Transformers 2 Has Wrapped – Plus: Possible Spoilers

Published 6 years ago by , Updated June 4th, 2014 at 10:09 am,

michael bay1 Transformers 2 Has Wrapped   Plus: Possible Spoilers

Principal Photography for the sequel to last summer’s box-office hit Transformers has wrapped as of last week.

We all know (well, some of us know) there were problems with the first film. I think Revenge of the Fallen is a huge test for Michael Bay to see if he can correct all of those mistakes and do this sequel justice.

During the writer’s strike, Michael Bay took it upon himself to write much of the script so they could make the June release deadline next summer. This way, when the strike ended, he had something prepared already for the writers to work from. What this means is that this whole film is entirely Bay’s baby. The story, characters, bots and action sequences are mostly on him.

So we’ll see how this film compares to the first and whether or not the problems of the first film still exist, are fixed, or get worse with the sequel because then we’ll know who to blame. Many people make fun of Bay, but the guy is crazy talented and I for one really enjoy a lot of his prior movies (the Bad Boys franchise, The Rock, The Island, Armageddon, etc.). Yes, they all feature a very large truck in some sort of chase scene (even the vehicles on the meteor in Armageddon – no matter what, he finds a way to do it) and yep, there are explosions everywhere. But that stuff works on screen for big summer flicks and I’m keeping hope for the sequel.

There is so much potential for this film to be amazing and I really hope Bay pulls it off. Bring on the explosions baby!

Now for some possible spoilers about Devastator and the new female lead played by Isabel Lucas.

I repeat: SPOILERS. So if you don’t want to be SPOILED, this is where you stop reading.




Transformers World 2005 has picked up on two possible spoilers for Revenge of the Fallen.

First we have a report confirming that Isabel Lucas’ new character, Alice, is a Pretender. Pretenders originated as a line of Transformers toys in the late 80s that were able to disguise themselves in organic forms. In the film, Alice’s disguise is that of an attractive woman with a robot mode similar to that of Frenzy from the first film (the worst robot in the movie). The report also details that the character will have an arm that can transform into an energy weapon, a long tongue and a tentacle for scanning.

Uhhh… why is any of this in the movie? I thought we were going to focus on more of the big transformers and story this time. Maybe it’s just because this is the first report on this, but this sounds incredibly ridiculous to me at the moment. I hope so much that this is just misinformation; I have no interest in undercover human-disguised robots.

This doesn’t sound like a good way to improve on the mistakes of the first film, and I don’t think this is what fans meant when they asked for a more robot-centric movie.

Source: Transformers World 2005

Next we have a more exciting spoiler, this time on something I think most fans want to see in the film: Devastator (this is NOT an official image from the film).

A member of TFW 2005 has a source who revealed some details on the upcoming Devastator figure for the Revenge of the Fallen toy line. Devastator and the contructicons were confirmed to be included in the sequel back in September. There is no information yet on the names of the components but we know that there are 7 in total broken down as follows:

Left Leg – Bulldozer
Right Leg – Dump Truck
Left Arm – Truss Crane
Right Arm – Wheel Loader
Left Shoulder – Articulated Dump Truck
Right Shoulder – Excavator
Head – Cement Mixer

Each component apparently has its own robot mode except for the Truss Crane. I hope that’s the case only for the toys because every part should be a Transformer on its own in the film.

Screen Rant is known for its negative feelings towards the Transformers movie – some of our writers hated it. Luckily, I joined the site after the movie came out and its hype had died down a bit because I wasn’t as much of a hater of the first film.

When I first saw Transformers in theaters, I was blown away by the action sequences as most were and really dug the designs of the bots (except for Frenzy who really brought the film down for me with all his/its scenes). It wasn’t all positive though, I almost couldn’t handle how bad some of the characters were and how a few of the scenes played out.

The most notable problem for me was Agent Simmons, played by John Turturro. Without exaggerating, watching his character in theaters was excruciating. He was for me, the single worst character from any film or television show I have ever seen in my life… ever. It hurts my brain to think about it now as I write this. I have never seen such stupid dialogue or characterization before – but we should probably move on from this.

Other problematic characters included John Voight’s and Rachael Taylor’s who were very unbelievable in their roles and were poorly cast in my opinion. For the most part, I dug the rest of the cast. I have read a lot of negative feedback on the Witwicky Parents and Anthony Anderson’s character but I actually enjoyed them and they worked for me on screen. That donut scene with Anderson’s character (Glen Whitmann) was hilarious. Also, that scene where his cousin runs from the cops and crashes through the glass when their house is raided made me laugh too.

As for some of the specific scenes that were problematic for me; the obvious one is Barricade chasing the Autobots on the highway, Sam Witwicky (played by Shia LaBeouf) pointing him out… then… the vehicle vanishing? What? Where did it go? He was there… and then he wasn’t? I don’t get it. I’m not sure that even counts as a plot hole… more like a segment of the film missing.

