skip to main content

Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Review: ‘Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon’

Less Than Meets the Eye

Above: Shia LeBeouf and Rosie Huntington-Whiteley as a couple is the least believable thing in "Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon."

The nicest thing I can say about "Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon" (opening June 29 at 9pm throughout San Diego in an attempt to pad the weekend box office with a few extra IMAX/3D dollars) is that it's better than "Sucker Punch," which is currently holding firm as my choice for worst film of the year.

"Transformers 3" is also better than "Transformers 2" but that film was so bad that 5-year olds animating their action figures could have made a better movie. In fact, Michael Bay's "Transformers" franchise has been nothing but painful to me. I would much rather watch the old animated TV show or animated feature film -- those were fun. Bay's films are big, noisy endurance tests that pummel viewers for more than two hours at a pop. These big, bloated summer action epics are meant to be mindless fun -- they definitely display a lot of the former but not much of the latter. I realize, though, that Bay has his fans and that they cannot be swayed in their devotion to him. So I understand that this review is unlikely to change any opinions -- you're either in Bay's camp or your not. But here goes anyway for those who may feel a similar need to vent about these mega-budget, effects driven films.

"T3" opens with a badly CGI-ed President Kennedy (that's Kennedy's second appearance this summer, he also figured into "X-Men: First Class") talking about the space program. The CGI facial work was so atrocious that I felt embarrassed for the film. Get it right or just don't even bother trying. Then we cut to actual archival footage of the president so we can see just how bad the CGI prez really is. Then Bay badly mixes grainy archive footage and crisp newly shot images with no attempt to make any of it match. But who the hell cares it's just the pre-credit backstory.

Apparently, the Americans sent Apollo 11 to the moon to check out a Cybertronian spacecraft hidden on the moon's dark side. What the crashed ship contains leads to a race between the Autobots (good robots) and the Decepticons (bad robots) to unlock the secrets and powers of the ship's cargo. The only good thing about this extended open/back story is that it keeps Shia La Beouf's Sam off screen for a good 15-20 minutes. But Sam eventually forces his way back into the narrative. He's been dumped by his hot girlfriend Mikaela (Megan Fox) of the first two films and now has inexplicably been taken in by the equally hot and vapid Carly (Victoria's Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley). He's received a medal from President Obama but still can't get a job. Fortunately for Sam, the world is placed in jeopardy again, and he can once again feel needed.

Bumblebee

Paramount

Above: Bumblebee

I have to say that I think the robot effects are better here but maybe since they got rid of Megan Fox the effects team no longer had to spend all that time CGI-ing out her toe thumbs and could spend all their efforts on rendering the robots instead. In fact, the robots are far more life-like and likable than any of the human actors -- although Alan Tudyk (with a goofy accent) and Ken Jeong (being politically incorrect again) in small supporting roles do give them a little competition. But not even the robots can redeem this film. Mainly because Bay doesn't know what to do with them or how to choreograph effective action. He blows a lot of crap up and has them running around like crazy but none of them develops a fighting style that defines their personality the way that King Kong or Godzilla manage to fight in a manner that says something about who they are. There were moments when the Autobots scored victories and Bay did all but light up an onscreen sign demanding "applause and cheers" but the audience seemed so weary that no one responded at all until the end. Plus, this supposed state of the art 3D is practically nonexistent. The only reason Bay is demanding people see the film in 3D is to boost the box office returns.

There's nothing original to be found in the film. I guess you could call the film green because it recycles everything -- the dialogue feels familiar, the action looks the same. There's a whole "Battle: Los Angeles" section as the military tries to take Chicago back from the Decepticons. At another point the burrowing Shockwave robot climbs a building to destroy it and the image looks ripped off from the dumb Korean actioner "Dragon Wars." There's another robot that looks like Predator. Perhaps that's an homage and not a ripoff; either way it reveals a lack of imagination.

Rosie Huntington-Whiteley is like a blonde Megan Fox -- equally bland, equally vacuous, equally posable. Actually maybe even worse.

Paramount

Above: Rosie Huntington-Whiteley is like a blonde Megan Fox -- equally bland, equally vacuous, equally posable. Actually maybe even worse.

Now I did think removing Megan Fox would be an improvement but Huntington-Whiteley is no better and possibly even worse. Fox had the infamous toe thumbs but Huntington-Whiteley has such massive collagen-infused lips (okay there is a possibility they are natural) that when she moves in to kiss LaBeouf she looks like she'll swallow him whole. She's a Victoria's Secret model and that's really all she does here, pose for pictures -- including one with the city of Chicago blowing up behind her while her hair swirls around her like a shampoo commercial. Even in the midst of all the chaos and destruction, she finds time to change her outfits and put on those practical stilletto heels. But those designer shoes miraculously transform from stiletto heels to flats depending on how much running she has to do. The action was so lame that I found myself watching her feet to see when they make the swap. She also fails miserably at convincing us that her character would fall for LaBeouf's Sam.

No, no, no, no, no... Wow. Might be the time Shia LeBeouf didn't say that in a film.

Paramount

Above: No, no, no, no, no... Wow. Might be the time Shia LeBeouf didn't say that in a film.

As for LaBeouf -- the only thing that could have redeemed this film was if his character bit the dust and preferably at the hands of Bumblebee who has suffered so patiently as his sidekick in all 3 films. LeBeouf is simply ridiculous as a romantic action hero. He plays Sam as if he were still on the Disney show "Even Stevens" and hamming it up. He is a grating performer and his shortcomings are set in even bolder relief by putting him in scenes with Frances McDormand, John Malkovich, and John Turturro. And what the heck are actors of that caliber doing in this piece of crap? Granted, each of these talented cast members -- along with Tudyk and Jeong -- find occasional moments of comedy but that's not nearly enough of a pay off considering how long and uninspired the rest of the film is. At least when Bay was making "The Rock" and "Bad Boys" there was some sense of fun. But as Bay's budgets have grown so too has his level of pretension.

Here's the part that looks like "Battle: Los Angeles," only it's Chicago.

Paramount

Above: Here's the part that looks like "Battle: Los Angeles," only it's Chicago.

I know there are still plenty of his fans out there that will defend Michael Bay to their deaths, and accuse me of being an old curmudgeon who just can't have fun at the movies. But even some fanboys will admit that these are not great films, that they are just big, fun, summer films. What I want to know is when did we have to start qualifying big, fun, summer films with the modifier "dumb." "Star Wars" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark" were just fun popcorn movies but they were smartly made. There's nothing smart about any of the "Transformers" films. Even if you like them you have to admit that they are overlong at two-hours-plus. Even Bay himself, in an interview in "Empire" magazine fessed up to how bad "T2" was: “We made some mistakes, the real fault with [Transformers 2] is that it ran into a mystical world. When I look back at it, that was crap. The writers’ strike was coming hard and fast. It was just terrible to do a movie where you’ve got to have a story in three weeks.”

"Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon" (rated PG-13 for intense prolonged sequences of sci-fi action violence, mayhem and destruction, and for language, some sexuality and innuendo) is a painfully lame summer action film that in all likelihood will make a killing at the box office this 4th of July weekend. If you really feel the need to see this, how about buying a ticket to the much superior Hollywood trifle "Fast Five" and then sneaking in to see "T3." At least that way your hard earned dollars won't be encouraging more of this Hollywood crap.

Companion viewing: "Transformers: The Movie" (animated), "Constantine" (the only film I know where Shia LeBeouf's character is mercifully killed), "The Rock"

Comments

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | June 28, 2011 at 10:22 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Huntington-Whitely, nice, but no comparison to Megan Fox! She will disappear into oblivion like Lokken, the hot girl in TERMINATOR 3.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 28, 2011 at 10:25 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

If only Shia LaBeouf would disappear with her.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | June 28, 2011 at 10:25 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Beth Beth! Still going on about SUCKER PUNCH. Well, I never had interest in seeing it, but I'm sure it might have been good for a few unintentional laughs. But listen, I saw previews of THE IMMORTALS, which you earlier defended, yet this early trailer looked like nothing more than Tarsem aping Zach Snyder!!! Don't tell me if you watch the trailer, you can't tell the obvious style!!! Be consistent, Beth!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | June 28, 2011 at 10:26 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

LOL on first reply! I would probably agree!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 28, 2011 at 11:10 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I am consistent. I have always admired Tarsem's visual skills and have always suspected that Snyder was only as good as the material he was adapting. So with SUCKER PUNCH he had no source material to give him his "vision" and so he came up empty. I did not defend THE IMMORTALS, only suggested it might be visually attractive.

Thanks for the comments!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 28, 2011 at 11:30 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Wow. If only I could suggest removal of the review. Your attacks on women suggest maybe you should take a look in the mirror or perhaps build up yourself rather than tearing others down. Their acting was horrific - but I hardly see how going on about someone's toe-thumbs or collagen infused lips tell me one thing about this movie. Get a life and stop tearing those you are envious of down Miss Accomando. or at the very least review the movie and leave your attempts at humor out of it - I for one, did not find it funny.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'wowbeth123'

wowbeth123 | June 28, 2011 at 11:56 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

beth . beth . beth . your someone who will never ever act in such a film . this is not funny one bit , your sarcasm is disgusting. your also not funny... not one bit . i left the theatre clapping, your opinion of this movie, just hurts. the new so called "megan fox" is a talented actress also sexy . angry kid i agree ! making fun of someones looks isn't correct for a critic. maybe the mirror should be check, look at your self before criticizing someones looks. also that joke of the cartoon being better then the film , just proves that this movie isnt intended for old women . i think you should go meditate and come back to life beth . anyway have fun writing crap . i personally think you are the worst critic ever born . enjoy life being hated or hating .

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 29, 2011 at 1:08 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

@wowbeth123 - Whew! I am so relieved that I will never act in such a film. (But I'm delighted that I will be a zombie in a movie; perhaps my disembowelment will make you happy.) When a film is this bad then yes I do enjoy hating it and am quite delighted to be hated for hating it. The fact that you took the time to write a comment also pleases me. You are also correct that TRANSFORMERS 3 is not intended for old women like me. I prefer the much smarter and more extreme action films coming out of Asia. But lots of young boys and men adore that original cartoon so I fail to see how liking the cartoon (and that's no joke) proves Bay's film isn't for old women. If you had seen the original cartoon and animated film you would understand why many people like myself prefer it.

As for making fun of the women, well I was making fun of the way women like this are used in Hollywood films. My comments ARE directed at the film. I think it's absurd to spend time using CGI to just make someone look better or to shoot collagen into one's lips to cater to Hollywood's perception of sexy -- it's those absurdities that I am addressing in my comments. As for Huntington-Whiteley -- she is a model and not an actress, and I was addressing that in my comments. That's all Bay uses her for, as some object to place in the scene like a prop. So I am criticizing Bay's use of her because it makes the film even more ridiculous.

And @angrykid919 - talking about physical aspects of these two actresses does tell you something about these films. If you choose actresses because of how they look rather than how they act then you open your film up to criticism based on the appearance of your actresses. And if you read the post, I did review the film and called it out for failing on very specific points -- lack of originality, bad acting, poor action scenes, etc. You, on the other hand, criticize me for "my attacks on women" but you have done nothing but attack me (suggesting I have no life or am simply envious of these actresses) rather than saying anything concrete to counter the points in my review. You don't find my review funny and that's your opinion. I find these actresses vapid and the film stupid. That's my opinion.

Thanks to everyone for their comments. I think this old lady is going to grab her walker and head over to the DVD rack to pick out a good movie to watch. Maybe DAWN OF the DEAD so I can start getting into my zombie character. I'd much rather be undead than look like either Fox or Huntington-Whiteley.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 1:43 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

You sound extremely butt-hurt. I can't understand cynics like you.

I don't hate you for hating. I just think you're retarded for getting off on quote: "When a film is this bad then yes I do enjoy hating it and am quite delighted to be hated for hating it."

You went into this movie obviously hating the franchise. You couldn't wait to write an article on how much you hate it, because it will garner you hate reactions, which in turn will feed your ego.

Beth "I do enjoy hating it and am quite delighted to be hated for hating it."

Get a life. If you want to be a movie critic, try watching a movie without bias. You apparently get your opinions from other people who, I'm sure you stroke their cynical egos, and they stroke you back.

Hipster much? Also, I don't hate your article. I just think you're a retard looking for attention by hating something just to hate it, and then loving the obvious reaction you're going to get.

That's called trolling. I'm not really sure why you are allowed to post articles on this site.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DRaGZ'

DRaGZ | June 29, 2011 at 1:57 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I don't understand why people see fit to defend this movie, or act as though it is only Beth that holds this opinion of the Transformers franchise.

I think it's helpful to point out that there is nothing wrong with the special effects, and that department (which is essentially an animation department) should be commended for their efforts. It's actually pretty impressive work, considering the scale of the CG they need to make.

But there are few grounds for defending the script, acting, etc., which is supposed to fall on Bay's shoulders.

That's been Bay's entire career, basically, depending on the talents of artists far more talented than he.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'pizzapet_1'

pizzapet_1 | June 29, 2011 at 2:04 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Ms.Accomando, its okay to not like a movie or even a series of movies but why go watch it (let alone write a review about it) if you hate it so much? Honestly I think your just looking for an excuse to write about something so u feel like you've accomplished something. But all you are really doing is wasting your time watching a bunch of stuff u don't like just so you can go online and bash on it. you're not a critic you're just plain annoying. and dont take people leaving comments as a good thing. because when the comments are nothing but bad its never good.

id also like to add that i didn't even take the time to finish reading the review by the time i was ready to give my own review about you.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 29, 2011 at 2:05 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

no you don't get off quite that simply.

