Print Page | Close Window

Members' Discussion of TRANNIES 3...

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: INFO on POSSIBLE 2011 RAZZIE® CONTENDERS
Forum Name: Forum Discussion & Add'l INFO on TRANNIES 3
Forum Discription: Where 2 Put in Yer 2 Cents, as Well as Find Reviews, Credits, B.O. Info & Promotional Crap on This Title
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5148
Printed Date: September 01 2014 at 12:37pm


Topic: Members' Discussion of TRANNIES 3...
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Members' Discussion of TRANNIES 3...
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 12:51pm
MANY of YOU HAVE BEEN WAITING SINCE http://www.razzies.com/history/09winners.asp%20 - "WON" WORST PICTURE (...and WORST DIRECTOR ...and WORST SCREENPLAY!) of 2009 to HAVE AT THIS WHOLLY UN-NECESSARY, GARGANTUANLY UN-WELCOME SEQUEL... 

AT LAST, YOUR TIME HAS ARRIVED...ENJOY!  

AND B.T.W. HERE's the http://www.razzies.com/forum/our-take-on-trannies-3_forum534.html - to READ "THE OFFICIAL RAZZIE® TAKE" on http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum-discussion-addl-info-on-trannies-3_forum535.html - ...  




-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 12:58pm
I knew this would be on here! Why not? 

Anyway, I think the users at IMDB are over-estimating things when they predict the percentage for this on Rotten Tomatoes is likely to be any higher than 50% (Come on, it's Michael Bay -- what more do you need to say?).  

PS: I hope Breaking Dawn sweeps this year!Wink
   


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 1:53pm
I predict that the best this movie can do is to have reviews as good as the first one,which were just average.

Promos say this movie will change history.It turns out it's plot is related to the moon landing.But the only way this movie could actually change history is by being the worst movie in the history of human kind...which it could well be!


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 3:28pm
I have some doubts about that being possible, especially since early reviews are coming in, and they seem to be fairly energetic. 

-------------


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 3:31pm
I'm still rooting for Season of the Witch for Worst Picture. I sincerely hope this film  doesn't "win," because that would mean a single franchise has won Worst Picture twice, which I wouldn't like. The reviews are going to have to be REAL (censored) low before I would consider giving this a Worst Picture nomination over Season of the Witch, Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son, and/or Red Riding Hood.

-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Spt. 12: Dolphin Tale 2, Search Party. Spt. 19: The Maze Runner, Tusk.


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 3:39pm
I still think Twilight:Breaking Dawn may deserve it all (and I don't care if Bill Condon is directing it). The fourth book was so bad, even the fans weren't pleased with it.

-------------


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 4:19pm
Trying to get a head start, eh?  I wouldn't be too hyped about this movie's Razzie chances.  Its reviews are likely to be higher than those of the second one. 
 
Just for the record, I personally don't think that 'Transforemers: Revenge of the Fallen' deserved Worst Picture of 2009.  Yes, it made a lot of money and it was panned by critics (only 19% on RT), but there were much more infamous (and harder panned) films out there like 'All About Steve', 'Old Dogs', 'Year One', and 'Miss March' (all had Tomatometer ratings in the single-digits).  Some parties disagreed with the results and others wouldn't take the awards seriously.
 
My guess is that this movie probably won't be bad enough to contend with the likes of 'The Roommate', 'Just Go With It', and 'Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son' for Worst Picture, but it has a pretty good shot at Worst Prequel or Sequel ('Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son' might take that too), Worst Supporting Actor (a nod for John Turturro and a win for Ken Jeong), and maybe Worst Director (Michael Bay's competition includes Dennis Dugan, Zack Snyder, Christian E. Christiansen, John Whitesell, and a few more still to come).  There's still about six more months of crap to go through.


-------------


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 4:24pm
Remember Miguel,the winner isn't always the worst reviewed(the 2nd is the proof).

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 4:43pm
I shouldnt really entertain this, but...what?  How about we actually give TBD a chance. Innocent until proven guilty, and all that. Condon may surprise some people with how it turns out. Also, last time I checked, these were awards for bad movies not bad books. 
 
Anyway I feel there are plenty of fresh blood options out there, a few of which GTA mentioned above and Miguel, too, actually. Rather than attacking the same things over and over and over again in quick succession! It's so boring. We might as well call it "the razzies bash transformers and twilight part 4". It would become as stale as Hollywood itself and makes it look like they are the only bad movies out there (in some people's opinions, anyway but not the critics' in the case of Twi especially) when they are not.  At least Transformers was not in the running last year but perhaps it's too soon for it to be a main focus of the Razzies again. Unless, of course, it gets ridiculously low scores. That I can not excuse really. 

Edit: How did I not know this was in 3D?? That doesnt bode too well. 

Originally posted by whatsthepoint

I still Twilight deserves it all (don't care if Bill Condon is doing the next one). The fourth book's so bad, that even fans aren't pleased with it.



-------------


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 5:00pm
Heh, this film deserves to be in the Razzie forums. I liked the first movie, it was decent, but the second sucked the big one, so I have no interest in seeing this movie.

-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 5:56pm
Don't worry guys, Shia LeBeouf says it's gonna be the best 3D movie ever made:  http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/dont-worry-guys-shia-labeouf-says-transformers-3-is-the-best-3d-movie-ever-made - http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/dont-worry-guys-shia-labeouf-says-transformers-3-is-the-best-3d-movie-ever-made   

-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 8:22pm
I think we may need to introduce you to Miguel...  

Originally posted by whatsthepoint

 
PS: I hope Breaking Dawn sweeps this year!


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 8:23pm
You do know that they get paid to say stuff like that, right? Do you seriously think actors are going to say "oh yeah, this movie is an utter piece of sh*t, don't waste your money on it"? No, they won't.  

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Don't worry guys, it's gonna be the best 3D movie ever made:  http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/dont-worry-guys-shia-labeouf-says-transformers-3-is-the-best-3d-movie-ever-made - http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/dont-worry-guys-shia-labeouf-says-transformers-3-is-the-best-3d-movie-ever-made


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 8:26pm
Transformers 2 got Razzed because a movie with 19% shouldn't even break even at the box office, it should be direct to DVD. 

Like it or not, this movie is going STRAIGHT to my Worst Picture nods list!   

