Welcome, guest. Register to remove this message!

[Summerganny]

I think it was pretty awesome.

The story was very good, though the movie didn't present it with a best possible way. I think the main difference between DOTM and previous ones (for me) is that when I watch/watched Transformers and ROTF I loved them, especially ROTF, just because of the good things that those movies had. Scenes like forest battle made me ingore all those annoying things. After watching those movies I'm quite "blown away", because the good stuff really impress me and Jablonsky's music is fantastic. DOTM works better as a movie. It's far from perfect, but there isn't so much (if there's anything at all) that annoy me. Yes, DOTM has it's flaws, but I didn't feel like I have to facepalm. It was good movie that had some awesome scenes and scenes not so awesome, but ok still.

After DOTM I had a bit strange feeling. It's not bad thing... it was kinda wistful feeling. The end of the road for Transformers-movies by Michael Bay. Bay did great work bringing Transformers into big screen and now, after two movies, DOTM is finally what I hoped from Bayformers. Like I said, it's not perfect, but very good and some scenes are extremely awesome. And though the first one and ROTF are enjoyable movies as well, DOTM is the one that represents Transformers the way I love Transformers stories, so thumbs up for the atmosphere, themes and story of DOTM.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon
+They used Sideswipe and Ironhide nicely, though they didn't get massive screentime.
+Set-up between Optimus Prime & Sentinel Prime
+The atmosphere is very strong. Overall this is much more rich movie in every way when compared to previous ones.
+DOTM looks, sounds and feels AWESOME.
+Plot. Finally very good...
-...but the movie doesn't tell the story perfectly
-Some scenes could have been a bit more clear, but again, you can't spot everything from a movie of this scale when you watch it first time.
-Autobots talking about leaving Earth, Ironhide's destiny, Sentinel Prime and their future is missed opportunity.
-The final battle in Chicago looks cool, but autobots should have had a bit more screentime...
-Overall, sometimes the balance between humans and transformers tilts too much for humans.

And couple of notes:
-I think that the possible reason why Optimus killed Sentinel was the so called "justified revenge" which is quite typical thing for american writers. I think that the ending should have been a bit more longer. Aubotos should have talked a bit more about fallen ones and Optimus should have told a bit more about their future, or something. But well, it's hard to say these negative things because the movie really feels GOOD, not "at least decent movie with some great scenes but with big flaws like previous ones". Though I loved them too.
-There are suprisingly much "mature" themes and some good lines.
-Is there some certain reason why Ferrari is Dino, not Mirage and the Einstein-bot is Que, not Wheeljack..? I kinda like that they didn't use so easily translatable names, but Dino and Que are quite exotic names for transformers.

As a movie, I'd say DOTM is 3/5 for me.
As a Transformers-movie it's at least 3½ or 4/5.

Could have been much better, but great movie still and Bay didn't leave a bad taste. He deserves more credit than he gets.

This post has been edited by Summerganny: 3 July 2011, 11:56

[Gemini Prime]

-Is there some certain reason why Ferrari is Dino, not Mirage and the Einstein-bot is Que, not Wheeljack..? I kinda like that they didn't use so easily translatable names, but Dino and Que are quite exotic names for transformers.

Dont know about Que but Dino was the name of Enzo Ferrari´s son, could be a nod to that.

[Stolpen]

-Is there some certain reason why Ferrari is Dino, not Mirage and the Einstein-bot is Que, not Wheeljack..? I kinda like that they didn't use so easily translatable names, but Dino and Que are quite exotic names for transformers.

Dont know about Que but Dino was the name of Enzo Ferrari´s son, could be a nod to that.

And Que is of course a James Bond reference. Especially when he threw his special invented weapons to Sam, Epps and the guys. In the credits he was at least listed as Que/Wheeljack.

[Summerganny]

Ok, thanks to both of you! So those names are just references/tributes.

[Thunderclash]

I have just returned from Colosseum Kino in Oslo where I have finally seen Dark Of The Moon in 3D (one of the final showings before the final Harry Potter chapter takes over the spotlight). And I'm sad to say I was disappointed with Dark Of The Moon. Better than ROTF, yes (not hard), but the plot was a mess. The deaths seemed to have no impact, some familiar faces just showed up for some brief screentime, only to be blown to smithereens (oh, it's hard to be a Decepticon ), and again like with the previous movies you get no real connection with the characters, be it humans or robots. I was looking at my watch already an hour before the movie ended, because I was discontent with the plot progression. I know this is an all-out action movie, but I really expected more depth. There was no sense of tension, no real build-up, just a lot of (probably fan-pleasing) bang, crash and wallop with short talky bits in between.

