Can you trust micheal bay on TF3 not sucking?

[Dr Jackstraw]

Eh, a promising start at very least.

Also on another note, the game is awesome

It feels a little more clunky and slower than WFC, But other than that, it really is WFC with a Bayformers skin.

imokaywiththat.jpg

[Saint Nathan]

It feels a little more clunky and slower than WFC, But other than that, it really is WFC with a Bayformers skin.

imokaywiththat.jpg

Seriously? Hm. Are you playing it on the 3DS? I need a new game.

[Johnny Boy]

It's has a 43% on rotten tomatoes so far... Oh well. There's always hope for a reboot.

[Stacy]

It's has a 43% on rotten tomatoes so far... Oh well. There's always hope for a reboot.

Who cares about percentages, do people watch movies anymore?

[PSI Wind]

Let me guess, they complained about "THE PLOT SUCKS HURR"

>Implying Transformers needs a plot to be good

[Balding Spider]

Let me guess, they complained about "THE PLOT SUCKS HURR"

>Implying Transformers needs a plot to be good

No what Transformers really needs is a competent director, better dialogue, and better actors. If it had all of those than it would've been good, just look at AVATAR.

It's has a 43% on rotten tomatoes so far... Oh well. There's always hope for a reboot.

I atleast expected it to be 50% but if it makes you feel better it's higher than Green Lantern.

Edited June 28, 2011 by Balding Spider

[Patticus]

Empire's Transformers review is up:

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/review.asp?FID=136209

You’ll believe a robot can fly, but you won’t believe a Huntington-Whiteley can talk.

Here's TotalFilm's review:

http://www.totalfilm.com/reviews/cinema/transformers-3

Now for the bad news. British model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley is awful – awful! – as LaBeouf’s new love interest, sucking the life out of every scene she appears in like some pneumatic Dyson sexbot.

Bay needs to hire better casting directors.

[Nepenthe]

I still see this propagation of the idea that a popcorn film like Transformers is only obligated to deliver special effects and leave every other element of film-making on the cutting room floor, this assumption that popcorn films are all inherently terrible anyways and we, as paying people, should bend over and be grateful that someone had enough money to shut down a street, explode some things, and add CGI in post. It assumes there's no such thing as range of quality in popcorn films, that at the least, there aren't good ones and bad ones. This simply isn't true.

No one in their right mind expects Transformers to be Black Swan. What filmgoers like me who are on a limited budget do expect however, is for them to also stand as solid films in their own right. I expect a storyline that can assume I don't want it to meander around and focus overwhelmingly on the annoying cast that isn't eponymous, I expect the humor not to sink to the lowest common denominator, I expect the CGI-laden battles to be clear, succinct, and powerful on the first watch instead of confusing, shaky-cam messes. In short, I expect a merely competent film with excellent effects, and RotF only provided me with the latter. That isn't good enough, especially not when I can rewatch the fuck-awesome Super 8 again or pick up Battle: LA at the store.

This is why many people are so harsh on the Transformers films. It's not because they're popcorn films. It's because they're bad popcorn films. But I give Bay one thing, though- His material makes great trailers. I'm listening to Machine Vandal as we speak.

[Stacy]

I am going to see this film tomorrow and make up my own opinion, at least its the last in the series I think for those who don't like them (though for those who don't like them shouldn't watch it I guess?).

I really hate those percentage rating sites, I don't know, I really can't go off on stuff like that, I just think its really.... I don't know, just bugs me. I enjoyed the last two Transformers movies so that is why I am going to see this one.

I don't expect every movie I see to be like Citizen Kane, but some people out there must.

Sonic 06 got a really low score in some Gaming magazines I still got it and got enjoyment from it, even though I myself found it was a bit flawed, you know?

