only good thing in transformers was the rocketjump in the 1st movie.

logged in to plus you

Megan Fox

"take this my love"

She's got two big talents!

http://www.galleries.com/minerals/elements/silicon/silicon.jpg

Sexy.

I wasn't talking about her lips!

I'd hit it.

was she born in sillicon valley?

Silicon peaks.

wow she is disgustingly skinny

yeah she could eat a few burgers. i'd invite her over to wendy's.

erok has a fatty fetish. :x

haha maybe! i just don't like being able to play the xylophone on a girls body...

Dude you'd totally wreck that, admit it! :P

hahah of course i would its fucking megan fox...just saying i prefer a little meat on my girls, i don't like seeing all ribs

Same. I'd prefer Monica Bellucci or Salma Hayek myself, but Megan Fox seems like she'd be kinkier. lol

you fat fucking fucks.
That girl there, megan, that's as big as they get here in sweden. ;(

sucks for you, thicker girls fuck way better than skinny bitches...And I don't mean fat cause fat girls are nasty, just thick enough where their thighs aren't stringbeans and their ribs don't poke through their shirts

Fat girls fuck better because they fuck as if it were the last time.

[img1]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y189/Lantichristo/4ldk40y.jpg[/img1] Not only does she have a big arse she also ginger

how the fuck do u post images on this shit site again :x

Check the FAQ !

I've read that faq ten thousand times, I still have no idea.

lol, oh this is the one with the 'fat' kid.

fat kid in shorts and pink tshirt holding a rose.

That rose never stood a chance of fulfilling its destiny.

First and last time I plus you :)

Promises, promises...

lmao

hahahahhaahahha :D

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1710625#pid1710625

Vedic totally ruined this for me. Actually i prefer milfs with a bit of meat so its all good.

Not like you get anything else in the UK

lmao

Saw it in the cinema day before yesterday, never saw the first one.

Special effects are jaw dropping and only really went to see it for this. Seriously, the work gone into the robots and morphing and all sync'd with the video footage is the best I have seen.

If you just want to relax for 2.5hrs and enjoy some amazing eye candy its worth a watch. Definitely an eye opener for how games will look in about 12-15 years.

I still say it could have been quite a lot better as a film with some changes in story and actors, but its one of those films where the special effects will carry it and you end up caring more about the cgi robot battles than anything else.

Very predictable at times, but this is a film about robots, so I'm not going to treat it too harshly. It is what it is.

83% IMO and worth a watch on the big screen.

in the first one, everytime a robot would transform, the camera would zoom in real close and start shaking and then zoom out again when the robot was done.

the same happenend in alot of the action sequences (zooming, camera shaking).

did they stop doing that in the second movie?

i read somewhere that it was done because the amount of cgi in the first one was too much for the limited computing power they had back then (a year ago i guess).

i also read that it wouldnt be like this in the second movie.

can you confirm this? i don't want to come out of the cinema all dizzy.

ps: camera shaking in star trek is way annoying to!

I have not seen the first one so I don't know, but I did not witness anything annoying about the special effects. I'm sure the company had no budget restrictions this time around, given this is probably the biggest film of the year.

I think it would take a certain type of person to whine about the special effects on Transformers 2.

The only thing I would critic is the robots are so complex, a lot of the detail seems to be lost, I think had they gone with a more polygonal look or put in some slow motion sequences you could have absorbed the brilliance of the work a lot more.

As it stands, it all moves along so quickly and fluidly that you can't absorb it quick enough so you feel like you want to rewind the certain scenes, but obviously you can't

This is a film that deserves to be seen frame by frame in many places. Its gonna be huge on Blu Ray.

there were like 3 slow motion sequences in the first one to, but the rest was just really hectic.

83% lol you...

I thought the same, definitely only worth 81.4%

well the star system is some what flawed in the sense that they typically rate in lumps of 20% (20% per star)

That means there is an awful lot of rounding up going.
Even when they use half stars, its still problematic around the 50-70% range.

Its like math for niggaz'.

That's because you don't understand the star system.

Percentile rating systems are retarded (And decimal systems, including half star systems are just percentile systems in disguise). Not only can nobody define the difference between a 7 and an 8 or a 72 and a 73 but it introduces the idea that the review is judging against perfection.

The star system is a simple way for the reviewer to sum up the general opinion of his review while allowing the public to make quick decisions without having to read every review ever (Or going in blind). It's not trying to judge how close to perfection a film is since that is a futile endeavor.

5 = Highly Favourable
4 = Favourable
3 = Ambivalent
2 = Unfavourable
1 = Highly Unfavourable

nah fuck that, yes the quality of art is purely subjective but its more fun and more interesting to pick out the truly great stuff from the just very good

personally i hate how mediocre stuff gets rated by so many brainless twats 5/5 or 10/10, it makes Internet reviews pointless

for example the imdb ratings as bad as they are, would be far worse if it was a 5 star system,all kinds of mediocre new movies would get 5/5 and you wouldn't be able to differentiate them from the truly great films of all time

That's what you get when you let people who aren't experts rate and review things.

