Behind the Magic: The Visual Effects of 'Transformers Age of Extinction'
Thursday, December 18th, 2014 11:29PM CST
Category: Movie Related NewsPosted by: LOST Cybertronian Views: 66,689
Topic Options: View Discussion · Sign in or Join to reply
News Search
Got Transformers News? Let us know here!
Most Popular Transformers News
Most Recent Transformers News
Posted by Peridot on December 19th, 2014 @ 11:21am CST
Posted by Sabrblade on December 19th, 2014 @ 11:24am CST
It's the lighting/shadow on the angles of his chin.Metro Prime wrote:At 1:16 into the video- Crosshairs has a beard/stubble?!
He does have a mustache, though.
Posted by Peridot on December 19th, 2014 @ 11:38am CST
Sabrblade wrote:It's the lighting/shadow on the angles of his chin.Metro Prime wrote:At 1:16 into the video- Crosshairs has a beard/stubble?!
He does have a mustache, though.
This definitely doesn't look like a shadow:
You can also see it here:
It's actually very appropriate, considering Crosshairs's personality and voice actor.
Posted by Sabrblade on December 19th, 2014 @ 12:30pm CST
Sure it does. Those parts angle downward and inward, being the undersides of his nose and lips.Metro Prime wrote:This definitely doesn't look like a shadow:
Posted by CrankyOldTruck on December 19th, 2014 @ 11:49pm CST
Sabrblade wrote:Sure it does. Those parts angle downward and inward, being the undersides of his nose and lips.Metro Prime wrote:This definitely doesn't look like a shadow:
And I'm going to argue against both explanations. What you have is a CG animator taking artistic license with his color palette and letting the audience run wild with its imagination. There are indeed two different colors but the shadow theory is nixed because, in the close up pic, there are two colors on the same plane on the left side of his face (our right side as we look at it) and it's receiving even light
The facial hair theory is blown because the deeper color that is supposed as "facial hair" is such that, if you take his entire face into account, he would have "hair" all over his face in a pattern and places that no human would ever have it.
Nice to see your imaginations are still working boys, but that's all you've got there ...imagination. Follow the patterns, follow the full degree of lighting and then get inside the mind of a CGI guy and you'll have your answer. I know, my way isn't as much fun.
Posted by Peridot on December 20th, 2014 @ 7:37am CST
CrankyOldTruck wrote:Sabrblade wrote:Sure it does. Those parts angle downward and inward, being the undersides of his nose and lips.Metro Prime wrote:This definitely doesn't look like a shadow:
And I'm going to argue against both explanations. What you have is a CG animator taking artistic license with his color palette and letting the audience run wild with its imagination. There are indeed two different colors but the shadow theory is nixed because, in the close up pic, there are two colors on the same plane on the left side of his face (our right side as we look at it) and it's receiving even light
The facial hair theory is blown because the deeper color that is supposed as "facial hair" is such that, if you take his entire face into account, he would have "hair" all over his face in a pattern and places that no human would ever have it.
Nice to see your imaginations are still working boys, but that's all you've got there ...imagination. Follow the patterns, follow the full degree of lighting and then get inside the mind of a CGI guy and you'll have your answer. I know, my way isn't as much fun.
Animators can't just "take artistic license". Paramount had to give ILM some finalized (or at least near finalized) concept art at some point, which they used for the final models. ILM cannot just alter the designs because they feel like it. The only spot that's even out of place or unnatural, at least noticably so, is the stuff under his eyes, and that could easily be war paint or anti-glare stripes. AND EVEN THEN, they're giant alien shapeshifting robots. Do you really expect their facial "hair", if it's even hair, to conform exactly to human facial hair growth patterns?
Posted by Rodimus Prime on December 20th, 2014 @ 2:47pm CST
I disagree. There's nothing about the facial structure suggesting that those parts are angled inward. Also, they're the same shade above and under his mouth. So if he has a mustache (as you claim) then he has to have a small beard, or at the very least, stubble. Otherwise, he has neither, which is what it looks like to me. If he did, his face would look a little more like Sentinel's did in DoTM, not flat and smooth as it does in those stills.Sabrblade wrote:Sure it does. Those parts angle downward and inward, being the undersides of his nose and lips.Metro Prime wrote:This definitely doesn't look like a shadow:
Posted by Rodimus Prime on December 22nd, 2014 @ 9:21am CST
Posted by Sabrblade on December 22nd, 2014 @ 10:52am CST
http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/ ... ler/31445/Rodimus Prime wrote::lol:
Posted by Rodimus Prime on December 22nd, 2014 @ 11:12am CST
Posted by Sabrblade on December 22nd, 2014 @ 11:15am CST
What's the other thread?Rodimus Prime wrote:So now 2 threads have the video.
