Transformers: The Last Knight (2017) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
713 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
fancy visual effet as usual, horrible ridiculous pilot, fragment shot
toddcha20 February 2018
Like all the other sequence, the visual effect is good, which is of course expected. However, the splendid visual effect cannot save an unreasonable screenplay with particularly fragmental shots and scenes.

There are countless flaws in the plots and poorly actings: 1. the self-righteous scientists, their smug parts have 0 contributions to the movie. 2. Cade, what's wrong with Mark Wahlberg? First time acting? Especially his tone is NOT convincing at all. He really needs to work on his facial expressions and tones. (or perhaps his shots are so fragmental? ) 3. the car chasing part in London city is to make audience excited or dizzy/faint? ...

After 30 minutes, all i want is to skip to the end.

The last straw that makes the whole movie doomed is Optimus' line: earth is my home. There is no need spending 150 mins on this movie.
35 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I liked this one. For what it was it was entertaining.
subxerogravity21 June 2017
Not bad at all.

What is it about the odd numbered ones in this franchise that are my favorite? The first Transformers movie was OK. The Third one was my favorite (Which is not saying much). This fifth and last one is up there with the third one.

Like the third one, it was an excellent use of CGI to do the action scenes. Transformers was one of the first movies that I've seen in which they did CGI scenes in the day time, and it looked really good. You can see that director Michael Bay has hit his peak in really making the CGI action interact well with the live action footage.

Like the original movie, The Last Knight is an ensemble cast that revolves around the main character. It's not the best ensemble cast I've seen. Josh Duhamel, who had been in the series longer than Wahlberg felt like a strange insert done for pure nostalgia, but if you are into the Franchise or Transformers in general the ensemble cast gives you that fandom.

Speaking of Wahlberg, his Cade Yeager is a much better character than Shia LaBeouf's, Sam Witwicky. I like the way Cade gets into the action more than Sam trying to get away from it. It makes for better interaction between the live action and CGI. Bay treats Wahlberg like a walking action figure.

It is weird how little action is actually in this movie. You have a few giant battles leading up to the epic one at the end, and in-between it's Micheal Bay pretending to be the filmmaker he's not with funny scenes that are not really funny and his attempts to poke fun at Romance scenes in films only made his film stupid. Stick to the slick action and crap blowing up Bay.

Overall, I enjoyed the film. Not one of my favorite franchises but I did like this one. It's like watching a live action cartoon, but that's all the Transformers movies isn't it? Thought this one seems to be the best cartoon out of them all.

OK http://cinemagardens.com
25 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Michael Bay's checklist to make bad movies
chris-j-chuba24 June 2023
1. Every movie must be 3hrs long, keep adding secondary characters until you get there.

2. Have a pointless love interest with no chemistry.

3. Have fight scenes pop up out of nowhere just to show off special effects.

4. Pay a famous actor to do what amounts to an extended cameo, no matter how forced.

5. Introduce stereotypical, secondary characters that were popular in the 80's, the cute kid and the comedic relief, black guy

6. Have heroic deaths, where each hero gets to give a speech as they die in the arms of their best friend. Play epic music just in case we don't understand the moment.

7. Even after 3hrs, leave the audience confused about the plot and behavior of main characters. What was up w/Optimus Prime was he a redeemed bad guy or a restored good guy, why the mood swings?

