Author Topic: Transformers 2. (Read 4470 times)

Luke · « **on:** June 28, 2009, 09:01:28 PM »

Anyone else seen it?
it is amazing, Megan Fox is so hot

.

kewlhotrod · « **Reply #1 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:03:13 PM »

Naw, I want to.

And yeah, Megan Fox is hot as hell.

I saw a preview of the movie on G4TV, and the part where Megan Fox was on the motorbike played like 50 times. xD

aquatsr · « **Reply #2 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:13:02 PM »

yeah MF is hot but Transformers 2 was shyte compared to the first one.

budgray19 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:34:37 PM »

it was awesome

EliteGamer83 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:50:32 PM »

Almost a little better then the first one imo.

One of the greatest movie's I've seen in ALONG time.

Anyone else used to watch the cartoon series?

kewlhotrod · « **Reply #5 on:** June 28, 2009, 10:13:10 PM »

Yeah, watched the cartoons all the time. xD

MARIOPARTY53 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 28, 2009, 10:47:52 PM »

the ending for the second was better then the first movie ending, but the first movie was overall better

AND HELL YEAH MEGAN IS HOT!!!

aquatsr · « **Reply #7 on:** June 29, 2009, 10:06:55 AM »

Quote from: MARIOPARTY53 on June 28, 2009, 10:47:52 PM

the ending for the second was better then the first movie ending, but the first movie was overall better

AND HELL YEAH MEGAN IS HOT!!!

What are you talking about? At the risk of spoiling the ending, it was only 2 minutes long at most (the final battle). I'll admit some of the battles during the movie were cool but the actual transformers battle, the "how everything is resolved" was a crap-twist ending. I spent 40 minutes wondering how they were going to end it and they did it in such little time.

I was disgusted.

robin1989 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 29, 2009, 02:00:50 PM »

i thought it was ace i found it very funny and an overall good movie

Modded Matt · « **Reply #9 on:** June 29, 2009, 02:13:09 PM »

it was a great movie. I saw it sat in IMAX.. it was great. better than the first one. there was far more action and the effects were as good if not better.

EliteGamer83 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 29, 2009, 03:18:06 PM »

I wanna see it in Blu-Ray that will be so sick...

Too bad I lack a HDTV and Blu-Ray Player/PS3.

*cry's*

robin1989 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 29, 2009, 03:31:38 PM »

yeh same here matt i always try to see films on the imax if there is an option and i go for a lunchtime midweek showing as i then have like the entire imax screen to my self so i lift all the arm rests and lie down to watch it - its amazing

imax i think is higher res than blueray

PsychoticWolf · « **Reply #12 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:10:48 PM »

Sorry to Kill your Hots for Megan Fox, but shes Not real She is Pure CG, Something That hot does not exist.

kewlhotrod · « **Reply #13 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:27:31 PM »

Lol... She's only partially CG, bro.

Megan Fox is real, and sexy without the additions.

EliteGamer83 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:40:29 PM »

Quote from: Mactastic Mendez on June 29, 2009, 03:31:38 PM

yeh same here matt i always try to see films on the imax if there is an option and i go for a lunchtime midweek showing as i then have like the entire imax screen to my self so i lift all the arm rests and lie down to watch it - its amazing

imax i think is higher res than blueray

May be but since it's so large it seems much loer quality then if you were watching it on a 70" HD 1080p LCD.

I forget is IMAX projection?

Oh I saw it on Sunday in my local movie theater and I am going to see it again in IMAX this Thursday

yeah Megan fox = CG, filters, motion track "enchantment" lol.

robin1989 · « **Reply #15 on:** June 30, 2009, 08:15:50 AM »

yes imax uses film projection so you cant really talk about resolutions when it comes to film based projection. imax does use a vastly larger print for the projection http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMAX it uses 70mm film instead of the standard 35mm film which adds up to much higher clarity and quality. plus you cant beat a 72ft high and 53ft wide screen

aquatsr · « **Reply #16 on:** June 30, 2009, 10:49:44 AM »

I see I'm outnumbered here lol. I liked the first one better because the storyline was more coherent than the second one, and the action wasn't just there for the sake of being... actiony.

EliteGamer83 · « **Reply #17 on:** June 30, 2009, 11:09:02 AM »

Yeah ot's bigger and high res sure. But like I said it would SEEM like higher quality if it was on a 70" 1080p cause you can take in the whole picture, also it is an actual screen, not projection. So you loose some of the quality through the projector.

ProperBritish · « **Reply #18 on:** June 30, 2009, 01:41:17 PM »

saw it on the 17th. man that was epic

Ben. · « **Reply #19 on:** June 30, 2009, 03:10:01 PM »

Going to watch it tomorrow.. Woooooooo

Modded Matt · « **Reply #20 on:** June 30, 2009, 04:55:27 PM »

Elete, I see what you are saying, I love the brightness of my hdtv, the IMAX here stated at the begining DPL projection technology. but the best thing about I max other than the quality is the 8 story screen!!!

for the record megan fox is hot cg or not.

jacobia jacob · « **Reply #21 on:** June 30, 2009, 05:03:51 PM »

mother of gawd... i didn't even know it was out yet!!!!

Luke · « **Reply #22 on:** July 01, 2009, 06:14:04 AM »

IMAX Fails.. Leaves everyone with a big headache for looking at there huge screen for too long.

VoX · « **Reply #23 on:** July 01, 2009, 06:30:56 AM »

Am I the only one that thought this movie was complete crap? The plot was about as thick as Megan Fox's tops and the themes of the movie were just pathetic, the "love" thing....come on.The CG was nothing short of amazing but that doesn't make it a good movie and neither does a "sexy" actress. I only saw the movie because my friend had been bugging me for a week, I walked in there with pretty low expectations and I was still let down. Normally, I wouldn't mind much because its an action film but after The Dark Knight I knew that action could be something deeper, that of which the best films of all time have. Directors, producers and screenplay writers should take some time more to come up with good quality movies rather than these CG feasts

jacobia jacob · « **Reply #24 on:** July 01, 2009, 06:34:57 AM »

i've seen thicker tops

VoX · « **Reply #25 on:** July 01, 2009, 06:42:31 AM »

Quote from: jacobia jacob on July 01, 2009, 06:34:57 AM

i've seen thicker tops

mm? That comment was sarcasm. Her tops were thin like the plot.

jacobia jacob · « **Reply #26 on:** July 01, 2009, 06:54:33 AM »

ya lost me...

aquatsr · « **Reply #27 on:** July 01, 2009, 11:16:48 AM »

Quote from: VoX on July 01, 2009, 06:30:56 AM

Am I the only one that thought this movie was complete crap? The plot was about as thick as Megan Fox's tops and the themes of the movie were just pathetic, the "love" thing....come on.The CG was nothing short of amazing but that doesn't make it a good movie and neither does a "sexy" actress. I only saw the movie because my friend had been bugging me for a weeks, I walked in there with pretty low expectations and I was still let down. Normally, I wouldn't mind much because its an action film but after The Dark Knight I knew that action could be something deeper, that of which the best films of all time have. Directors, producers and screenplay writers should take some time more to come up with good quality movies rather than these CG feasts

Yay, I'm not the only one!

News:

Author Topic: Transformers 2. (Read 4470 times)