And of course there’s the final city battle which for the most part was awesome, except for Optimus being useless. What happened to that sword in your arm buddy? It worked pretty well on Bonecrusher when you ripped his head off. But hey, maybe he can only use it once a day or something.

Now to tell you how I really feel – Just kidding.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen hits theatres June 26th 2009.

Source: Transformers World 2005

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I would say hatred of the first Transformers movie is the glue that binds Screen Rant together. :-P


  2. So I’ve been told ;)

  3. There were good part in the first movie? Where? I certainly didn’t see any. The robot designs were easily the single worst part of the movie, and considering how bad it was, that’s saying something.

    As for your comment that this movie is a test for Michael Bay, he already failed the only test that matters: the first movie. This sequel doesn’t deserve to be given a chance to fix the mistakes, nor do any other potential sequels. The first movie failed so completely and was so unforgivably bad that any future efforts from any member of this team is automatically going to be written off, by me anyway, as not worth the time or money.

    The only thing I’m wondering is if Bayformers 2 will replace Bayformers 1 as the worst movie ever made, or simply end up sharing that title.

  4. that sword really did it for me. I dig swords, so if Optimus Prime unsheathes that sucker again you bet I’ll see it. of course I’ll be waiting on one of you screen ranters to confirm the swords involvement in Revenge of the Fallen.

  5. Interesting, how the very things that the article writer says he loves about Bay, are the BIGGEST PROBLEMS of the first film. Blah blah blah, EXPLOSION….blah blah cliche, token appearances of both human characters and vehicles, blah blah obligatory chase scenes, cheezball dialogue between explosions, and the list goes on.
    And how is it, because something is labeled a “summer blockbuster,” that it doesn’t have to be “good,” meaning well made?
    LEMME give you a quickie tip, and it is a spoiler: Robert Orci himself, who is in love with Bay, says that all the things mentioned above, including the shaky-cam action sequences that moved a hundred miles an hour, “worked well” in the first movie, and would most likely NOT be changed.
    Translation: “worked well” means MADE MONEY, so “we’re keeping it all the same, and to heck with you all…” “You all,” of course, referring to people who mistakenly believe that when you spend 150 to 200 million to make a movie, maybe these problems shouldn’t exist?

    I’m definitely part of the “you all….”

  6. @Jim Dandy

    Rob is definitely the exception here on Screen Rant in his opinion of Transformers. :-P

    As for me, the ONLY reason I plan on seeing the sequel is so I can give it a “proper” review. If it’s significantly different from the previous one in a good way, it’ll get a good review from me.

    But I’m not holding my breath.


  7. Well, I did enjoy the action sequences and even bought the DVD. I agree with Rob that John Turturro’s character was especially lame. I thought the CGI was incredible, but hey, that’s just me.

  8. @FlameStrike,

    The point I was making is that TF2 is ENTIRELY Bay’s whereas the first had so much input from so many others and he didn’t write it all.

    All the decisions about the sequel are his to make I believe. So if it’s way better than the first, he’d doing it right, if it’s the same or worse then he’s the problem.

    As for the bot designs? Would you rather the box designs from the 80s? That would look rediculous, they’re supposed to be organic metal. They tried designing them closer the original look and it didn’t work at all. The only one I had a problem with was Frenzy. That guy was so stupid and not just in design.

    @Jim, I entirely disagree. The cinematography and the action sequences were incredible in my opinion. That was the one main bright spot of the film. The issue was that alot of the shots were from the perspective of the humans, much like the story of the film. Since the sequel will (hopefully) be more bot-centric, the fights should have alot more wide-shots and they should get more screen time (significantly more).

    The sequel will make more than the first, and that made more than $700 MILLION world wide. So you haters are in the minority, most movie goers enjoyed the flick and everyone will see the next one.

  9. I disagree. Transformers was a good film. It was not spectacular in any part, but I would say that it’s not any worse than the first Pirates. Cinematography was good, and the movie itself was good start. Was it perfect? No. The characters were shallow, and the Bots (who the movie is NAMED after) did not get enough screen time or character development. This franchise is not supposed to be about the humans. It’s supposed to be about the Bots protecting the humans. I hope this problem is fixed in the sequel. That is the main problem with Hollywood in general. A similar problem occurs with other franchises such as the AvP franchise. The whole movie is supposed to be about the Predator’s and Alien’s warring with the human’s getting in the way, but because there is no empathy from either the Predator’s or the Aliens, there is a problem with the movie being relevant (which is why they try to adjust the movie to include empathy.)

    Bay can certainly redeem this movie and make it better. My only questions is: Where is The Fallen? I mean, the movie is kind of named after him (according to one theory.) I have not heard anything about him and really hope they put him in. Considering it would be awesome if Optimus and Megatron tried to take him down which leads to Optimus being taken down and thus sets up his return in the third movie. Just my opinion, but hopefully a few nuggest can be gleaned from this.

