Reviews

Transformers 3

3

Can Michael keep those ’bot blues at Bay?

“Impress me!” demands horrible boss John Malkovich of Shia LaBeouf when the latter’s Sam Witwicky arrives for a job interview.

Those left cold by the last Transformers may well ask the same of Michael Bay before risking what looks likely to be his final orgy of Hasbro-inspired robo-carnage.

For them, good news. Transformers 3 (full title - Transformers: Dark Of The Moon) might struggle to equal the sheer exhilaration of Bay's 2007 trilogy-starter, but it’s a whole lot more coherent and fulfilling than Revenge Of The Fallen.

Yes, it’s punishingly long – the longest so far, in fact – and comes saddled with some excruciating attempts at comedy (the most painful involving The Hangover’s Ken Jeong as a LaBeouf-accosting conspiracy theorist).

Yet the clever hook (say, what if the Apollo 11 moon landing were a cover for some Alien-style exploration of a derelict Cybertron spacecraft?) provides a secure foundation for Bay’s customary bombast, while the devastation wreaked by snake-bot Soundwave makes it the most bad-ass Decepticon since Blackout.

Perhaps Ehren Kruger’s best move, though, is to ditch Fallen’s baffling, globe-hopping patchwork in favour of a straightforward earth invasion story that, like this year’s Battle: Los Angeles, adheres faithfully to the ID4 template.

Admittedly, it takes a while for the pieces to fall into place and for characters (flesh and metal) to reveal their true colours. But once they do, the stage is set for a final hour of über-destructive robot wars in the streets and skies of Chicago, complete with wing-suited commandos plummeting from the heavens, four climactic smackdowns and a terrific bit of skyscraper-toppling.

Now for the bad news. British model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley is awful – awful! – as LaBeouf’s new love interest, sucking the life out of every scene she appears in like some pneumatic Dyson sexbot.

Introduced with a leering pan up her Victoria’s Secret pins, she achieves the unlikely feat of making Megan Fox look like a proper actress, particularly at moments where she is required to be in peril.

Huntington-Whiteley is so terrible, in fact, she makes her co-stars bad too. LaBeouf, for one, has rarely looked so sweatily desperate than in scenes where he is obliged to simulate ardour. But then his own performance isn’t much to write home about either, pitched as it is at such a heightened level of consternation you fear he might pass out at any minute.

Elsewhere Frances McDormand gives good ball-breaker as a pushy Secretary of Defence (“Stop with the ma’am!”), while Alan Tudyk amuses mightily as the hair-trigger assistant of John Turturro’s oddball Sector 7 agent.

Leonard Nimoy, meanwhile, gets to recycle his “needs of the many” speech from Wrath Of Khan in his role as the reawakened superbot Sentinel Prime. Now that was a sequel...

 

Verdict:

A largely linear plot and some ingenious appropriation of 20th century history helps T3 correct most of T2’s deficiencies without really matching T1’s superior entertainment value and element of surprise.  

Film Details

User Reviews

    • BruceShark

      Jun 26th 2011, 10:33

      AHHH, the beloved 3 stars. Or as I like to think of it the, 'we'll sit on the fence until we've seen every other reviewers reviews of the film and we see what it takes at the box office and then we'll change our opinion accordingly'. Must agree with one thing though. Miss 'Hit with a massive, i mean MASSIVE, ugly stick' Rosie Huntington-s**teley is awful in this film, I mean just awful. I haven't seen the film yet. But she is awful in it.

      Alert a moderator

    • fuzzydunlop1

      Jun 26th 2011, 17:40

      I never had any desire to see this, so I think I'll saving my money for something worthwhile.

      Alert a moderator

    • Hadouken76

      Jun 26th 2011, 21:15

      Looks like it going to be a long 2 and a bit hours. Judging by the trailer, the fight scenes will again be hard to follow and Huntington-whitely will be deadweight, she looks like a discarded blow-up doll, how did she flash...sorry pass the audtion, I'll never know.

