Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon [** SPOILERS FROM POST 823 ONWARD **]

Professey Chin

conan_ wrote: »

I saw this film only for Megan Fox : )

Who wasnt in it

jaykhunter

Mega Chin wrote: »

Who wasnt in it

ha ha ha, lol. Yep, replaced by a gorgeous blonde but with a melted face. Her lips are a bit terrifying. ("aren't you a bit young and pretty to have terrible plastic surgery?")

I enjoyed the film enough, but thought there was far too much time spent on the nagging Shia LeBouf looking for a job and complaining about it -- who cares? But the CGI action was great as always, cresendo'ing at the end of the film. At this point you should know what you're getting into; ya gotta get past the terrible american pie-esque humour, listen to Lebouf bang on about whatever until you get to see robots knocking the crap out of each other. So enjoyable enough....but this film really could've done with at least 40+minutes less of ratboy. Someone should fanedit the film. Make it a lot tighter.

Sad Professor

I decided to put this on for a laugh last night. I thought it was unspeakably bad, just as bad if not worse than ROTF. I haven’t a single positive thing to say about it. Everything about it, including the action, was terrible. Maybe the action sequences were easier to understand on the big screen, but on my 40-inch HDTV I had no idea what was going on most of the time. With the exception of Bumblebee and Optimus, I couldn’t even tell the robots apart. And why is it so f**king long?

Fair play to anyone who sat through it in the theatre, especially the first hour. For anyone who hasn’t seen it, spare yourself and just watch the trailer instead. Or on second thoughts, don't watch the trailer as it might make you think the film is good. It's not. It's poorly made garbage of the highest order. The cinematic equivalent of banging your head against the wall for two and half hours.

krudler

Sad Professor wrote: »

I decided to put this on for a laugh last night. I thought it was unspeakably bad, just as bad if not worse than ROTF. I haven’t a single positive thing to say about it. Everything about it, including the action, was terrible. Maybe the action sequences were easier to understand on the big screen, but on my 40-inch HDTV I had no idea what was going on most of the time. With the exception of Bumblebee and Optimus, I couldn’t even tell the robots apart. And why is it so f**king long?

Fair play to anyone who sat through it in the theatre, especially the first hour. For anyone who hasn’t seen it, spare yourself and just watch the trailer instead. Or on second thoughts, don't watch the trailer as it might make you think the film is good. It's not. It's poorly made garbage of the highest order. The cinematic equivalent of banging your head against the wall for two and half hours.

the lack of big screen and 3D really shows how sh1te it is, I skipped past all the Sam jobhunting and gay jokes and onto the city action scenes at the end. Bay really needs to learn how to make a sub 2hr movie.

jaykhunter

couldn't have been that bad if you sat through all of it, and the previous Bay films

ah c'mon the

giant-worm-drilling-into-buildings

thing was pretty cool

Sad Professor

Not really. I'd rather play a sequence like that than watch it. I finished beating GOW3 last night as well, and I was just thinking how Michael Bay should be making video games and not films.

jaykhunter

Ha, that's a point actually. Just looked up Transformers : War for Cybertron and he had no part making it.

Then i looked up Transformers 3 @ Box office mojo. Did you know it took in OVER 1.1 BILLION DOLLARS? :eek: It's the fifth most successful film OF ALL TIME.

And that's why he doesn't make terrible cash-in games. Cash-in movies is far more profitable

Oafley Jones

Sad Professor wrote: »

I decided to put this on for a laugh last night. I thought it was unspeakably bad, just as bad if not worse than ROTF. I haven’t a single positive thing to say about it. Everything about it, including the action, was terrible. Maybe the action sequences were easier to understand on the big screen, but on my 40-inch HDTV I had no idea what was going on most of the time. With the exception of Bumblebee and Optimus, I couldn’t even tell the robots apart. And why is it so f**king long?

Fair play to anyone who sat through it in the theatre, especially the first hour. For anyone who hasn’t seen it, spare yourself and just watch the trailer instead. Or on second thoughts, don't watch the trailer as it might make you think the film is good. It's not. It's poorly made garbage of the highest order. The cinematic equivalent of banging your head against the wall for two and half hours.

It's a terrible movie, but it's no where in the league of ROTF. DOTM is at least somewhat coherent.

Sad Professor

jaykhunter wrote: »

Then i looked up Transformers 3 @ Box office mojo. Did you know it took in OVER 1.1 BILLION DOLLARS? :eek: It's the fifth most successful film OF ALL TIME

Which is why unadjusted box office figures should never be taken seriously. Adjusted for inflation, it doesn't even make the top 100.

jaykhunter

Oh c'mon, it's still a remarkable achievement. I bet you didn't denigrate Dark Knight and the rest when they broke a billion.

tbh, i was expecting that Futurama pic of the professor meme to be the response :pac:

nix

TDK was great though, The transformers movies were horrible (all of them), start to finish. Need more than sfx to make a good movie :rolleyes:

With TDK your hung on every scene and watching a good story unfold, with Transformers, your bored between scenes waiting for the next scene which is whoring SFX.

jaykhunter

i think you missed the point of my post. (TDK is my 2nd favourite movie of all time). I'm saying that breaking a billion dollars in today's era is a remarkable achievement, and I bet that people would only crap on said achievement to belittle a film they don't like.