On a more positive note, I actually found Rosie's character Carly to be both likeable and charming, but she hardly got pushed. For a model-turned-actress she did a good job, in my opinion. And you can't fault the posh English accent .

This post has been edited by Thunderclash: 11 July 2011, 23:05

Reason for edit: No eye-hand coordination....

[Soulgem1]

I have just returned from Colosseum Kino in Oslo where I have finally seen Dark Of The Moon in 3D (one of the final showings before the final Harry Potter chapter takes over the spotlight). And I'm sad to say I was disappointed with Dark Of The Moon. Better than ROTF, yes (not hard), but the plot was a mess. The deaths seemed to have no impact, some familiar faces just showed up for some brief screentime, only to be blown to smithereens (oh, it's hard to be a Decepticon ), and again like with the previous movies you get no real connection with the characters, be it humans or robots. I was looking at my watch already an hour before the movie ended, because I was discontent with the plot progression. I know this is an all-out action movie, but I really expected more depth. The was no sense of tension, no real build-up, just a lot of (probably fan-pleasing) bang, crash and wallop with short talky bits in between.

On a more positive note, I actually found Rosie's character Carly to be both likeable and charming, but she hardly got pushed. For a model-turned-actress she did a good job, in my opinion. And you can't fault the posh English accent .

Agree with almost everything you say. Things didn't matter. Robots dying, humans dying, Chicago getting destroyed - it felt too trivial. Another thing I noticed, that I really didn't like, was that they skipped locations way too sudden. Near the end, Bumblebee was fighting and rescuing Sam, then suddenly he was captured by the Cons.
The girl was cute, but like the last, she had only one expression - and I lost interest in here after a short while.

Shia did ok for the first time in any movie he's been in - that's saying he was less annoying than before.

Shockwave was bad ass, like expected, and one of the few positive things about the movie. But when all is said and done, these three movies have been a massive disappointment for a G1 comic fan - and probably for most TF fans. Yes, they have sold tickets, but that just shows how hungry we were for robot action, no matter how it was presented.

[Thunderclash]

Shockwave was bad ass, like expected, and one of the few positive things about the movie.

But he too was a blank slate, a 'Con just suddenly showing up to serve under Megatron. He seemed to be a relatively important character, but there was no background information on him, for example what did he do back on Cybertron? Optimus knew who he was, but for some reason some screen writer forgot to fill us in on some interesting (and possibly juicy) tidbits on Shockwave's past. And this is something I find it hard to forgive; the writer's must give us a reason to develop an interest in the chacters, or everything will end up having no soul.

[BigPete]

I really enjoyed the movie for what it is. The people who don't like it seem to have trouble understanding what the movie is and isn't. They want the movie(s) to be something they are not. They are not heavy, plot-driven, logical movies and can never be regarded as such, because then, yes, you will be disappointed.

It's like saying that Casablanca is a shitty movie because it's not a comedy, or that Gone With the Wind has really bad CGI in it...

These are popcorn flicks, summer blockbusters, big action movies, and as such, they are insanely successful! It's a quick fix for anyone who likes lots of actions, explosions, and special effects. If you see them as such, you will be pleased.

Right now, Dark of the Moon has made almost $650 000 000, more than three times its budget, in less than two weeks. It's the highest grossing movie this year so far. It is the highest movie ever that opens for the Independence Day weekend, it's the second biggest movie ever to open on a Wednesday, it's the fifth fastest growing movie ever, it's the third most popular movie to open in the month of July, it's the second biggest worldwide opening, etc. etc. etc. etc. It keeps breaking record after record after record.

53.5% of the people who have seen it rate it at an A, and 22.3% at B, on a scale from A to F, while the percentage of people rating it from D to F are 15.1%

They must be doing something right...

[Thunderclash]

I really enjoyed the movie for what it is. The people who don't like it seem to have trouble understanding what the movie is and isn't. They want the movie(s) to be something they are not. They are not heavy, plot-driven, logical movies and can never be regarded as such, because then, yes, you will be disappointed.

It's like saying that Casablanca is a shitty movie because it's not a comedy, or that Gone With the Wind has really bad CGI in it...

Not the most logical choice of movies for comparison, but okay... . Regardless, questions tend to pop up during a movie and if left unanswered, they will diminish the experience.

These are popcorn flicks, summer blockbusters, big action movies, and as such, they are insanely successful! It's a quick fix for anyone who likes lots of actions, explosions, and special effects. If you see them as such, you will be pleased.