Reviews and ratings should be left explicity to experts, people who are in a position to have a valuable opinion on the subject matter because they've seen/heard/played/read everything that's worth having seen/heard/played/read.

Anybody who uses mass rating sites such as imdb and metacritic to make decisions or form opinions is a complete retard.

I disagree.

Critics and experts often more insight into movies and such, that is true. But sometimes their opinions are just way off.

I mean one of my favorite movies is "Super Troopers". I know it doesn't have any depth or real cultural worth, and the plot can be told in two sentences. But I always enjoy watching it any many of my friends do, too.
However, some "experts" prevented it from even being shown at German cinemas.
And I'm sure it would also be butchered by most of the critics.

So, according to you, I should make my decisions based on what those experts say?
Which mean I would not have seen that movie.

On the other hand, my impression of a movie and the rating at imdb correlate at least to some degree. For example I haven't ever liked a movie that was rated below 4. And I enjoyed almost all of those that were rated 7,5+.

Of course, those rating aren't nowhere near perfect, but they give a good tendency. Just the same as reviews from critics. But nothing more.

So, in the end I base my decision on four things, my gut feeling, critical reviews, imdb rating and actors involved.

Liking and enjoying something does not make it good or mean that the experts were wrong. The experts have seen more films and thus their opinion is more valueable than ours.

The majority of people are stupid and have bad taste which makes the opinion of the masses worthless.

Any ratings system involving the public that uses a decimal system will see the majority of ratings being given in the 6 - 10 range (Check out the frag movie ratings here).

Reviews and ratings are primarily for those who have already experienced the product and secondly to provide guidance to people who are unsure which product would suit them best.

How did these experts manage to prevent Super Trooper being shown in German cinemas?

well, the people who work with film distributors managed to prevent it from being seen. And they happen to match your criteria of an expert: They've seen more movies than us. (And I really don't think many "real" critic would say it's a good movie!)

About the 6 - 10 ratings. I think for imdb specifically, that is true when the people get home from the cinema after just having seen it. Then later the rating usually drops. And there are lots of movies who aren't that bad who have a 5, something rating. Again, not saying it's perfect, but it matches my personal opinion more often than not.

Anyway, in the end I guess our discussion boils down to one question: What makes a good movie?

Is it, when it fullfills predetermined standards (technically and artistically), or is when many people feel adressed by it and enjoy watching it.

And from what I can take from your comment, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one ;)

Not predetermined standards :)

yes predetermined standards.

I understand perfectly.

And those titles you used are far from universal and vary from magazine to magazine. Many mags do not print the titles, so you're just looking at stars.

Whichever way you look at it, 5 stars means the a film is judged in blocks of 20%.

While that might work for very bad or very good films, there is a ton of room for error around the most scores of around 70 - 90%.
Given anything over 80% would get 5 stars, so what if one film was around 82 and another was 98?

How would define it with your crappy system?
You would not, its that simple.

A percentage system is far more accurate, your system, at best is vague and could potnetially be over generous, or under generous with a film.

It's not judged in blocks of 20%, as there is no 100% because the system is rating against perfection.

When someone asks if you like a film, no one replies "Hmm, 73 out of 100", you simply say whether you thought it was good or bad and add emphasis if required. If more detail is required, you give it a review.

The difference between a film rated as 82 and 98 is mostly arbitrary since the numbers were picked simply to indicate that there was a preferrence for a film over another film.

It also creates a situation where genuinely fantastic, innovative games with slight flaws are rated as worse than highly polished but ultimately generic titles. The systems also end up with most products receiving a rating in the 6-10 range.

But your vote of "83%" is 4/5 with 3 extra percent. Is the 3 percent that important? What was it about the movie that won that extra 3 percent?

you saw it? premiere 24 day wtf? :D ps. in lithuania its written "1st in world premiere 23 day 00.00" :D

ye, went to cinema randomly yesterday, and it was on... hadnt planned to see it or anything, was a bit of luck....

Megan Fox

Megan Fojji Fox

america! FUCK YEAH!
Megan's tits! TWICE FUCK YEAH!

dont care about this kids movie

but a Megan Fox highlights clip from the movie would be nice

how about this? http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/megan-fox-video - i agree as well, special effects never get me.. it can never be better than a great narrative to a great plot or a well stylised and original cinematography. just another typical blockbuster and as you say, only thing worth seeing is megan fox.

not bad :)

Indeed, all the goods of transformers compiled in one minute.

she looks bored, i thinks she needs my "company"! Megan if you read this, call me!

five dolla?

$4,50, recession got to me :/

awesome

Made mistake by watching 1st part in cinema.

NEVAR AGAIN.

i loved the first one

the sound for the transformers was awesome.

But the garden scene sucked

But then again i aint 12 anymore :)

megan foxes tattoo is fucking stupid imo

Watch Drag me to Hell instead and support good classic horror !!
Just watched it and it was great fun :>

Anyways, dont care about Transformers, but Megan Fox is indeed hot -> Corset Pics!

it was alright.

Chevrolet Camaro

lol at anyone watching a movie cuz of a chick in 2009

haha true, this ain't fuckin 1980

it's called porn.

