DescentBB

It was extremely cheesy and they tried too hard with the comedy... but all in all it was one of the most entertaining movies I've seen all year; I left laughing and grinning.

Sure has hell kicked Spider-Man 3's ass.

Sure it was a bit cheesy, but it's Transformers and I thought they did a dang good job on the robots/characters. I just wanted to see more story behind some of the characters but it was still good and I'm sure a sequel will reveal more about them. After all, they left a ton of important characters out.

I don't know if I would compare it to Spider-Man 3. Both movies seem different.

Accept Spider-Man 3 stunk like horse poopy on steroids. I ranked it just under Star Wars prequels since at least it had Venom. It had terrible directing/writing/acting and made absolutely no sense in the real world or within the comic book world. It even strayed from the land of fantasy in my book. Not only that, but they set it up for the worst super-hero movie sequel to ever be made: Spider-Man 4.

Not to say that this film was realistic or anything because it wasn't of course. But it kept fairly true to the G1 characters/comics, it was actually designed to be more realistic than the comic books and updated for the current generation of viewers. Everything in the story made sense and fit well together and the acting was pretty good. Not to mention, they set it up so that it was concluded but slightly open-ended.


BTW, was the tank supposed to be Brawl or Devastator? I don't get it. When I read the text and they were calling in the Deceps, I noticed that they mentioned Devastator. However, the only constructicon I saw, was Bonecrusher (at least from what sites all over the net claim to be). It takes like 5 or 6 constructicons that all connect together to get Devastator (he is like a super-transformer). The tank I've heard was supposed to be Brawl, which is a combaticon, not a constructicon, which would make sense, as he was a tank.

whatever, man.

[]V[]essenjah wrote:Accept Spider-Man 3 stunk like horse poopy on steroids. I ranked it just under Star Wars prequels since at least it had Venom. It had terrible directing/writing/acting and made absolutely no sense in the real world or within the comic book world. It even strayed from the land of fantasy in my book. Not only that, but they set it up for the worst super-hero movie sequel to ever be made: Spider-Man 4.

Not if the rumor I heard was true. Their planning on making a second hulk movie.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0800080/

It looks like the rumor may be true.

Actually.... that could be really good if they hadn't changed the entire cast. Proven method behind it. Edward Norton as Bruce Banner? LOL

However, Spider-Man 4 will be even worse than that from what I have read about it. I mean... vampires? On top of the fact that the director and cast will all be different.

That movie was so f'n bad.... and wasn't the bad cop car a mustang? (or was it a charger?)