting, then get back into their ship and have it launched off the moon? Really? If so, Jesse Ventura would like to give you a chair head shot because you've never watched his show. After that all I had was to admire the hot female lead and the giant robots beating the crap out of each other.
And Roger Ebert lost 2 1/2 hours of his life that he could have used contemplating when he use to have a chin. I'm sure Gene Siskel would have rather spend 2 1/2 hours watching Transformers Dark of the Moon instead of rotting in hell but too bad for him.
Other than that I thought the movie was a fun summer movie.
 
So you are saying that the second one was better?
Honestly, yeah. If you cut out twenty minutes of sexist and racist jokes and people yelling for no reason, I think what's left of the second movie was a reasonably entertaining action flick. I could tell who was fighting who (for the most part). The shots of Optimus Prime really played up his awesomeness. The parents showing at the end and letting go of their son was a hamfisted attempt to pull emotional strings, but at least they made ANY attempt to be emotionally engaging.

The "action scenes" in the third movie just looked like a giant cloud of particle effects. There were no establishing shots - every scene seemed to start in the middle of a robot contorting around in some bizarre dance that didn't make sense while explosions went off, obscuring them. Even the fighting scenes with Optimus Prime were ONLY cool because he was Optimus Prime. And while they did get rid of many of the bad jokes that made the second one so painful, they also removed the last semblance of emotional engagement.
 
The movie lost me at the beginning when Michael Bay tried to play off the moon landing as a real event and not the national hoax it actually was. Does anyone believe that, with the technology we had at that time, on our first try successfully shoot a rocket into space, have it land gingerly on the moon, let the astronauts get out and walk around while broadcasting, then get back into their ship and have it launched off the moon? Really? If so, Jesse Ventura would like to give you a chair head shot because you've never watched his show. After that all I had was to admire the hot female lead and the giant robots beating the crap out of each other.
And Roger Ebert lost 2 1/2 hours of his life that he could have used contemplating when he use to have a chin. I'm sure Gene Siskel would have rather spend 2 1/2 hours watching Transformers Dark of the Moon instead of rotting in hell but too bad for him.
Other than that I thought the movie was a fun summer movie.
Wow.
 
Right? My brain just went :Leyla:

On a more serious note: So when I saw TF2 I had 3 VERY serious vodka martini's beforehand and I ended up sobering up halfway through. At that point I realized I had entered hell.
How much do I need to drink to make it through TF3? I feel like there is a "right" number of drinks but I'm unsure as to what it might be... Half a bottle of good Tequila? I mean, if 3 martini's didn't cut it...
 
The movie lost me at the beginning when Michael Bay tried to play off the moon landing as a real event and not the national hoax it actually was. Does anyone believe that, with the technology we had at that time, on our first try successfully shoot a rocket into space, have it land gingerly on the moon, let the astronauts get out and walk around while broadcasting, then get back into their ship and have it launched off the moon? Really? If so, Jesse Ventura would like to give you a chair head shot because you've never watched his show. After that all I had was to admire the hot female lead and the giant robots beating the crap out of each other.
And Roger Ebert lost 2 1/2 hours of his life that he could have used contemplating when he use to have a chin. I'm sure Gene Siskel would have rather spend 2 1/2 hours watching Transformers Dark of the Moon instead of rotting in hell but too bad for him.
Other than that I thought the movie was a fun summer movie.
What the fuck did I just read?

Honestly, yeah. If you cut out twenty minutes of sexist and racist jokes and people yelling for no reason, I think what's left of the second movie was a reasonably entertaining action flick. I could tell who was fighting who (for the most part). The shots of Optimus Prime really played up his awesomeness. The parents showing at the end and letting go of their son was a hamfisted attempt to pull emotional strings, but at least they made ANY attempt to be emotionally engaging.

The "action scenes" in the third movie just looked like a giant cloud of particle effects. There were no establishing shots - every scene seemed to start in the middle of a robot contorting around in some bizarre dance that didn't make sense while explosions went off, obscuring them. Even the fighting scenes with Optimus Prime were ONLY cool because he was Optimus Prime. And while they did get rid of many of the bad jokes that made the second one so painful, they also removed the last semblance of emotional engagement.
No... just no. I still think you watched the wrong movie.

How much do I need to drink to make it through TF3? I feel like there is a "right" number of drinks but I'm unsure as to what it might be... Half a bottle of good Tequila? I mean, if 3 martini's didn't cut it...
The answer to this question is 0. Go sober and stop being a goddamn internet pissant nagging for no goddamn reason other to get on the "bandwagon". You're all big boys/girls, you should all be able to formulated your own opinions.

Try it, it tastes like individual freedom.
 
The answer to this question is 0. Go sober and stop being a goddamn internet pissant nagging for no goddamn reason other to get on the "bandwagon". You're all big boys/girls, you should all be able to formulated your own opinions.
Thanks for setting me straight Jay. What would I ever do without you and your name calling?:awesome:

And for the record, I'm being somewhat serious in my question and I'm betting there are a few other people that enjoy going to bad movies after some drinks.
 
The movie lost me at the beginning when Michael Bay tried to play off the moon landing as a real event and not the national hoax it actually was. Does anyone believe that, with the technology we had at that time, on our first try successfully shoot a rocket into space, have it land gingerly on the moon, let the astronauts get out and walk around while broadcasting, then get back into their ship and have it launched off the moon? Really? If so, Jesse Ventura would like to give you a chair head shot because you've never watched his show. After that all I had was to admire the hot female lead and the giant robots beating the crap out of each other.
And Roger Ebert lost 2 1/2 hours of his life that he could have used contemplating when he use to have a chin. I'm sure Gene Siskel would have rather spend 2 1/2 hours watching Transformers Dark of the Moon instead of rotting in hell but too bad for him.
Other than that I thought the movie was a fun summer movie.
wtf.gif
 
Thread about movie sequel derailed by insane conspiracy theory.

Damn, I love this forum!

... Also, tell Buzz Aldrin there was no moon landing. I would LOVE to know how that works out for ya.
 
The movie lost me at the beginning when Michael Bay tried to play off the moon landing as a real event and not the national hoax it actually was. Does anyone believe that, with the technology we had at that time, on our first try successfully shoot a rocket into space, have it land gingerly on the moon, let the astronauts get out and walk around while broadcasting, then get back into their ship and have it launched off the moon? Really? If so, Jesse Ventura would like to give you a chair head shot because you've never watched his show. After that all I had was to admire the hot female lead and the giant robots beating the crap out of each other.
And Roger Ebert lost 2 1/2 hours of his life that he could have used contemplating when he use to have a chin. I'm sure Gene Siskel would have rather spend 2 1/2 hours watching Transformers Dark of the Moon instead of rotting in hell but too bad for him.
Other than that I thought the movie was a fun summer movie.
I think this is English for "My brain melted from Michael Bay's shithouse movie and I am not longer coherent."
 

Cajungal

Staff member
Fuck yeah!

...Man, if I kept liquor in my house, I'd try and make one of those now and then post a picture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top