Edited June 28, 2011 by BW199148

[Nepenthe]

As I said in the Cars 2 thread, if you only look at the score without including the shortcomings of the rating system and the context and justification of the critics' opinions, you're more likely to dismiss them as unreliable when they don't agree with you. When it comes to films, a medium I'm fairly into, a consensus lets me know what I'm in for; I can usually configure the thoughts of critics- what they believed was good or bad- and determine whether or not a film would personally be worth my money, so I adjust expectations accordingly. Sometimes I agree and sometimes I don't, but nonetheless, RT has proven helpful to me over the years.

But I have a curious question to pose to everyone here: What would your reaction be if the critics actually adored this film and it had like a 95%? Would you still consider them unreliable and excuse any influence they may have over your current decision to see it, or would it become a rebuttal to naysayers who believed the film to be bad?

[Johnny Boy]

Well it certainly can't be as bad as rotf. Seeing it tomorrow.

[Stacy]

As I said in the Cars 2 thread, if you only look at the score without including the shortcomings of the rating system and the context and justification of the critics' opinions, you're more likely to dismiss them as unreliable when they don't agree with you. When it comes to films, a medium I'm fairly into, a consensus lets me know what I'm in for; I can usually configure the thoughts of critics- what they believed was good or bad- and determine whether or not a film would personally be worth my money, so I adjust expectations accordingly. Sometimes I agree and sometimes I don't, but nonetheless, RT has proven helpful to me over the years.

But I have a curious question to pose to everyone here: What would your reaction be if the critics actually adored this film and it had like a 95%? Would you still consider them unreliable and excuse any influence they may have over your current decision to see it, or would it become a rebuttal to naysayers who believed the film to be bad?

[Facehugger]

Would you still consider them unreliable

[Johnny Boy]

Saw it today. Thought it was pretty decent. And a satisfying way to end the series IMO.

[Balding Spider]

Just came across the most intense review of TF3 I've ever seen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode/2011/06/transformers_3_dark_of_the_moo.html

[Nepenthe]

Just came across the most intense review of TF3 I've ever seen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...of_the_moo.html

[Dr Jackstraw]

My body was not ready

Out of the box, it's the best one in the trilogy, just pretty damn good.

Look if you never liked the other films, then don't expect to like this one. However I personally thought it's definitely the film ROTF should have been.

Also I demand you see this in 3D. It's fucking fantastic. It manages to beat both Avatar and TRON as perfect examples of good 3D.

Edited June 30, 2011 by Dr Jackstraw

[Conando]

A complaint I've heard is that they still spend too much time on the human characters, in a movie about giant fighting robots that disguise themselves as vehicles.

[Phos]

Pretty much anything I saw of the second movie was astoundingly cringe worthy.

And 2 hours and 34 minutes?

[Milo]

Well, reviews are in, and apparently the critical approval rating @RT is 36% "rotten" (16% higher than ROTF's 20%, yet 21% lower than the original movie's 57%). Consensus: "It's special effects -- and 3D shots -- are undeniably impressive, but they aren't enough to fill up its loud, bloated running time, or mask its thin, indifferent script." The audience's rating is a high 90%, however-and that's 1% higher than the audiences's approval rating original movie (at least as of now).

I'm still gonna see it anyway. I think some critics expect too much from summer blockbuster movies.

[PSI Wind]

You know, when I think of a Transformers movie, I expect gigantic robots fighting with explosions and badass scenes. Besides some of the human sections of the movie (Which, by the way, was in the cartoons), that's what I got from these movies. They aren't gonna be amazing movies, but they ARE going to be great fun to watch.

[KittyNakajima]

Just got back from seeing it tonight. I didn't really have a gripe about the human parts since a good percentage of that had some sort of ouch moment that I won't spoil.

As for the Transformers themselves. Two things - Megatron was essentially the robotic equivalent of Saddam Hussein post 2003, and Optimus Prime is one hard O.G. when pushed to his breaking point.

[EXshad]

I saw it. It's late. I'll do a quick pros and cons list because I'm tired and want sleep.