"Fox had the infamous toe thumbs but Huntington-Whiteley has such massive collagen-infused lips (okay there is a possibility they are natural) that when she moves in to kiss LaBeouf she looks like she'll swallow him whole."

That statement there - for one, has NOTHING to do with the movie...deal with it - and you can't BUY your way outta that statement by saying "oh ladi da well you open yourself to that by allowing models to act" - take your craft serious? I think not.

Furthermore, the statement:

"I have to say that I think the robot effects are better here but maybe since they got rid of Megan Fox the effects team no longer had to spend all that time CGI-ing out her toe thumbs and could spend all their efforts on rendering the robots instead." baffles me a bit - I suppose you were there when they were supposedly doing this? No, more likely its just an assumption you made based on your apparent distaste for those involved.

I seriously hope you don't get paid because there is NOTHING professional about you. I will grant you one thing - you're very good at conveying distaste, cynicism, and all the things in people that make them toxic. I sincerely hope you are as miserable as you come across because I'm sure it is quite amusing to those around you.

@retox bravo on your points.

oh, and PS: yes, I grew up on the originals and they were MUCH better.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 2:05 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Not sure that anyone has acted that only Beth holds this opinion of the Transformers' franchise. What's funny is that people hate it to hate it, and then watch this particular film hating it, because they are previously biased to the other two movies (mostly because of other people's opinions and unexplained butt-hurt egos).

I'm not even defending the movie. I just can't understand people who write these cynical articles who are VERY obviously biased.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'pizzapet_1'

pizzapet_1 | June 29, 2011 at 2:05 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

P.S. I created this account just to leave my previous comment.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 29, 2011 at 2:16 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

@DRaGZ - "I don't understand why people see fit to defend this movie, or act as though it is only Beth that holds this opinion of the Transformers franchise."

I don't think most of the comments here are really defending the movie - but rather they're calling a lack of professionalism just that. I'd be fine with the review if it wasn't attacking personal characteristics of those involved or voicing an overly distasteful loathing for it. Its one thing to think a movie was bad and give it a bad review but this comes across as a personal vendetta against those involved in making it. I suppose Ms Accomondo would have Michael Bay burn in hell for its creation given her tone.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'wowbeth123'

wowbeth123 | June 29, 2011 at 2:17 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

i made an account to argue with you . trash . truly this website should cut you from your job. and give better reviews then being truly disrespectful . old women and act so have fun being an extra in a movie you trash , and have fun . because truly people hate your guts. ps i made an account just to write stuff .

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 2:20 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I'm going to go ahead and add her to my mental list of "People Not to Take Seriously". Going into the Top 10. #1 being Armond White. Thanks Beth!

Also, I use ad block plus. Not a single dime from my clicks or page loads was given to this site. If in fact this ridiculous author is getting paid for her trash commentaries, I didn't contribute. feelsgoodman.jpg

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'wowbeth123'

wowbeth123 | June 29, 2011 at 2:21 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

and also to conclude you should be disappointed for what your saying. and if its not intended for old women then go tell your boss . because where all just gonna come back and make you more frustrated .

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 29, 2011 at 2:27 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

@retox - everyone has biases -- even you -- and to pretend we don't is simply ridiculous. As a critic I will have biases just like anyone and I'm up front about them. As I said in my review, most people have their minds made up about Bay and I know nothing I can say will likely change that. I went in hating the first two films and with low expectations of the third. And Bay delivered on those low expectations. I went in with similar low expectations of FAST FIVE and was happily surprised. And when a film is as bad as TRANSFORMERS 3 or SUCKER PUNCH I have to find some way to enjoy myself so yes I do enjoy writing a review where I get to slam a film. If you read any of my other reviews (which I know you won') you would see that I write a lot of favorable reviews as well and those give me even more pleasure. I didn't write a review to get hate reactions but if people get riled up because I hate a film then yes that can be fun. I don't feel like everyone has to agree on films because I like a good discussion. I just wish more people would actually talk about the film rather than just trying to insult me. So far no one has bothered to defend TRANSFORMERS 3 with any examples of why they think the film is good. Saying I'm a "retard" is just name calling; it in no ways makes a cogent defense of the film or a valid argument against anything I said about the film.

I don't look to anyone else to form my opinion and I would rather stir a reaction -- negative or positive -- than to stir no reaction at all. My friends and I love to argue about films and we don't always agree and that's fun.

As for why I'm allowed to post on this site, well it's my blog and I write about film all the time here. As for wanting to be a movie critic, I already am one. It's my job and I love it because I have loved movies since my dad showed me KING KONG.

@DRaGZ- thanks for the comment and I agree that the FX folks have done some impressive work too bad Bay didn't support that with a good script and direction.

Thanks again to everyone who has taken time to comment.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 2:30 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Also...

quote from Beth:

"Thanks to everyone for their comments. I think this old lady is going to grab her walker and head over to the DVD rack to pick out a good movie to watch. Maybe DAWN OF the DEAD so I can start getting into my zombie character. I'd much rather be undead than look like either Fox or Huntington-Whiteley."

Obviously a washed up, failed actress turned blogger is butt-hurt. Have fun with your hipster "extra" casting in a sh***y zombie movie that no one is ever going to watch, criticizing movies because you have a failed career and hate anything that looks better than you do.

BTW no matter how cool you think you are, or how many times you watch Dawn of the Dead, whatever movie you are about to be an "extra" zombie in, will never be as awesome as Dawn of the Dead. And neither will you.

Stop trying to be so anti and zombie hipster. It's really an unbecoming characteristic.

I really hope you don't get paid for your articles.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 2:33 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

What I also think is funny, is that you're comparing Transformers 3 to Sucker Punch. Common denominator? You hate movies with awesome special effects and hot chicks in them.

I really, really feel like you have some personal issues going on when you make claims like this.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 2:35 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Quote Beth: @DRaGZ- thanks for the comment and I agree that the FX folks have done some impressive work too bad Bay didn't support that with a good script and direction.

Quote Beth: I don't look to anyone else to form my opinion and I would rather stir a reaction -- negative or positive -- than to stir no reaction at all. My friends and I love to argue about films and we don't always agree and that's fun.

Quote Retox: You apparently get your opinions from other people who, I'm sure you stroke their cynical egos, and they stroke you back.

---

Seriously, are you even reading what I've been posting?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 29, 2011 at 2:41 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Wow I am flattered that some of you took time to make accounts just to trash me. You are focusing on two comments I made about the actresses and ignoring all the other points I have made about the film. Yes I went in with low expectations and in my review I specify exactly where the film fell short.