      Alert a moderator

    • MikeyRix

      Jun 26th 2011, 22:30

      Not interested, never was and never will be interested. Just thought I'd voice my indifference. Also, your star ratings imo seem to be really effing dodgy lately :/ what's up with that?!

      Alert a moderator

    • kilroy0097

      Jun 27th 2011, 12:19

      I think the issue here is easy to understand. Michael Bay should stick to what he knows which is explosions, VFX, action, guns and toys. He does not do human interaction or human interest. He has no clue when it comes to the human factor in films. He falsely believes that you need some hot girl (though I don't find RHW all that attractive personally) in a move to be eye candy. That's all Megan Fox was in the movie was eye candy. When it comes to Shia's character a girl was never needed in the story so why was the hot girl there? Because Bay seems to believe one is needed. So this shows that Bay is using a formula and not judgment. Stick to explosions and robots Bay because when it comes to humans you don't do so well.

      Alert a moderator

    • kilroy0097

      Jun 27th 2011, 12:19

      I think the issue here is easy to understand. Michael Bay should stick to what he knows which is explosions, VFX, action, guns and toys. He does not do human interaction or human interest. He has no clue when it comes to the human factor in films. He falsely believes that you need some hot girl (though I don't find RHW all that attractive personally) in a move to be eye candy. That's all Megan Fox was in the movie was eye candy. When it comes to Shia's character a girl was never needed in the story so why was the hot girl there? Because Bay seems to believe one is needed. So this shows that Bay is using a formula and not judgment. Stick to explosions and robots Bay because when it comes to humans you don't do so well.

      Alert a moderator

    • JDogg1982

      Jun 27th 2011, 12:31

      5

      Don't know what people expect from TransFormers... the TV series was about robots who kicked the s**t out of other robots and had no plot, so stop moaning when the films are the same. The films do exactly what it says on the tin. It's not going to win any oscars but it's the most enjoyable film I've seen this year and it looks fantastic in 3D!!

      Alert a moderator

    • Sarah6

      Jun 27th 2011, 13:49

      Not even surprised Rosie H-W was naff - she wasn't cast for her acting ability. She was cast because she's a model and they needed a shot to rival the one of Megan Fox's stomach in T1.

      Alert a moderator

    • KingofSpain

      Jun 27th 2011, 14:41

      Come on TF, no comment on the quality of the 3D???? It was bloody shot stereoscopically. Major fail you guys, your reviews are getting worse by the week.

      Alert a moderator

    • rosco30

      Jun 28th 2011, 19:57

      Im confused, u have slagged the S**t outta the 2nd installment and said it was worse than the 3rd one, but yet ur mag has givin the 2nd one a four star review and this one only three stars, tut tut

      Alert a moderator

    • Siban1982

      Jun 28th 2011, 21:40

      Thought the second one was overly long, terribly scripted with some awful attempts at comedy. Halfway through John Turturro has to actually make a point of spelling out the plot to the audience. The 3rd looks long with action scenes showing nothing particularly new. I like the staging concept but it seems like the only interesting idea running it. Bay has a lot of characters here but very little taste for emotional development with relationships. It all seems a little plain, not at all dark and another attempt at the firsts success. As for the review, I would make a guess of it being accurate and I don't care how you guys rated the last movie (it's like you have to take every single film you've ever rated 3 or 4 stars and make a comparison!). As for 3D... 3D can suck my balls.

