What was the moral of the story? Listen to the voices in your head?

What happened to the twins? I saw Leo and Simmons walk away from the pyramids without them.

How did Prime combine with jetfire in the comic adaptation because I heard Jolt wasn't in it.

 

1. What u mean?

2. Dunno but they alive no worruy  

3. Ratchet puts all piece of jetfire to prime

 

Like Optimus said "fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing."

 

The moral of the story is to stop looking to Transformers for moral lessons. Strike that - stop looking to movies for moral lessons.

 

1) That Hollywood has no morals.

2) Epps killed them off screen because bots acting gangsta ain't cool.

3) Don't know, didn't feel like paying for a comic book about the movie I was going to pay to see.

 

1. Explosions are good for the soul?

2. Poor movie editing. Same with Wheelie.

3. Ratchet did it.

 

1. Leaving home is only scary if you have giant evil robots chasing you. Also, there is only one really tight shirt out there in the world.

2. Unknown, presumed still gangsta in Autobot HQ.

3. Jolt is in everything, and his Jesus-whips are all-reaching.

 

Here are your answers Mr. Sexington:

1) What moral? It's a movie about fighting robots.
2) PLOTHOLES!
3) (none)

 

*pompous prick mode engaged*

That's not a goddamn plothole! I get so fucking tired of people tossing this term around while obviously not knowing what it means. An absence of information does not a plothole make. In order to be a plothole, there has to be an absence of justification for something that, in the context of the story, contradicts both past events or statements and any reasonable logic.

If the twins had been torn in half and ground into spare parts by Devastator, only to appear after the battle celebrating with everyone, THAT would be a plothole. They were obviously dead, then appeared alive again with no explanation at all. What you're talking about is either poor writing or poor editing, depending on who dropped the ball on all the disappearing characters (I have a sneaking suspicion it was Bay's doing, but don't quote me on that). They fought with Devastator, Devastator decided to stop fucking around and attack the pyramid, and they just didn't do anything on camera after that.

*pompous prick mode disengaged*

I mean Hell, what were they supposed to do, anyway? The fact that they even tried to fight an enemy that was literally ten times their size was going above and beyond the call of duty. If I were them, I'd have gotten on my knees and thanked Primus when Devastator decided I wasn't worth smashing, then gone and chilled by the beach while the Fallen was busy giving Prime his face.

 

That and the ongoing "no sacrifice, no victory". Sadly it's a bit hard to guess the main message since the movie focused on other things instead.

 

1. You expect Transformers to have a moral?
2. They might have drove off with Bumblebee
3. Ratchet put the parts onto Optimus.

ZOMFG THE MOVIE WAZNT PERFECKT !!!

 

I don't thik ROTF is that kind of film, maybe if Ridley Scott, Spielberg, or Jorge Lucas directed the film, but in this case it was Bay.

 

I'm glad somebody gets it. It's weird that people are so concerned with two characters they claim to hate.

 

Absence of justification, context, contradictions of past events, reasonable logic, if you put things that way then the entire is movie is some huge massive plot hole. Bay can do explosions and the shoot 'em up, but I don't think people have ever applied the words context, story, or logic as descriptive words for his work.

 

So you strike again? You yelled at me for the same bloody thing. While you may be right about what a Plot hole is, or is not. Sorry if you get tired of people using the term wrongly, but it probably WON'T change, and you're going to continuously get worked up over nothing. You can either choose to b*tch about it, or you could let it go. Either way, your "Pompous Prick mode" or whatever you call it, will make others pissy.
WEll, this is a Transformer Forum, so I suppose that there are worse things.
But, I ask you, Why do you get so pissed about that, if you cannot change the way people think about it?

 

Are you sure that was me? I don't recall going off on anybody else about this.

 

You know what? I am not sure now.
I remember that I said something about a Plot hole, and then somebody said they were tired of people not using it correctly.

It seemed like what you wrote, if not, my apologies dude, I am just curious. Since you don't call the Twins' disappearance a plot hole, what should we call it? Sloppy Editing? Or a rushed climax/ending?

 

I would call it either sloppy writing or sloppy editing, depending on who it was that decided they should drop off the face of the Earth. If Kruger/Orci/Kurtzman didn't have anything about them after Devs fled the scene, then it's sloppy writing. If there was something else with them and it was either never filmed or cut after being filmed, I'd call it sloppy editing. There's also the term "plot cul-de-sac", which refers to plot threads that are noticeably lacking adequate closure, but didn't really need to be resolved for the movie to make sense. However, I don't know if you'd consider the twins existence to be a plot thread in and of itself.

 

Nice points, I do wonder where all the Autobots went, somebody obviously screwed up.

 

1. People will snap up whatever crap Hollywood throws at them.

2. They went to have a beer with Scalpel, Wheelie and Barricade.

3. A wizard did it.