  10. @Rob

    I hated the action scenes. I couldn’t even tell what the heck was going on with sweeping, extreme closeups of such insanely complex robots. At certain points I actually had to turn away from the screen from visual overload – I imagined the film triggering epileptic seizures.

    You should read my review. 8-)


  11. “The point I was making is that TF2 is ENTIRELY Bay’s whereas the first had so much input from so many others and he didn’t write it all.”

    No, but so many of the problems in the first movie resulted from Bay’s decisions that there’s no chance at all that giving him free reign will improve anything.

    “All the decisions about the sequel are his to make I believe. So if it’s way better than the first, he’d doing it right, if it’s the same or worse then he’s the problem.”

    Bay can’t do it right. Neither can the so-called Transformers fans named Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. This will not be better than the first. There’s absolutely no chance of that happening. There is, however, a chance that it could be worse that the first, though they’d really have to be trying to make that happen.

    “As for the bot designs? Would you rather the box designs from the 80s? That would look rediculous, they’re supposed to be organic metal. They tried designing them closer the original look and it didn’t work at all. The only one I had a problem with was Frenzy. That guy was so stupid and not just in design.”

    And here’s where I had to talk myself down before posting. There are other options than copying the robot style of the 80′s cartoon. They could have taken a stronger cue from the Alternators toyline, only making the robots even more detailed. They could have taken a cue from the Beast Wars and Robots in Disguise series, which didn’t stick with the “boxy” style that everyone thinks wouldn’t work.

    The point is, though, there were other options besides making them so over done that you couldn’t tell one from another in a fight. There were other options besides making them so unrecognizable to the fans that they might as well have been completely different characters from a completely different franchise. There were other options besides making them look like walking scrap-metal piles. At the very least, they should have been made to look like armored war machines. When Iron Man looked more like an actual Transformer than any of the Transformers, that’s not good.

    By the way, have you seen evidence of them having tested a more traditional visual style for the robots? I haven’t. I’ve only got the word of the people who made the movie, and they’re known liars. Given the fact that fan made CGI videos kept that style and still made the robots look real, I don’t believe that professional CGI artists couldn’t have managed it, and won’t until I see hard proof.

    “everyone will see the next one.”

    You’re really exaggerating on this point. I know of at least two people who won’t see it so it will be, at most, everyone minus 2.

  12. lol, that’s entirely your opinion when it comes to the designs.

    The way they did it, they had every single part having a purpose and location in robot and vehicle form. To me, that and how it looked was closest you can get to organic robotics in live-action form. You and others may not have liked it, me and other others did.

    I haven’t seen “evidence” as you call it, but I didn’t think they were on trial, lol. I do remember seeing some concept pics of Optimus in a more classic-design style back in the day. Maybe check out TFW2005 see if they have old articles on that. I’m not sure that’s something they would need to lie about either way.

    As for exaggerating, “everyone” isn’t usually a literal term, heh. I don’t think my GF’s neighbour’s 6-month old will see it in theatre either. Make that everyone minus 3.

  13. “The way they did it, they had every single part having a purpose and location in robot and vehicle form. ”

    Nope, wrong. The robots had more mass than they did in vehicle mode. Something the movie makers said they weren’t going to do.

    “I’m not sure that’s something they would need to lie about either way.”

    They lied about so many things when they were talking about this movie that they might as well have been politicians. There’s no reason to believe anything they said without evidence to back it up.

  14. I didn’t know they were breaking so many promises.

    Could you show me some examples so I can see there dishonesty?

  15. 1. The characters would be based on their original series counterparts. Optimus and Bumblebee most assuredly were not, Ironhide, Jazz, and Ratchet didn’t get enough screen-time or character development to count, and Starscream, Frenzy, Devastator, Scorponok, Bonecrusher and Megatron bore no resemblance to their original series counterparts, unless you consider Starscream being a jet and Scorponok being a scorpion to be enough to qualify.

    2. Starscream and Megatron would have the same interaction dynamic as they had in the original series. Nope, not even close. Starscream was never that subservient unless he’d either been beaten down by Megatron first or was trying to avoid being beaten down by Megatron. Neither happened in the movie.

    3. They were going to respect the Transformers franchise. Everything they were saying though, and the final product, showed anything but respect for the franchise.

    4. They wanted fan input. If they wanted it sow much, why were the fans ignored?

    5. The designs we saw in the concept art were nothing more than that, and the final product wasn’t going to look anything like the concept art. When we saw the preview pictures toys and test shots of the toys, they bore a striking resemblance to the hideous designs shown in the concept art, and the same hideous designs showed up in the movie.

    6. The leaked script wasn’t even close to the final product. This was being said even as the trailers were being released, and the scenes in the trailers were all in the leaked script. The final movie also wasn’t all that different from the leaked script.

