|
|
Author
|
Topic: Transformers: Age of Extinction
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 07-17-2014 04:52 AM
You might remember Transformers, Dark of the Moon from 2011. You could argue that mankind came pretty close to extinction when they transported a whole planet into earth's orbit. But seemingly, we got closer to extinction in this movie... whatever you say Mr. Baylord.
If you were, just like me, fooled into thinking that Dark of the Moon would be the last in this miserable franchise by the lack of a Transformers movie in 2013, you're in for a surprise. The uncrowned King of Teal and Orange has a whole new 165 min. fantasy/sci-fi/transfo-porn epic in store for you.
In the Michael Bayniverse, there is no room for unimportant stuff like plot, logic, consistency and physics. So, if you can switch off the parts in your brains that are responsible for processing said unimportant stuff for an hour or three, this movie could actually be enjoyable. Otherwise this thing is just a very lengthy repetitive sequence of:
1. Say what..? 2. ... ??? !! 3. Whatever... 4. Goto 1
This movie has so many flaws on so many levels, I wouldn't even know where to start and where to end. This post could go on for five pages and I wouldn't be done with it. So, let's not do that... Besides that, the first three movies already got a good workout from somebody else, here, here and here.
* Mild (like a drop of Tabasco in a 20 galon vat of water) spoiler alert *
Luckily, Megratron (correction, Galvatron!) is alive and kicking at the end, so the franchise can continue... I guess, even if they catapult Megatron into the sun, he (she, it?) will survive by infecting the core of the sun with his evilness and beaming evil infected transformatrons onto the earth...
The special effects in this one, just like the predecessors, look pretty much awesome. Actually, I feel pity for the fact that so much talent and money is being thrown at something that has so little redeeming qualities.
And before I forgot to mention it, this movie is also brought to you in stereoscopic 2D. I call it that way, because, with exception of a potential headache, the "Three-D" added close to nothing regarding depth perception.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|