As for going to see a film that I might not like, well that's part of the job. And yes it is a job that I get paid for. And this is not frustrating in the least because I also get paid to respond to comments like yours.

Once again thanks for taking the time to comment. Maybe some of you can also take the time to proofread your comments so the points you are making will be more clear.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 29, 2011 at 2:44 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Guidelines

Please stay on topic and be as concise as possible. Leaving a comment means you agree to our Community Discussion Rules. We like civilized discourse. We don't like spam, lying, profanity, harassment or personal attacks.

this should have a new footnote: *unless they are at the expense of public figures our bloggers chose to attack.

lol - just a minor quip

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 2:55 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Ok first of all u guys stop leaving stupid ass comments lyk get a life cuz it's jst plain retarded ok u get a life ur the one leaving retarded comments that noone wants to hear so shut up already!
And second of all I think that new girl in the movie is pretty but no effense she looks like she can't act the model girl watever her name is.
I think it was a mistake taking Megan Fox out of the movie cuz no offense but most of the guys and perverts watch transformers cuz of the action nd cuz of Megan. Most of them are probably not gonna watch it cuz she's not there.
I think it was a bad idea cuz she's a great actress nd they took out a good looking actress just to put a good looking girl that dsnt act a well as Megan! Nd btw Shia Labeouf is cute but not hot. That's all I had to say!!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 29, 2011 at 2:56 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

"Wow I am flattered that some of you took time to make accounts just to trash me."

- Don't be - most of us won't be back once this discussion is through, you can count on that.

"You are focusing on two comments I made about the actresses and ignoring all the other points I have made about the film."

- that should tell you something about those comments. Also, you should note you called them comments and not critiques. You're a critic, you can keep your personal comments to yourself, thank you. Especially when they detract from the entire point of your argument - which was substantially and well founded other than your destruction of it through your tone and "comments" btw.

"As for going to see a film that I might not like, well that's part of the job. And yes it is a job that I get paid for."

- Well, that's unfortunate for us.

"And this is not frustrating in the least because I also get paid to respond to comments like yours."

- Spare me, please. Maybe you should check your spelling and grammar, as well.

"Once again thanks for taking the time to comment. Maybe some of you can also take the time to proofread your comments so the points you are making will be more clear."

- I think Rotek's had a bit too much (no offense Rotek - just an observation)

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Milfulater'

Milfulater | June 29, 2011 at 2:58 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Beth you're admittedly not a fan. So why trash the movie. Your review is biased therefore your credibility goes to nothing. The sad part about Internet is biased opinions that get treated like they aren't. For the fans it was a good movie unlike something such as green lantern which was abysmal even for fans. Fans don't go for acting or the lead actress, who in fact was horrible but at least pleasing to look at. Your opinion is one thing and there is nothing wrong with it. Just don't state your opinion as a movie review that you admittedly say "Transformers 3 is not intended for old women.", shame on you for reviewing it and this website for posting it as a legit movie review. Next time leave your opinions out of the review. It confuses all the kids that you insulted by throwing your emotions into it. The fact you can't separate yourself from your opinion shows why you review for a website and not a reputable source.
Good day ma'am.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 29, 2011 at 3 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

*Retox not Rotek (lol)

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 3:03 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Hey it's Katty again so in my last comment I forgot to say that Beth u r doing a vey good job in this blog thing ur doing it's cool nd keep It up. Wuld lyk to know wat u think about fast five! I love that movie so much and other fast and ferious movies specially the ones with Vin Diesel in them!! Hahaha Jst write ur opinion about fast five in ur comment please becuz idk if I'll remember to look fOr it so thnx!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 3:05 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Hey angry kid wassup

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'angrykid919'

angrykid919 | June 29, 2011 at 3:05 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

can we suggest removal if reading something causes an aneurysm? Wow Katty.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Miguel Rodriguez'

Miguel Rodriguez | June 29, 2011 at 3:07 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Wow, I'm not sure where a lot of the venom is coming from in a lot of these posts. The only thing that merits a response on here because it seems to attempt an actual point, rather than just being insulting:

"What I also think is funny, is that you're comparing Transformers 3 to Sucker Punch. Common denominator? You hate movies with awesome special effects and hot chicks in them."

On the surface, it may seem that way, but there have been favorable reviews Beth Accomando has done of films that had spectacle effects and were also blessed with beautiful women. Fast Five is one such example.

The real common denominator between Transformers 3 and Sucker Punch is that they are both unwatchable. I am going to admit here that I wasn't as pained by Transformers 3, mostly because I was expecting something more along the lines of the far worse Transformers 2, but it was not a pleasant experience. A big reason for this is the constant focus on LeBeouf and Huntington-Whiteley, both of whom were absolutely dreadful. Why so much focus on these awful characters and so little on the Transformers themselves? Sucker Punch was worse than all the Transformers movies put together (and often the effects were also horrid). I don't even want to go into that one.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Miguel Rodriguez'

Miguel Rodriguez | June 29, 2011 at 3:12 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Ok, I have to address this one:

"Next time leave your opinions out of the review."

Do you not understand that the definition of a review is an extended opinion? That's the whole point of criticism--to state an opinion! Transformers 3 is at 37% on RottenTomatoes.com right now. If those reviews weren't opinions, they would all be at either 100% or 0%. There is a difference in percentage because, among critics, there is a difference of opinion (although there seems to be a general trend toward the negative in this case).

Milfulater, I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but please understand that this review and all others like it are always going to be 100% opinion, and you are free to disagree with them.

Just to state, I am a huge Transformers fan and I was again let down by another movie.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 3:13 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Milfulater I agree with you. You might think She should have left her feelings out of it but not everyone might agree with you also, she is expressing herself and she has the right to do that if she wants to. But u had a good point. Beth, I think u should put your feelings in the review becuz they r important and also appreciated.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 3:14 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Angry kid I was jst saying Wassup ok chill

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 29, 2011 at 3:15 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

@Milfulater - I have to disagree with you completely. A review IS an opinion. If a review was not an opinion then it would simply be a plot description. Critics are paid to have opinions and to voice them. That's the whole point of criticism. And yes critics have biases just like everyone. My bias against Bay is based on having seen every one of his films and finding them increasingly flawed and some downright unwatchable. I trashed this movie because in my opinion -- and based on all the evidence I cited -- it was bad enough to be trashed. A review is simply one critic's opinion, which you can then agree or disagree with.

As for saying TRANSFORMERS is "not for old women" that was in response to a comment posted and it is accurate in the sense that older women are not the target demo for this film.

@Katty I love your final comment about Shia.

Thanks again for the comments.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 3:28 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Beth do you think their going to make another transformers movie? And if they do, do you think they will put Megan Fox back in for the whole movie?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 3:40 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Anyone who includes Fast Five in comments here, alongside of Sucker Punch, compared to Transformers 3 is an idiot. Yes, that includes Beth Acoomando, Miguel Rodriguez, and "Katty".