Posted by Rodimus Prime on December 22nd, 2014 @ 11:59am CST
Posted by LOST Cybertronian on February 9th, 2015 @ 6:22pm CST
Creating the Knightship for "Transformers: Age of Extinction" was an immense challenge for the visual effects team due to it's massive scale. In fact, the Knightship is over five times larger than the worm-like drilling robot that appeared in "Dark of the Moon" which had previously held the record at ILM for most complex model.
Posted by Ultra Markus on February 9th, 2015 @ 6:48pm CST
maybe its unicrons hand.............
Posted by Rodimus Prime on February 10th, 2015 @ 4:54am CST
Posted by Autobot032 on March 15th, 2015 @ 2:56pm CDT
2014 wasn't the strongest box office year, movies didn't sell as well as they had in past years and the economy has been rough on a lot of people, so frivolous spending such as going to the movies (which can be incredibly expensive) is out of the question for some, if not many.
With this in mind, seeing Age Of Extinction take the number one spot is awesome for us Transformer fans because the brand is still alive and fresh, even with new and casual fans as well old school who've been here since the beginning. With more Transformers success, the more Transformers toys and series we'll get and that's always a good thing.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Transformers: Age Of Extinction turned in a $245M domestic gross, did $545M foreign and another $301M China (Paramount kept $75 million of that), for a total of $1.09 billion. That is just short of the last installment, Transformers: Dark Of The Moon, which grossed $1.12B to become the first Transformers to crack the billion dollar gross mark.
You can read the full article and see the rest of the staggering numbers over at Deadline, here, and when you're done come on back to the forums and share your thoughts on this big news!
Keep your optics tuned to Seibertron.com for the latest in news and updates, plus the best galleries around!
Posted by SlyTF1 on March 15th, 2015 @ 3:00pm CDT
Posted by griftimus prime on March 15th, 2015 @ 3:09pm CDT
Posted by Autobot_Benz on March 15th, 2015 @ 3:28pm CDT
Posted by Bouncy X on March 15th, 2015 @ 6:13pm CDT
okay i just said that because those above me claimed it the worst and then another the best. i wanted to three little bears-it-up!!!
Posted by ZeroWolf on March 15th, 2015 @ 6:15pm CDT
Posted by TimothyR on March 15th, 2015 @ 6:53pm CDT
Posted by SlyTF1 on March 15th, 2015 @ 7:53pm CDT
TimothyR wrote:i know that the story for these movies is never going to be anything special.. so, my only real complaint is the way the human built transformers transformed. that morphing that they did where they floated around was awful, it really lost some of the magic of what transformers are. i really hope they get rid of that **** for the next one.. something tells me they won't though.
They're supposed to be abominations. They're made by humans. They aren't meant to be natural "Transformers." They're drones.
Posted by Sabrblade on March 15th, 2015 @ 9:01pm CDT
On a different yet related note, can you instead explain how mere human beings were able to perfect such a sophisticated form of transformation that borders on being full on magic, when the highly advanced technological alien race had only perfected a much less advanced form of transformation that keeps to more realistic levels of feasibility and practicality, despite the art of transformation being part of the latter's very nature?SlyTF1 wrote:TimothyR wrote:i know that the story for these movies is never going to be anything special.. so, my only real complaint is the way the human built transformers transformed. that morphing that they did where they floated around was awful, it really lost some of the magic of what transformers are. i really hope they get rid of that **** for the next one.. something tells me they won't though.
They're supposed to be abominations. They're made by humans. They aren't meant to be natural "Transformers." They're drones.
Posted by JazZeke on March 15th, 2015 @ 9:14pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:On a different yet related note, can you instead explain how mere human beings were able to perfect such a sophisticated form of transformation that borders on being full on magic, when the highly advanced technological alien race had only perfected a much less advanced form of transformation that keeps to more realistic levels of feasibility and practicality, despite the art of transformation being part of the latter's very nature?SlyTF1 wrote:TimothyR wrote:i know that the story for these movies is never going to be anything special.. so, my only real complaint is the way the human built transformers transformed. that morphing that they did where they floated around was awful, it really lost some of the magic of what transformers are. i really hope they get rid of that **** for the next one.. something tells me they won't though.