      Alert a moderator

    • BruceShark

      Jun 29th 2011, 1:47

      must admit it's actually quite good. not as good as the first but tons better then the sequel. though it is slighty bum numbing long and the last hour does drag a little bit. and boy has bay up'd the violence. didn't watch it in 3D. can't be doing with that s**t. as for the actress??????. she is c**p

      Alert a moderator

    • BigPaul

      Jun 29th 2011, 17:26

      I have to say this was the absolute worst installment of the franchise, made the second one look like 'The Godfather' by comparison. Do they really think a more grown up, darker story means coming up with a plot that's meant to be complicated, about conspiracies and human/Decepticon alliances, but actually isn't. The film seemed to finish before it got started. You don't care who dies because none of the transformers are given any screen time (I had to look up online when I got home to see who the other Autobots were apart from Optimus and Bumbullbee). There are dozens of Transformers, on both sides, so why are they making up characters (I mean what the hell was that worm thing) and not even developing them. Megatron did absolutely nothing for the whole film apart from sit around with tea towel over his head. Why does Bay keep giving robots human features, one of the wreckers has a beer belly, Sentinal has a beard, one of the police SUV's had dreadlocks, I mean its just ridiculousness. The inclusion of R-H-W just goes to show the gaping void left by Megan Fox, shes no where near as attractive and cant act if her life depended on it. The best thing about this film is Shia LaBeouf, bless him he's doing his best to hold the franchise together. Quite simply if they had made a live action version of the 86 animated movie it would be awesome, with Hot Rod, Kup, Ultramagnus, Springer, Galvatron and UNICRON!!! When I watched the first one it was like a wet dream, I honestly could have knocked one out when I first saw Optimus Prime on screen, when I left the cinema after this one I wanted to cry, because I feel like my childhood has been raped.

      Alert a moderator

    • writerdave87

      Jul 1st 2011, 17:55

      I actually really enjoyed it. Went in expecting- wanting- to hate it, and didn't have a single real issue with it. The girl wasn't even as bad as I was expecting (I actually prefer her to Megan Fox tbh). Thought it was a bit slow to get going, but once the battle in Chicago started, bloody hell it was brilliant. Very well choreographed, excellent CGI, giant ultraviolent robot slugfest. I saw it in 3D and think it handed Avatar its a*s on a plate in that regard too. I'm not a Michael Bay fan, I didn't like the first Transformers, I hated the second film, but loved this one. It's like Bad Boys 2- just switch off your brain and enjoy it!

      Alert a moderator

    • writerdave87

      Jul 1st 2011, 17:55

      4

      I actually really enjoyed it. Went in expecting- wanting- to hate it, and didn't have a single real issue with it. The girl wasn't even as bad as I was expecting (I actually prefer her to Megan Fox tbh). Thought it was a bit slow to get going, but once the battle in Chicago started, bloody hell it was brilliant. Very well choreographed, excellent CGI, giant ultraviolent robot slugfest. I saw it in 3D and think it handed Avatar its a*s on a plate in that regard too. I'm not a Michael Bay fan, I didn't like the first Transformers, I hated the second film, but loved this one. It's like Bad Boys 2- just switch off your brain and enjoy it!

      Alert a moderator

    • mystra

      Jul 1st 2011, 21:56

      i want to give BigPaul a hug... i feel the same way and i haven't even seen it yet.... i think what i'm dreading the most is Rosie fernly Whittingball or whatever her name is. Megan Fox in 1st film was perfect - hot chick that without what brought them together Sam would never have landed, yes the was the belly scene but i got that, she helped out Bumblebee at the end when he had no legs, yay she's eye candy and her character gets to do stuff. Come the 2nd film Bay just lets her stand around/scream/run slow mo and pose like a porno. She does nothing, just eye candy. New bird will be even worse seeing as out of all the existing and very beautiful actresses in the world... he's gone for an underwear model. it just makes me cringe. I hate moaning about sexism in stuff, it's so bloody lame a subject but Bay makes it really suck to be girl transformers fan. I don't mind eye candy - hey that's all part of the blockbuster package - but make them more than just dolly birds standing around half naked. I'm pretty sure there is such a thing as being sexy AND awesome! We shall see......