Even if it doesn't directly line up with ticket sales, it's still very impressive. That said, the market is much, much more bloated now and films have much less time to make their money so it's not that lop-sided.

In any case, generally speaking, quality does not equal popularity; but popularity is impressive imo.

e_e

jaykhunter wrote: »

Even if it doesn't directly line up with ticket sales, it's still very impressive.

Replace "impressive" with "depressing" and we'll be in agreement.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

I decided to put this on for a laugh last night.

I'm disappointed, Prof.

Disappointed and hungry.

Sad Professor

Well, I don’t know if I’d describe it as an achievement, but it is certainly very disturbing that a film as sh*t as DOTD can make so much money.

But you are right, it is a different kind of market today. Many of those films on the adjusted list made their money over a much longer period of time. If some of them were released today they'd probably risk being flops because they wouldn't be left in the theatre long enough to get going. However, films like Transformers are specifically designed for this type of big-opening-weekend-or-bust market. All the marketing is focused around getting people into the theatre early and ignoring the reviews.

The box office success of the film says more about people's feelings about the first two entries in the franchise than it does about this one because there simply isn't time for word of mouth to really spread anymore. Not everyone reads film forums or film blogs. And at a certain point a film like this becomes a big event which everyone goes to for no other reason that it's big and there's little alternative. I suspect a lot of people in this thread went to see it simply because their mates were going.

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm disappointed, Prof.

Don't be. I watched Dogtooth right afterwards to cleanse myself.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

Don't be. I watched Dogtooth right afterwards to cleanse myself.

The cinematic equivalent of getting a Big Mac with caviar for dessert

karma_

I attempted to watch this. Such a horrible, horrible excuse for a film. I'm not sure the vocabulary yet exists to truly describe just how terrible it is.

Galvasean

Sad Professor wrote: »

Well, I don’t know if I’d describe it as an achievement, but it is certainly very disturbing that a film as sh*t as DOTD can make so much money.

A lot of depressingly bad films raking in a lot of money.
A few that stood out for me:
#5 Transformers 3
#6 Pirates 2
#8 Prates 4
#12 Pirates 3
# 16 The Phantom Menace
#21 Spider-Man 3

http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide

jaykhunter

And yet AVATAR escapes your wrath :pac: (and wow, those Potter films really make a lot of cash!)

Ya, it's a great point, I heard Kermode make the point about TF3 on his YT page (that if u spend enough money on a film, it becomes an event, so everyone'll see it) but honestly we all paid to see it so we're all to blame lol. (although i'm fine with it. Make 20 of 'em, it's not like it's stopping LeBouf or Bay from making a decent film)

Anyway....does this mean Bay's doing Transformers 4? And if he does is he doing a Paul WS Anderson and keeping Shia LeBouf around?

Are there any big lots of Transformers that haven't been used by Bay yet?

Soby

jaykhunter wrote: »

And yet AVATAR escapes your wrath :pac: (and wow, those Potter films really make a lot of cash!)

Ya, it's a great point, I heard Kermode make the point about TF3 on his YT page (that if u spend enough money on a film, it becomes an event, so everyone'll see it) but honestly we all paid to see it so we're all to blame lol. (although i'm fine with it. Make 20 of 'em, it's not like it's stopping LeBouf or Bay from making a decent film)

Anyway....does this mean Bay's doing Transformers 4? And if he does is he doing a Paul WS Anderson and keeping Shia LeBouf around?

Are there any big lots of Transformers that haven't been used by Bay yet?

Ill forgive ya over HP (either like it or ya dont) but the amazing spectacle that was Avatar can not be dissed. How did you not enjoy it ?

Penn

jaykhunter wrote: »

Anyway....does this mean Bay's doing Transformers 4? And if he does is he doing a Paul WS Anderson and keeping Shia LeBouf around?

Don't know about Bay but I think LeBouf said he isn't doing another one

Mark Hamill

Soby wrote: »

Ill forgive ya over HP (either like it or ya dont) but the amazing spectacle that was Avatar can not be dissed. How did you not enjoy it ?

The insultingly bad script, acting and environmental message? It was like a billion dollar videogame made by Al Gore.

Anakin.S

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The insultingly bad script, acting and environmental message? It was like a billion dollar videogame made by Al Gore.

The best thing about Avatar was the 3D, I watched it twice in the cinema and I did enjoy it more the second time.

But back to Transformers, I think Bay killed a prospectively fantastic franchise by including cheap jokes and adolescent innuendo at the expense of the script and hoped the special effects would mask how bad the franchise went downhill after the dog ‘lubricated’ on the autobot.

Johnny Bitte

Barrington wrote: »

Don't know about Bay but I think LeBouf said he isn't doing another one

Christ ever time he came on screen I just felt ill! From screaming Optimus to just being a dickwad, definitly one of my "I hate the actor some much I m not going to to see that film" people.

What we need is an all Transformer film with no human involvement except maybe to save us or something.

Anyhow, best thing for the franchisee is to let these movies sink into to the past and maybe a proper script might come some day!

And why couldnt Bumblebee speak?