    7. This movie wouldn’t have any cheating in the transformations or mass shifting. Wrong, the robots were more massive than the vehicles and they never transformed the same way twice because the CGI artists had to hide the cheating necessary to make them work on screen. Also the cube mass shifted.

    8. The movie would be better than the “kiddie cartoons” from the 80s because it would only take the best elements of that cartoon and discard the weaknesses. Either they lied here, or they considered character development and a well told story to be weaknesses of the original series. Instead of taking the best parts of the original, they ended up living down to the worst elements of the original.

    Shall I continue? Or are 8 examples enough?

  16. I didnt have a problem with the first movie. Every movie has its flaws and I did see some in this one but I still liked it. Im definatly going to see Transformers 2 in theaters.


    With the whole characters suppose to resemble the originals they were proablly just trying to modernize the characters but yea they did break a few promises.

  17. I wanted to write a ton of opinions but the ‘Rules’ (NO profanity or Personal Attacks) won’t let me comment on this one! It’s gonna be a real ‘$tinker’… -Stark

  18. I thought Transformers was a great film, best cinimatic experience of that year! I wasn’t asking for shakespere! and i wasn’t expecting a rectangle shaped gun (megatron)

    Micheal Bay did transformers justice! C’mon remeber films like streetfighter the movie!

    I think a lot of people are just being anal!

  19. this is in the same year as spiderman 3 :(

  20. @ Flamestrike. I don’t see any lies there bud… Here’s comes the Uber-post:

    1. I’m not sure what you thought “based on” meant, but big red-blue truck called Optimus leading the Autobots, a yellow car called bumblebee, protector of the lead boy, a sports car called Jazz, a superiority fighter, second in command of decepticons called Starscream, a leader of the decepticons called Megatron, an emergency response vehicle and medic called Ratchet, Skorponok a giant scorpion robot… Maybe its just me, but that does seem based on the transformers show and universe…They are vehicles that transform into robots and vice versa, lol.

    Have you seen The Hurricane, Good Morning Vietnam or Saving Private Ryan? These movies are ‘based on’ real life events…but all 3 have many scenes, story elements and other aspects that are entirely inaccurate to what happened. Very important details are left out, or heavily alterered and falsified for obvious dramatic and film-storytelling purposes.

    You may say, those are movies based in reality. So to give you a fictional example: X-men. That movie (or sequels) didn’t do ANY justice to how the x-men formed…in fact, pretty much everything with that film is entirely off compared to the original source material. It even completely ignores the cartoon which was very recent at the time. How about Batman Begins? Does that follow the origins of Batman at all? Nope.

    I’m not sure what you think ‘based on’ means but it certainly doesn’t mean exact copy translated to feature film. It means, literally, “based on”. Transformers and the characters in it were and are based on Transformers. No lie.

    2. There wasn’t much dialogue between the transformers in the film. The film was more based on humans experiencing this insane phenomenon and encountering the aliens. I would imagine that’s because in real life, they didn’t have a billion dollar budget…they had $150 million and were very limited in how much screen time they could give. Also, since the film was made for mainstream audiences, it had to be given the perspective of humans to make it work and make it more effective. (Keep in mind, I’m not saying they did a great job of that by any means – but that was the goal of the screenplay). From what I do remember of the film, Starscream led the decepticons to free Megatron and Megatron did talk to Star scream and comment on his failure “yet again”. I think that was an obvious throw-back to the original series for the fans.

    3. They did respect the franchise. Did you see the 1986 transformers movie? I’m a transformers fan and alot of my buds are…but we watch that piece of crap to laugh. Sure it was fun when I was 7, but it’s terrible by all standards, heh. In fact, if you’re above the age of, let’s say 18 or even much younger (as an example) and you watch the original show…it’s pretty terrible. It’s barely watchable to me now – but I still love it for nostalgic reasons, and I have a bunch of transformers figures still to this day. It’s awesome because it’s giant robots with lasers that transform into vehicles…not because it had good dialogue, good plots or a good story, heh. That is NOT why transformers are popular. (for the original cartoons that is, I would argue Beast Wars was for an older audience including teens).

    Old-school transformers is cool like Chuck Norris is cool… (hint: it’s not because of his acting ability or the quality of his films).

    4. I think you’re being dishonest on this one. I’ve not heard of too many movies including fan input on the writing process, but this movie did take alot of fan input. There’s a reason Peter Cullen was sought out to do the voice – that was from the community.


    Wasn’t it also fan input that made them take out Arcee and put in Iron Hide or something? I don’t remember the details on that one.

    5. I don’t know what concept art you are referring to and how it compared to the film. That’s irrelevent to me, just like the concept art we have now for Devastator. More importantly, what you think is hideous, others really like.
    Again, this = Opinion

    6. Leaked script…okay. Which one? From what I understand, ALL film execs deny truth from very secretive leaked materials. Are you upset about this because they didn’t come out and say “yeap, this specific website’s article on our script is entirely right. That is pretty much the whole story, its all there for ya.”? …I don’t get it.