8. Have the main villain who was indestructible at the start of the movie, badly lose the last fight of the movie.

I felt bad for Laura Haddock, she could have served a purpose other then 'love interest' had they combined her role with Hopkins, and dropped Hopkins. This would have shortened the movie by 30 minutes (oh yeah, rule #1). But instead they gave her a trite role, 'the scholar who was the ONLY one who could FIND the artifact only to hand it over to Wahlberg the ONLY one who could USE it)
20 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not impressed
0U23 February 2020
The best part of this movie is the action, the story was very lack luster. I think it had potential with a good cast including Anthony Hopkins, but the writting always falls short in these movies. You can watch it over and over for the action, you just might scratch your head at certain spots.
29 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
My First Ever Review
sulimcool127 September 2017
I actually liked this movie it's far far better than the previous one , i don't know why it's getting bad reviews, i liked the movie , the story line was good , camera work awesome , 3d very impressive , even though it's a lengthy movie i did not get bored , i would love to see more transformers movies like this , do give it a watch
36 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Michael Bay toppes himself
alansabljakovic-3904429 December 2019
This is unwatchable and so bizarre. I mean Merlin and king Arthur in Transformers movie????
35 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Only this franchise could take something as inherently exciting as giant robots fighting and make it utterly dull.
Pjtaylor-96-1380448 May 2018
Despite all its spectacle, 'Transformers: The Last Knight (2017)' is simply completely mind-and-arse-numbingly boring. It's an utter chore to sit through from beginning to long-awaited end. It's also the kind of self-indulgent trite that goes in one ear and straight out of the other. Honestly, I felt as though I'd been sat in the cinema for years, never mind the already far too long two-and-a-half hours I actually had to endure this for. Not a single frame provided even a morsel of entertainment - which is weird because, for all intents and purposes, the admittedly impressive visual effects should've at least granted me some brief form of passive enjoyment during one of the over-blown action set-pieces. Yet, the takeaway I have from the picture is this: only Michael Bay (and his team, of course) could make something as inherently exciting as giant robots battling one another so painfully and utterly dull. 3/10.
44 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Pray let this be the last
TheLittleSongbird1 July 2017
Just for the record, before those defending the film jump down my throat and start accusing me of all kinds of unfounded things like they have done with their tiresome, uncalled for and disgustingly condescending critic bashing, this review is not coming from a 'Transformers' detractor. Far from it actually oddly enough.

Most of the animated show are really entertaining and well made, and the animated film likewise in a guilty pleasure sort of way. Of the live-action films, the first was enjoyable, 'Revenge of the Fallen' (often considered the worst) for me wasn't that terrible but had a lot wrong with it while 'Dark of the Moon' and 'Age of Extinction' were mediocre. This is coming from somebody with a diverse taste in film and television (and a huge fan of classical music and opera), loving films of all genres old and new.

Am honestly of the opinion that Michael Bay's 'Transformers' franchise got worse with each instalment, and having seen some describe 'The Last Knight' as the worst of the five having seen for myself with an open mind but with a little knowledge of its reception personally am in agreement. By all means, 'The Last Knight' is not irredeemably bad, none of the 'Transformers' films are. As usual the special effects are mostly of an awesome standard and the Transformers themselves are very well voiced, particularly a note-perfect Peter Cullen and Frank Welker.

Bringing some welcome gravitas and fun to the film is Anthony Hopkins in one of the better performances of all five films put together. The best character is the refreshingly witty Cogman, performed with sleek enthusiasm by Jim Carter.

However, Bay's direction is smug and self-indulgent and while there is some audacious stylishness to some of the cinematography too much of the editing is enough to make one get a headache. The Transformers don't have enough to do and while well voiced their personalities have been better defined before and their scenes lack tension, fun, excitement or any kind of intrigue. While the action sequences worked in the first three films, they didn't here and 'Age of Extinction', especially here, being chaotic and dull in rhythm. Aside from them being so poorly edited that it was confusing making out what was going on and to the point it was seizure-inducing, they got increasingly repetitive and dull. So instead of feeling thrilled the only feeling I got was boredom, and that was true of a lot of the audience in the cinema.

None of the human characters are interesting, some are wasted and some are pointless (such as Izabella and Sqweeks). Others are annoying, of all the characters in the entire film faring worst in this regard is the complete failure of a comic relief character in Jimmy, annoyingly played by Jerrod Carmichael. Once again the script is very poor, which has the subtlety of a sledgehammer (even for a live-action 'Transformers' film where subtlety was never a strong suit and wasn't expected, but this was nauseating overkill too often) and is laden with tiresome clichés and cheap lowbrow humour that is on 'Age of Extinction' level and makes that of 'Revenge of the Fallen' comparatively tame.

'The Last Knight' is again overlong by an hour, with the basic story being very thin on the ground and both rushed and slow moving. To make up for this, or disguise it more like, a lot of subplots are added, far too many and many of them are unsatisfyingly resolved or explored or serve no point at all, all giving an over-stuffed feel. Hopkins aside, the acting for the human characters is really not good, with Mark Whalberg being wooden and unconvincing at being tough and Laura Haddock is completely out of her depth. The two generate zero chemistry throughout. Even John Tuturro, Stanley Tucci and Mitch Pileggi are lacklustre.