Hey, I loved Bay's "Armageddon" and "The Rock". So much so I even bought the region 1 Criterion Collection editions on DVD. Most Bay movies have this visual flair that allows you to repress any attempt of a deeper plot. But Transformers have a rich history and there should be easy to find something that ties together characters (Autobots & Decepticons) and a stronger story. On the basis of being a blockbuster I do not fault "Dark Of The Moon", as it caters to just about everyone, not just the fanboys (and fangirls). But it's the lasting impression that counts. And here "Dark Of The Moon" falls short.

Right now, Dark of the Moon has made almost $650 000 000, more than three times its budget, in less than two weeks. It's the highest grossing movie this year so far. It is the highest movie ever that opens for the Independence Day weekend, it's the second biggest movie ever to open on a Wednesday, it's the fifth fastest growing movie ever, it's the third most popular movie to open in the month of July, it's the second biggest worldwide opening, etc. etc. etc. etc. It keeps breaking record after record after record.

53.5% of the people who have seen it rate it at an A, and 22.3% at B, on a scale from A to F, while the percentage of people rating it from D to F are 15.1%

They must be doing something right...

Definitely. The numbers speak for themselves. But earnings rarely say anything about the quality of the movie. To me this was the equivalent of Brett Ratner's "X-Men: The Last Stand". So I'm expecting a reboot of the Transformers movie franchise in very much the same way as "X-Men: First Class" . The question is: Who's ready to take over from Bay? Can we get Furman to write the screenplay? And where do they go with the toy line? Can they finally ditch the monstrous movie designs and go back to more normal-looking bots and cons? Or is the hideous movie designs now the new norm, "forever" destined to haunt the possible future movie franchise?

[mikoel]

These are popcorn flicks, summer blockbusters, big action movies, and as such, they are insanely successful! It's a quick fix for anyone who likes lots of actions, explosions, and special effects. If you see them as such, you will be pleased.

There is a perfectly normal things that every movie has to be, so they could work: The story, character development, pacing, and redemption of things. TF3 does not contain any of these. About the pacing: After the only shock-twist, we move over to the mother, who shows us a book cover where there is a picture of (apple)vagina, and she tells how the girls love the boys, with a big penis. Seriously, wtf?!
Yes I like women, breasts and sex, but the wtf, after all, this is the Transformers movie. Or at least should be. Bay shows us his own sexual fantasies through the whole movie.
And not to mention those of your "lots of action and special-effect" -things. During the first hour and a half we did not even get to see "lots of action" only comedy. Just "Leboof and co doing silly things". One and a half hours. An action film. Jesus. Bay really can do anything these days...

Not every movie has to be Oscar material, but "robots smashing stuff" is no excuse to drop the ball when it comes to basic story telling and elements like dialogue, pacing and character development.

The entire film is crystallized in a very well on Shockwave: A character comes out of nowhere, nothing is explained. None. He has a pet, sandworm, stolen from Frank Herbert's Dune. Does not explain anything. Shockwave says one word and then disappears. Appears at the end again, do not do anything and finaly die. And all supposed to praise how bad-ass character he was and how happy I was that I got to see him on live-action film. I say bullshit.

They want the movie(s) to be something they are not. They are not heavy, plot-driven, logical movies and can never be regarded as such, because then, yes, you will be disappointed. It's like saying that Casablanca is a shitty movie because it's not a comedy, or that Gone With the Wind has really bad CGI in it...

Transformers 3 should be an action film, but the first ONE AND A HALF HOURS, we see only the mentally retarded (level of the) humor, main actresses panties, and fat Chinese men with gay-jokes. Jesus. One and a half hours of idle time is not used ANY WAY in story or character development. Not to mention... anything about the..wellll... Transformers. Its only stuppid and bad humour.
And that if anything is a mark of really, really bad movie.

Right now, Dark of the Moon has made almost $650 000 000, more than three times its budget, in less than two weeks. It's the highest grossing movie this year so far. It is the highest movie ever that opens for the Independence Day weekend, it's the second biggest movie ever to open on a Wednesday, it's the fifth fastest growing movie ever, it's the third most popular movie to open in the month of July, it's the second biggest worldwide opening, etc. etc. etc. etc. It keeps breaking record after record after record.

And what's the point? You will not receive any of the money. Bay and Spielberg will receive them. Easy money from the film, which does not even try anything, in any level. Success of the film does not mean that it would be good. Success only tells that many people went to see it.

[Soulgem1]

I really enjoyed the movie for what it is. The people who don't like it seem to have trouble understanding what the movie is and isn't. They want the movie(s) to be something they are not. They are not heavy, plot-driven, logical movies and can never be regarded as such, because then, yes, you will be disappointed.