    7. Mass-shifting? I’ve never even heard of that before. Did you notice that visually? I just googled that because it astounds me that that is a complaint or inferrence of dishonesty on the creators part. I didn’t find anything talking about that in the film other than the allspark cube.

    As for the special effects, OF COURSE they cheated, that’s called movie making bud. Check out special effects docs on like any sci-fi movie ever. As for this movie, notice how the same angle on a transformation was never shown twice? How many times did you see Optimus transform? Once up close from the front, once on the highway from behind on a wider shot. How can anyone tell a difference in transforming from that? There are hundreds of thousands of parts. And I’m not sure how this is a complaint. This is some of the best special effects ever in a film at the moment and it just might have been nominated for an oscar for that ;). (James Cameron’s Avatar may change everything next year).

    In the original, didn’t Megatron turn into a hand gun like 1/30th his size? What about soundwave?

    8. Maybe if the budget was over a billion dollars, the entire film would be about a dozen robots on each side fighting. But it wasn’t and it’s not. It’s about people experiencing alien robots. With the greater budget for the sequel and them confirming much more screentime for the bots, I would imagine we’ll get way more character development from the transformers.

    You’re heavily exaggerating by saying they’re such liars that they should be politicians. That’s absurd. The problem are not these 8 baseless points, it’s anti-fanboyism. No matter what, I think you’re gonna hate this movie, and I don’t think you realize how poor the original transformers show and movie was. And I can say that, I’ve seen every ep. more than once and I’m a fan of the franchise and several of the TV shows. I’m curious what you think about the quality of the oldschool transformers.

    Anyways, I can’t believe I spent all this time actually responding to those points, lol. I could have written 2 new articles! ;)

    I’d give transformers like a 6.5 out of 10 and it’s very far from perfect. But these things you mention have nothing to do with it man – that logic applied to any fictional movie…heck even nonfictional would make anything bad, lol. 6.5 out of 10 is higher than what the originals would get – easy. And don’t forget, opinions are just that – they differ between people…and there are alot of people who saw this movie. Notice I didn’t use the word “everyone” in fear of literally meaning being taken ;)

    Let’s go talk about Bolt and Monsters vs. Aliens now, shall we? :)

  21. “I’m not sure what you think ‘based on’ means but it certainly doesn’t mean exact copy translated to feature film.”

    Anyone who believes that’s I was asking for an exact recreation is, at worst, a complete idiot, and at best has not been paying attention and has no idea what he’s talking about.

    I don’t care about superficial details like the alt-mode. I was referring to the character elements, and only the character elements. I understand that a number of things had to be changed and updated. I accept that. However, then you have Starscream saying “I live only to serve you,” thats so out of character for the G1 version on whom they said he was based he might as well have been Cop-Tur from GoBots. When you have Optimus Prime, the one who always manages to come up with a way to save his teammates, abandoning one of them because he can’t even be bothered to try to look for a way to try rescuing him without harming the humans, that’s completely out of character.

    I commented that “Starscream, … Scorponok, … bore no resemblance to their original series counterparts, unless you consider Starscream being a jet and Scorponok being a scorpion to be enough to qualify.” Apparently, you do, because you’ve cited the alt-modes as being enough to count. I do not share that opinion. I have a higher standard than that.

    You’re right one one thing though: There wasn’t much dialog between the robots in the film. What was there, however, felt so completely out of character that I didn’t believe these were even supposed to resemble the characters whose names they shared from ANY of the Transformers series to that time. You said that “Starscream led the Decepticons to free Megatron,” which only proves my point, especially when you consider that the Starscream the writers were supposedly using as a model for the movie would have proclaimed Megatron to have fallen long since, and would not have even bothered to look for him, much less to try to rescue him. He simply would have proclaimed himself leader and moved on from there.

    As for respecting the franchise, they most certainly did not. When they say things like “a worthy effort requires a deserving source,” I have a hard time believing that they have any respect for the source material or the franchise, or that they’re even putting their best efforts into making the movie any good. When they decide to make changes, not because they benefit the movie, but just because they can, I don’t believe they respect the franchise. Now, I’ll grant you, the original series definitely had it’s low points, but it also had stories I’d rank up there with some of the best SF ever written. One episode even had a single, two word line, right at the end of the episode, that gave more character to the character that spoke it than we saw in ALL of the characters in the live action movie combined. The problem is, that’s not what people like to remember. They like to remember the episodes with bad animation, bad writing, and laughable plots. They also ignore the comic series when they talk about Transformers, which also had some good stories and character development, and I’m saying that as someone who’s not exactly a fan of the 80′s comics.