By the way, Katty just made her account and hasn't posted on anything else. Also, uses extremely ridiculous "internet grammar". Only leads me to believe that Beth is using her internet acquaintances to make posts (or is making fake accounts for herself) to push this article.

What's really sad is that she gets paid for this garbage. This is terrible trash. Also Beth, this wasn't a review. This was a vitriolic, virulent, blog based on other people's opinions and your own self loathing insecurities.

You are NOT a critic. You're a self absorbed deject.

Also, I have read your other "reviews". They are just as stupid.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Chrisjbobo'

Chrisjbobo | June 29, 2011 at 4:01 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

@Beth thank you for your review I haven't seen the movie but me being a child of the 80's and my blind fanboyism I will see it on Friday I personally have been let down by both the other movies

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 4:02 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Quote "Miguel Rodriguez": Do you not understand that the definition of a review is an extended opinion? That's the whole point of criticism--to state an opinion! Transformers 3 is at 37% on RottenTomatoes.com right now. If those reviews weren't opinions, they would all be at either 100% or 0%. There is a difference in percentage because, among critics, there is a difference of opinion (although there seems to be a general trend toward the negative in this case).

This proves that you, Beth, and "Katty" are retarded.

Audience
90%
Liked it:
Average Rating: 4.4/5
User Ratings: 60,137

biased, retarded reviewers (wannabe critics...), who try to get blog ratings to support their site (which by the way again, I use ad block, so I don't support your site with ads)

Critics vs. actual viewers and not ad/blog whores. Hm. 36% vs 90%.

So much stupid in this place.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 4:15 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Shut the fuk up retox ur stupid that's how I type nd no she ddnt make this account I did. Wow calling me retarded that's fine like I care nd I don't have to comment on any other articles she's made becuz I don't care about other articles I typed in transformers nd this came up I decided to sign up wow big deal dsnt mean that it's her u moron! And for ur info I ddnt compare fast five to transformers jackass I said I love that movie! I can say watever the hell I wanna!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 4:17 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Btw wow whores really?! That just shows how rude and disresPectfull you are nd yes I was being rude in my las comment too but u deserved it son of a bitch

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 4:20 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Katty = someone who works for the website and is trying to get more comments. All the more reason to install Adblock Plus for Firefox (also available for Chrome) so you don't have to pay blog whores for commenting on their own posts.

Katty is obviously fake typing typo errors. This site is full of fail.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'retox'

retox | June 29, 2011 at 4:21 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Katty stop making comments with fake typos.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 5:35 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Ur stupid dats how I write I'm telling u I choose to write lyk this nd ur not gnu tell me how I should type If I wanna type lyk dis I will!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 5:39 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Retox? More lyk Retard! Hahaha u think u know it all by u don't how can u accuse me of that how do we know UR not Beth! Accusing me of bullcrap

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 5:41 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I'm running out of patience nd battery so I'm out! Later!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'IanForbes'

IanForbes | June 29, 2011 at 7:28 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I'd say I'm surprised by the personal attacks going on but then again, this is the internet. Beth is 100% correct in trashing the film, aside from most of the CGI (don't tell me JFK looked human) Michael Bay has made a terrible film.

The argument that 38% of critics like it vs. 90% of audiences is flawed because up to this point, the only audience members who have seen it are the super fanboys who went to previews, 9pm, & midnight screenings. If they don't like it, nobody will. And obviously there are going to be people who like this sort of thing, audiences have spent billions of dollars on the franchise. Critics just tend to want more from films than special effects; you know, a coherent script, competent actors, sensible direction.

As a huge Transformers fan, I was okay with the vapidness of #1 because I expect nothing from Michael Bay. #2 was exactly that and should have been flushed. #3 is aptly compared with films like "Sucker Punch" because they fall into the same general pool of dumb, CGI-driven films from directors who are more concerned with how the women look than what they say.

I'm a critic too and always laugh when we are attacked for delivering an opinion because that's exactly what a film review is. Sure, there are filmmaking elements that can more objectively be discussed but at the end of the day, we either like or dislike a film. Sometimes a particular facet of the movie sticks with us (toe-thumbs/Devasator's metal balls/LaBeouf in general) and we call them out on it.

And we go and see films even if we're probably not going to like them because it's our job and a movie as heavily marketed as Transformers 3 is expected to be reviewed by our readers.

I'm going to bet that those who are attacking Beth aren't also criticizing whatever film critic waxed poetically about this film on the basis that "robots are cool" and "girls are pretty"; which is hypocritical.

If you don't like one critic's opinion this much, read someone else's. Your goal in reading reviews is to learn the critic's taste and be able to decide if you generally agree or disagree with their OPINION. Then you can better gauge if spending $329 on a film is worth it, which is the point of these reviews in the first place.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Byronik'

Byronik | June 29, 2011 at 10:06 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I only just realized "Shia LeBeouf" is French for "Where's the beef?"

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'cyrusg'

cyrusg | June 29, 2011 at 12:16 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

this review is absolutely hilarious. well done.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'beth182'

beth182 | June 29, 2011 at 1:03 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I agree with angrykid919, you trashed on the actresses wayy too much. its one thing to not like the film. but its completely another thing to be rude about peoples physical appearance. im sure your not perfect looking either. besides Megan and Rosie are both beautiful, and in my opinion, Rosie did awesome for not having acting experience. As far as you saying all she did was "pose", perhaps that could be because its her job to do that, and it has been for years. Im sure she'll learn from this film, and become better and better in her upcoming movies.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 29, 2011 at 2:16 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Thanks to everyone for a very entertaining exchange of ideas and opinions. If we all agreed on everything it would be a dull world indeed.

And as far as I know there are no plans for Bay to make a TRANSFORMERS 4 or for him to work with Fox again. There are rumors of a BAD BOYS 3 though.

Here's one more opinion to throw into the mix.

http://io9.com/5816415/

Thanks again!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Miguel Rodriguez'

Miguel Rodriguez | June 29, 2011 at 2:36 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

"As far as you saying all she did was "pose", perhaps that could be because its her job to do that, and it has been for years."

beth182--I don't disagree with you, but I also think she was chosen because all they wanted was a woman who could just stand around, and as Roger Ebert said "(in two hilarious scenes) stare thoughtfully into space as if realizing something." Of course that is indicative of the empty and valueless thought that was put into the casting by the filmmakers.

The biggest problem with that in this film is that it was so long and bloated and so much time was devoted to her lack of character that it was painful to sit through. Sitting through so much of that can feel so grating that one can not help to report it as such.

Of course, I personally fault that with the filmmakers and not on the model personally. She was written and directed to be porcelain husk of a person.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Erika2'

Erika2 | June 29, 2011 at 3:42 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Retox-

"What's really sad is that she gets paid for this garbage. This is terrible trash. Also Beth, this wasn't a review. This was a vitriolic, virulent, blog based on other people's opinions and your own self loathing insecurities."