In conclusion, weak film and gives the sense that the 'Transformers' franchise has run its course. 3/10 Bethany Cox
61 out of 85 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Absolutely terrible but also fantastic.
sammas-nz30 October 2017
We've got to the point where no one expects anything good from any of these Transformer movies, and this one is no different. It has a confusing, pointless plot with heaps of holes, shocking acting, and unlikable characters.

However, I didn't watch this movie with the intention of being a critic; I watched this movie one afternoon when I felt like watching a crappy action movie with robots, explosions, and the occasional fart joke. And in that sense, the movie nails it. I had no idea what was going on the whole way through but I'd be damned if I didn't love every minute of it. Mark Wahlberg's acting is disappointingly terrible and that's awesome, and the editing is absolute chaos. It was perfect.
185 out of 285 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Definitely not the best Transformers, but still worthy if u enjoy good special effects
MichaelNontonMulu21 June 2017
Well as a sequel to Transformers movie, this one was having not so many Transformers. It had the same ingredients of the previous movies where a lead character would have a very important role to save the world and there would be support from the US armies/troops. This one was having a formula that was similar to the 3rd Transformers (Dark of The Moon) with some rather outrageous theory about the history, myth or legends.

The challenge of telling this kind of story was that it kind of makes the movie to be difficult to digest. It was not helping either when it was having too many side stories. This movie unfortunately was not able to compile the whole side stories (or even the main story) into a cohesive movie. It felt like so many parts being forced to be put into 1 movie. Sorry to say, this time I really could not enjoy the storyline, and it also had too many of unnecessary characters.

Perhaps if they just stick to fewer characters, the movie would be more enjoyable. My personal views, the children involved in the beginning were a distraction (including Izabella) and some of the Autobots & Decepticons minor roles were really not interesting. Even John Turturo's character of Seymour from all previous Transformers' movies felt forced to be included. The only worthy characters that I felt have significant importance were Edmund Burton and Viviane. The Autobots that were also worthwhile to see were Cogman, Hot Rod, Bumblebee and of course our real favorite, Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen).

Apart from the lousy story line and too many characters, the movie was certainly excellent in term of its special effects and its 3D effects. As I found out that 98% of the movie was shot in IMAX 3D camera, all those effects felt truly amazing. However, I got to say that the sound effects did not feel too spectacular. I am not sure if the cinema was only focusing on IMAX and hence it did not have the good sound system, but I was not really entertained with it. The movie did have some funny and interesting moments especially during the time when Edmund, Viviane, Cogman and Cade were in the same screen. But other than that, it did not have too much funny moments. My views is that the movie would definitely be trashed by critics though general audience would probably still be interested and attracted to see this in theaters.

So if you are a fan of Transformers movies and have been following the previous 4 movies, you would definitely still be entertained with this one, even though the Transformers were not as many as the earlier ones. My wife and I still believed that the original Transformers was still the best of all 5, and unfortunately this one fell into the least enjoyable of them all. I am actually not really fussy about storyline when I watched a full special effects action movie like this one as I would not expect it as Oscar worthy movie anyway, but if it was up to the point of making it less enjoyable, then it became a downside. However, if you are a hardcore fan who do not care about the story at all, and just want to see those cool special effects and the amazing Optimus Prime in action, then you should definitely see this one. Recommended to see this in IMAX 3D (but you must be prepared to be tired as it has a duration of 2.5 hours).

For my complete review, pls see michaelnontonmulu.blogspot.co.id
23 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Stop
andrewjoy-758787 March 2020
Boring pointless rubbish, just don't bother it's bad
30 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
It's the fifth film, you know what you're getting by now.
briangcb25 June 2017
I rarely write reviews, but I'm actually surprised about how harshly this is getting bashed. Well, I'm not *that* surprised. All the Transformer films get eviscerated by critics. So I don't put much stock in reviews. All I'll say is; it's more of the same. If you like the previous 4 films, you'll like this one. I enjoy them all for what they are; cheesy popcorn movies. I personally think this film improves on Age of Extinction. Both Mark Wahlberg and Laura Haddock's characters had equally important roles. Unlike the first three films where Sam was always "The Chosen One" and his girlfriend's job was to just run in slow motion yelling "SAAAAAM!". The main group of Decepticons were actually given personalities and unique identities. Though completely under- utilized. They make a big deal of giving them Suicide Squad-like introductions and their screen time amounts to maybe 45 seconds each. I was actually surprised how much screen time Anthony Hopkins had. I figured he'd slum it for two or three scenes, of exposition, grab his paycheck then disappear. But he's actually a prominent character and he seemed to have a lot of fun in the role.