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

Trying to get a head start, eh?  I wouldn't be too hyped about this movie's Razzie chances.  Its reviews are likely to be higher than those of the second one. 
 
Just for the record, I personally don't think that 'Transforemers: Revenge of the Fallen' deserved Worst Picture of 2009.  Yes, it made a lot of money and it was panned by critics (only 19% on RT), but there were much more infamous (and harder panned) films out there like 'All About Steve', 'Old Dogs', 'Year One', and 'Miss March' (all had Tomatometer ratings in the single-digits).  Some parties disagreed with the results and others wouldn't take the awards seriously.


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 8:57pm

Anyone who says this movie has little chance of making it to the final five Razzie nods is in some serious denial! There is no other movie coming out this year that is the living embodiment of what the Razzies are all about, the worst of Hollywood's worst. All spectacle, no substance! I have my pencil ready to check every box of the voting ballot that this flick will be listed next to. Let the bashing of this turd of a movie begin!



-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 9:13pm
Actually, there is another movie coming out that even better embodies the worst of Hollywood's worst.  It's called 'The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1'.  Your prejudice and discrimination has gone too far.  If you sabotage the 2012 Razzie Awards like you did the 2010 Razzie Awards (by swaying voters in the wrong direction), I will gladly give you a Methane Special Achievement Award for 'sabotaging a major award show twice'.


-------------


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 9:15pm
Miguel I am going to remind you of something you JUST said....
I personally don't think that 'Transforemers: Revenge of the Fallen' deserved Worst Picture of 2009.  Yes, it made a lot of money and it was panned by critics (only 19% on RT), but there were much more infamous (and harder panned) films out there like 'All About Steve', 'Old Dogs', 'Year One', and 'Miss March' (all had Tomatometer ratings in the single-digits).  Some parties disagreed with the results and others wouldn't take the awards seriously.

If Transformers didnt deserve a razzie for 19 PER CENT??? There is absolutely no justification for insisting Twilight gets one. What a hypocrite.




Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 9:15pm
The comment below just got Michaels a Methane Movie Award nomination for Worst Film Critic for letting his prejudice and discrimination keep him from showing proper judgment.  

Originally posted by Michaels

Like it or not, this movie is going STRAIGHT to the Worst Picture nods list.


-------------


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 9:19pm

I have to admit that I kind of agree with GTAHater and 27Years on this one... I mean, all this franchise-bashing kind of makes it feel like the Razzies are losing their identity. Instead of dis-honoring the worst movies of the year, we just seem to bashing the biggest "undeserved" studio-successes. I am not disillusioned, though I am assuming that both this movie and Breaking Dawn 1 are likely to be nominated for worst picture. But I personally would prefer it if this didn't happen.



-------------


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: June 24 2011 at 10:30pm
I know how you feel. I might have approved of Breaking Dawn Part I getting nominated for Worst Picture under one of 2 circumstances, neither of which will happen: First, broadening Worst Picture to 10 nominees like the Worst of 1980 RAZZIES, and/or second, Breaking Dawn Part I getting worse reviews than Season of the Witch, The Roommate, and Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son.
 
To Mr. Burn: I'm predicting Dark of the Moon will get 30-34% at Rotten T, and just under 50% at Metacritic. Perhaps it's enough to get it 5 nominations, and maybe "win" one award, but this film will need to far underpass my prediction before it would ever deserve 8 nominations.


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Spt. 12: Dolphin Tale 2, Search Party. Spt. 19: The Maze Runner, Tusk.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 5:30am
Again, Miguel, give one of those made-up "Worst Critic" awards to yourself, please! We all now the nano-second a "Breaking Dawn Part 1" Forum is up, you're going to be all over it like flies on s***, so stop being such a hypocrite!  

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

That comment just got you a Methane Movie Award nomination for Worst Film Critic because you let your prejudice and discrimination keep you from using proper judgment.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 5:34am
By any chance, were you looking into a mirror while typing that "prejudice and discrimination" comment, Miguel? How is my bashing of "Transformers" any different than your obsession over "Twilight"? Oh yeah, there isn't any difference! So, go have a Coke and a smile and face the fact: there are worse movies out there than your despised "Twilight." It's not going to "win" Worst Picture, so deal with it!  

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

 
Actually, there is another movie coming out that embodies the worst of Hollywood's worst.  It's called 'The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1'.  Your prejudice and discrimination has gone too far.  If you sabotage the 2012 Razzie Awards like you did the 2010 Razzie Awards (by swaying voters in the wrong direction), I will gladly give you a Methane Special Achievement Award for 'sabotaging a major award show twice'.



-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: oiram
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 6:47am
If I end up paying to see this movie in the theaters, I'm going to hate myself in the morning!

-------------
Elizabeth Hartman and Judith Barsi are more talented and beautiful than Scarlett Johansson and Chloe Grace Moretz. Fact.

Worst Supporting Actor: Brendan Fraser/Gimme Shelter and The Nut Job




Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 7:11am
Could LeBeouf be getting paid by the studio to say that??   

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Don't worry guys, Shia LeBeouf says it's gonna be the best 3D movie ever made:  http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/dont-worry-guys-shia-labeouf-says-transformers-3-is-the-best-3d-movie-ever-made - http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/dont-worry-guys-shia-labeouf-says-transformers-3-is-the-best-3d-movie-ever-made   


-------------


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 8:45am
The 1st one received one minor nomination.The 2nd one won three including Worst Picture.Do you really have any doubts this won't go to the ballots?
Originally posted by Michaels

Do you seriously think actors are going to say "oh yeah, this movie is an utter piece of sh*t, don't waste your money on it"? No, they won't.
They did it with the 2nd one,remember?
Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

The comment below just got Michaels a Methane Movie Award nomination for Worst Film Critic for letting his prejudice and discrimination keep him from showing proper judgment.
F*ck!What do I have to do to get that nomination?!


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 8:48am
Don't worry, you'll have another fifty million movie-goers right alongside of you.

Originally posted by oiram

If I end up paying to see this movie in the theaters, I'm going to hate myself in the morning!


-------------


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 9:23am
The difference is, Burn, that your dislike and distrust of Transformers can be backed up with your own sound and reasonable arguments against it, coupled with only 15 per cent approval from top critics!! 

