Disaster? The 2nd biggest moneymaker of the year. Your definition of "disaster" and the rest of the world's seems to differ...

I thought this the best of the lot, however much that says. Yes it's bloated and silly like all of them, but the film has a much darker tone than the first two that I like. Scenes of the Decpticons rampaging through Chicago actually POWDERING people where creepy in a fun way.

And I may very well be in a minority here, but I am absolutely uninterested in extras or bonus material. I just don't need to see 15 hours of extras to a two hour movie. By the time you get to the 45-minute documentary by the set caterer about what happened the night they served spicy chili on the set the magic has been lost in the minutiae.

Wow...such harsh review for a movie that was a kids cartoon.  Seriously too many of you people have grown up to the point you want everything to be the Dark Knight.  The big difference is that Batman was that dark type of character, transformers are not.  We are talking about a movie with live robots and are complaining about physics?  Do you even want to go there with some of the movies everyone does like?

I don't put a lot into the money it made as that's not a good gage of how good it was, phantom menace anyone?  Besides which, 3D money pushed it over a billion.   Though all that being said you can't deny the popularity of these movies.  When part 4 comes out it will still made 800 mil worldwide when all is said and done.

The only thing you have a right to complain about is the double dipping thing they have going on with the DVD.  I can't stand when they do that but this transformers disc isn't the first nor will it be the last to do that.  Do what I do, speak with your money.  Don't buy it and wait a month or two for the ultimate edition to come out. 

Oh dear....I guess the whole "you shouldn't be expecting Shakespeare when watching a movie called Transformers" debate had to come up here.  Lest you forget, there was an episode of the original cartoon where Cybertron was brought to Earth's orbit, and it DID impact the gravity and natural disasters all over the planet.  So if the physics were important enough to the writers of the cartoon, why weren't they important enough to the writers of the film? 

I'll also bring up something I said in my comments when the film first came out in theaters: Think about the film Aliens.  It was a balls to the wall action film, and it easily could have sacrificed having memorable characters in order to have more action and explosions.  But it wouldn't have been nearly as great a film otherwise.  And no one is making any claims that it was Shakespeare, but it's an undeniably great film.  Why couldn't Transformers have given us something like that?  Why did Michael Bay feel the need to throw in so much stupid comic relief that completely undermined the overall tone of the film? 

I just watched this and I have to agree with the review and grade.  YES the effects was nice, but lord all-mighty the story was off and I too found myself wishing something would fall on Sam.  My boys, bless their hearts, didn't fall asleep or get up and go play Xbox, but they didn't dig.  It seemed to take forever to get done.  Film is always good for eye candy, but bad on depth. 

And just because it made tons of money, doesn't make it great...it makes it something that was entertaining.  That is why I rented it, looking for the action..which didn't disappoint, but fell short in story.

I liked the movie for what it was. I will agree with Tim on the Blue Ray Extras - that's a damn shame that there are no extras, and I was thinking the same thing when I saw the coupon inside the box. SMH @ Paramount.

Transformers kicked ass end of story!

This movie was horrible. I want Transformers, not half a movie about whiney early 20's garbage. Whaaa, Spike can't find a job. Whaaa, Spike has issues because his girlfriend pays the bills. Whaaa, Dr. McDreamy is going to steal Spike's girlfriend. What the hell am I watching, an episode of Friends? Too much focus on crap human issues. 

And yes, the premise was poop as well. Bay has no connection to reality and neither do any of his movies. Even if they had followed the plot of the cartoon and comics, at least the script would have been somewhat legible.

Oh yeah...another douchy film review instead of a media release review!  So surprised.  Stick to the specs and spare us yet another hater tirade.

Yes there were plot holes...but the one's given were explained in the film if someone would actually pay attention or use a little imagination.  Since when do science fiction/fantasy films have to explain everything in realist terms?  

How was the space bridge tech going to save Cybertron?  It would allow other planets to be mined far easier for one, which could solve warring over energy and resources. 

Where was the Ark heading before it was damaged?  It was escaping the Decepticons as far as the Autobots knew...and it was also to rendevue with Megatron which only Sentinel Prime knew.  That was mentioned in the movie!

How did Cybertron not cause mass devastation on Earth?  This is a leap, but I'm going to suggest because unlike in the cartoon episode, this was not the entire planet brought over by the bridge...just a link or doorway.  Since it wasn't the entire planet, then it wouldn't have it's center of gravity, thus not causing the damage one would expect.

There's really nothing in this film that should make it more far fetched than most other genre films.  Hate it for the stupid humans and bad humor, but don't go hating on everything just for the sake of it.

@ ultrazilla2000 - For the sake of it?  I didn't like it.  You did.  You defend why you liked, me and others vent for why we didn't.  Life goes on.