I've just been over several of the reviews and now what's mystifying is of course the fact that the consensus is worse than ROTF which many here will agree was a bad movie by most standards. However, consensus from those that have seen the film so far has been positive - and largely centering around one thing...

The transformers are more at the emotional core of this film than in previous ones.


That said, I am finding several reviews that have a problem with this or that have a problem with humans being sidelined for it - this is the precise opposite of what a lot of other people wanted and I'm now wondering if there really is a problem with critics not being able to relate to a non-human emotional core of a film.

Compare this to Godzilla which, I will admit, is a good film. But the emotional center is in fact the humans of it - same goes for Pacific Rim which is more spectacle than Godzilla was and both reviewed better than AoE. On top of this ROTF and DotM rated better and the emotional center was again the humans.

So aside from running time which I think everyone can agree is too long I am honestly starting to think that a lot of reviewers do have a core problem with a non-human emotional center to a film.

 

Then these critics completely miss the point of what Transformers is about. It's not about humans, it's about giant sentient alien robots.

 

"Critics not being able to relate to a non-human emotional core of a film"

Uh...



RT's concensus: "Robots delights on a visual level, but the story feels like it came off an assembly line"

Still pulling the 64% it opened with.

 

I thought about this but I get the feeling that childrnen's movies get a pass for generally being populated with anthropomorphic characters. But I tried thinking of a film aimed at the PG-13 audience where this is a huge focus but am coming up blank - only aliens that appear mostly human anyway or are a side character to the leads. Nonethelss I noticed it in a lot of the reviews that (for lack of a better term) there are too many transformers in transformers.

 

I think you mean too many Autobots in Transformers.

Seriously, how many Decepticons are in the film? Like, legit from outer-space decepticons that are actually evil?

 

Never watched a film based on what a critic said yet....their job title says it all!!! They are paid to criticize and i would hate hate hate to be them!!!

 

I know fans have complained about too many human scenes in the past, but have critics complained about that, as well?

 

I think any critic that says that is being dumb. It's called 'Transformers' for a reason. Not 'Humans and their Transformer friends'

 

Actually I really would kinda like to see what Doug Walker thinks of this XD

Mostly because while he can be over the top as the Critc..he's more of a down to earth and fun guy...that and 80% of the time he reviews bad movies XD

 

The critics can all go and suck it. It's these same critics that put Bay down for a movie called Transformers not having enough to do with "transformers". And now the movie actually has a lot more transformers interaction and characterization, they want to say critical against too much transformers? All it is, is critics that don't like Bay. Guess what guys, this movie is going to make all kinds of money and is going to green light the next movie if you like it or not.

 

Wasn't that their complaints about the last movies?

TOO MANY HUMANS!

*now*

TOO MANY TRANSFORMERS!

 

From the fandom, yeah.


This reminds me of when we first saw some designs.

"THE MOVIE DESIGNS AREN'T ENOUGH G1"

*Hound, Drift, and Lockdown*

"THESE DESIGNS ARE UGLY"

 

I'm looking forward to his review, as well!
I also can't wait to see Brad Jones' response, but mostly because his angry reaction to DotM made me laugh, lol.

 

Because A:TLA was such a good movie that made twice its budget in profits, that the sequel was even entertained.

Oh, wait, no, it didn't. It did make twice its budget ultimately, but it also ruined M. Night's career (he literally can't even bullshit his way out of admitting he fucked up on that one), killed el cheapo 3D effects, and actually rivals ROTF in being considered one of the worst movies of the last decade.

And both A:TLA and AoE happen to share the same female lead...hoo boy...

To be fair, Hound is basically Kup + Bulkhead and should have been named Bulkhead, Drift is effectively Japanese Springer right down to the triple changer aspect, and compared to the existing movie toy from ROTF you can not say AoE Lockdown looks pathetically generic.

 

And how is ruining his career a bad thing?

 

First off I don't blame Nicola for the last air bender. It was her first movie acting in. Not very many movies a actor/actress first stars in is much good.
Sure some are good but that's very rare.

As for the last ari bender being bad, its M Night we are talking about lol. Not saying Bay is the best and Bay is far from the best director/producer, but M Night is no where near Bay's level lol. We can't compare these two movies or directors lol.

 

It isn't, but you certainly don't see a profitable movie getting a sequel, either.

 

Judging from the few reviews I've seen/read, I don't believe the deeper characterization of the robots was a detriment to AOE but it was cited as one of it's fresh new strengths along with the casting of Mark Wahlberg, introducing the Dinobots and describing Lockdown as one of the best villains cast in the franchise yet (which isn't too hard considering how they have been constantly portrayed in the past).

The actual issue that these reviews often highlighted was that these films still hit the same beats and follow the same plot structure as every single one of the previous entries in the franchise. For example they all had a McGuffin: TFTM had the Allspark, ROTF had the Matrix, DOTM had the Pillars and AOE has the Seed. Every film since TFTM has tried to change the appearance of the overall plot in different ways in order to hide the actual structure so they could appear as much as possible as a different movie.

I haven't seen the movie for myself so I can't really make an actual judgment. However, I've pretty much read all the spoilers and there hasn't been anything anyone has said that sounds that different from the previous films minus one or two things. The structure still sounds an awful lot like previous films.

So if you asked me to go on anything (since i haven't watched the movie yet), I'd say the actual problem with the film isn't the deeper focus on the bots but that Michael Bay sounds as if he's kinda outdone his welcome and is incapable of actually doing something genuinely different. When I say 'genuine' i mean that in the deepest way possible... as in... literally do something vastly different with the franchise and MEAN it.

 

True..then agian some movies SHOULDN'T HAVE sequels

I'M LOOKING AT YOU BLUES BROTHERS 2000!

 

Thought the focusing on the robots be a good thing guess people don't get the point of the transformers franchise.