Miguel's tirades against Twilight cannot be backed up by anything! The fact that Eclipse was even in the running for the Razzies last year is appalling. The movie had 67 per cent approval from top critics! Not only was it dis-honorable and against any code of proper conduct, it was people missing the big picture for the sake of pettiness. And it dragged the Razzies through the mud. If the same thing were to happen this year, it would be utterly disgraceful. Why some people cannot see that, I will never understand.  

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

By any chance, were you looking into a mirror while typing that "prejudice and discrimination" comment, Miguel? How is my bashing of "Transformers" any different than your obsession over "Twilight"? 


-------------


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 9:44am
Eclipse was garbage -- Nuff said! It deserved every one of its Razzie nominations. 

-------------


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 9:55am
Your opinion does not really matter. In fact, my opinion doesn't really matter much either, but at least I can make decent attempts at backing up my opinions with valid points and facts, and not just make ignorant statements of my personal dislikes. 

What does matter are critics, experts in all things film. And they gave Eclipse 67 per cent approval. Fact. 

So, Razzie nominations not justified.  


-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 10:52am
When it comes to people saying the Razzies might lose credit for going after franchises, I don't think it will be any kind of blow to the awards' creditibility. The Razzies have done much more questionable things in the past. The first and foremost would be their constant Razzing of Sly Stallone, to the point it almost seemed like they had a personal vendetta against him that rivals Miguel's vendetta against "Twilight"! Next would be "Fahrenheit 9/11", a documentary, winning "acting" awards for George W. Bush and members of his staff who appeared on-screen. And then there's the year that we had THREE Uwe Boll movies, and TWO Seltzerberg movies ... only for them to all lose to "The Love Guru".
 
So the Razzies' choices and results can be questionable at times, but in the end, they are nothing to get all excited or mad about. Like the MTV Movie Awards and all other public voting award with the word "Choice" in their titles, this award is pretty much just for fun. Just a lighthearted way for us to give Hollywood the finger for vomiting bad movies into our local theaters, and nothing more. So "Transformers 3" and "Breaking Dawn 1" getting nods after past installments got nods/wins is not going to hurt anyone's credit as a PUBLIC VOTING awards show.


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 11:02am
My opinions can be backed up by how much the public wants to see this P.O.S. franchise get punished after brainwashing the American youth into giving it positive awards over superior films like 'Inception'. If we do that, then the public will look upon us with respect and regard us as heroes.

Burn, to be honest, I don't see any possible way 'Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1' can lose. It deserves to win Worst Picture for all the crimes the franchise has committed.

-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 11:35am
Um, Miguel, do you know this for a FACT, or are you pulling this public opinion out of thin air? I doubt that, like you, the "public" is losing sleep over "Inception" losing the MTV Movie Awards. After all, it won 4 Oscars and was up for Writer/Producer/Director Guild Awards. And us Razzing "Twilight" isn't going to make us "champions" in anyone's eyes. You really need to stop believing that people take publicly voted awards as seriously as you seem to.
 
2. Um, yeah, there is a way. All that needs to happen is for there to be a movie worse than "Breaking Dawn 1," and that it be seen by enough voting Razzie members. Given the amount of bad movies these days, and all the various ways movies can be seen through home entertainment, that can (and likely will) easily happen. 

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

1. My opinions can be backed up by how much the public wants to see this P.O.S. franchise get punished after brainwashing the American youth into giving it positive awards over superior films like 'Inception'. If we do that, then the public will look upon us with respect and regard us as heroes.
2. Burn, to be honest, I don't see any possible way 'Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1' can lose. It deserves to win Worst Picture for all the crimes the franchise has committed.




-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Movie Man
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 12:45pm
I actually liked the first one, and while part two was confusing, I will go see part three of this (I do admit however the horrible casting choice of the new girl.)

The new girl is supposed to be Carly, who in the Transformers universe, is the new girlfriend and future wife of Sam Witwicky. Michael Bay auditioned a lot of women to replace Fox, and they picked THAT girl instead of some down to earth girls who look 10 times better by comparison.

I actually put "Transformers" on my top 10 list of 2007 (#10) and the visuals were dynamic and realistic looking. Why that movie lost the Best Visual Effects award to that PC "talking bears" movie is beyond me.

Even though part two was a little weak, what Micheal Bay does do good at is expanding and allowing the story to play out in its entirety. I was surprised to see 2 1/2 hour PG-13-rated films based on toys, and the third one clocks in at 157 minutes, so we'll see what happens.

Thank you Michael Bay for introducing me to the Transformers world in a way that the PC 1984 cartoon version couldn't have done.


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 12:47pm
No matter how anybody wants to dress it up a movie with 67 per cent critic approval (Eclipse)should never have been in contention for nominations. Especially when there are so many movies with less than 30 per cent. Its plain wrong. A fact is a fact. 
Michaels I see your point about public voting but these award are not exactly open to the public so its not in the same kettle of fish as other public awards thus should have some standards of conduct to warrant the nominating and awarding of the actual worst in my opinion.
Miguel you can not say that Transformers did not deserve a razzie for 15 per cent and Twilight did/does for 67 per cent. Your argument is ridiculous, weak, hypocritical and false. 
Perhaps you should just go into your little I hate Twilight shrine at home and throw darts at the books (because the movies are only visuals of the books) or maybe get some counselling to help work out some inferiority issues because you obviously crave some respect and think that razzing twilight is the way your going to get it!! 


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 1:43pm

Let this be a warning to anyone going to see "Trannies 3", thinking it will be an improvement since the last sequel (much like how "Star Wars" fanboys were desperately hoping that "Revenge of the Sith" would be the best of the prequels), go into the theaters with ROCK BOTTOM expectations. If you go in expecting this movie to be great in terms of characters and storylines, you are just setting yourself up for a huge disappointment. Just prepare to turn your brains off and stare at all the pretty colors, because that is all these movies have been good for. You have officially been warned.

PS: I, too, would like to thank Michael Bay. For with "Trannies 2", he finally made a movie bad enough for him to "win" the long awaited Razzie that he so rightfully deserved! I'll get my yearly  Transformers fix through the "War For Cybertron" video game (which could have introduced you to "Transformers" better than any other form of media could), thank you very much.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 2:29pm
That did it, Burn! I've had enough of your prejudiced and slurred judgment toward this franchise! I hereby dub you 'the worst film critic that ever existed' because your blind attitude toward this franchise has established your identity as nothing more than a heartless bastard. Take this title as a token of my disapproval.

