Director Michael Bay's final time (or so he says) at the helm of the franchise is filled with a lot of fun and weird moments to counter the serious tone of the story, which includes Optimus Prime turning evil and the possibility that the world will come to an end. In TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT, the good robot/car Transformers called the Autobots are at war with both humans and their perpetual enemies, the bad car/robots the Decepticons - again. Merlin, it turns out, owed his "magic" to a relationship with an early Autobot visitor, sowing the seeds for a world-imperiling threat that will arise 1,600 years later.
He later learns that a Cybertronian talisman he found that is the key to finding Merlin's staff, and is whisked away to Britain where he meets Sir Edmund Burton (Anthony Hopkins, who at least looks like he's having fun).
Last summer saw installments of both the "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" and "Star Trek" franchises disappoint, and it now looks as though Paramount has put both properties on the back burner. This latest film - which is number five in the franchise - proves that the Transformers universe is still alive and well, and is showing no signs of slowing down. Then at 8PM, the Mark Wahlberg film moved up to 3,000 sites.
X-23Rey Izabella (Isabela Moner, yup, they couldn't even come up with a name for her, so they just changed a letter).
To save the world, he needs the help of Yeager and Oxford University history boffin Vivian Wembley (Laura Haddock).
However, if you have seen Transformers: The Last Knight you know there may be another sequel coming - whether it's directed by Michael Bay or not.
One of the best characters this time around is Downton Abby's Jim Carter as a steampunk-esque version of C-3PO named Cogman. There is, and it comes pretty quickly after the Transformers: The Last Knight ending. "It's just the fatherly thing in me, you know?" The film got average two stars.
TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT, from Paramount Pictures. Today, with the aforementioned blockbusters and more to come in even less than one year, that is no longer a valid excuse. The objective of that movie is to develop more time with less robots in a way, and to go back to 1985 and go back to sort of the original heritage if you would of the Transformers.
"After "Pain and Gain" I was like, 'Whatever you want to do". The question "Why?" emerges as to what objective a Transformers movie serves in a blockbuster landscape that offers better stories, better direction, and better set pieces.style="text-align: center;"