I really don't have much else to say. As stated above, it's the fifth film, you've already made up your mind whether you want to see it or not. If the negative reviews have put you on the fence or dissuaded you, think about whether or not you enjoyed the last four films. If yes, then ignore the critics and enjoy yourself.
120 out of 227 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Quantity over quality
Darryl_Lazakar0124 June 2017
The Transformers franchise is one of the rare bad movie franchise that continues to entertain and made a lot of cash. They are a type of movie where you throw your brain out of the window, be entertained and have some fun. The trailer for the fifth Transformer movie did give us the impression that this movie might be good, but is it really what the trailer show us?

Well, I've got the answer: It's both a very entertaining movie and a huge mess. This movie, in a typical Michael Bay fashion, is a very entertaining ride from start to finish, which is also a poorly constructed pieces of awesomeness that the movie itself cannot show it's potential to be a good movie (despite being the one with the most potential to be a good movie!)

Pros: The story is the most creative and the most entertaining out of the five. Idk why but this is the most "fun" Transformer story so far.

Mark Wahlberg is fine. Not great, just fine. Stanley Tucci, although brief, brings a good performance as Merlin. Laura Haddock who plays Vivian the professor, and Isabella Moner as (the lazily named) Izabella, both being the latest to be "Michael Bay-fied" also gives a good performance, in particular Isabella Moner. Anthony Hopkins is way to good for this movie, and he's one of the bright spots in this movie.

For the action scenes... You don't need a review for this (because it's Michael friggin Bay.) The visuals are amazing as usual, although there's nothing new to be seen. The cinematography is just fine. The Third Act is a mind-blowing, over the top action that will (obviously) blew your mind. The small cameo by Nicola Peltz and Shia LaBeouf is also well executed.

The post end credits scene (yes, there is one) is well executed (I guess), and the fact that the long typical​ styled​ credits is replaced by appear/disappear credits (that it's only purpose is to match the end of the song to the end of the credits) is a nice touch as well.

Cons: Despite being the most "fun" Transformer story, it is also a mess. The story is so convoluted that it's very hard to follow. There's so many plot holes, I mean a lot of plot holes that makes the movie less exciting. The first and the second act was so rushed and it felt like a large portion of the story there was missing. I can bet that there's a large portion of deleted scenes removed from there.

Ken Nolan, despite I have high hopes for you for the screenplay, but you're not as good as the other Nolan. The screenplay is littered by very bad and cheesy one liners and despite trying to be funny, it just don't land. Not to mention some awful characterization: Isabella Moner's character is just someone in the wrong place and in the wrong time, she's just there. The inventor guy is so annoying. Josh Duhamel as Lennox from the first three movies is, I don't know, "useless". Like Isabella Moner's character, he's just there. John Tuturro's Seymour Simmons is for me can be removed from the movie and made this movie 5 minutes shorter.

Despite being the shortest of the entire franchise, it feels like the longest. Also in the credits I see around 6-7 editors for the movie, but the movie is poorly edited, a downgrade from the previous installment (what the hell are you doing editors?!). When introducing the Deceptions, they went for the "Suicide Squad" style introduction, which is very unnecessary. I hate the constant change of aspect ratio in standard theaters. Does it even necessary to "force you to watch in IMAX 3D to see more"?. Also, is it just me, or the editors were lazy enough so that when they introducing the locations, they use the exact same font and effect from a better Michael Bay film: "13 Hours: Secret Soldiers of Benghazi".

Overall this movie is both a entertaining, no brainier fun, but with over convoluted plot and bad editing, makes this movie not as entertaining as the previous installments. If you want some over the top, out of this world action scenes, go watch this movie and have some fun, otherwise don't watch this movie because it's definitely not for you. Just don't forget to bring some popcorns and drinks because it's going be a very long ride.

Final Score: 7/10 for action sequences, explosions and more explosions.