PROS:

-The Autobots got a lot more attention this time. Nearly all of them felt like good, likable characters, and they got... adequate development. Sure, it would have been nice to see more, but the whole point of these movies is to show what a Transformers invasion would be like from a HUMAN perspective. They really did great with them this time, in that regard. The history between Sentinel and Optimus could be felt whenever they shared the screen, for example.

-THE HORRIBLE SEX JOKES ARE NEARLY ALL GONE, THANK GOD. And while I'm at it, I actually legit enjoyed half of the humor in this movie.

-The plot is very solid and tight. The only major plot hole seems to be the usage of the Matrix, since it's integral to the Decepticon's plan and they didn't know Optimus would have it, but then again, consider that the original plan was for The Fallen and his army to overtake Earth, and how he was supposed to have the Matrix, and not Optimus (according to the plan). Awakening Sentinel, as well as the space-bridge plan, seems like an ace-in-the-hole should the original plan fail, and it was a good use of the second movie's shell of a plot. Sure, they should have explained it more, but if you can piece things together, you're fine.

-The emotion was great. You can really feel the weight of all the tension this time, unlike the last movie. Deep shit happens, and it's ALL irreversible.

-The people weren't just there to be pains in the ass (like that annoying college bitch from the second one); for the most part, each character had a purpose to serve, and they served it well.

-Shockwave was a total badass, and was a great foe that the heroes had to contend with as the leader of the Decepticon's assault on Earth. They did him justice as a silent, fearsome warrior.

-Sam, for once, has CHEMISTRY with his girlfriend. In the last 2 movies, his relationship only worked because the movie said it did, with no other believable reason beyond that; here, it was actually believable. Also, the underwear model is a vastly better actress than Megan Fox. Seriously.

-The action. Wow. It was great, cohesive, and it was ALL lengthy and well-done. ALL OF IT. Including the final confrontation. Unlike that OTHER MOVIE.

(Decepti)CONS:

-THE DECEPTICONS HAVE ALL BEEN REDUCED TO GRUNTS WITH NO CHARACTER. Megatron and Starscream have almost NO major roles beyond being grunts to the main foe. I mean, granted, besides Megatron, Starscream, and The Fallen, that's how it was in the second movie, but at least then, Megatron and Starscream were given some basic development and character interaction! Here, I think they have 3 scenes in the whole movie. It's absurd. There's not a single decepticon in this movie who has a role bigger than being a grunt to the main villain, and it sucks major balls, especially since the Autobots were finally given more attention.

-Remember that stupid, dopey, slapstick bullshit from Revenge of the Fallen? It comes back for 2 lengthy scenes; one with a character named "Wang" or something, and in the one where Simmons makes his return. These scenes are so facepalmingly stupid, overdone, poorly written, and clashing with the movie's overall tone that they legit detract from my overall enjoyment of the movie. In fact, there's a handful of really bad jokes sprinkled throughout the movie, just to make sure that we remember that this is the same crew that brought us ROTF.

-Que. This fucking afterthought of a Autobot. He was made specifically for this movie, but serves no purpose other than to be an robot with light-brights for hair. He also acts like Einstein, for some reason. And has like, 3 lines in the whole movie. And because the writers didn't give a shit about him, neither could I when he was killed off, even though we obviously were supposed to. He should have been cut. Really. The other autobots were just fine; this guy was just useless.

-The pacing is wacky. Not as bad as ROTF, but... well, let's just say that RIGHT after the battle, there's literally one minute of movie left. Just one. And 10 seconds of it are spent with Optimus Prime delivering an uninspired monologue about something before Linkin Park angsts at us. Again. Seriously, this is the supposed FINALE of the trilogy. WRAP UP THIS SHIT. SO much is left unexplained, like, oh, I dunno, THE DECEPTICONS THAT ARE STILL HIDING AMONG US?! There's no way they killed ALL the decepticons that came to Earth in that one climactic battle. And the movie DOES sorta start slow, after the opening flashback sequence about the moon landings. So yeah, that's another problem carried over from ROTF.