No, I shouldn't have to take a bad movie, just because it was meant to be bad. There are good movies in this genre, there's even truly great movies in this genre.

I'm probably a bigger Marvel Comics fan than I'm a TF fan, and both Iron Man and Thor was as good as they could have been. Can you really say the same about TF? They're basically the same genre, not plot driven and certainly not logical.

I don't mean to be negative, because I really have a relaxed attitude towards the TF movies. went into the theater expecting nothing, and that's what I got. I can go home and read the G1 comics and post my minibots around on Metroplex to get my Transformers fix. But I understand perfectly well what the TF movies are: Not nearly as good as they should have been.

[BigPete]

The movies are what they are.

If Hasbro wanted them to be anything else, they would have insisted on another director, but they are very pleased with Michael Bay. VERY pleased. In fact, they are so pleased with him, they put him in the Transformers Hall of Fame!

There will always be people who love the movies, like the movies, dislike them, and people with vast amounts of butthurt and nerd rage over some popcorn flicks...

Regardless of whether you like the movies or not, Transformers as a brand have never been more popular than they are now, and we owe that to Michael Bay and the hundreds of people who worked on the movies with him.

You may not like him, the way he does things, his sense of humour, or his style of movie making, but the least you can do is to respect the man for the life he blew back into Transformers.

And remember that it's impossible to create something that everyone likes. Just because you don't like the movie, doesn't mean that it's actually bad, or that others think, or should think that it's bad. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and you need to respect that as well without starting a pie-throwing contest.

[Gemini Prime]

Seems to be discussion on the quality of DOTM, something that is impossible to pass judgement on. Afterall, you cant make an objective conclusion on a subjective (and highly individual) experience. But I was wondering something. Did anyone find DOTM to be boring?

The reason for my question is that I share many of the critizisms regarding DOTM but it never bored me. As a matter of fact none of the live action films (including ROTF) bored me. I can think of many films that where slaughtered by critics, I agreed on most of the critizism but they still never bored me.

The third and fourth Pirates of the Carribean where nowhere near as good as the first two but they where still entertaining. Same goes for (to name but a few) several Bond films, most Star Trek films, Robocop 2 and 3, Terminator 3 and 4, Matrix 2 and 3 and all (yes all) of the Predator movies. I can even say that the Star Wars prequels who really are shite never really bored me.

So yeah, I can agree that DOTM (and the rest of the live action films) where kinda crap in many ways. But where they boring?

[Soulgem1]

So yeah, I can agree that DOTM (and the rest of the live action films) where kinda crap in many ways. But where they boring?

I didn't find them boring the first time I saw them, but I saw the second movie twice, and got a bit bored. And like was mentioned before, it took a good while before the action started in the new one.

The new Star Wars movies are are extremely boring in some parts. At times you can see the actors just walking slowly and talking. And the scenes with Padme and Anakin are ridiculous. Not even the fight scenes are interesting. The battle between Obi Wan and Vader in ANH is a slow but intense battle, never boring at all. The same two battle in ROTS and it's just 30 minutes of lava and jumping - boring. But I guess this too is subjective, and I run the risk of getting called a movie snob that should watch a different genre.

Now I am curious how the 3D was. I find it a bit annoying, since I like to wear my normal glasses at the theater. I lucked out and caught a "2D" showing of DOTM, but I'd still like to check out the 3D version some day in the near future.

[Gemini Prime]

I didn't find them boring the first time I saw them, but I saw the second movie twice, and got a bit bored.

I guess most movies can be boring if you see them too often. I have decided that Raiders of the lost ark is the best movie I have seen (in case someone asks) but I cant see it more than, maybe once a year. Otherwise it gets boring. I guess my point is that I am not sure that a movie such as DOTM attracts the same parts of the brain as, say 2001: A space odessy does. I think it attracts the same parts that a rollercoaster does. It´s a spectacle to behold, fun while it lasts but wont leave a lasting impression and as far as I know no one has critized a rollercoaster for it´s poor abilities in doing Shakespeare.

If you seek good acting movies can offer that, but so can theatre and radio. If you want a good story you can read a book. But if you want a spectacle that show your eyes images that you never seen before then only a movie (or a tv- show/videogame) can do that. Transformers have done that really well (as did the Star Wars prequels) and I find that entertaining, despite it´s many flaws.

Now I am curious how the 3D was.

The 3D adds to the "rollercoaster- spectacle" of the film and is, in my opinion the best 3D I have seen since Avatar (another movie that was a bit shite but not boring). A tip though, I saw Avatar with my girlfriend in the VIP lounge at Bergakungen here in Göteborg. They served wine and 3D and alcohol led to an "embarrasing incident" for my lady.