On a side note: Michael Bay, should you ever direct another Transformers movie, can you please prioritize story over visuals, cause I think that is the biggest flaw in every Transformer movie. Thank you.
16 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The movie isn't that bad,that these critics are claiming it to be . . . . . P.S:- Don't expect too much and you will be Entertained ...
lavish20126 June 2017
see, I'm not saying the movie is amazing but it isn't that bad either, i have seen far worst movies from big and reputed franchises. I know there are lot of potholes , underdeveloped characters ,a whole new concept out of nowhere( I liked the new concept) ....and all the other stuff critics are saying....

but on the bright side there is lot of transformer action and amazing CGI effects and a lot of other stuff too (I can't tell you the spoilers, you know). moreover you got to see prime vs bumblebee.... this is my personal opinion and i was entertained , hope you guys will understand that...
15 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A movie out of even common sense
omegafleons1229 September 2017
The movie is made by a teenage writer who cannot even write conversations natural, read part of DaVinci Code, part of Arthur, and watched a Star War movie. Putting everything together without logic, this is what the movie is. Oh, by the way, his knowledge about physics never go beyond what his parents told him in kindergarten.

There are more than enough critics on plot and poorly told stories; I'm not going to repeat. But I have to point one character: the Old Man. Who cares what his name is (I didn't get it AT ALL) I don't know what kind of personality Michael Bay want to create. What I saw was a rude, uneducated, changing man with a lot of money. It was so awkward while he dump the famous names into my ears and declared that all those people tried to keep that stupid secret. I don't know what he said "I can't go with you" because he eventually was there, and...just died there.

After 10 min, the only though I had was to see how bad the movie can be. YKW, it's just worse than I thought.
101 out of 168 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
So Much Fun
bertkyle30 June 2017
This movie is outstanding. You know how when you are a kid you and your brother throw over the toy bin and pull out dinosaurs, knights, tanks, submarines, Lamborghinis, Transformers, GI Joe, Voltron, some LEGO vehicles that can be disassembled and reassembled and a few Star Wars space ships? Maybe your sister wants to play so somehow a Barbie ends up in the mix. Then you have an absolutely epic battle with Knights fighting space ships and LEGOs transforming on the spot to whatever you want. Toys switch back and forth and fight for whoever is holding them. Complete insanity ensues. The story makes no sense because it can't but the battle is truly epic. Your brother grabs a chair and declares its his planet and throws it at your toys so you throw the couch at his. Finally your mom comes in and sends everyone outside, so you leave every toy out and all the furniture turned over to clean up later. Maybe your sister declares that Barbie just did something. That is this movie! It has absolutely everything and makes about as much sense as it can considering. This movie truly channeled second grade for me. I had so much fun and I cannot wait to go back! Definitely watch in 3D and try to watch in IMAX if it is available. Do not wait for it to come out on DVD.
164 out of 306 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Interesting Pacing...
MikeOzen26 July 2018
This has all the ingredients of a good film, but it's composition is certainly not as recognisable as most Sci-Fi Action films recently released.

The pacing is oddly fast with some intriguing storylines swiftly being washed to the side for more CGI spectacles.

One thing I will say in this film is that elements of the script are really very good. We enjoyed the 'butler' robot very much with his sarcastic remarks bringing humour to the film and tied nicely with his master's equally dry sense of humour.

I really wish I could rate it higher because we were left saying 'that wasn't bad' when the credits rolled but honestly I can barely remember the storyline it was shifting so rapidly.

Hopefully the next Transformers instalment will carry a little more weight in terms of storyline and pacing to support it's awesome CGI elements and give the film a better shape overall.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Don't waste your time
alppein1 August 2017
The worst piece of dirt this year so far. No logic, no plot, no story, but with Anthony Hopkins. Why did Anthony participated in this dirt ball mind crap, I don't know but it is not enough. This movie is empty, it is a 2 hours long advertisement of various car manufacturers and American military. Worst Transformers ever, please let this garbage just die and don't bother us with actors who just can not save this movie. It was just awful to watch, I couldn't believe the low quality dialogues and just the waste of money for junk CGI no one really cares about. But why did Mr. Hopkins lower himself to participate in this charade of a movie is beyond me.