-------------


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 2:49pm

Miguel, Please stop with your endless Twilight/Breaking Dawn-comments. If you'll read the title of this forum, you should know that this forum is to discuss Transformers 3, not Twilight.  

Your constant complaining about these movies alienates the members who couldn't care less about them (like me) and I think it makes the site overall an unpleasant place to be...



-------------


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 3:52pm
27Years, http://www.razzies.com/forum/twilight-saga-eclipse_forum445.html - INDIANA JONES 4 won over movies under 40% despite getting 77%.The STAR WARS prequel were nominated for/won a bunch of categories including Worst Picture each,though their ratings were 62,67 and 80%(better than EPISODE VI).But everytime I bring up the subject they use excuses(much like Miguel claiming teens have been brainwashed).Yeah,INDY 4 had aliens and fridge-nuking.And yeah,EPISODES I & II lacked character and plot development,while http://www.razzies.com/forum/star-wars-episode-iii-the-sith-hitz-the-fanz_forum12.html - Hayden Christensen's "acting skills".But if critics,who are experts and know more about film than anyone on this forum,as you guys have pointed out,they're right.

The Razzies may seem like the same light fun as public voting awards,but they've been chosen as one of the official sources to decide on bad film quality,so they should be taken seriously.
Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

That did it, Burn! I've had enough of your prejudiced and slurred judgment toward this franchise! I hereby dub you 'the worst film critic that ever existed' because your blind attitude toward this franchise has established your identity as nothing more than a heartless bastard.
You dubbed him?So he hasn't win the Methane Award yet?Well,now he obviusly will.Good job,jerk!Now you've taken the surprise and fair trial of the awards...much like the Oscars every couple of years.LOL
Originally posted by Vheid

Miguel, Please stop with your endless Breaking Dawn-comments. If you read the title of this forum, you would know that this is a forum to discuss Transformers, not Twilight.
And this time at least,you brought the subject up.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 7:11pm

My last comment had nothing to do with Breaking Dawn.  It was a response to BurnHollywoodBurn's heartless perception of the upcoming Transformers movie.  As a result, I have scrapped my Methane Movie Award category for Worst Movie Critic because it's no longer a contest.



-------------


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 7:33pm
Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

My last comment had nothing to do with Breaking Dawn.  It was a response to BurnHollywoodBurn's heartless perception of the upcoming Transformers movie.  As a result, I have scrapped my Methane Movie Award category for Worst Movie Critic because it's no longer a contest.



Do I believe him, and his Twilight-hating schlock? I know, I hate Twilight, but still, Miguel, you should be respectful with Burn's feelings on the new Transformers movie.


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 7:46pm
I just love the irony about a poster with a "heartless perception" towards one franchise going all crazy over another poster for having a "heartless perception" for different franchise, to the point the former dubs the latter as the "Worst Critic Ever". I think Armond White would abject to that statement, and I mean the REAL Armond, not MWG.
 
Now, I'm no Michael Bay fan either, but I'll give him SOME credit. The man does know how to make great visuals. But that's about it. Like most, if not all music video directors, he can make great images for the screen, but he has NO clue how to tell a story. The man is better off doing music videos or commericals, because that's what he's best at. But his movies will always be nothing more than 3 hour long music videos.
 
As for this movie's chances for Razzie spray-painted gold, I would say it will tie "Transformers 2", getting no less than 5 nods, but no more than 8 nods, and probably winning somewhere between 2 to 4 awards. But that's just a guess on my part.


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 7:58pm

If we split up Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-Off, or Sequel into two categories, could this be nominated for both categories?



-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 25 2011 at 8:23pm
Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

That did it, Burn! I've had enough of your prejudiced and slurred judgment toward this franchise! I hereby dub you 'the worst film critic that ever existed' because your blind attitude toward this franchise has established your identity as nothing more than a heartless bastard. Take this title as a token of my disapproval.
B-O-O-H-O-O. Do I now get to give you a made-up award, too? I think "Only Person In the World That Takes Public Vote Awards As Seriously As Industry Awards" will due nicely. Or "The Dude Who Talks Out Of Both Sides Of His Face, As He Gets All Mad At Others Badmouthing Movies They Haven't Seen Yet, While He Himself Insults An Entire Franchise That He Saw One Installment Of". See, I can make up stupid and pointless awards, too.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Film Reel Redemption
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 12:29am

Even though Herr Bay 'learnt' from 'Trannies Too' and has possibly thrown out the pointless sex jokes and the obnoxious stereotypes (the twins in particular), we can probably still expect the film to contain mindless action, CGI assaults that would make the entire theatre shout 'MY EYES IT BURNS!' and dialogue and characters so wooden that it would not be able to out-act the Garden Shed production of 'Richard III'.



-------------
You see in this filmmaking world there's two types of people my friend. Those with the knowledge of film and those who think they do but really don't.


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 5:56am
Hell, and Shia LaBeouf is like the Lawrence Olivier of bad acting in Transformers movies, as well as Megan Fox. I mean, sure Bay learned his lesson from Revenge of the Fallen, but still, it's gonna be suckier, and is gonna dumb down for the audience, thus making Americans more stupid.

-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 10:08am
Further proof that Michael Bay is a f***ing tool!
 
http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/michael-bay-writes-to-theater-projectionists/ - http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/michael-bay-writes-to-theater-projectionists/
 
http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/paramount-making-too-many-3d-demands/ - http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/paramount-making-too-many-3d-demands/
 
Hey, here's an ideal to make your movies more profitable: try actually making them GOOD, rather than depending on 3-D surcharges!


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 4:14pm
Thank You, BHB, 

According to the Hollywood Beancounters, "3-D" REALLY means:  

  • D-pressing
  • D-moralizing
  • D-spondent


-------------
2014 Pic: LEGEND OF HERCULES! Actor: Aaron Echkardt, Director: Renny Harlin, Remake: Transcendence


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 4:38pm
Originally posted by JoeBacon

According to the Hollywood Beancounters, "3-D" REALLY means:  

  • D-pressing
  • D-moralizing
  • D-spondent

And here I thought "3-D" really stood for "Triple De Profits".