They're supposed to be abominations. They're made by humans. They aren't meant to be natural "Transformers." They're drones.
That really bugged me too. Are we really supposed to believe humans could build better Transformers than the Transformers themselves? (Also, "Transformium", really? That's even worse than "Unobtanium".)
Regarding the headline, I'm downright shocked that this movie managed to beat out Guardians of the Galaxy. GotG was by no means a perfect movie, but it was miles smarter and more original than AoE. Plus Gunn proved that you can have a movie where CGI characters get just as much focus and character development as the human actors.
Posted by Sabrblade on March 15th, 2015 @ 9:22pm CDT
THAT I had no problem with because it's supposed to be a dumb name. Wembley and/or Joshua said it was a focus grouped name, which means it's meant to sound lame as a jab from the movie towards focus groups.JazZeke wrote:(Also, "Transformium", really? That's even worse than "Unobtanium".)
Posted by Flashwave on March 15th, 2015 @ 11:25pm CDT
JazZeke wrote:Sabrblade wrote:On a different yet related note, can you instead explain how mere human beings were able to perfect such a sophisticated form of transformation that borders on being full on magic, when the highly advanced technological alien race had only perfected a much less advanced form of transformation that keeps to more realistic levels of feasibility and practicality, despite the art of transformation being part of the latter's very nature?SlyTF1 wrote:TimothyR wrote:i know that the story for these movies is never going to be anything special.. so, my only real complaint is the way the human built transformers transformed. that morphing that they did where they floated around was awful, it really lost some of the magic of what transformers are. i really hope they get rid of that **** for the next one.. something tells me they won't though.
They're supposed to be abominations. They're made by humans. They aren't meant to be natural "Transformers." They're drones.
That really bugged me too. Are we really supposed to believe humans could build better Transformers than the Transformers themselves? (Also, "Transformium", really? That's even worse than "Unobtanium".)
Regarding the headline, I'm downright shocked that this movie managed to beat out Guardians of the Galaxy. GotG was by no means a perfect movie, but it was miles smarter and more original than AoE. Plus Gunn proved that you can have a movie where CGI characters get just as much focus and character development as the human actors.
I think the premise of the "transformation" was that it was built around a Transformer's Cellular structure, and their ability to reformat their exoskeleton based on a scanned vehicle mode, whereas a traditional Transformer does it via contortionism. *Cough*Nanites*/Cough*. They were growing Transformers out of Stem Cells basically, by harvesting mechaorganic tissue and poking it with the proverbial science stick. The THEORY, I have no problem with, because sure, a nanite cloud rebuilding itself would look like a blob. PROBABLY, the Transformers never designed this trait because they already had a method of Transforming that worked and worked well. Chalk it up to complacency or simple ignorance. The problem I have with it is the way it was handled graphically, and that when you introduce Nanites, it becomes very hard to take down the enemy realitically, which is what ultimately happened.
I don't recall when TF4 and GotG came out, but I think TF4 simply beat it out because it had more time to sit in Theaters, a better following who saw it multiple times (GotG was a newcomer even to casual comic fans compared to Thor or Ironman), and a stronger showing (and support, especially in China) overseas. Those overseas numbers help.
As for "Transformium", G1 introduced a lot of metals too. As a fan, I kinda wish they'd stuck with Cybertronum, but there's no reason for a human to use Cybrtron as a root name, since they've only ever seen Cybertron for 20 minutes.
Posted by SlyTF1 on March 16th, 2015 @ 1:11am CDT
Sabrblade wrote:On a different yet related note, can you instead explain how mere human beings were able to perfect such a sophisticated form of transformation that borders on being full on magic, when the highly advanced technological alien race had only perfected a much less advanced form of transformation that keeps to more realistic levels of feasibility and practicality, despite the art of transformation being part of the latter's very nature?SlyTF1 wrote:TimothyR wrote:i know that the story for these movies is never going to be anything special.. so, my only real complaint is the way the human built transformers transformed. that morphing that they did where they floated around was awful, it really lost some of the magic of what transformers are. i really hope they get rid of that **** for the next one.. something tells me they won't though.
