Looks a bit atrocious to me. But as Bayverse characters all look like demented Insecticons, I suppose Dinobots should ALSO look like Insecticons (i.e. overly complicated, deep-set faces, with lots of unnecessary moving face parts to convey "life").
The bigger question is WHY PLASTER A DINOBOT ALL OVER A MOVIE CLAPPER????
Doesn't that just waste money? I mean, do they plan on auctioning this crap???
Jack Hallows wrote:as long as there are dinobots in it, i don't give a ****. i've completely separated every transformer universe from the movieverse...
While I understand your point, your opinion represents the lowest of artistic lows. You are lowering the bar to ensure your own satisfaction.
Where's the accountability for really bad design choices? It doesn't matter? Why not just watch Ice Age and imagine the dinobots in it, then?
Why not close your eyes and say the TF movie is good? (Not directed specifically at you, as a lot of people agree with your point).
While art is subjective, it isn't unreasonable to expect a certain level of polish or accomplishment. And loathe as some may be to it, criticism paves the path to improvement.
But if the bulk of you have a "who gives a sh*t?" attitude, then why not make the next TF a romantic comedy? Why not use puppets and high school actors? Seems like there's nothing Bay can do to dissuade you from paying him money to see crap TF designs; crap, American-Pie-wannabe jokes; and completely forgettable plots.
The Bayverse veers from the TF norm, sure, but when you veer THAT far off the road, are you even in the race anymore?
I'm just asking Bay to reel it in a little and get back to TF roots - he's already borrowing heavily from the G1 universe, as it is.
Wait, I forgot - he's said that he's "IMPROVED" the TF universe. So this (and all past movies) represents the greatest accomplishment the TF brand has ever achieved. His comments alone are enough to keep me home this Summer.