Transformers: The Last Knight | 6/21/2017 | Big Budget, Weak OW?

[That One Girl]

5 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

I don't trust @That One Guy. He shilled for MONSTER TRUCKS. 

 

 

 

The movie is so fucking terrible but you have no idea the level of comedy in this movie.  It's actually insane that people wrote this shit down on a script and thought it was passable.

[GiantCALBears]

Just now, That One Guy said:

 

The movie is so fucking terrible but you have no idea the level of comedy in this movie.  It's actually insane that people wrote this shit down on a script and thought it was passable.

I need a few others to confirm this but you are making me want to see it now dude. BAKED. 

[kowhite]

How much of this movie is proper IMAX?

 

That One Guy is really laying down the hype for me on this movie, he's saying all the right things I must go.  

[Plain Old Tele]

1 minute ago, kowhite said:

That One Guy is really laying down the hype for me on this movie, he's saying all the right things I must go.  

 

[The Futurist]

Who has a better track record with critics than my man Bay ?

[kowhite]

2 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

 

So you're saying it's proper good and well written?

 

Tele...we need to talk...

[kowhite]

3 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Who has a better track record with critics than my man Bay ?

 

He certainly is consistent.

[Barnack]

6 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Who has a better track record with critics than my man Bay ?

uwe boll ?

 

Most of is movie didn't get review on RT, but when they did never got over 25%, never did he sold out with some good reviews from time to time:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/uwe_boll/

 

 

And he literally beat critics up:

http://www.cinemablend.com/pop/Uwe-Boll-Kicks-Crap-Out-Critics-1121.html

 

In video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swg4SshYx2E

 

And he mick dropped is exit like that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT1J65KHX8E

Edited June 21, 2017 by Barnack

[kowhite]

Uwe Boll doesn't count, he's not an auteur, he's a tax loophole.

[Brainiac5]

54 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

2/10

 

Edited June 21, 2017 by Brainiac5

[That One Girl]

1 hour ago, Telemachos said:

 

 

Its a better King Arthur movie than what Guy Ritchie put out  

[Biggestgeekever]

People were discussing the aspect ratios in here, I believe.

 

I'm sure this will only apply to IMAX screenings, but the aspect ratio was completely schizophrenic. There were numerous instances where it would change about 15 times in a minute, and I mean that literally.

[kowhite]

1 minute ago, Biggestgeekever said:

People were discussing the aspect ratios in here, I believe.

 

I'm sure this will only apply to IMAX screenings, but the aspect ratio was completely schizophrenic. There were numerous instances where it would change about 15 times in a minute, and I mean that literally.

 

Like Revenge of the Fallen huh.  Is there at least a lot of it?  Large format just gets me...I'd watch 50 Shades of Gray if it were shot like that.

[BadAtGender]

1 hour ago, That One Guy said:

 

The movie is so fucking terrible but you have no idea the level of comedy in this movie.  It's actually insane that people wrote this shit down on a script and thought it was passable.

 

You mean they actually wrote down the script?

[Biggestgeekever]

3 minutes ago, kowhite said:

Like Revenge of the Fallen huh.  Is there at least a lot of it?  Large format just gets me...I'd watch 50 Shades of Gray if it were shot like that.

There was a lot of it, but there's only a few scenes in the movies where it stays constant for more than a minute or two. Most of the time, it's constantly switching back and forth even during action scenes and (most baffling of all) during regular conversations. The aspect ratio would be at its largest on a close-up of Walberg, the film would then cut to Isabela Moner and be in a smaller ratio. And this would also happen in the opposite order; it was totally crazy.

[kowhite]

7 minutes ago, Biggestgeekever said:

There was a lot of it, but there's only a few scenes in the movies where it stays constant for more than a minute or two. Most of the time, it's constantly switching back and forth even during action scenes and (most baffling of all) during regular conversations. The aspect ratio would be at its largest on a close-up of Walberg, the film would then cut to Isabela Moner and be in a smaller ratio. And this would also happen in the opposite order; it was totally crazy.

 

Well, that is disappointing.  That format looks amazing...you do that for SCENES...or like God King Nolan, for a whole movie (that's still happening for Dunkirk right?).

 

But I suppose, I'll take what I can get.  You're supposed to build to that, not just randomly cut to it.  But, hey it's Bay.

Edited June 21, 2017 by kowhite

[BadAtGender]

I'm not sure what's more shocking... that this is the 4th wide release this summer to hit below 20% on RT.. or the fact that it's still not the worst reviewed wide release.

[kowhite]

26 minutes ago, DamienRoc said:

 

You mean they actually wrote down the script?

 

Crayons aren't only for kids.

[A Marvel Fanboy]

2 hours ago, The Futurist said:

Who has a better track record with critics than my man Bay ?

Uwe Boll

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/uwe_boll

 

nvm

 

Edited June 21, 2017 by firedeep

[redfirebird2008]

1 hour ago, kowhite said:

 

Well, that is disappointing.  That format looks amazing...you do that for SCENES...or like God King Nolan, for a whole movie (that's still happening for Dunkirk right?).

 

 70-75% of Dunkirk is 65mm IMAX footage. Rest of it is traditional 65mm in scope ratio.