      Alert a moderator

    • writerdave87

      Jul 2nd 2011, 0:36

      The sexualisation of Thrice Nightly Whitely is ridiculous, but it's Michael Bay- he's essentially a perpetually masturbating 15yo boy. That said, this is probably his best film by a long way.

      Alert a moderator

    • bobbybarrett

      Jul 2nd 2011, 1:55

      'sucking the life out of every scene she appears in like some pneumatic Dyson sexbot' without a doubt the best description of a piece of acting I have ever heard. Have to say tho I enjoyed the film, then again I only went to see Rosie's a*s in 3D and to find out how many cars Michael Bay could destroy in 3 hours ( lost count )

      Alert a moderator

    • ChiefBrody1

      Jul 2nd 2011, 16:10

      Transformers 3 is a bloody awful film, 2 and a half hours!? WTF? Yet again I am guilty of believing the hype and trailers, and yet again Mr Bay delivers a truly vapid, souless piece of c**p. My IQ has dropped since watching it. Don't get me wrong, I seriously enjoyed the first one, but that's probably because due to a "smaller" budget, Michael Bay had to show (whisper it) restraint. Seriously, X-Men First Class had more charm, characters and story in it's little finger. Oh look, there's Shia LaBeouf being whiney and irritating. Again. Oh look, there's his unbelievably hot girlfriend complete with camera up a**e shot. Again. Oh look, there's his annoying "comedy" parents who turn up FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER. Again. Oh look, there's lots of cars exploding, crashing or flying through the air. AGAIN. I could go on. And please don't get me started on the "humour". I was embarrased and there were only 3 of us in the cinema. Hmmmm, a green robot, I wonder where he comes from, I was waiting for him to say 'to be sure, to be sure'. Even the impressive special effects and 3D got boring after a while, there's only so many times I can see giant robots beating each other up. How Steven Spielberg can lend his name in any format to this is unbelievable.

      Alert a moderator

    • writerdave87

      Jul 2nd 2011, 20:55

      Spielberg lent his name to Kingdom of the Crystal Skull...

      Alert a moderator

    • moviemoments

      Jul 2nd 2011, 23:39

      1

      Michael Bay is definitely the master of slow motion. He put his heart and mind into the third instalment and he created a really good movie. But not perfect unfortunately. Transformers Dark of the Moon has its ups and downs but its also the best of the series for sure. Movie itself is about 20 mins to long. Bay probably wanted to make it perfect but sometimes less is more. Personally I liked beginning the most but the ending ..... not so much. The scene when Decepticons started invasion was literatelly taken from Skyline. For the moment I felt like I'm watching that boring movie again. As for making that movie in 3D I hoped there will be more moments when I will jump coz something will be coming my way like a dead Decepticon or something. Well I was waiting for that moment but I ended up being dissapointed. Oh and Rosie Huntinghton...... My Lord that girl deserves a medal for running in high heel shoes in the middle of the war. But mind you she managed to change those high heels for flat shoes couple of times in the same scene. How did she do that? And of course her allways clean white jacket and perfect hair. How did she managed not to get it messy or dirty? Good advise. She would probably look more real if she had a little dirt on her face and clothes. As for her performance I was hoping she will be better than Megan Fox but unfortunatelly she was just as bad as her. Let's just hope she won't come up with the idea to call Bay evil and difficult to work with. Cartefull Rosie someone tryied it once and she is still paying for her cockiness. As for Shia LaBeouf I think he did great. His character was funny convincing and the main thing REAL. I didn't feel the connetion between Shia and Rosie though. The movie is filled with great special effects and loads and loads of action. Definitely movie worth watching. I personally enjoyied those few scenes with Sam's parents. They were the best. Still uncommonly funny. So People don't waste your time. Go to the cinema and enjoy watching the best Transformers of all.