They're supposed to be abominations. They're made by humans. They aren't meant to be natural "Transformers." They're drones.
They didn't "perfect," anything. Them breaking down into their base particles in order to transform isn't perfected. That's primitive, at best. It may be more useful for combat purposes, but far from perfected.
Posted by ZeroWolf on March 16th, 2015 @ 5:21am CDT
I thought an arms race of weapons made from transformers tech would of been a better storyline to go with instead of its consumer angle. That way all drones the drones could of been military vehicles. Stinger could of still featured as a light reconnaissance car to keep up his mirroring of bumblebee.
Posted by AutoBorst on March 16th, 2015 @ 7:02am CDT
Posted by Sabrblade on March 16th, 2015 @ 8:29am CDT
They created the process and made it work with zero negative consequences. Sounds perfected to me.SlyTF1 wrote:Sabrblade wrote:On a different yet related note, can you instead explain how mere human beings were able to perfect such a sophisticated form of transformation that borders on being full on magic, when the highly advanced technological alien race had only perfected a much less advanced form of transformation that keeps to more realistic levels of feasibility and practicality, despite the art of transformation being part of the latter's very nature?SlyTF1 wrote:TimothyR wrote:i know that the story for these movies is never going to be anything special.. so, my only real complaint is the way the human built transformers transformed. that morphing that they did where they floated around was awful, it really lost some of the magic of what transformers are. i really hope they get rid of that **** for the next one.. something tells me they won't though.
They're supposed to be abominations. They're made by humans. They aren't meant to be natural "Transformers." They're drones.
They didn't "perfect," anything. Them breaking down into their base particles in order to transform isn't perfected. That's primitive, at best. It may be more useful for combat purposes, but far from perfected.
Posted by Lockdownhunter on March 16th, 2015 @ 8:51am CDT
P.S.Cannot wait for Jurassic World too!
Posted by Sabrblade on March 16th, 2015 @ 9:00am CDT
You kiddin'? Loopholes are what these filmmakers seem to love most (after excessive carnage and needless adult humor, that is).Lockdownhunter wrote:Let us hope that TF5 will be even better with almost no loopholes!
Posted by guarayakha on March 16th, 2015 @ 10:40am CDT
inb4chrisprattinTF5becausehesineverythingnowadays
Posted by Sabrblade on March 16th, 2015 @ 10:42am CDT
Lockdown, Bee, and Crosshairs each did get to transform onscreen at least once. Hound, however, got the short end of the deal.guarayakha wrote:At least AoE does not comes with a Screaming LaBeouf. The Kreo-formers though...urghh. I guess it's probably faster (and cheaper?) to do a simulation of floating cubes than to rig a transforming model that'll only be scene like what, once each? Not even the bots get to transform on screen except for Prime and Drift. And Bee gets a cheating shot of "car flaps opening"-> Camera change to humans-> back to botmode. Which is funny considering that in TF1's audio commentary Bay explicitly said that he hated that one shot where Bee does just that, because it's lazy work.
inb4chrisprattinTF5becausehesineverythingnowadays
Posted by Insurgent on March 16th, 2015 @ 12:15pm CDT
ZeroWolf wrote:I think the transformation was a visual style more then anything else as it's combat advantages were certainly not played upon in the final battle in Hong Kong.
That's because the drones weren't sentient. Or at least were just rudimentary intelligent. They didn't have the mental ability to use themselves in that way. However, Galvatron did, as seen during the motorway chase when Bee shot at him under the bridge. But Galvatron didn't do anything in the final fight.
I do agree though, I do not like the flying pixel transformation. Except for when Galvatron used it in combat. I admit, that was sweet.
Posted by Deadput on March 16th, 2015 @ 1:55pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:Lockdown, Bee, and Crosshairs each did get to transform onscreen at least once. Hound, however, got the short end of the deal.guarayakha wrote:At least AoE does not comes with a Screaming LaBeouf. The Kreo-formers though...urghh. I guess it's probably faster (and cheaper?) to do a simulation of floating cubes than to rig a transforming model that'll only be scene like what, once each? Not even the bots get to transform on screen except for Prime and Drift. And Bee gets a cheating shot of "car flaps opening"-> Camera change to humans-> back to botmode. Which is funny considering that in TF1's audio commentary Bay explicitly said that he hated that one shot where Bee does just that, because it's lazy work.
inb4chrisprattinTF5becausehesineverythingnowadays
I just finished the movie yesterday and I can confirm that Crosshairs does transform but you can't see him because Grimlock is in front of him.