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 4:40pm
Clearly you guys haven't seen DIGIMON.LOL

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 5:28pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Further proof that Michael Bay is a f***ing tool!
 
http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/michael-bay-writes-to-theater-projectionists/ - http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/michael-bay-writes-to-theater-projectionists/
 
http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/paramount-making-too-many-3d-demands/ - http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/paramount-making-too-many-3d-demands/
 
Hey, here's an ideal to make your movies more profitable: try actually making them GOOD, rather than depending on 3-D surcharges!


Wow, not only is Michael Bay a dick, but so is the studio, Paramount Pictures. And I thought 20th Century Fox was a greedy company, and it still is, but this studio? Hell, Paramount is even owned by a greedy conglomerate, Viacom.


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 6:01pm
Originally posted by Grounder the Critic


Wow, not only is Michael Bay a dick, but so is the studio, Paramount Pictures. And I thought 20th Century Fox was a greedy company, and it still is, but this studio? Hell, Paramount is even owned by a greedy conglomerate, Viacom.
I bet Viacom is still pissed off from losing their copyright case against YouTube. Come on, having clips from your movies and TV series on YT is like free advertising! Then again, that was before Google bought YT and made it into yet another marketing and commercial machine. Sigh, mega corporations have to own everything, don't they?


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 7:20pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Originally posted by Grounder the Critic


Wow, not only is Michael Bay a dick, but so is the studio, Paramount Pictures. And I thought 20th Century Fox was a greedy company, and it still is, but this studio? Hell, Paramount is even owned by a greedy conglomerate, Viacom.
I bet Viacom is still pissed off from losing their copyright case against YouTube. Come on, having clips from your movies and TV series on YT is like free advertising! Then again, that was before Google bought YT and made it into yet another marketing and commercial machine. Sigh, mega corporations have to own everything, don't they?


I know, right? Unhappy


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: RoadDogXVIII
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 10:24pm
You guys think the film is bad? How about the promotion. One year has gone by since Megan Fox was dropped, and they're still talking about it. I think they even have her antics dedicated in an article in July's GQ. For God's sakes, the girl's moved on from that BS, why bring up old sh*t. I think he should befriend Howard Stern, because the two of them love to crap on anyone they lost who's having a great life.

Speaking of which, I love how Howard Stern trashes her. The guy just filed a lawsuit THREE MONTHS into his new contract, because he wanted bonuses for the SIRIUS/XM merger. Yes, even though XM listeners can't get his show, he still wants bonuses from that half. He works 3 days a week, takes off... well not as much as people speculate, loves to trash his co-workers (Benji acting up? Dedicate an hour and a half to what an asshole he is, and gratuitously curse and stroke your own ego in the process), whines that SIRIUS isn't treating him right, salivates about stories regarding male genatalia, talk about how YouTube is bad but is using the site for clips for his own show, takes commercial breaks every 15 minutes, brags about his photography hobby (an Imus trait), has Robin become his Anthony to his Opie, always probes his guests about their familial woes when it isn't why they're being interviewed in the first place, ignores the fanbase who made him popular so he can hear Bobo salivate over Beth's upcoming whatever-the-hell-she's-up-to hobbies, and has a wife who leaves him constantly so he can jerk off to babysitter porn and come into the studio to stammer and slur about it. And I'm supposed to believe he's a humanitarian compared to Fox? Thumbs Down

Plus, while I'm not really a Rosie Huntington-Whitley basher, how the hell is she the hottest woman in the world recently? There are probably two women who deserve that honor: Diora Baird and Kelly Brook, two actresses who have no trace of work done and have beautiful breasts. Click these links below and tell me if I'm talking out of my asshole:

http://egotastic.com/2009/04/diora-baird-hot-1/diora-baird-bikini-and-lingerie-pictures-from-fhm-magazine-3/ - http://cdn03.cdn.egotastic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/4589_diora-baird-fhm-02.jpg

http://egotastic.com/entertainment/celebrities/kelly-brook/kelly-brook-sexy-magazine-pictures-only-strengthen-my-resolve-007472 - http://egotastic.com/entertainment/celebrities/kelly-brook/kelly-brook-sexy-magazine-pictures-only-strengthen-my-resolve-007472

And those tools over at IMDB say that if we don't like Rosie, then we're a bunch of fags. Sure, sure, sure, sure, sure.

I used to be a fan of Michael Bay, but after what went on after Revenge of the Fallen, I saw a side to him that disgusted me. It's like The Emperor's New Clothes. He ain't gonna be having his balls out anymore; Dark of the Moon is being embargoed by critics, and just http://www.totalfilm.com/reviews/cinema/transformers-3?ns_campaign=reviews&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=totalfilm&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0 - one review came out, and even if it's a fresh review, it doesn't sound so positive. Like one guy said who responded to it, if my DVD wasn't so scratched, I'd remove it, because everything that just went on made me just embarrassed to have actually supported the first film, and hoped that the second one would've been a smash.

Like a wise man said, "Fool me once, shame on me. You ain't pulling me back!"


-------------
You think you know, but you have no idea.


Posted By: RoadDogXVIII
Date Posted: June 26 2011 at 10:26pm
Also, the people who are defending it must have English as their second language.

-------------
You think you know, but you have no idea.


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 2:59am
It seems that the early reviews for this movie on RT are mostly positive (I know that they will drop). So, I was wondering IF by any chance this movie were to pull a Fast Five and would receive mostly positive reviews (I know that this will not likely happen) would the people here dare to admit that they were wrong about there early judgement of this movie?

-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 11:18am
Originally posted by Vheid

It seems that the early reviews for this movie on RT are mostly positive (I know that they will drop). So, I was wondering IF by any chance this movie were to pull a Fast Five and would receive mostly positive reviews (I know that this will not likely happen) would the people here dare to admit that they were wrong about this movie?
Nope, because as you mentioned yourself, that RT rating is going to start heading south the closer we get to Friday.
 
As for the whole Megan Fox thing that RoadDog mentioned, that just proves once and for all who the REAL star of those movies were .... her body!


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 11:20am
Originally posted by RoadDogXVIII

Also, the people who are defending it must have English as their second language.


What's wrong with people who have English as their second language?


-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 11:49am
Originally posted by Vheid


What's wrong with people who have English as their second language?
He means to say that people defending "Transformers" aren't smart enough to write while using proper English grammer and spelling.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 11:54am
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Originally posted by Vheid


What's wrong with people who have English as their second language?
He means to say that people defending "Transformers" aren't smart enough to write while using proper English grammer and spelling.