      Alert a moderator

    • patches89

      Jul 3rd 2011, 1:13

      1

      awesome film really enjoyed it

      Alert a moderator

    • patches89

      Jul 3rd 2011, 1:15

      5

      awesome film really enjoyed it

      Alert a moderator

    • ashleywolf

      Jul 3rd 2011, 9:31

      3

      As a third transformer movie, it is more entertaining than the last, but not as good as the first. Bigger has never meant better, maybe that's why Bay will never be in the same class as Cameron or Spielberg. When they go big, everything goes bigger as well (scale of the action, story, cgi, ect). As with all Bay's previous movies, with the possible exception of BB 1, 2 and The Rock, his attempt at creating a love story inside an action movie is sockingly bad. He should stay clear or put as much effort into that as he puts into the choosing of females for eye candy purposes,or at least as much effort as he puts into making the cgi 100% believable. That said, it's an awesome movie considering it was directed by Bay. Good performances by McDormand, Tudyk and Turturro.

      Alert a moderator

    • FBJHolloway

      Jul 3rd 2011, 22:18

      1

      I find this film an insult to my intelligence and the worst scripted film in history. I found the first 2 films watachable and funny. This film is why we have script writers and proves that even people like John Malcvich have problems acting with such ludiscrous trash. I had to leave te cinema after 40 mins. I can appreciate other users saying the liked this flm, but for me they must have been deaf or just able to put up with lame acting. I guess the film crew must have paid a lot for bronzer and lipstick. If anyone ever gives Michael Bay another film to do I will be giving it a wide berth. I also agree with total film, linking a holocasut, like the Chernobyl event is sickening and in bad taste. Lame lame lame. 3 Stars if only.

      Alert a moderator

    • FBJHolloway

      Jul 3rd 2011, 22:19

      1

      I find this film an insult to my intelligence and the worst scripted film in history. I found the first 2 films watachable and funny. This film is why we have script writers and proves that even people like John Malcvich have problems acting with such ludiscrous trash. I had to leave te cinema after 40 mins. I can appreciate other users saying the liked this flm, but for me they must have been deaf or just able to put up with lame acting. I guess the film crew must have paid a lot for bronzer and lipstick. If anyone ever gives Michael Bay another film to do I will be giving it a wide berth. I also agree with total film, linking a holocasut, like the Chernobyl event is sickening and in bad taste. Lame lame lame. 3 Stars if only.

      Alert a moderator

    • FBJHolloway

      Jul 3rd 2011, 22:19

      1

      I find this film an insult to my intelligence and the worst scripted film in history. I found the first 2 films watachable and funny. This film is why we have script writers and proves that even people like John Malcvich have problems acting with such ludiscrous trash. I had to leave te cinema after 40 mins. I can appreciate other users saying the liked this flm, but for me they must have been deaf or just able to put up with lame acting. I guess the film crew must have paid a lot for bronzer and lipstick. If anyone ever gives Michael Bay another film to do I will be giving it a wide berth. I also agree with total film, linking a holocasut, like the Chernobyl event is sickening and in bad taste. Lame lame lame. 3 Stars if only.

      Alert a moderator

    • writerdave87

      Jul 3rd 2011, 23:32

      I expected much worse acting than I actually got in the film tbh, if you go to a Michael Bay film and expect brilliant performances, that says more about you than it does about the film. I'm not deaf but I've seen much worse. If you left after 40 minutes that's a shame, as the film immeasurably improved shortly after that. As an action film I still thought it was great. And a quick FYI, Chernobyl, while an environmental catastrophe, was not a 'holocaust'. More people have died from accidents in wind power- seriously- than they have as a result of Chernobyl (the only nuclear accident in history to cause any deaths at all). I found Pearl Harbor in far worse taste. Russians and Ukrainians have been writing books and making films and games set in Chernobyl blaming other causes than the actual human error for years, so lambasting Bay for doing it seems pretty lame.