I appreciate the fact that you call her vitriolic and virulent when every other comment of yours calls someone "retarded". I take far more offense to your name-calling (and general lack of respect for both the people on this site and the whole population of people that you attack with your terminology) than I could take to a review that, at the end of the day, you simply don't agree with.

Nice work, Retox.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Katty'

Katty | June 29, 2011 at 3:48 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Erika2 shut the fudge up ok ur stupid nobody cares about wat u have to say

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'LilySobriquet'

LilySobriquet | June 29, 2011 at 4:27 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Beth, your review is absolutely hilarious! I would much prefer to read it again, a hundred times, than to see this movie even once. Even Megan Fox dissed Transformers! And to all the pearl-clutching little nitwits complaining: since when are toe thumbs and collagen lips sacred cows? Bad acting warrants Beth’s facetious focus on these physical trivialities. It's the least a critic could do, especially considering how much money these vapid tarts get paid just to bore us to death.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Erika2'

Erika2 | June 29, 2011 at 6:21 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Katty-

I was being sarcastic towards Retox, not talking smack against any of you. I was disagreeing with his/her use of the word "retard" towards Beth and everyone else. Not sure why you are mad at me for defending you all, but okay.

Have a nice day!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'coldplayer85'

coldplayer85 | June 29, 2011 at 9:41 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Hi Beth,

First of all, fu*k all the personal comment.

I would like to comment on the movie though. And yes you're 110% right about the movie. I excitedly watched it yesterday, and man almost halfway to the movie, I feel bored. Ur right, the cartoons are much, much better than this. I would like to highlight some point (and blind fanboys, please stay out of this).

1) jumping plots, leaving you with an open mouth. For example after Bumblebee catched Sam and his friend from Starscream, suddenly he was caught and raising his arms behind his head. WTF?? Also Optimus left his weaponry behind, suddenly his flying!! This and much more.

2) a lot, I mean A LOT of character were wasted. Shockwave for example, is famous for his gigantic laser blast, and yet, look when he tried to shoot down Optimus. I can fart stronger than that. Seriously. When Ironhide died, yes its a liittle bit sad, but afterwards nobody ever mentioned about him! Is that what happens when ur best friend died? No act of strong revenge, nothing! Unless Ironhide was a floor wiper at Cybertron, this movie is a serious crap.

3) the new girl (whatever her name is) is the nothing more than Megan. Same whore attire, same whore looking, just like u said, the Hollywood interpretation of plastic skinny beauty. I'd rather watch this movie WITHOUT a female character. After all, its about the Autobots and Decepticons fighting each other, not who's butt is the cutest in the morning.

4) the Decepticons were looking for the Autobots in Chicago, I mean the entire army is swarming everywhere, but still, they can just have a weekend ride through the streets, up to their HQ. WTF man??? And when Bumblebee drive that flying thing, and attacked the HQ, nobody from the entire Decepticon army did anything! Its like someone shooting at your corridor and u just "oh nice firework".

5) the worse part was when the Decepticons army started to attack Chicago. Come on Bay, u can do much better than a blank screen, then a spaceship blasting missiles, then eh? Its over. Remember Independence Day? U can feel the fear, how people are running for their lives when the aliens are blasting the Empire state building, I mean MASS HYSTERIA. Now that's an invasion.

All in all, I'm very disappointed with this. I really expected more, much more. I think X-men: First class was much better than this, the story seems to evolve and not a character were wasted.

If there's Transformers 4, then please, change the director, change the concept, and please, I mean pleaaaaasee..keep that 'whore actress" in Girls Gone Wild.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 29, 2011 at 11:20 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Thanks ColdPlayer85 for taking the time to provide your review (and that includes your opinion) of the film. I too was disappointed that the robots weren't put to better use.

Thanks again to everyone for posting comments.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth_Is_Right'

Beth_Is_Right | June 30, 2011 at 8:35 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Come on team,

Can anyone really argue with what Beth has said here. Sure she exaggerated some points for comedy's sake, get a sense of humor. There is no one who is being honest with themselves that could say that any of the Transformers were good movies. If you like them, that's one thing. But they're not good movies. There's a thing called a guilty pleasure. The guilt is that we know we shouldn't enjoy them but somehow we still do, like listening to Journey songs or poking around in other peoples things when they're not around.

The point is valid that the Transformers movies aren't geared towards women, especially those old enough to drive. Cuz women notice stuff like shoes and plastic surgery and occasionally plot. Guys notice stuff like hot girls and cool looking robots and can become so distracted they forget that their intelligence is being insulted.

If you want to watch a good movie that you don't need to feel guilty about there are plenty. You can have a real debate over the quality of a film like Donnie Darko or even Total Recall, if you're an action junkie. You cannot however have and intellectual conversation about the merits of Transformers..... Just admit it's a guilty pleasure. You like hot girls and stuff that blows up. You shut your mind off for 2.5 hours and watched boobies and fireworks. Trying to claim anything beyond that is just asinine .

For the record.... i'm a 35 y/o Male.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'LilMiss'

LilMiss | June 30, 2011 at 8:55 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Im new here, came across this site when i searcded T3 reviews. I saw the movie yesterday and i was dissapointed, it was long, to much blowing up, plot was not good, etc etc. Glad i did not see it in 3D. It was So BORING i fell asleep the last thirty minutes, when the first pilar went down. Hope theres no T4 and if there is it better out do this one or director change! Its my opinon only and ive read all the replies on here so i know i might get attacked. Which is LAME.
@BETH liked your review i felt the same way aboyt the movie.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 30, 2011 at 1:17 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Wow! Wish I had taken the name Beth_Is_Right. It would save me a lot of time posting comments. ;)

Thanks for giving women credit for paying attention to stuff like plot. We can get distracted though by hot hunks (300, that's all I'll say), and not notice occasional flaws in storytelling. My guilty pleasures for dumb action are LIVE FREE AND DIE HARD, and more recently SHOOT 'EM UP and FAST FIVE. Thanks for a well articulated perspective from the target demo.

And LilMiss I hope no one attacks you for your opinion here. I love a good discussion about film but hate it when it just descends into name calling.

Thanks again for all the comments. I love reading them.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'The0ne'

The0ne | June 30, 2011 at 4:12 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I went to watch the movie on opening night. About 10 of us enjoyed the movie in silence. :)

I agree with Beth on this review. The movie does not have much in it at all. The acting is weak mainly because the script is weak to begin with. I did enjoy seeing John Malkavich though :D Lebeouf is buffed up if you didn't notice but again the script is so limited its hard to judge whether anyone has a chance to act at all. Sigh.