WORST MOVIE 2017
234 out of 408 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
explosive muddle
SnoopyStyle4 July 2017
King Arthur's wizard Merlin allied with Transformers to bring a powerful staff. In the present, an international force has been formed to battle the Transformers. In a devastated Chicago, Izabella and her fellow street kids work to save the newly arriving Transformers. They are joined by Bumblebee and Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg) who has been hiding his Transformers in his junk yard. Meanwhile, Optimus Prime finds the Transformer homeworld Cybertron in ruins. Quintessa rules Cybertron and takes control of Optimus Prime on the way to Earth to retrieve her staff. Yeager and his group is recruited by Sir Edmund Burton (Anthony Hopkins) who reveals the secret history of the Transformers and that professor Viviane Wembly is a descendant of Merlin.

So... that happened. It is everything Michael Bay. It has plenty of explosions, slow-motion action, hot babe, and big CGI set pieces. I'm willing to live with all that. It could be mind-numbing popcorn fun. There's nothing wrong with that. There is simply too much with the plot for this type of movie. Then there is the overall Michael Bay directions. His noisy muddled messy style is getting annoying. The historical Transformers leave me scratching my head. It is chaos in action and in story execution.
24 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
This should receive higher rating
sonny_623721 June 2017
I am of the opinion that, Transformers 2, 3 and 4 were unwatchable. I liked the first one a lot, and I like this new one a lot too. And the CGI is far more superior than previous Transformers movies. I like the story, and not as many subplots as previous ones. This one is focused. And the humor is better, it is not as forced and I was surprised by a few unexpected jokes and I was actually laughing. But there are still some classic cheesy Michael Bay, over the top humor. I didn't laugh with previous Transformers but I did laugh a lot with this one. I can actually tell you what this movie is about, but I can't tell you, nor do I remember anything had to do with plot from the previous 3 installments. I don't know what the critics are talking about that this movie is messy, it is NOT messy at all. It is a very, very Transformers movie, how it should be.
17 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Knights of Transformers
Prismark1015 September 2017
The fifth Transformers movies has four writers, including Oscar winning hack Akiva Goldsman and has six people who edited it and it is still a bloated mess.

The film starts off in legendary Arthurian times as twelve Transformers hidden on Earth give drunk Merlin an alien staff, they combine into a dragon to help King Arthur beat the Saxons. Merlin is later warned that an evil entity will come for the staff.

In present day Earth, Transformers are declared outlaws by all governments of the world and a special unit is created kill them but still more alien robots arrive.

Somewhere along the line Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg) comes in possession of an ancient Transformers talisman and then bought over to the UK by Sir Edmund Burton (Anthony Hopkins) where he is introduced to an Oxford professor, Viviane Wembly the last living descendant of Merlin. She must find and use Merlin's staff to prevent the planet being destroyed by Cybertron.

The film has state of the art special effects and it has plenty of Michael Bay's trademarked directorial flourishes. It is also overlong, stupidly plotted and incoherent.
19 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Honestly not that bad, fun lazy afternoon movie
thejasvi2 July 2018
I'm not a huge transformers fan, but I don't dislike the series either, they have there moments, and the first was a genuinely fun comedy more than anything. I did however give up on the series midway during Age of Extinction, there was a point where it felt like everyone except for the brilliant technicians just gave up. It just became really silly. Cut to today where I wanted to turn my brain off and watch something pretty to look at, and having seemingly run out of films to see, and noticing a 4K version of the film was available on demand, and decided to just see what happened.

Maybe because I had such low expectations, but I went away satisfied. The film started real lazy, you could almost sense Michael Bay sleeping in his director's chair, as the rest of the team just took care of things. It did get better about a good half hour in though. My biggest complaint is scenes don't transition well, and the constantly changing aspect ratio, I get why Nolan does it, but I have never liked it, in fact I hate it. The reasoning is so that the viewer gets the full resolution, nothing is compromised, but to me so much is compromised, it is jarring and just reminds you that you are watching something technical and man made, rather than allowing the viewer to truly escape. Nolan's films dont' have the brisk editing pace of Bay's films however, so it's not as jarring, and usually the ratio will change for a whole scene, rather than keep cutting back and forth, but in Transformers, it feels like 5 different formats are used within one quick scene or montage, it's really too much. I'd much rather have just seen the film on TV, where they would have been one consistent ratio and sacrifice the picture quality.