    Another example I can proevide of not respecting the franchise is changing, almost universally, elements of the series that have remained consistent almost across the board for over 20 years. The visual aesthetic alone was only changed once, and that series was largely decried, at the time, as being the wost Transformers series ever. Now, there are a number of fans looking back on those almost as “the good old days.” That series, at least had well written stories and character development, elements that everyone who likes this movie scoffs at.

    As for fan input, I am not being dishonest about that, and I find such a comment to be highly insulting and unforgivable. I was on the discussion boards for Producer Don Murphy where fan input was encouraged, and where he even admitted that it was an experiment, even if the atmosphere was toxic. Yes, Peter Cullen was cast as a way of throwing a bone to the fans, who at the time the decision was announced were coming down VERY hard on the movie because of the robot designs, among other reasons. However, they ignored the calls for Frank Welker to return as Megatron. As for Arcee, not so much. Yeah, there was a segment of the fanbase that didn’t want her in the movie, and there was a segment that did. The reason for dropping her, though, was that she didn’t fit the story. My speculation is that was because the Autobots didn’t have a heavily armed powerhouse to go up against the Decepticon tanks, which is what they needed Ironhide for. Of course for all the character development he got they could also have chosen Trailbreaker, Brawn, Huffer, Warpath, Hardhead, Grimlock, or any of a dozen others, and you’d not have been able to tell the difference.

    The concept art, yeah, I’ll give you the point that the hideous designs are my opinion. That, however, doesn’t change the fact that the concept art that leaked out was practically indistinguishable from the final product. The outcry over Megatron’s look was phenomenal, and prompted the response that it was just concept art, not the “final design.” Funny, I couldn’t tell the difference when I did see the final design. I also couldn’t see any changes made to Starscream from his “early concept art.” That looked so much like the toy that surfaced a couple of weeks later that it quickly became obvious they weren’t telling the truth on that front.

    The leaked script: This was an early draft of the movie, one which was, I believe, written by John Rodgers before Orci and Kurtzman came on. It was, supposedly, so completely rewritten by Orci and Kurtzman that it bore no resemblance to the final shooting script. Yet virtually nothing was changed. Every scene in the trailers confirmed that. Every scene in the movie confirmed that. This was not just a script review I’m referring to. I’m talking about an actual script that I downloaded and read. One that was confirmed to be legitimate but “out of date” and not even close to what they were using. I can accept that they want to keep things secret, that they don’t want to spoil the movie for those who, unlike me, had not been following the development ever since the announcement at OTFCC 2003. My point is that this was just another example of the lies they told throughout the process.

    The mass-shifting, though, was one of the big ones. They outright said, in no uncertain terms, “There will be no mass shifting in this movie.” They commented that it was completely ridiculous in the cartoon, at said that there was no way to make it work believably on screen in a live action format. Then they design robots that couldn’t fit into their own vehicle mode because they have too many parts, and they have this gigantic cube that shrinks down at least twice because it first becomes small enough for one of the robots to hold in it’s hand, then small enough, again, for a human to hold in his hand while appearing to have the same relative size! And yes, if you’re willing to believe someone as dishonest as you’ve accused me of being, I did notice the robotic mass-shifting myself even before the movie opened simply because there has so much empty space in the vehicle modes that they wouldn’t have had room for arms and legs to fold up unless they all went under the hood, which consistently became the chest of the robot. Simple logic told me that mass shifting had to occur, despite what the writers and director were saying. That logic was confirmed by ILM’s Scott Farrar in an interview on

    Now, I know they had to cheat to make that work. Metrolight Studios had to cheat to make it work on a TV series almost 15 years ago, and they did a damn good job of it. The fact remains that when you have a robot who has easily twice as much mass as his vehicle mode, they CGI artists are going to have to cheat, and make sure that the cheating is done on the far side of the Transformer while he’s changing, which means you can never have him transform the same way twice. Again, yes, I personally noticed this.

    Finally, and I have no idea where your point eight comes from as mine was about them promising to make this better than the original series and instead living down to everything they criticized about that same series. I understand they had budget limitations, and that they couldn’t have done the movie without presenting it, at least in significant part, from the human perspective. Most people are so unimaginative that they’d not have been able to accept a live-action movie based on that story from any other perspective. That being said, there is no reason they couldn’t have presented a movie with compelling characters, robotic and human alike, a compelling and though-provoking story, not unlike those that the original series had done on more than one occasion, and still actually done away with all the negative elements from that same series.

    Yes, the original series was pretty bad at points, I’ll even concede the idea that it was bad more often than it was good, but when it was good is could have held its own with some of the best SF out there. The people who made this movie, however, didn’t even try to live up to that, they just said anything they felt would justify their changes even if it was unsupported by facts, insulting to the Transformers property, and/or insulting to the fans they were trying to convince to see the movie.

