15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 27 Jun 2014 9:31 a.m. PST |
Anyone still excited about the Transformers franchise? I've seen the original movie back in 2007 but did not see 2 and 3. Bad reviews and director Michael Bay conspired to turn me off. The latest installment sees Mark Wahlberg taking over from Shia LaBeouf and begs the question: Did Transformers finally jump the dinobot?
Pass! But I'm sure it'll make enough money globally (especially in China) to warrant at least 3 more sequels and save it from "extinction." |
Garand | 27 Jun 2014 10:12 a.m. PST |
Yeah, not excited at all. I saw 1 and 2, and the latter only really because a local landmark was used in he movie. Damon. |
passiveaggressive | 27 Jun 2014 10:29 a.m. PST |
The only thing exciting about was Megan fox. |
The Beast Rampant | 27 Jun 2014 10:38 a.m. PST |
I saw the first in the theater, and thought it was "OK". My biggest beef is that there is a happy medium between the somewhat blocky look of the toys/original cartoon bots (which I liked, but readily admit wouldn't translate well to a live action movie), and the whirlygig swiss watch nightmare of Bay's uber-CGIed crap. The fight scenes are seizure-inducing. I saw parts of T2 on TV, and it was utterly dreadful . And the two "ethnic" 'bots? Wow. Despite the fact that I had no interest in the last two, my reptilian hindbrain wants to see this one for some reason (probably the dinobots). But it is almost certainly crap, and anyway, Bay shall not see a dime from me. Want to see how big bot action is done, Mike? Watch 'Pacific Rim'. |
Bob Runnicles | 27 Jun 2014 10:49 a.m. PST |
There are two things that make me want to see this; Mark Wahlberg instead of Shia LaBouef, and Grimlock. However they have to overcome the massive detrimental 'Michael Bay' factor first and that may be a mountain that cannot be climbed. |
doug redshirt | 27 Jun 2014 11:09 a.m. PST |
I would pay to see a movie with kids playing with their Transformers before paying to see another piece of this franchise. |
McKinstry | 27 Jun 2014 11:19 a.m. PST |
Do they have to set the soundtrack for permanently deafen? Worst sound in any movie, ever. |
Dynaman8789 | 27 Jun 2014 11:23 a.m. PST |
Finally? The very first one was a Turd. Now way in Hades I will watch another. |
Tango01 | 27 Jun 2014 11:37 a.m. PST |
Allow me to add this article. The New Transformers' Robotic Dinos Aren't as Dumb as They Sound "Word from Autobot Command Center is that the fourth movie in the Transformers cycle, Age of Extinction, will feature more than just giant alien robots that mimic modern human machines in an effort to blend unseen into our society. The film will also include giant alien robots that transform into dinosaurs. Cynics may argue that these Dinobot warriors are nothing but a blatant merchandising decision foisted upon unfortunate screenwriters (who, at some point, must have heard the phrase "If it doesn't make any sense, then you make it make sense!"). Well, quiet down, cynics. As a toy-loving science-fiction novelist and former roboticist, I can throw down at least five reasons why Dinobots make perfect sense. Biomimetics. Roboticists routinely study the biomechanics of natural organisms to create robots that will excel in similar situations. Eons of planetary dominance are proof enough that sauropods were well evolved for combat on a building size scale in an Earth environment (so the same gravity, atmospheric conditions, and light and sound and vibration ranges). Why shouldn't the Transformers leverage 150 million years of evolution?
" Full article here wired.com/2014/06/dinobots Amicalement Armand |
Thomas Whitten | 27 Jun 2014 11:38 a.m. PST |
I was thinking it might not be bad with Wahlberg, but from what I've read, the movie is pretty much the same as the first 3 sans LaPew. |
Tango01 | 27 Jun 2014 11:50 a.m. PST |
Also
Shockingly, Nothing Makes Sense in Transformers: Age of Extinction "Transformers: Age of Extinction—the fourth installment in Michael Bay's quest to turn Hasbro toys into VFX piggy banks—is about what happens when we as a people fear the "other" so much we're willing to turn on each other to extract it from our lives. No, wait, it's about American exceptionalism and intergalactic jingoism. It might also be about terrorism. Well, not really. It's definitely about people being filmed from the ground up getting out of cars in slow motion, and Mark Wahlberg in a really tight T-shirt. Probably. Actually, I have no idea what Transformers: Age of Extinction was supposed to be about—I don't think it did either—but by the end Optimus Prime had ridden a fire-breathing Dinobot like he was President Obama on a unicorn in an internet meme, so I guess it wasn't all bad. Here's the thing: No one is going into the latest Transformers installment without the ability to suspend disbelief. Like its predecessors, it's a movie about alien robots that turn into automobiles and get into massive fights. Plus it's a Michael Bay movie; he's sticking to his flashy, well-shot guns, so expecting Martin Scorsese is ridiculous. But in Age of Extinction, the movie's multitude of inexplicable plots go nowhere and, in addition being largely incoherent, put the movie at a runtime—165 minutes—that means it stays way past its welcome
" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
Mithmee | 27 Jun 2014 12:26 p.m. PST |
Well it does look at better than the last two. |
Zargon | 27 Jun 2014 12:54 p.m. PST |
|
War Panda | 27 Jun 2014 3:37 p.m. PST |
I saw the first one and was disappointed if not surprised. Saw the second one (or half of it)and honestly thought it was one of the worst pieces of %$^%£% I ever saw. I despise Mr Le Puff so at least this new reflux (my name for big Hollywood sequel) has disposed of his services
|
Pictors Studio | 27 Jun 2014 5:05 p.m. PST |
I liked the first one. I thought it was a clever adaptation of a toy into something that worked as a big screen action movie. It still paid enough attention to the original storyline to not totally off die hards but wasn't so nerderific that it couldn't appeal to a mass audience. Plus Megan Fox. The second one wasn't good but wasn't terrible. The third one was basically very similar to the first with another hot chick who probably wasn't quite as hot but did a really good job of running all over blowing up Chicago without losing even one of her heels off of her stiletto shoes. I'm not going to see this one unless someone pays for me to go. |
Tango01 | 27 Jun 2014 11:18 p.m. PST |
Agree with you Scott. Amicalement Armand |
Ron W DuBray | 28 Jun 2014 8:26 a.m. PST |
Its a over the TOP shoot em up with big robots movie and it was fun to watch. The Humans should have died so many times is a given I hope. :) (people don't run away from roll over crashes)( or being caught like a baseball in a large steel hand)or (standing within 10 yards of a missile going off) :) but it was fun. The best super human trick is being dumped out of a speed vehicle rolling up the highway and they just kept running and fighting with out the 4 weeks in a ICU and 6 months in rehab) :) really superman would not walk away from a day being on the same side as the auto bots but these humans are all made out of "transformieum" LOL and can't be killed. |
PapaSync | 29 Jun 2014 7:09 p.m. PST |
I'm not much for Oscar movies. I pretty much go for a good old comic book on the screen type movies. Which is what Transformer movies are. As far as that goes IMO it was the best one of all of them. Walhberge was way better than LePuff that's for sure. And they didn't over do it on the pretty girl thing. Not as bad as it was done on the previous movies. I enjoyed it very much and so did the audience as there was plenty of clapping and cheers and the end. 8) |
Patrick Sexton | 30 Jun 2014 6:39 a.m. PST |
It was enjoyable like the rest of the franchise. Well executed SFX and I liked the cast. Hell, I have always thought these have turned out way better than could be expected, given they are based on incredibly bad cartoons from the dark age of animation. |