Posted by SlyTF1 on March 16th, 2015 @ 10:44pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:Lockdown, Bee, and Crosshairs each did get to transform onscreen at least once. Hound, however, got the short end of the deal.guarayakha wrote:At least AoE does not comes with a Screaming LaBeouf. The Kreo-formers though...urghh. I guess it's probably faster (and cheaper?) to do a simulation of floating cubes than to rig a transforming model that'll only be scene like what, once each? Not even the bots get to transform on screen except for Prime and Drift. And Bee gets a cheating shot of "car flaps opening"-> Camera change to humans-> back to botmode. Which is funny considering that in TF1's audio commentary Bay explicitly said that he hated that one shot where Bee does just that, because it's lazy work.
inb4chrisprattinTF5becausehesineverythingnowadays
Don't forget all of the Dinobots, at least twice.
Posted by Optimum Supreme on March 17th, 2015 @ 3:21pm CDT
bolding mineAutobot032 wrote:According to Deadline, an industry trade website, Transformers: Age Of Extinction was the clear winner of 2014, having the largest box office take of the year, it even beat out other big greats such as American Sniper and The Lego Movie!
Wow, it beat a movie that wasn't even in wide release at all in 2014 and only in limited released for a week? Impressive!
Posted by chivesbot20 on March 19th, 2015 @ 3:27pm CDT
Posted by Va'al on May 15th, 2015 @ 3:26am CDT
Amazon has released its lineup of movies and TV shows that will be available for streaming come June 2015. During those hot summer days, Amazon Prime members will be able to enjoy titles like "Transformers: Age of Extinction," "The Shining," "Lucky Number Slevin" and Season 5 of "Covert Affairs."
Amazon Prime titles
June 1
"The Shining"
"Roman Holiday"
"Apocalypse Now"
"Apocalypse Now Redux"
"Something Wild" (1986)
"Sid & Nancy"
"Sucker Punch"
"Troll"
"Troll 2"
"Rep: The Genetic Opera"
"The Island of Dr. Moreau"
"Seven Psychopaths"
"The Paper Chase"
"People Will Talk"
"Far From Home: The Adventures of Yellow Dog"
"Murder of a Cat"
"Nine Months"
"Word and Pictures"
June 12
"Life of Crime"
June 13
"Transformers: Age of Extinction"
June 15
"Leprechaun: Origins"
June 19
"A Most Wanted Man"
June 22
"Lucky Number Slevin"
June 24
"Covert Affairs," Season 5
June 26
"Katy Perry: The Prismatic World Tour"
June 27
"The Mist"
Posted by TurboMMaster on May 17th, 2015 @ 6:26am CDT
The main question is, Why Galvatron didn't do anything by himself during Hong Kong scene, he isn't easy to be damaged, and he showed already that he is strong enough to fight with Prime. Yet again he let his mindless drones get the job done, whey never learned that this can't work don't they.Insurgent wrote:ZeroWolf wrote:I think the transformation was a visual style more then anything else as it's combat advantages were certainly not played upon in the final battle in Hong Kong.
That's because the drones weren't sentient. Or at least were just rudimentary intelligent. They didn't have the mental ability to use themselves in that way. However, Galvatron did, as seen during the motorway chase when Bee shot at him under the bridge. But Galvatron didn't do anything in the final fight.
I do agree though, I do not like the flying pixel transformation. Except for when Galvatron used it in combat. I admit, that was sweet.
Imagine how mucha Decepticons could be effective, without "Megatron/Galvatron is only sitting and giving order" rule
Posted by dreadwing95 on May 17th, 2015 @ 7:23am CDT
TurboMMaster wrote:The main question is, Why Galvatron didn't do anything by himself during Hong Kong scene, he isn't easy to be damaged, and he showed already that he is strong enough to fight with Prime. Yet again he let his mindless drones get the job done, whey never learned that this can't work don't they.Insurgent wrote:ZeroWolf wrote:I think the transformation was a visual style more then anything else as it's combat advantages were certainly not played upon in the final battle in Hong Kong.
That's because the drones weren't sentient. Or at least were just rudimentary intelligent. They didn't have the mental ability to use themselves in that way. However, Galvatron did, as seen during the motorway chase when Bee shot at him under the bridge. But Galvatron didn't do anything in the final fight.