    My arguments are not baseless, and I am most assuredly not exaggerating. I am calling it as I see it, and nothing more. I am calling it as someone who followed the news regarding the original movie for four years, and participated in discussions involving one of the producers, at least one of the writers, and a representative of the director. I am calling it based on my experiences, my observations, and my perspective as a fan of The Transformers in nearly all of its incarnations.

    I had serious doubts about the first movie in this series even before I saw it, based, at first, largely on the choice for director, and then on the continuing flow of news regarding the movie. I did not expect much from it. In point of fact, my expectations has sunk to the point that I almost didn’t bother to see it, and wouldn’t have if I hadn’t had free passes. After seeing it, I left feeling not like I’d seen a Transformers story, not even like I’d been entertained by anything I’d just seen, but like I just been ripped off and like I wanted a refund. Just like I had after seeing “The Rock” and “Bad Boys,” both of which I actually paid to see. I gave the movie an F on Yahoo! movies, and one star on both Barnes & Noble’s website and, and that one star was only because I couldn’t give it less than that.

    Yes, I hated the first movie, and I hate the people who made it, and I am not going to see the second. I am in fact going to do everything I legally, and realistically, can to discourage anyone else from doing so because the people making this movie should not be rewarded for their incompetence.

    This, incidentally, is the last time I am going to be posting on this topic, in part because I have lost all respect for you Mr. Keyes, and in part because I am getting so angry over this topic, and the resulting attacks on my integrity, that I suspect any further posts would get me banned from this site. That’s assuming that this one does not, which I am already half-expecting to happen.

    If so, so be it. I’ve enjoyed my time here, but I guess it had to end sometime.

    If not, then I’ll see you all around in other topics.

  22. Hey dude, sorry if I upset you – don’t mean to attack or anything. You seem very upset over this film and its makers and its too bad because its a film meant to entertain the largest crowd possible.

    If you do end up seeing the sequel someday, I hope you and I both enjoy it better than the first.

    If you get a chance, you should re-read all the comments here tomorrow or a few days from now after things settle. There’s no need to get angry or lose respect for people or get highly negative over opinions of a film. And I definately don’t want to see you go.

    Do you watch the new Transformers Animated as well? What do you think of that in comparison to prior shows?

  23. For whatever reason, Transformers seems to be the kid that’s just a little different and easy to pick-on on this site. So I’ll join Mr. Keyes in defending it. As with many films that are either redone or is predated by something else, one shouldn’t expect a literal re-enactment with better graphics and more attractive casting. There has to be gives and takes in order to modernize the characters and story-lines for the current audience (or simply a lack of time to develop a particular element). With that in mind, this film adopted new elements and left out some for what was in my opinion (and that’s simply what it is) an overall pretty impressive product.

    As stated above, the character designs were made to avoid mass changing. To literally expect it to be a part-for-part piece-by-piece transformation would be asinine as there would be steering columns and seats poking out of the characters bodies. So there initially must be some give and arguing over a few cubic feet here and there ends up being an argument in futility. If you watch the special features on the DVD the creators go through the design process and show some of the mechanics of the transformation and all the algorithms they had to go through to make it work. The characters in robot form ultimately end up as close as reasonably possible the size they ought to be in relation to their vehicle. After this the only arguments are on your own characters design taste (boxy, fleshy or more of an animatronics figure). To which I wish they would have been closer to the original than they were. By that it’s mostly just paint-jobs and head shapes.

    Character interactions were another problem with the film. Sector 7 doesn’t need to be discussed as that gives it way too much credit (it’s like the Jar-Jar Binks of Transformers). The problems with the character interactions were more in the lack of time to develop the characters. Trying to compress all of the robot character development from even the first three episodes of Transformers (More than meets the eye Pt. 1, 2&3) would be extraordinarily difficult while developing human characters that an audience could relate to (as it is difficult for Joe Schmuck to relate to a 4 tonne robot from outer-space). So yes I would have liked to see more development of both Autobots and Decepticons (particularly the Starscream and Megatron relationship); but considering the time available it wasn’t a poor job. Megatrons condemning demeanor towards Starscream and Starscreams deceptive “I live to serve you” (as there are times in the original series where Starscream fakes loyalty to avoid unabated conflict) was a moderately good job all things considered (this is especially amplified when he takes off at the end instead of helping Megatron fight Prime).

    Consumers being a major involvement in product design are, despite some people’s opinion, not a Hollywood trait. So what involvement there was for the Transformer film are although not unique, not entirely common. What people want and what is practical from limitations of capital available, production abilities or even distinguishing it from previous products may often be separated by significant gaps. There were attempts to bring in fans opinions into the movie. For example, Welker was approached for the voice of Megatron but it was ultimately deemed inappropriate as his voice has aged.