      Alert a moderator

    • chaosdefined

      Jul 4th 2011, 11:37

      2

      I'm amazed you neglected to mention the gaping Plot Holes and terribly bad editing. I mean, examples...* ***SLIGHT SPOILERS*** Sam is being chased by Laserbeak through the office while s**t gets real. Then suddenly it cuts to Sam and his girlfriend driving in his car. So what, Laserbeak gave up? Sam has learned the art of teleportation after Revenge Of The Fallen seemed to be full of it? Another great piece of editing would be when Bumblebee catches Sam and that soldier guy who looks like Johnny Noxville from falling off the building...then the next scene practically, Bumblebee is amongst some Autobot hostages on the other side of the river. Worst of the franchise in my opinion. Bad writing, bad acting and just generally dull repetitive action.

      Alert a moderator

    • CasualLuke

      Jul 4th 2011, 23:55

      4

      I don't understand why people slag off these films so much. Yes, Rosie was awful but she was amazing eye-candy. It was very long but I paid a tenner to see it at the Imax and I felt I got my moneys worth, even if it did feel like I had laser eye surgery when I left. These films aren't trying to be oscar winners or anything like that, or trying to win anyones approval for that matter, it's just about going to the cinema and revelling in the action. For me, this film epitomised the summer blockbuster, and it was really good fun.

      Alert a moderator

    • chaosdefined

      Jul 5th 2011, 9:36

      I think a lot of us are just from an older generation, when movies were able to have action and a decent plot at the same time!

      Alert a moderator

    • jaykays hat

      Jul 6th 2011, 10:45

      Michael Bay is never going to do Shakespear, he is going to blow sh*t up and amaze us with his action scenes, thats why I got to see his films. If I wanted to watch faultless acting whilst being bored to death I'd go see the latest Coen brothers or Aronofsky movies. Transformers does exactly what it says on the tin. Yeah the acting was c**p, yeah the new bird was awful, yeah the script was s**te, but I got to see Bumblebee and Optimus kicking robat a*s in glorious 3D.

      Alert a moderator

    • garethjnash

      Jul 7th 2011, 23:56

      2

      This is a poor film. Only JUST better than the rubbish first sequel. Terrible pacing. The tone of the film is all over the place. Such a shame, as the first one was great. Like Shia, I'm done with the franchise.

      Alert a moderator

    • Rytrospyk

      Jul 10th 2011, 13:05

      1

      I don't think Rosie was terrible all the time, sometimes yes she was terrible but not always. I actually regret seeing this film at the time I sort of enjoyed it but it did take ages to get to anything decent. I may be in the minority but I actually prefered the 2nd film, at least it was stupid big, this was stupid smaller. The one redeeming feature for me is Bumblebee, I don't know what it is but that one robot conveys more emotion than any of the humans, except when Shia shouts 'Optimus!' as he always seems to do. I'd give it 2 stars whilst your watching it, and 1 star when you sit back and think about it.

      Alert a moderator

    • BigPaul

      Jul 13th 2011, 19:25

      I know what all these people saying it's not meant to be Shakespeare mean, that its not meant to be a serious film and you shouldn't treat it that way, it's just dumb fun and you shouldn't expect any different from Bay. But the fact is it's not trying to be dumb fun, The Expendables, last action hero, The A-Team, Commando, Crank, Bad Boys 1 & 2, these were dumb films - films with simple plots that weren't afraid to admit it. Tyrees Gibson tried telling us that this would be 1 of those films. But they tried to give at story line that didn't work. The first one had such a simple story (two sets of giant robots searching for a lost power source and fighting each other on the way) that the spectacle worked and you could turn your brain off and enjoy. This film throws so many un-answered plot devices at you that you can't just sit and watch. Now I can't find in myself to blame Bay for this as he can only work with what he is given, in terms of script, and I like all his other films - yes even pearl harbor. The one thing I can him for though - and I know I mentioned this before - is Dosie Munttingly s**tley. Emmy Rossum, Kayley Cuco, Maggie Grace, Ellen Page, Michelle Trachenberg, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Tisdale, Emily Browning, Keira Knightley, Hayden Panettiere, hell even Lindsay Lohan are far better actress' plus a hell of a lot better eye candy. After all this though I know full well I will be going to see the fourth (when and if) film as at heart I will still be trying to please the little 8 year old boy inside me.