Besides this, the film was fun, Laura Haddock had a good rapport with Wahlberg, helping the 2nd half of the film keep some momentum. And it's the 2nd half I personally enjoyed the most, the story kicks in, and it's just fun, big and loud, and not overly silly or ridiculous. I was able to throw myself in for the ride and not be taken out by some idiotic dialogue or over the top illogical action scene. I was able to be a 10 year old kid again and just have fun. It's not a 1/10 film, it's not even a 3/10. It's just a solid film, I was most surprised with how big budget it was considering it's the 5th in the series, but it's turned a good profit worldwide, becuase it knows it's audience. They want to have some laughs, and see robots explode the crap out of stuff.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Absolute Mess!
philcorerules11 March 2018
The writing, editing and direction were amateurish at best. This movie is downright terrible. Period. DO NOT WASTE THE TWO AND A HALF HOURS!
72 out of 120 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Pardon The Interruption: A Bayhem Apologysts
octagonproplex24 June 2017
Look, let's all agree from the outset that Transformers -- as a concept -- is absolutely asinine. It's a race of advanced alien super machines disturbingly taking on traits of human behavior and cultural affectation whilst mostly rolling around in the guise of various performance vehicles fawned over by philistines. There's no rationale where this isn't a mind-numbing conceit born from a toy line aimed at the aggressive fantasy synapses of immature brains. And that's a perfect sandbox for Michael Bay to build his arena and wallow with gluttonous abandon.

So now that that's established, let me declare the main thesis point for advocacy here: He's a genius! That's right -- Michael Bay is a genius!

Because Bay is one of the few commonly known filmmakers in the zeitgeist, certain glib hipster constituencies lazily feign credibility in cinematic knowledge by dropping his name in loathing as a pathetic synonym shortcut for superiority though snark. In deed, any faint praise toward Bay is often immediately shot down with hyperbolic aghast and equated to justifying Hitler by his work as a painter, or musing on the songwriting merit of Charles Manson. Now I won't dispute that Bay has an inclination for silly sophomoric humor and vapid glamorization of excess. Nor will I gloss over his propensity to indulge in stereotypes and cliché. One may not be simpatico to his fetishizations, but it's sort of pointless to criticize the very essence of the art form, especially when it's done with such gusto. At lest Bay seems to have a knowing wryness that can take a joke at expense of his brash reputation. As an artist working in the medium of moving visuals, Michael Bay is nothing short of brilliant. If he plays to the lowest common denominator, that denominator in nonetheless true to a passionate perspective set by him. These raucous boyhood reveries aren't just mercenary exploits, but expressions of what Bay truly loves and wants to revisit. Intimately personal to a singular psyche, these are massive experimental art films that happen to align with commerce as their principled dogma. If nothing else, being cognizant that what you're getting is being given with a verisimilitude that absolutely attends to the authentic aura of its own axiom, ought to eek some appreciation -- however begrudging. Just because Bay makes movies with the sensibilities of a thirteen-year-old boy, doesn't mean he ought to be demonized as though guilty of atrocities.

It's fairly true that Bay's spectacular extravaganzas cater to simpletons, but the dense amount of information breathlessly presented through pure cinematic terms within them is anything but simple. The fact that most of the breakneck exposition being blasted at an audience actually sticks, is proof that Bay is profoundly competent beyond eye-popping exhilarations. It should be noted that before his feature debut with "Bad Boys", Michael Bay was already one of the most sought after and acclaimed commercial directors of all time, having amassed an astounding amount of advertising awards for his ability to pack viscerally entertaining stories into thirty-second to a minute-and-a-half short form films.

Unlike the majority of filmmakers credited on complicated productions of vast proportion, Bay (quite uniquely) doesn't shirk responsibilities off to 2nd-Unit crews and department heads to autonomously realize aspects or sequences, but rather personally micromanages all divisions to his specified fruition. With a wicked efficiency in speed and breadth, Bay generals hugely intricate on- set sequences involving simultaneous camera setups of stunning aesthetic composition involving impressive precision in kinetics, frame- rates, lighting, lens augmentations, stunt work and practical effects rigging -- with actors performing in frame – and orchestrates all this "Bayhem" safely. Then without missing a beat carries that energy over to lording over every minute aspect of post-production; from the incredibly layered complexities of editing, effects, sound design, music, and even marketing. Bay is no gun-for-hire hack, he is a specific visionary of immense skill set. Although some may be bewildered by the styled nature of its non-stop sensory bombardment -- and regardless as to its vulgar pronouncement, no one can claim it's not often astonishingly beautiful and does somehow express a cohesive whole. That's an extraordinary exhaustive task that only a handful of the most adept and composed directors in the world could even dare attempt, which Bay confidently mounts on a frequent basis, to a degree perhaps unequaled.