    Essentially my two biggest criticisms of the film were the lack of panned out shots. I think all the close up shaky angles detracted from the film, but not significantly. The biggest problem I had with the film was actually the poor choice of names used. Using both Bonecrusher and Devastator as names in the first film are going to make it tricky for the Constructicons to be in the second film, and I’m quite interested how they go about doing it.

    As for the sequel, who knows really? It was stated before hand that false information would be released. Although a lot of what is shoring up seems reasonable, I wouldn’t be surprised if some of what’s been reported ends up being false (through no fault of the site’s of course). The Pretender seems to be one of those false information scenes. The new character is likely just a distraction and another female interest of Sam and likely a rival for Mikaela (so that there is some element of human plot). Michael Bay does occasionally run with bad ideas, but I don’t think he is dumb enough to add an Austin Powers Fembot to the film. Although I could go on and on about the Transformers universe (and do intend to do so on whatever the next article posted about them), I feel like I’m a few citations away from writing a thesis paper, so I’ll just Roll Out instead (forgive my terrible pun).

  24. The first movie was awsome. In order to enjoy a movie you can’t pick it apart, I think you forget just how hard it is to make a movie.

  25. dear rob, well all i can say is wow. I mean my god after reading your defenses to flamestrike who for someone who so apparently hated the film and no doubt the sequel has no problem with being on topic after topic about it, i find it amusing.

    Personally i feel sorry for you rob and director’s like mike bay. To deal with die hard fan crazed maniacs who own ever dvd, probably memorized every line per episode and have the free time and the will to care about the robot vehicle size ratio gives me a whole new level of respect for you guys.

    To take anything, be it spiderman or a old cartoon or a tv show and to have to listen to people rant and nit pick every little detail gives me a head ache i cant describe. God omg wolvering is 5’3. jackman is TOO TALL!!!!!

    I’ve watched the lotr trilogy many many times and i could give a rat’s behind how much they follow the books and what parts were left out etc. I just liked the movies.

    I didn’t care if bumblebee was a camaro, megatron didn’t turn into a gun and wait for someone to pick him up to shoot and dear god optimus had flames on his legs, i’m going take a few days off work because i can’t stop crying.

    I’ll just stick with the saying if anyone wants the cartoon or comic, go read it or watch it. Transformers like spidey or xmen etc i have gotten people into these who never picked up a comic or seen an episode before.

    So if a few whiners don’t like the movie or the sequel because it was not pound for pound a copy of the crappy and outdated cartoon,oh well.

    What fans don’t realize is the core audience is not enough to warrant a 700 million dollar movie. That’s why changes are made, dialogue is updated and this is 2008, not 1988.

    These are generally entertaining movies made for a broad audience to attract new people to the franchise, not just long time fan vets.

    but i’m not going to get into any more of a debate about this film or part 2. I know plenty of people myself included that will see it, twice even and trust me it will do another 500 plus million

    and everyone involved and people watching it will enjoy it so like anything else, who cares. I mean god is it possible for the dark knight to make any more money then it has lol

    but there are people out there who didn’t like it and pick it apart, oh well.

    I’m going to pop transformers back in just so i can enjoy the explosions and know somewhere out there a fanboy is wheeping lol

  26. “So if a few whiners don’t like the movie or the sequel because it was not pound for pound a copy of the crappy and outdated cartoon,oh well.”

    Well, lengthycobra, you’re an idiot.

    Flamestrike herself said she wasn’t asking for an exact remake, just something that was respectful of the original. She agreed some changes needed to be made. They just changed things so much it was no longer a Transformers movie to her.

    Personally, this movie made Transformers even more of a joke to me than it already was. For you, though, it seems to have demonstrated fully just how much of an mean-spirited moron you are.

  27. so Ill just defend this film also since so of you are in cloud nine smoking something and not relizing how hard it would be to make this film perfect for everyones opinion thats just it opinion.if they made the film to make everyone happy it would be a 12 hour movie and cost over a billion dollars.
    so if you didnt like the first one then dont watch the 2nd if you liked it then watch no.2 I will and my kids will. so grow up!!!

  28. this movie was sick you all blow who hated it and are ripping on it

  29. For what it’s worth, I found the movie to be a reasonable reimagining of the Transformers franchise, given the limitations imposed by having to direct it towards The General Public. To be honest, reading so many of these nit-picking detractors carping on about mass-shifting and suchlike, it reminds me of why I quit reading and posting in the fan fora. The film is what it is. As a Summer popcorn-flick that bothers to do some justice to the source canon, while *also* making money at the Box Office, it works. Okay, the human characterization was crap, but I didn’t go to watch fleshlings get all sweaty and panicky over giant robots. I went expecting full-motion, well-realized, physically realistic transforming robots who would shoot/pound the bearings out of each other, and I got what I wanted. It helps, when anticipating a new film, to temper quixotic hopes with knowledge of what is realistically achievable on film. Transformers could have been better, but it was more than adequate as a first-run, and proved the concept well enough that live-action can work. Enough said.