      Alert a moderator

    • Igrayne

      Aug 24th 2011, 22:11

      Why is it whenever someone has to admit to himself he likes a film which would not impress a half demented chimp who had no grasp of art or story, they say "turn off your brain" or " it is a family film". If I want to turn off my brain I will go to sleep, if a film is being made purely just to be "entertaining" why then do they throw millions of pounds at it and put a goodlooking bimbo in it and have lots of brainless explosions and awful comedy aimed at relating to the dumbest and most simple of us? It is not escapism when they steal your money because they have doctored parts of the film to look alot more inspired and serious, insult your intelligence for ever believing this would not be terrible and childish and wreck a cartoon we loved as children which was alot more well written and conceived than these bad bad films. IT IS NOT ESCAPISM IT IS BOLLOCKS, GROW UP.

      Alert a moderator

    • Legacy3D

      Oct 10th 2011, 22:24

      2

      Transformers: Dark of the Moon (3D) Review The third and final transformers film to complete Michael Bays trilogy. The film begins in 1961 when the space race between the United States and Russia has begun to get the first man on the moon. Eight years later the United States is the first to achieve this onboard Apollo 11. While there, they find parts of a lost ship belonging to the Autobots known as The Ark. In present day Sam (Shia LaBeouf) now living with his new girlfriend Carly (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley) has graduated college and is now searching for a job. Meanwhile the Autobots look to protect earth from a new serge of Decepticons. After discovering The Ark upon the moon they find onboard there former leader Sentinel Prime. This leads to a large battle between The Autobots and the Humans against the Decepticons with an unlikely enemy, within the streets of Chicago. This is the first movie of the series to be released in 3D to continue the large number of films with 3D effects these days. The Third Transformers is a mixed movie, with positives and negatives. Problems with the film are the somewhat over complex story in parts, the casting of Ken Jeong who has no place in this movie as he is rather annoying and Rosie Huntington- Whiteley casting as Sam’s new love interest after Megan Foxx left the series. She is nice to look at but her acting is very bad and not at all believable. Positives are the beginning of the film when there are some scenes depicting the events of the first moon landing and the battle scene in central Chicago. The victual effects being very good in this part of the movie especially when one of the Decepticons destroys an office block. Overall Transformers: Dark of the Moon is an enjoyable movie to watch if you’re a Michel Bay fan or like the other transformers movies in the series. But does not achieve its full potential 3 Stars (3/5) Transformers: Dark of the Moon (3D) is out on DVD and Blu Ray Now

      Alert a moderator

    • FBSBussey

      Nov 10th 2011, 15:14

      so I thought it was a good movie other than two overwhelming factors that ruined most of the film for me. 1. No Megan Fox, They discovered an alien species together, kept a long distance relationship going, finally said I love you at the end of the 2nd movie and they bring in Rosie Huntington's character after Shia Lebouf's character wins a medal for his actions. I love you let's break up, where's the time gap? I know megan fox said you're like hitler Michael Bay but that's not a reason to eliminate an actress that made your first two films, at the very least you could've replaced the actress and kept the same character. 2. Plotline was all screwed up. How are you gonna have a movie where there's a plan to get the sun blown up thus devasting earth and the life on it and than have a movie that has a plan that occured in the 70's to use the earth and it's inhabitants as slave labor to rebuild cybertron it makes no sense. As far as I'm concerned they hollywooded it up and played to the dimwitted masses.

      Alert a moderator

    • FBSBussey

      Nov 10th 2011, 15:19

      ok 60's whatever

      Alert a moderator