I do agree though, I do not like the flying pixel transformation. Except for when Galvatron used it in combat. I admit, that was sweet.
Imagine how mucha Decepticons could be effective, without "Megatron/Galvatron is only sitting and giving order" rule
im not sure he couldve stood a chance against the dinobots but i do agree he couldve done a lot more in the final battle
Posted by Beardy on May 19th, 2015 @ 2:32am CDT
Optimum Supreme wrote:bolding mineAutobot032 wrote:According to Deadline, an industry trade website, Transformers: Age Of Extinction was the clear winner of 2014, having the largest box office take of the year, it even beat out other big greats such as American Sniper and The Lego Movie!
Wow, it beat a movie that wasn't even in wide release at all in 2014 and only in limited released for a week? Impressive!
1 - Transformers: Age of Extinction Paramount Pictures $1,091,404,499
2 - The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies Warner Bros. / New Line Cinema / MGM $955,113,783
3 - Guardians of the Galaxy Marvel Studios $774,176,600
4 - Maleficent Walt Disney Pictures $758,654,942
5 - The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1 Lionsgate Films $752,100,229
6 - X-Men: Days of Future Past 20th Century Fox $748,121,534
7 - Captain America: The Winter Soldier Marvel Studios $714,766,572
8 - The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Columbia Pictures $709,582,323
9 - Dawn of the Planet of the Apes 20th Century Fox $708,835,589
10 - Interstellar Paramount Pictures / Warner Bros. $672,974,414
Lego and Sniper don't feature on the list for obvious reasons...
Age of Extinction beat all of these movies which were on wide release last year. Clearly.
In comparison to most of those films in the list, I did not like AOE as much - but the figures speak for themselves.
It's also the 12th highest grossing film of all time. No other film from 2014 is even in the top 20 highest grossing films...
Posted by RhA on May 19th, 2015 @ 3:51am CDT
Beardy wrote:Optimum Supreme wrote:bolding mineAutobot032 wrote:According to Deadline, an industry trade website, Transformers: Age Of Extinction was the clear winner of 2014, having the largest box office take of the year, it even beat out other big greats such as American Sniper and The Lego Movie!
Wow, it beat a movie that wasn't even in wide release at all in 2014 and only in limited released for a week? Impressive!
1 - Transformers: Age of Extinction Paramount Pictures $1,091,404,499
2 - The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies Warner Bros. / New Line Cinema / MGM $955,113,783
3 - Guardians of the Galaxy Marvel Studios $774,176,600
4 - Maleficent Walt Disney Pictures $758,654,942
5 - The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1 Lionsgate Films $752,100,229
6 - X-Men: Days of Future Past 20th Century Fox $748,121,534
7 - Captain America: The Winter Soldier Marvel Studios $714,766,572
8 - The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Columbia Pictures $709,582,323
9 - Dawn of the Planet of the Apes 20th Century Fox $708,835,589
10 - Interstellar Paramount Pictures / Warner Bros. $672,974,414
Lego and Sniper don't feature on the list for obvious reasons...
Age of Extinction beat all of these movies which were on wide release last year. Clearly.
In comparison to most of those films in the list, I did not like AOE as much - but the figures speak for themselves.
It's also the 12th highest grossing film of all time. No other film from 2014 is even in the top 20 highest grossing films...
AOE beat the Hobbit? [petpeeve}Hell yeah! On a very personal note, I think Peter Jackson jumped the shark with LOTR and really butchered the Hobbit, making it form light-hearted into something that's harshly shoe-horned into LOTR. No Ents? Again no Tom Bombadil? A made-up war? Yes, the Hobbit deserves to be beaten by Micheal Bay. [/petpeeve]
Posted by Va'al on June 14th, 2015 @ 7:37am CDT
To view on Netflix, follow this link: https://www.netflix.com/gb/?trkid=13462064
To view on Amazon Prime, follow this link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00L83TQR6?tag=seibertron07-20&
Posted by Kup98ss on June 14th, 2015 @ 9:09am CDT
Posted by Carnivius_Prime on June 14th, 2015 @ 10:19am CDT
Posted by dragons on June 14th, 2015 @ 10:26am CDT
Posted by Madeus Prime on June 14th, 2015 @ 11:29am CDT