The new actress creep me out every time I see her and her infused-whatever lips. That is just nasty and gross. Her acting is no better than Megan really but is no where near as horrible as some reviews commented on. She's better than the guy in Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith. You know, the mannequin actor. Plus Michael Bay doesn't do her any justice, or did he, by showcasing her like the Victoria Secret model that she is. This also made me sick to the stomach.

The action is what you expect from Michael Bay. Very young kids will enjoy it while adults will go be more "Huh?" It's his type of film, thinking too much about why he chose to do it that way will only hurt or even kill your brain cells. Just enjoy the action. Towards the end when they shoot the "eyes" off of the bad guys, blinding them (hahah), so they can take them down; just ignore that they are robots with other sensors. Actually, ignore that they are highly advance robot "beings." The story doesn't follow the animation if you keep up with it as I do (I'm a almost die hard fan of Transformers).

3D was done just ok. Nothing spectacular. I've seen better with Captian EO, very old film at Disney. I honestly don't know what to say about this movie in the positive sense really. It's just so hollow to begin with, not to mention degrading to real Transformers fans.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'The0ne'

The0ne | June 30, 2011 at 4:17 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

However, rude ColdPlay85 was in his response there are tons more that are wrong this movie and the other two. Those that he highlight are not even the worst offenders, just the obvious. Dare I should spoiled the movie and list them here, dare me :)

Just enjoy the action and move aside the "huh" portion of your brain. If you don't you'll regret it!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'The0ne'

The0ne | June 30, 2011 at 4:26 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Nevermind, I am reading through other comments and I see why he said what he did.

Be a movie critic, that's all you have to do for us. As you've said, it doesn't have to come down to name bashing and/or supporting your views with such distasteful comments, from either parties.

This is not a bad movie by all means, it's just has a poor script with a director that likes things to go BOOM and look pretty. People will like what they want to like regardless of the faults in them. The new lead actress is not a bad actor, but for me I shiver when I see those infused lips of hers. It is one of the nastiest thing ever. I'm sure my nephews will like it because that's what they want to see.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'The0ne'

The0ne | June 30, 2011 at 5:39 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Spoilers and what's bad about the movie,

1. Transformers have eye(s) but it is not the only means to to view their surrounding. This is how the movie ended btw. In addition, Starscream could have taken off after his eye got shut down but he was weakened like a human without an eye would. Funny and enjoyable at least.

2. Transformers are highly advance beings with advanced A.I. Missiles coming at them will be avoided easily. Shooting running little humans is easy target practice. It doesn't make for a good movie though. This is just facts, from the animation and the books (yes, read them). Their A.I. allows them to calculate millions of possibilities when shooting at a target. Other transformers can compute a way out, humans will die.

3. Transformer can scan and take on forms of what hey need. There is no need for autobots to be cars always, although that's what they've known for. The scan takes less than 5 seconds before they can assume the form. They don't even need to scan if they have the info in their system, which by now they should :)

4. Cycbertron would have been destroyed with the first interruption as the world is machine. After literally being cut off from teleportation it wouldn't been able to be whole at all or possible to "rejoin" the first part.

5. All characters with the exception of the few are not their counterparts in the animation.

6. There is absolutely no reason Bumblebee can't speak normally unless he chooses not too.

7. This movie is more dark as you can see people dying everywhere even incinerated to skeletons. I like it :)

8. There is no chance the autobots can slip un-noticed by the flying decepticons. Take take a look at the opening for the first movie. Even human can't escape the scans.

9. Prime should never be stuck that long on the cables. Transform to break out, unleashed his swords...unleash a dremel tool! Laser beam?

10. Decepticons could have destory autobots easily if using energon detecting sensors. But we can count on stupidity, even from robots, to help.

11. The base in Chicago is ludicrous to even try to think about it, in dead center of downtown where most damage and eye candy movie effects can take place.

12. Decepticons being repair on the single battle cruiser drops like dead flies. They are being repair not turned off. Even if dropped from tower high buildings some would have survive instead of all exploding.

13. No reason Megatron can't be fixed already since they have the resources for the worm like machine that shockwave controls. Shockwave is a powerful laser purple gun and is the architect on the decepticons side. He's the one the manages just about everything.

Well, 15 err less cause of character limit should be more than enough...happy viewing!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | June 30, 2011 at 11:35 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Wow TheOne! I think you wrote more than I did about the film. Thanks for sharing your opinions. The phrase I like to use to describe these kind of mindless action films is "don't do the math." It comes from a filmmaker at a Q&A session who was being asked about the ages of his characters and how their ages didn't make sense based on their backstory and his answer was simply: "Don't do the math."

Thanks.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'bc379'

bc379 | July 1, 2011 at 12:16 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

The only two reasons I hate Summer are the heat and boring blockbusters.

Die-hard fans are taking this Transformers series too seriously. I don't know why they love a film that lacks logic, sense and good managing of CGI; I'm not even gonna bother mentioning the acting (God! Someone take them to Glee and teach them a lesson, considering that those kids have to act like they're having the time of their lives when they are more miserable than a kid without a Christmas gift).

I like this review because it's the only accurate one. Therefore, I agree with everything because I had to suffer too but I only saw the first film twice because the first time I fell asleep (good riddance) and the second time I went loaded with coffee thinking "I need to see what everyone is talking about"... oh, the mistakes we make in life.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'themann'

themann | July 1, 2011 at 2:33 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

@Katty- please just slam your head against the keyboard next time and maybe we could all understand your comments better

as for the review, i respectfully disagree with it. I haven't had the chance to see the movie yet but i liked the first two pretty good. I remember the cartoons and the movie reflects them well in my opinion, but i the movies would be a lot better if they took all the sensual jokes, scenes, etc. out.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'himesama'

himesama | July 3, 2011 at 1:12 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Beth,

OMG. I made an account just to post here. Thank you so much for this post. I am sick and tired of simple-mindedly praising a movie just because it is a franchise.I disliked the movie so much I wanted to read a real review of it and see I was not alone in this opinion. I could not agree more with you. Even when I was watching the movie I had the Battle Los Angeles deya vu! And then I saw all the dishing that started and it really bothered me! I mean, it's not your fault Megan fox's thumbs freak most people and Rosie looks plastic (even if she's not)! It's Michael Bay's for being so sexist and crowd pleasing the lower minds that follow him.

here's my review of the movie

I want to add some thoughts on the bad of the movie:

1. Patrick Dempsey is usually a decent and lovable actor. He was a huge disappointment. Not because he was a bad guy, but his dialogue and acting are so contradicting and simply incongruent.

2. I have to re agree with you on the fact that the new girl just didn’t fit into a plausible relationship for shia. I mean, Michaela was dating him because of the adventure they had together. But this girl dating him because he got a medal from the president? and he has no job? please, it’s a movie, but that is just stretching it! Plus, the argument “Michaela just dumped me” was kind of uninspired and uncreative. It was hard to relate to sam risking everything for another chick when you had seen him so lost for the other one in two previous movies. I guess you can only blame Michael Bay and Megan Fox for being so childlish and unprofessional God-knows-what happened between them.