Aha, thanks for explaining, but this kind of makes me doubt my English grammer and spelling-skills (something I already was very insecure about)...


-------------


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 12:36pm
I inferred a tone in RoadDogXVIII's post. By how he said it, most defenders (and potentially apologists if the reviews descend like Mr. Burn says they will) of Dark of the Moon made unreadable posts. Vheid, your posts are close to perfect considering you're originally from Europe. I'll be gosh-darned if those potential apologists can write posts half as readable as yours.
 
And this just got me thinking. It dawned on me a few months after Dark of the Moon was announced as the title. You people call Transformers "Trannies". "Trannies" is also a slur (or should I say "slurrrgggh!") for transvestites. While the "Religious Reich", as the hardline religious conservatives are better known, hate transvestites, I think we should be worried about trans fat instead!


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Spt. 12: Dolphin Tale 2, Search Party. Spt. 19: The Maze Runner, Tusk.


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 12:51pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

I inferred a tone in RoadDogXVIII's post. By how he said it, most defenders (and potentially apologists if the reviews descend like Mr. Burn says they will) of Dark of the Moon made unreadable posts. Vheid, your posts are close to perfect considering you're originally from Europe. I'll be gosh-darned if those potential apologists can write posts half as readable as yours.


Thank you, I am glad you cleared this up for me.


-------------


Posted By: Film Reel Redemption
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 1:10pm
That RT score better start going down or we're in trouble with the people who are gonna see this film (thankfully a majority of us (including me) are NOT amongst them)...

-------------
You see in this filmmaking world there's two types of people my friend. Those with the knowledge of film and those who think they do but really don't.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 1:21pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

And this just got me thinking. It dawned on me a few months after Dark of the Moon was announced as the title. You people call Transformers "Trannies". "Trannies" is also a slur (or should I say "slurrrgggh!") for transvestites. While the "Religious Reich", as the hardline religious conservatives are better known, hate transvestites, I think we should be worried about trans fat instead!
Transvestites, trans fat, whatever. So long as the movie is being insulted, I don't care what "Trannies" is short for.
 
As for that RT rating going down, don't worry. I bet only the Armond Whites of the critic world have seen "Trannies 3" so far. Just wait and see what happens to that rating once the Peter Travers of the critic world see that movie! The week is still VERY young!


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 1:52pm
Originally posted by RoadDogXVIII

Plus, while I'm not really a Rosie Huntington-Whitley basher, how the hell is she the hottest woman in the world recently?
With Michael Bay and Paramount trying to get movie theaters to fix the projectors so that the 3-D version of "Trannies 3" looks just right, I'm sure they wouldn't think twice about having Maxim declare their walking blow-up doll as Sexiest Woman Alive. Not that those lists even matter any more, since just about every magazine and web site has their own version. The last time a magazine got that Sexiest Woman Alive title right was Esquire when they gave it to Kate Beckinsale ... in my opinion.

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 2:36pm
Not really, and nobody has to apologize for early bad word of mouth about FAST FIVE either. Word of mouth isn't prejudice, it's acting out on your taste. When you're deciding which movie to see at the cinema download you look at the list of movies available and choose which one appeals to you the most, based on not much info. These two movies are sequels in franchises with a history of bad reviews, and the people working on them have similar histories. Nobody should be blamed for predicting this would suck.  

Originally posted by Vheid

So, I was wondering IF by any chance this movie were to pull a Fast Five and would receive mostly positive reviews (I know that this will not likely happen) would the people here dare to admit that they were wrong about there early judgement of this movie?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: June 27 2011 at 11:21pm
Just to spite Bay, instead of seeing it in the best and most expensive 3d movie theater (AMC), im going to see it in the cheapest theater possible (Cinemark) lol, or i might just watch it online.


-------------
I don't have pet peeves, I have major psychotic f**king hatreds! George Carlin


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 4:48am
Online, online, online!

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 6:22am
Pick online. It'll be better. Just don't pick the Pirate Bay.


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 2:10pm
If you pay more than $1 to see this movie, you paid too much.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 5:09pm
Seriously?!Nobody got my joke?!  

Originally posted by Vits

Originally posted by Michaels

Originally posted by JoeBacon

According to the Hollywood Beancounters, "3-D" REALLY means:  

  • D-pressing
  • D-moralizing
  • D-spondent

And here I thought "3-D" really stood for "Triple De Profits".

Clearly you guys haven't seen DIGIMON.LOL


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 5:51pm
Finally! Just 1 more review on Rotten T until it has 100 reviews. Right now it's losing 35 to 64. In the off chance that the reviews don't descend further, Dark of the Moon may be the 30th-35th worst film of the year.
 
Even if the reviews only descend to between 25-28%, I'd still be assured that it's a very bad film... but I wouldn't think it THE worst; I'd still only award it 1 RAZZIE.


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Spt. 12: Dolphin Tale 2, Search Party. Spt. 19: The Maze Runner, Tusk.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 6:05pm

It's officially at 100 reviews ... and 35%! Even if we went along with 27Years' "under 40-50% rules", it still counts as one of our's! I don't have to say I'm sorry about ripping this movie a new @$$hole!



-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 6:43pm
Click http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110628/REVIEWS/110629981 - to see what Roger Ebert thought,and http://www.richardroeper.com/reviews/transformersdarkofthemoon.aspx - to see what Richard Roeper thought.

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 8:06pm
Wow, if Ebert's review is THAT bad, I can't wait to see what Peter Travers is going to say about it!

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 8:44pm
I don't know, but meanwhile, R.T. says this one is better than the 2nd one, but not as "good" as the 1st one: 

"Its special effects and 3D shots are undeniably impressive, but they aren't enough to fill up its loud, bloated running time, or mask it's thin, indifferent script."

So I guess it won't be considered for Worst Mis-Use Of 3D.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 28 2011 at 9:12pm
That's like saying being kicked in your left testicle is not as bad as being kicked in your right one.  
 
PS: Yes, I did use the testicle comparsion on purpose -- as a homage to the worst scene from the second movie.  

Originally posted by Vits

 I don't know,but meanwhile,R.T. says this one is better than the 2nd one,but not than the 1st one.


