JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Service Alert
All Destiny releases will be temporarily offline tomorrow for scheduled maintenance. Please stay tuned to @BungieHelp for updates.

OffTopic

Surf a Flood of random discussion.
Edited by ZEPHYR: 8/7/2014 9:45:43 PM
31

Was Transformers: Age of Extinction really worse than Revenge of the Fallen and Dark of the Moon?

We all know that since 2009, the quality of the live-action Transformers films has been declining. When the trailer for the latest film, [i]Transformers: Age of Extinction[/i] went public, people were divided on what to expect; some hoped it would be a big improvement, others thought it was just going to be another unnecessary sequel with another sloppy and confusing plot, racist and sexual humor, more focus on the human characters than the robots, etc. As soon as it hit the theaters, most people (including the critics) seemed to be leaning toward the latter side. On Rotten Tomatoes, it has a "rotten" score of 17%, making it lower than [i]Revenge of the Fallen[/i]. Being a Transformers fan, though, I had to see what it was like. I had intended to see it just for guilty pleasure purposes, and to do a drinking game (with my water bottle). I did see it, and... ...I actually enjoyed it! Now before someone goes and activates the [url=http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/specials/43885-nostalgia-critic-talks-transformers-4]"Michael Bay Has Someone's Penis" alarm[/url], I would like to point out that while I thought it was far from a bad film, it was also far from a superb film. Below is a list of my reasons. -Jack Reynor's subpar dialogue (he has a few good lines, but most of the time he's kind of dorky, especially for a race car driver). -Stanley Tucci's somewhat over-the-top acting (especially in the third act). -Aside from engage in battle with Optimus and create new Decepticons, Galvatron does next to nothing in the film. -Dat runtime, dough. -Certain jokes tend to go nowhere. Those are only my minor cons. My bigger problems with the film are: -Optimus Prime's menacing dialogue (He is not supposed to be a badass executor, he's supposed to be a wise and caring leader. I'm pretty sure Peter Cullen [his voice actor] wasn't too happy with his lines either). -The Dinobots having not as much screen time as we had hoped (They're fan-favorite characters for G-d's sake!). Those are the only problems I had; other than that, just the usual Michael Bay schlock. All in all, I actually thought it was pretty good, and it was the sequel I've been waiting for. The situations were understandable, the Autobots seemed to have more of a sense of character to them, Lockdown was the best villain in the series so far. But is it honestly [i]that[/i] much worse than [i]Revenge of the Fallen[/i] or [i]Dark of the Moon[/i]? The latter movies were obviously so-so, but I honestly think [i]Age of Extinction[/i] is the best we've had since the first movie. It obviously had [i]some[/i] flaws, but not enough to get in the way of enjoyment, imo at least. What are your thoughts, Flood? [i]Transformers: Age of Extinction[/i]: Worse than the last two movies or better? Still bad or good? Post in the thread below!

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

View Entire Topic
  • 2
    Bayformers films aren't meant to be appreciated with any depth. They are called popcorn flicks for a reason, you go watch the shooty shooty boom boom and eat some popcorn and that's it.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

    4 Replies
    You are not allowed to view this content.
    ;
    preload icon
    preload icon
    preload icon