3. Mentioning the bad acting is an understatement since the movie is so plagued by it. I can only write of the character it should have done without: After two movies, we can do without Sam’s parents and the stupid, not-funny Sector 7 agent. I am glad not to see Sam’s roommate in this movie; it was enough to bare with him in one movie.

4. The movie is about transformers, yet you can only relate to optimus or bumble bee. No other autobot has a part or scenes were you can relate with them besides optimus and bumble bee. If the movie is about transformers, the real characters of the movie should be them. We related with the twins on the second movie, and they dont make an appearance or mention on the third one. They kill the only other autobot we recognized, ironhide. On a good note to Michael Bay, thank you for eliminating starscream, he was terrible enough since the first one; took you long enough, Michael.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'himesama'

himesama | July 3, 2011 at 1:13 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago


5. Terrible disappointment to see that an involvement from Steven Spielberg couldn’t deliver a decent movie.

6. Ok, so the fight scenes were better and less monotonal than transformers 2, but again, the scenes should have some logic and plausibility to them. So Optimus misses like 30 min of battle because he is hanging from wires waiting to be released and all this time not attacked by any decepticons? Trained military men died in the building, but the chick running in heels made it? And her-stupid-good-for-nothing boyfriend too? Megatron defeats sentinel after a pep talk with the Victoria Secret Model? Was he inspired? Optimus defeats Megatron with one arm and one hit? Come on!

I see that I could go on… If only we could save a few from watching it!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | July 3, 2011 at 10:57 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Thanks himesama! I think my favorite comments from you were about Optimus hanging on wires (I forgot how dumb that was) and how the chick in heels survived. She had those amazing transforming heels though. :)

BTW: This just in from the HOLLYWOOD REPORTER... Box Office Report: 'Transformers: Dark of the Moon' Scores Third-Best Global Bow Ever http://j.mp/iyNQIG

Oh well. I guess we'll be getting more.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | July 3, 2011 at 6:05 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

77 comments! Never have I seen so many on this website! You would think it was about an emotionally-charged socio-political issue!

Come on, people, calm down, it's TRANSFOMERS 3!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | July 3, 2011 at 10:48 p.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

Well there were more for CLOVERFIELD, I AM LEGEND, and CASINO ROYALE. But those posts aren't available any more. Those were wild! Even had a death threat. And you're the one who started this one off!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'themann'

themann | July 4, 2011 at 2:39 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

summary of this review.........GAY!!!!!!!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | July 5, 2011 at 11:43 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

@BETH LOL!!!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | July 5, 2011 at 11:44 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

Death threat sick and to be reported!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | July 5, 2011 at 10:42 p.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

@themann -- why thank you. I take that as a compliment.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'pllorenzo'

pllorenzo | July 5, 2011 at 10:47 p.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

We have definitely given this film more publicity than it's worth. It's a loud, obnoxious, racist, sexist, waste of character, waste of good actors (John Tututurro, Frances McDormand, and Alan Tudyk), and waste of our brain cells. There was only a few really good scenes (anything with Tudyk, 'cause he actually acted) and the sequence with the "squirrel" suit dive, which was cool.

@themann - it's better to be gay than to be Bay.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | July 6, 2011 at 7:58 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

Between GREEN LANTERN's Blake Lively and TRANSFORMERS Rose Huntington_Whitely--It's Blake by a long shot!!! Why they got rid of Megan I'll never know!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'themann'

themann | July 6, 2011 at 9:46 p.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

@pllorenzo - no....no its not... anything is better than being gay

wow you people make a big fuss over a freaking movie. i mean come on. who goes to the theater to watch a movie about transformers and expects to have a life changing experience. when i go to watch transformers i expect to see a bunch of huge robots blowin up stuff which is exactly what i saw so i have been pleased with the movies.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'sirjeff54'

sirjeff54 | July 8, 2011 at 5:05 p.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

Amazing review. I had to create an account for that! Michael Bay did an fantastic job of completely ruining what could have been an amazing series of movies. It's quite unfortunate, but hopefully someone in the future will see how bad they were and make it their life goal to make a movie that does the original Transformers justice!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Superstar123'

Superstar123 | July 17, 2011 at 8:39 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

I am not really commenting on the review but it was really good i am just commenting on the movie. Micheal Bay really messed up the third movie i had such high expectations for it but it is soooo CRAP. I loved the first movie and the second butt this movie just ruined the trilogy for me. This movie does not have the same standards as the 1st and 2nd transformers and all the fast and furious movies. Even Tokyo drift was better than this, even though that movie wasn't really good at least it kept me a little entertained from some parts.
Also when i am older i want to be a film director and after i watched the first and second transformers movie i was like to my mum "see how gd these movies are and how well Bay directed these movies i want to big as him and David Spielberg" but watching Dark moon i dnt want to be like bay having started a trilogy so great and finished it soo Crap!! I Always hate it when there is a good movie and the first is soo gd but the sequels are so Crapp it like the director just put me off the whole movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Kensuke'

Kensuke | July 19, 2011 at 9:37 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

I'm really impressed it became such a nice 3D movie that I watched animation in Japan.

2.5hr is kinda long for movies but I didn't feed that.

4 stars.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'JohnFreikong'

JohnFreikong | July 23, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

This is my tought about the movie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMbUG6y_sHA

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'JohnFreikong'

JohnFreikong | July 23, 2011 at 9:35 a.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

This is my tought about the movie

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Beth Accomando'

Beth Accomando, KPBS Staff | July 28, 2011 at 12:55 p.m. ― 3 years, 3 months ago

@sirjeff54 - we can only hope someone else will come along and do the Transformers franchise justice. I used to enjoy the cartoon.

Thanks to everyone for the additional comments.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'BeccaJ'

BeccaJ | December 29, 2011 at 9:35 p.m. ― 2 years, 10 months ago

I'm a little late in looking for reviews on this movie, but a month ago I just watched the movie on DVD and I have to say I was very disappointed. It was so hyped up. Megan Fox was gone and was hoping for a strong female who people could relate, but instead got a model who was simply just eye candy. I hate the way Michael treats his female characters who whoever wrote these movies. How hard is it to have a strong female who people can relate to and is intriguing, completely awesome, supportive of the main character or even just important!

So yes Beth, I don't think you were downgrading Rosie's looks because you're jealous or don't look like her. I hated the fact that when she wore white, it was barely dirty while all the other male characters were dirty as hell. They did this to Megan's character in T2, so it was disappointing to see see it yet again and even more annoying. So to me Rosie's character was just eye candy and played no importance to the movie. In fact, if you take her out of the equation, you would barely see a difference. It may have been a bit better to not have her there at all.

( | suggest removal )