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 5:16am
I have a hard time believing that it's actually the worst of the year, considering that this currently has a score of 48 out of 100 on Metacritic. http://www.metacritic.com/movie/transformers-dark-of-the-moon - link

Oh and I just read this article about what kind of douche Shia LaBeouf actually is. http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/class_act_shia_labeouf_suggests_megan_fox_cheated_on_her_boyfriend_with_him/ - link

My favorite part of the article:

LaBeouf claims that though movies like “The Bourne Legacy,” “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” “127 Hours” and “The Social Network” came his way, they didn’t meet the high standard of quality he aspires to. “I’m looking for Warren Beatty—type game changers,” says the “Eagle Eye” and “Disturbia” actor.

You can see LaBeouf’s Beatty-like performance in the game-changing “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” when it opens tomorrow.

update: I don't care about the Megan Fox-cheating part, but his arrogance is beyond believe.



-------------


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 7:00am
I have a feeling it will make lots of money, but my suffer from "sequel syndrome," and probably make less than Revenge of the Fallen (hey Pirates 4 made less than the third). But I'm sure it's worldwide gross will be spectacular.


-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 11:16am
Well, Vheid, as it has been established, it's really not a question of what was the worst movie of the year according to RT or MC, but which movie the Razzie voters thought was the worst of the year.  
 
As for LaBeouf, yeah, the kid's a douche and he should be forever grateful that Spielberg cast him in just about every Dreamworks production of the past 7 years. I find it funny when anyone claims "This movie will be better than the last one because Michael Bay and Shia LaBeouf said so", when both of them are s***-eating grin pricks!  

Originally posted by Vheid

I have a hard time believing that it's actually the worst of the year, considering that this currently has a score of 48 out of 100 on Metacritic.
 
Oh and I just read this article about what kind of douche Shia LaBeouf actually is.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 12:08pm
Spill.com's review of Trannies 3 is out, here's the http://www.spill.com/Audio/AudioPost.aspx?audioId=640 - LINK .  

Also, I had already read the Shia LaBeouf article, and...of course he's a douchebag! 


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 3:28pm
Well, I just saw this and here's the good, the bad, and the ugly with A LOT of spoilers:

The Good:
 
The action-The action's REALLY good and, unlike the last one, you can actually tell what the hell's going on.
The special effects-ILM really went all-out with the effects on this one.
The 3D-The 3D was well used for this one and the screen wasn't dark and dingy like a certain Airbending movie.
The (large) Autobots-Optimus, Bumblebee, and the rest got a lot of good scenes. There scenes were better acted than the human's!
Leonard Nimoy as Sentinel Prime and his betrayel-Nimoy was pretty good as Sentinel. There's a scene were Optimus tries to give him the Matrix of Leadership that's handled well. His betrayel was a massive oh-sh*t moment and, unlike a certain Anti-Monitor named Bob, it makes since.
Optimus meets Neal Armstrong and Buzz Aldrein-Self-explanetory.
John Turtorro-Turtorro gave, perhaps, the only good human performance with nary a thong in sight. Also, he gets crippled, which means no more thong scenes in the future either.
Skids & Mudflad's not-return-The most annoying robots since Paulie's "wife" from Rocky IV aren't here. Also, Leo's not back either.
The characters act smart sometimes-During the final battle Lennox had his troops shoot at the Decepticon's eyes so they can plant explosives on them without getting stomped. Also, Carly plays Megatron's massive ego against him so he'll attack Sentinel.
Shockwave-They choose wiesely when they put him in here. His gaudy original purple is gone as well.
Laserbeak-He's a Decepticon vulture and he's awesome. He kills a bunch of humans who know about Sentinel.
The other Decepticons-They're pretty cool, too.
The destruction of Chicago-The Decepticons take over Chicago and obliterate it. It shows that Sentinel isn't kidding around.
The opening scene-This was done well.
 
The Bad:
 
Michael Bay-He's still a massive hack of a director, but he's showing signs of improvement. As said above, you can tell what's going on.
Characters (like John Malkovich and Sam's parents) disapear and never show up again-It's very distracting and makes one wonder what happened to them. It would be in the ugly, but when we get there, you'll understand why.
Wheelie rides again-The annoying little runt from Revenge Of The Fallen is back, despite disapearing midway through that abomination. Even worse, he has a hairy friend this time who humps a computer at one point.
Starscream's death-Starscream goes down like a b*tch. Shia LaButthole launches a grappling hook into his eye and puts explosives into his socket. This would be awesome, except it's LaButthole doing it. If you're going to kill off a cool character, at least do it in an awesome way, like they did with Megatron's decapitation.
 
The Ugly:
 
The acting-The performances are so bad that showing isolated clips to P.O.W.s would violate the Geneva Convention. LaButthole and Megan Fox 2.0 come off the worst.
Ehren Krueger-Seriously, why does this hack still get work? The only good script he's ever punched out was The Ring, and he ruined that with the sequel.
The legnth-It's two hours and 37 minutes, and, with previews, nearly three hours long!
Scenes without Decepticons and/or (large) Autobots-They still haven't learned that no one gives two-sh*ts about non Transformers-scenes. LaButthole having trouble finding a job? Megan Fox 2.0's boss is a sleazy-asshole? No one cares. Although, he does become important when it's revealed he sold out the humans to the Decepticons.
 
So, all in all, it was mixed-bag of a movie. It wasn't as good as the first one which I gave a B. Nor was it as bad as ROTF which I gave an F. Grade for this one: C+.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 4:10pm
So according to SchumacherH8ter's review, this movie is worthy enough for Worst Actor, Actress, Ensemble, Screenplay, and Director. Well, so long as it wins for something, I can accept it not winning Worst Picture.

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 4:26pm
Don't forget Worst Supporting Actors and Actress! Patrick Dempsey was Megan Fox 2.0's boss, Ken Jeong* plays one of LaButthole's co-workers who gets killed by Laserbeak, John Malkovich was their boss who disapears from the movie after Bumblebee knocks him off his ass, and Frances McDormand plays an obstructive bureacreut who had a fling with Turtorro a few years back. I wouldn't mind a Worst Sequel or Remake nod either**. Just don't list Tutorro.
 