Or are you trying to say you watch it because of the guy?

I think I'll watch it for the electric devices.

ok O.O

I watch it for the humiliation.

(Oh I can't really say that seriously, joking!)

get a vibrator

hmmm

megan fox is very pretty and has very sexy hair and all, but imo, shes a bit lacking in the most important part -> shes got a skinny figure.

the highlight of the movie for me were the sound effects tbh. i just loved them

Why is everyone so obsessed with some greedy bitch?

who cares about personality?

I hope they make one in the mood of T2.

forest fight = pure epic

That was probably the best looking scene by far.

Terrible movie, just a special effects wank fest, none of it made much sense really and was just an excuse for explosions and fighting (Which was pretty boring).

Everything about Megan Fox just looks weird, wrong or fake. She looks like a CGI woman that's based off of Angelina Jolie but super skinny.

haven't seen it so far, but i agree on Megan Fox.

"Terrible movie, just a special effects wank fest"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyx2dHAguuU

So the nigger likes Roflcopters and sunset's. Nobody is perfect.

i agree with you for once..

That's nice, does it disturb you or something?

no, just surprised

first one was awesome
second one - even more awesome ... for about 2 hours
then it was like - let's get this shit over with and nuke the montherfuckers, seriously.
I mean, not everyone can sit through 2:40 of constant explosions and Shia running around being cool.

Also, I felt a lot of dynamics and shots were borrowed from the first movie, or just very similar

"Shia running around being cool. "

You must have seen a different cut.

probably irony, i've only seen the first movie, but even in that one, shia's character was obviously a douchebag and an idiot;
doing stupid stuff in his school project and behaving like a total... well, just stupid kid almost throughout the whole first half of the movie, and suddenly being exorbitantly reponsible ...

i wonder if would've found the character likeable, if i were like 12 or 15... i certainly don't like him now..

shia is a goddamn douche.

Just saw it. The story is painfully "THERE HAS TO BE SOME SMALL PLOT HOLE WE CAN PULL A SEQUEL OUT OF", the jokes were mildly amusing, and the action was alright. Didn't care for it much, but it could have been worse. 7/10

i lol'd at the first one
and i won't bother watching this

same with games: gfx doesn't cut it when everything else is plain bullshit

Opposed to such games I'd say movies like that fall in the

"Watch when hung over" and possibly the "Watch with mates and beer in the early evening" category.#


Just don't do it sober ;)

Pure Gold

nice costumes

I kind of felt bored when I saw this movie, its just too much going on the screen that I have no interest in paying attention to, kinda like watching an world of warcraft match...lots of blinky things but i have no interest to know the meaning or the end.

Shit sucked. Even for £2.70 I feel ripped off.

If you have seen the movie or do not care about spoilers:

http://www.toplessrobot.com/2009/06/bonus_rob...2_faqs.php

Hits the nail on the head.

hahaha, this is awesome.

Seems like Michael Bay is worse than Uwe Boll.

Why would a robot need to fart, pee, or vomit? And why would it need testicles?
Michael Bay does not understand what a robot is.

also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fLSSLwx1G8

I am already incredibly sick of this movie, and I'm just typing questions about it. Sam resurrects Optimus, Optimus kills the Fallen, end of story, right?
Pretty close. Sam dies, though.

Really?
Yeah, for a little while. But then the Transformers in heaven send him back because he still has work to do.

Fuck you.
I'm serious.

bahahaha

I hate this movie omgs#$#:# mainstream sucks!

soz..couldnt help it :(

Nice but what's up with her nipples ?
Photoblurred out ?

i think it's some patch thingie to cover them.

Yeah, which is a tad silly really as if you the nipple is that important when the whole breast is showing anyway.

they might be there so her nipples dont get hard and hurt, some girls have very sensitive nipples and cold water can fuck em right up.

Fucking pussies.

how do you know that?

My girllfriend has told me, not to mention several of my chick friends. You also see professional footballers wear them. Footballers usually wear them so their nipples dont get friction burn from their shirts.

It sounds bizarre but its quite common (friction burn that is) I get it when I have extended gym sessions, especially when my shirt is rubbing against my chest during cardio.

BAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

fyi she's shooting a scene in that pic

So does she have a grocery list tattooed on her side? It always sucks when you forget what you had to buy in the store :/

Is this from some movie?

i'm a big transformers fan but this movie was a load of bullshit. the -only- thing that was alright was the fighting scenes, but they were ruined by the american troops who were so gay i was almost facepalmed inside the cinema. the scripts had so many faulty parts it not even funny, one being that sub marine officers cant count how many robots go up or down in the water. 5 + 1 - 1 = 5, right? according to this movie its 6. morons...

Is it just me or is anyone else having problems envisioning manly Swedish troops?

without getting a boner, yes.

you might not understand this since you're german and all but peace is the way of love.

bullshit! True love is all about domination

... and scat.

there you go

nice white power flag combined with discussion about domination. CONSIDER YOURSELF REPORTED.

THEY WILL NEVER FIND ME