Overall, I liked it. It had a handful of the problems ROTF did, but not nearly as many, and it improved upon that film in numerous other areas as well. I recommend it if you liked the last 2, or liked the first one but hated the second (or vice-versa, if you're fucking crazy... jk). It's a fun, solid end to the trilogy, and MOSTLY makes up for the previous one. To those who hated the first 2 though, this won't change your mind. In fact, it'll probably make you hate the trilogy more, just because Michael Bay ACTUALLY made a sequel to ROTF that didn't fix all of its problems. Just sayin'.

Edited July 1, 2011 by EXshad

[Psychobob’s Ghost]

Well I’ve just finished watching Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and I have to say that I enjoyed it. Then again I enjoyed Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, which I know some people on this forum thought was rubbish, so maybe I’m not the best person to judge this film. I will say that I am constantly annoyed by critical reception to Bay films, admittedly critical reaction was split over T3, but I don’t understand how someone can score a film badly based on the lack of something it was never trying to included in the first place. Should I really care about the absence of an intellectual and though provoking script in a film based upon giant robots blowing shit up?

T3 was definitely a better film than T2, it struck the same balance between the human commandos and the autobots as in T1 (in T2 the humans were much more sidelined) but it lacked the concurrent story lines that ran throughout T1. T3 favors the more action orientated storytelling of T2, so after leaving the cinema I felt like I’d over indulged in action, much in the same way a person can feel sick after eating too much chocolate.

I still believe that T1 was a better film, by using multiple story lines the film was able to cover a range of topics from action through to comedy, romance, and so forth. Having said that if I were given the choice of watching T1 or T3 I would pick T3. The action has been ramped up so much for T3 that it makes even T2’s action sequences look timid by comparison. There is a danger that with so much on screen carnage you may find yourself becoming desensitized to the action, a similar effect which I experienced with Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, but unlike George Lucas’s sixth/third entry into the Star Wars franchise each of T3’s action set pieces manages to outdo what came before it.

What astounded me is how grotesquely violent the film franchises has become. If it weren't for the fact that the film uses robots instead of humans I doubt the film would have received anything less than an 18 rating. I doubt I could watch a film featuring humans who have their arms and legs ripped off, faces ripped off (or split in too) and stomachs ripped out. The film even goes as far as using lubricant and brake fluid to emulate arteries and blood.

Moving on to the subject of watching the film in 3D I would definitely recommend it. My only basis of comparison for the quality of 3D is with the film The Last Airbender (a film that was 3D mastered retrospectively). I noticed that someone in this topic commented that the quality of 3D was better than that of James Cameron's Avatar, if that’s the case then it’s more a reflection on the underwhelming and sorry state of 3D than it is a glowing recommendation for T3 in 3D. There are times when 3D makes the action sequences appear much more dynamic, it’s good in arial views for conveying distance, but it doesn’t actually make objects appear three dimensional.

The end sequence between Optimus Prime, Sentinel Prime and Megatron managed the impressive task of getting me to empathize with all three of them. I’ve never felt an emotional connection between a CGI creation, but in that particular scene all three characters felt as real to me as the human actors. On the subject of Sentinel Prime Leonard Nimoy turns in an impressive performance as the former leader of the Autobots. At the very least Bay must be commended for having the balls to brazenly reference Star Trek and have Nimoy deliver Spock’s dialogue lifted directly from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Did anybody else get that in-joke?

[Kevin]

I saw it a few days ago with a friend of mine, and I thought it was an improvement over Revenge of the Fallen. There were a lot of humorous lines throughout the film, which I thought was a plus, and the camera was a lot less shaky than it was in the previous film. Thankfully the twins weren't as annoying in this film, and I personally thought Optimus Prime was the character that stood out the most, especially the fantastic voice work done for him.