*Jeong could, also, be listed for his cameo in Big Mommas 3, his disapointing turn in Hangover 2, and the upcoming Zookeeper.
**If we split this category, it could be listed twice.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 7:04pm
Wow, Ken Jeong had one hell of a bad year. That dude needs a new agent. But since Michaels and H8ter listed how this flick is worthy for just about every category on the ballot, we might as well go the full nine and give it Worst Picture, too!

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 29 2011 at 7:10pm
Yeah, I don't really mind Tranformers: Bark At The Moon getting a Worst Picture nod, just as long as Turtorro and the 3D don't get listed.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 9:43am

I think Turtorro will be safe, seeing as how he's managed to dodge an nod from starring in the first two movies, and Jeong will probably take all the heat for all the crap he has done this year. As for the 3-D, that all depends how much the voters hate it, knowing that it's just an excuse for the theaters to charge an extra $3-$5. Like Burn said, let's go the full nine and give it a nod in every category!



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 10:50am
Turtorro was on the nominating ballot for ROTF, but didn't make it to the final four. I felt that Turtorro was the only good non-Bumblebee part of that P.O.S. Then again, there was that thong he wore so maybe his almost nod was justified.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 1:23pm
Today I finished a test early,and didn't have more classes in 4 hours.So I went to the movies,for the first time I saw them opening the doors,and I saw this movie,which premiered today.

They promised they learned from their mistakes and improve from the 2nd movie.They did,except for the "Sorry,we're out of reel" ending.No more excess of movement and noise,no more not understanding what's happening,no more not telling TRANSFORMERS apart.And most important,the action wasn't mind-numbing,it was sit-grabbing.

The other 2 were written to be very long movies.This one is written as a 3-part mini-series,and it helps.But,it still feels a little long.Specially when you're halfway through the 40 minute final battle,and you realize you're halfway through.From that point on,is no longer that exciting.

Shia LeBeouf has officially become the most anoying person on Earth.I was impressed as how good he is for ad-libbing,but this time he never shuts up,and nothing he says is funny,and it's mostly just mean.I remembered that in dramatic scenes,Megan Fox showed hints that she could be good,while Rosie Huntington-Whitely doesn't.In fact,it's very obvious this is her first time acting.However,half the movie,she brings the charisma that is required,something Fox never did.The rest of the supp. actors are a little over the top,but that's because of the characters they play,and they're all very funny.This includes Ken Jeong who you think should be considered.He was actually good(specially since he was under used a few months ago).

Michael Bay's directing improved(not that it could get any worse).However,his music video editing continues,and this time is more obvious.Specially since there are like 3 scenes where everything is like a trailer.I mean it.A person scapes from a DECEPTICON,and it fades to black and then continues a few times,just like in a trailer.The FX improved too.And they toned the sunset-y photography down.

I give this 6/10(as good as the first one).If you don't agree,maybe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll0Phn5NG5M -


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 2:41pm
Nah, I prefer the view of a PROFESSIONAL critic like Ebert, thank you very much.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 2:43pm

What was said about LaButthole being the most annoying person alive is 1000000% correct! That scene where LaButthole tried to act tough is funnier than any intentional humor* in the film.

*In my review, I forgot to mention how soul-rapingly bad the "comedy" was in the film. Still better than Wheelie humping Megan Fox in the last one, though.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 2:53pm
Hehe, Shia LaButthole ... that's has to be put on the voting ballot! The kid needs to be there if only for comparing his work to that of Warren Beatty!

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 3:02pm
From the same interview where he compared himself to Beatty, he talked about 127 Hours and The Social Network like they were beneath him*.
 
*For those that didn't read the interview, LaButthole said he turned down roles in those two because they weren't "Warren Beatty game-changers". If we keep Worst Screen Couple he should be listed as "Shia LaButthole and his game-changing performance".


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 3:47pm
Wow what an idiot!


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 4:51pm
By the way:
1)Although characters do dissapear midway through,it doesn't matter.Yes,I wish I knew if WHEELIE & BRAINS actually died,but SAM told his parents to evacuate the city,and what happened to the boss is irrelevant to the plot.
2)The racist twins didn't came back.There are some foreign stereotypes,but they're totally harmless.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 5:15pm
The thing about Sam's boss is that he's played by a major actor. If you're gonna get a major actor like John Malkovich, why not use him more?

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 5:30pm
True.And I think you didn't "get" the use of white letters.LOL

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 1:39pm
Burn,you should be happy that the Grand Canyon hole is gone.In the movie,from the beginning,people are aware of the TRANFORMERS.

For those who've seen it,explain to me how did CARLY recognized MEGATRON?Yes,at the beginning it's revealed that SAM told her about what he's been through,but it makes no sense.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 3:06pm
Still further proof that Michael Bay is a hack, and is mroe than worthy of another Worst Director Razzie nomination: 
 
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Proof-That-Transformers-Dark-Of-The-Moon-Recycles-Footage-From-The-Island-25509.html - http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Proof-That-Transformers-Dark-Of-The-Moon-Recycles-Footage-From-The-Island-25509.html
 
Even though he loves his gasoline-guzzling Hummers, Bay says he does believe in recycling!


-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 10:10pm
Originally posted by Vits

For those who've seen it,explain to me how did CARLY recognized MEGATRON?Yes,at the beginning it's revealed that SAM told her about what he's been through,but it makes no sense.
 
Well, Megatron was around Sentinel who was around her boss and his name was probably said and she remembered something about LaButthole talking about it and put two and two together.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Spyke
Date Posted: July 02 2011 at 4:22pm
Just got back from the 8:45pm screening here in England, I got back home around midnight. Its s-o-o-o-o long!  

Now, I love the cinema (or theatreWink) and to me nothing beats it, so I usually love watching a nice long film in their seats. But today I was begging to be let out! I felt like walking out, but it wouldn't have been fair to my Dad (who, it turned out,  didn't enjoy it either). 

With Bay hyping up the use of 3D in the film I was expecting something mind blowing, but I felt so so so cheated! The 3D was absolutely pointless.  

As for that girl who replaced Megan Fox. Well she is such a bad actress, it's like she's reading her lines from a queue card held up behind the camera. Fox was actually better than she is.  

The plot was kinda thrown together, and although it made more sense than number 2, it was still mashed and stupid.  

Sorry for my mini review (rant over).  


-------------



Print Page | Close Window