There is a reason why the often emulated, never replication, bigger than life spectacle that Bay routinely accomplishes has garnered proper recognition, accolade, and defense over the years from peers such as Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Ridley Scott, Oliver Stone, Edgar Wright, Paul Thomas Anderson, and Quentin Tarantino; Because they know that action and montage is the purest form of cinema and Michael Bay is a master of that discipline -- and the fact that it seems so undisciplined is maybe even a testament too. Also they understand the overwhelming workload required to definitively command such gargantuan ventures, and the fact that Bay does it time and again with virtuoso vision of auteur aesthetic is a totally impressive feat -- even if you don't care for it.

Opposing the consensus dismissal that Bay is an unsophisticated abomination that merely makes incoherent populace bombasts that lack any semblance of subtly or nuance in pensive development -- I would counter that perhaps the purveyors of that notion simply lack capacity in comprehending communication through super sophisticated rapid sensorial stimulation. Bay may be stuck in arrested development in his childish proclivities, but that child is nonetheless a supreme savant in cinematic verse.

As for "Transformers: The Last Knight", it has the same expected virtues I've detailed as well as those defects of being excessively loud and shallow. Sure, I'd prefer Bay tone down the bro banter, silly stoicism, and frenetic editing – but such criticisms can only go so deep when what is presented is so staggeringly authentic to its aspiration. Anyway, Anthony Hopkins seems to be having a helluva time!
11 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Done
daddyxj-112 August 2017
OK, that did it, I'm Done with watching Transformers movies at the theater. I will just wait until the next movies are on video or ready to stream. I am a huge Transformers fan and I know the mythology well but this movie takes the mythology and flips it upside down and backward. As a movie on its own, it is a hot mess of bad writing, editing, and pacing. BUT Michael does know how to shoot a "scene" but they are strung together incoherently.

So What I Liked were the music and the effects. That's pretty much it. Steve Jablonsky's score was over 100 times better than this movie deserves. I really like how he brought back some of the original themes but made them the sound of desperation. The confusing climax had this mellow desperate theme (you hear in the trailer) that in a better movie would have worked very well but it does nothing for you because whats on screen is in the way. The two tracks that are worth noting are "Sacrifice" and "We Have To Go". Just listen to those tracks and if you have a filmmaking state of mind you can imagine a better movie with those tones. Also, the special effects were well done compared to AGE OF EXTINCTION's hammy job. I know it's all CGI that we have seen before but the imagery that was composed is awesome to look at especially the climax with the parts of the planet hanging down and "scraping" earth.

Now What I Didn't Like (Got Time? then read on) #1 the editing. This is by far, to me, the worst edited movie in history. Like I said Michael Bay films the scenes very well (like the opening battle) but when they are put together you have no idea what the hell is going on. And then the noticeable aspect ratio. So nobody in the editing room noticed that different shots had black bars at the top and bottom disappearing then reappearing. This happens because some shots were shot in IMAX. I do defend Michael Bay because I do think he is a better director than this (The Rock, Bad Boys, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor) but he really dropped the ball on this film. He knows how to shoot a sequence but that's all it has going for it. If you watch a couple of shots on YouTube before seeing the movie you would be like "wow that looks like a good movie" NO it's just a good shot and sequence. And supposedly they had a writers room come up with a plot by using Transformers mythos, HUH? Well, a lot of things irked me. Without giving away any spoilers I'm gonna name the mythos they got wrong (if you are a Transformers fan then you'll know what Im talking about)...Nemesis Prime, Bumblebee's Abilities, Hot Rod, Megatron/Galvatron, The Quintassons, Cybertron, Barricade???,The Ark, and a very important evil transformer that I will not give away the name because it is a spoiler but once you find out what his alternate mode is your gonna flip and wanna walk out of the theater.

I am so glad that Michael Bay is going to step down as director of this series because obviously, he does not care about the problems these films have. I say hire an up a coming director who gives a damn about making a good movie and not in it for the cash grab. But as for now, I am done spending my money in hopes of a great movie experience. Want to see a good Transformers movie, then go see the animated "The Transformers- The Movie"
117 out of 208 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed