Talk:Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)

Quotes

I think Ratchet's line "Jolt, electrify" should be in the quotes because, c'mon, JOLT ACTUALLY DOES SOMETHING. --75.82.9.197 01:38, 27 August 2012 (EDT)

Chromia

Where's Chromia? She is confirmed! I added her why is she gone? And what about Ratchet? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Godziboy1993 (talk • contribs).

They haven't been "confirmed". They got stolen from factories in China. That is not an official confirmation. --Detour 15:58, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Ok, this is ridiculous. Yes it IS AN OFFICIAL CONFIRMATION. She was even in the god damn trailer! And why isn't Ratchet and Longhaul up on that either? Stolen from factories give me a break. Put them back on. Godziboy1993 21:55, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh and Barricade is on there too. His toy was stolen from a factory. Why the hell not Chromia, Ratchet, and Longhaul.

Because it is illegally acquired information. That simple. We'll add them once Roberto Orci confirms their presence, or Hasbro releases official photographs of the toys. To find out more, refer to Help:Official info. --Detour 22:10, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Paramount pictures cast list.

This poster looks like a pretty official cast list. FFN, you think it's dubious? - Starfield 06:50, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, for a Starter, Overload should be added to the list of constructicons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GUIGUI (talk • contribs) 17:20, 2 April 2009 EDT.

I agree, they didn't pull that name out of the æther. But it might be premature to spell it "Longhaul", or move The Fallen to the Decepticon column, or move Jetfire to the Autobot column. - Starfield 21:31, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

I really do not understand how this is set up. Why is Demolisher a seperate character? Who is the 7th constructicon when only six are shown combining into Devastator?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Godziboy1993 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 6 April 2009 EDT.

Who knows? - Starfield 19:40, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Japanese world premiere.

With the premiere in Japan, does that mean ROTF characters are [[Category:Japanese-original characters]]? - Starfield 10:50, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

You'd better be joking. - Chris McFeely 11:12, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

Transmitter at official site

What was the necessary stuff to log in again for the Transmitter? I can't remember if it was Derik or Detour that had posted up some things for it... Not that it's updated much. << >> --Lonegamer78 23:45, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

How about an actual article?

This thing is basically a list of info. Why isn't this a bit more organized, like on Wikipedia? And is the stuff about the Writers' Strike really neccesary? I'd edit it, but I do not appear to have that privilege. Jim Java 16:56, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

Yes it's a list of info, because right now all we have is info. It's better than Wikipedia's page because it focuses on confirmed news only and not rumors, stolen toys and third-hand reports. Yes, the stuff about the Writer's Strike is necessary, since it did affect production of Revenge Of The Fallen. No, you can't edit it, because the page is protected on account of so many anonymous users and new users making additions based on rumors, stolen toys and third-hand reports. --Detour 17:28, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

In about a month and a half, this article will get a total top-to-bottom re-write, when... y'know... we see the movie. Till then, there's not a lot of point in dramatic changes; they'd just be swept away under the deluge of information that we'll have when the film is released.

That said, I feel your pain. "Writer such-and-such has envisioned a storyline involving the Constructicons" seems like a ridiculous bit of information to have right upfront at this point in the game, when we've seen them in the trailer. ETA: If you'd seriously like to have a go at cleaning it up, you could always set up a temp page somewhere. -- Repowers 17:33, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

At the same time, I don't really see the point of doing a page like the Wikipedia. We'll never be able to compete with them in terms of sheer information on things like production, and were are restricted by our rule of only using information that has been released by Hasbro/Takara, Dreamworks, Paramount and their partners (and they generally don't release much in the way of information). Besides, as I've understood this wiki, our focus is on the content of the fiction itself and the characters starring in it, which is what differentiates us from the Wikipedia. We're not really here to tell people about how the director of photography and camera personnel filmed the 2007 movie on a mechanical bull or something. --FFN 21:06, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

Could we at least organize this in paragraph form? It wouldn't take very long, but it would look way better. Just thought I'd ask. Jim Java 20:50, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

I don't think that would make the article better at all. The article as-is is a list of things. Making that list into a big block of text is not going to help anything. We don't need to pretend that this article isn't a list. --ItsWalky 21:18, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

I'm gonna throw my hat in here and tell you to just wait. It's like Repowers said, give just over a month and the entire article will be totally redone top to bottom, just like you want Jim Java. Until then look at the Wikipedia article, I'm pretty sure they have it broken into paragraphs and make it an "actual article" as I'm sure you're insinuating.--AWT88 22:22, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

UK Release 19th June = World Premiere

As I write this the UK will be getting this a whole week before the States. So like, can we come and get started on the articles, or will there be Dubya-like emphasis on US civil (=Spoiler) liberties? 82.7.126.27 12:58, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

I figure it'll be okay if articles are filled out following the UK release. After all, most of Animated Season 2 aired a week early in Canada, and we still updated those pages even though they hadn't aired stateside yet. As long as media is officially released in a language we can understand (unlike that whole Dubai incident last year), it's fair game. -- Cyberlink420 01:40, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

World premiere was today, June 8, in Japan

As the title says. Do we need a new, updated "No spoilers" disclaimer in this article and maybe also on the main page?--Nevermore 16:35, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes and yes and then some. We should have heavy disclaimage on ALL the in-movie character pages, and also make them--as well as, obviously, this page itself--off-limits to anonymous editors. (Also, holy shit, am I actually editing on IE now? Miracle!) --Thylacine 2000 16:47, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Score

Should the score's info be added? Samples are up at Amazon Germany's listing. --Lonegamer78 20:04, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

Bay wanted to have German soldiers in the movie, German government said "no"

Source: Press conference from German premiere

Translation:

Bundeswehr soldiers in the cinematic end fight between humans and alien machines: That's how Hollywood warhorse director Michael Bay ("Armageddon") had planned it for his action flick Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.

But German authorities threw a monkey wrench in his plans. The Bundeswehr soldiers at an Air Force base in the American desert state of New Mexico had been thrilled, "but unfortunately, the German government said no", the 44 year old director said at Sunday's German premiere of the science fiction flick. The cooperation with the US Department of Defense, on the other hand, hadn't been a problem - he had a direct connection there.

Will probably work it into the article once we go from pre-release to full article.--Nevermore 19:14, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

What? Germany isn't allowed to -have- a military.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 173.11.36.165 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 24 June 2009.

You shouldn't be able to state such garbage 122.107.178.246

You are mistaken, sir.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 11:29, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Errors and Inconsistencies

I've just seen the film. I'm not sure how the final ROTF page will look, but if the previous movie is used as a template, then I can suggest NOW that the Errors/Inconsistencies section be spawned off onto its own page? Drmick 19:52, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

Basic outline here: "Revenge of the Fallen (film)/outline". Not sure when we should drop it in, but it should be soon. -- Repowers 20:13, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

why cant we edit things on the rotf page especially the errors because i have one to add

Unnamed Decepticons

Do we have any way of getting names for the unnamed decepticons, like the Ravage hairballs seen in the trailer and comic-books? The movie's not going to help, as it was incredibly lax on providing names for characters.KrytenKoro 03:31, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Mysterious voice credits

Frank Welker is credited as "Reedman" along with Soundwave and Ravage, and Kevin Michael Richardson is both one of the Primes and "Skipjack". Do we know who these characters are? It doesn't help that both actors are known for Random Monster Noises roles. -LV 03:53, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Edit: I may mean Soundwave, Devastator and Reedman. The point is, Reedman: WTF? -LV 04:06, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

I too saw those credits and wondered... but, I could also swear that I remember someone, maybe Ironhide, saying the name "Skipjack" aloud at one point in the film (at one of the base scenes, maybe?). For the life of me, though, I can't think of the context it was in. --

Did we happen to catch credits for Demolishor, Rampage, or any other growly-roary-types? - Chris McFeely 07:24, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Devastator clearly said "DEVASTATOR!" during the big overhead shot of him slowly bearing down on the twins. --FFN 07:37, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

I definitely interpreted that as Megatron shouting "DEVASTATOR!" at Devastator for no particular reason. As for Demolishor...he must have had a voice actor, since he had actual dialogue, but I don't recall seeing it. -LV 11:15, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, I couldn't decide if the roar of "DEVASTATOR!" was Megatron, or if Devastator had decided to declare his own name for some reason (which wouldn't be that odd, given that Megatron did it in the first movie). - Chris McFeely 11:40, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

It sure sounded like Megatron's voice to me. --abates 17:16, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

I'm also with that Megatron's the one calling to Devastator. --Lonegamer78 01:45, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Surely he was calling to get Devastator to stop playing with the humans and come wreck up the pyramid? 137.195.68.169 10:50, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

In the IMAX it was clearly Megatron based on where the sound was coming from. - Starfield 22:49, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Demolisher is in the credits as Wheelbot. But I kept missing it. First time, some dickhead at the back started sticking his hands in front of the projector and blocking it. As for Devastator, he NEVER speaks. Megs yells Devastator's name. Welker just handled roars and snarls (some blatant Welker animal noises are in there)User:Eire 15.57 25th June 09

Reedman has to be the raptor-like thing formed by the ball bearing bots. He's a reed-thin man.

Sweet, nice to know he has a name. -Derik 11:41, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

This seems to be corroborated by the Decepticons DS game (not the best source, given the divergence of video game plots, but an official one): before the mission to steal the All Spark shard you're told that "Ravage and Reed Man" have been sent ahead to secure the target... presumably referencing the skinny con's theft of the object in question. --Inevitable Betrayal 17:44, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Any chance you can get an exact quote on that? (Because it seems to present Reedman has his own character, rather than a remote probe controlled by Ravage, and I'd like to be able to cite it.) -Derik 17:56, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

I'm afraid not. The dialogue popped up on the map screen between missions instead of within the mission itself, so it's not replayable, and I was surprised enough by it the first time I didn't think to write it down. I could start another file and play through to that point again (though I'd rather not, it's a bit of a letdown compared to the first movie's DS games), but at the moment all I can say for sure is that it referred to them as a duo, "Ravage and Reed Man," with Reed Man parsed as two words like that, not one.--Inevitable Betrayal 02:35, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

Well jeez! Sounded like a people-name! I wonder who "Skipjack" is, then? He... he couldn't be the little guy who gets killed for parts, could be? That guy didn't speak words, but he did make a sort of cry/yelp of protest as he was set upon. - Chris McFeely 17:46, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

That was one of the film's legions of Constructicons. Probably not a "Skyjack." -Derik 17:54, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Skipjack. But, eh, i'm just tossin' it out there. The identity of the sacrificial guy does not really seem to be confirmed - people are just assuming he's a Constructicon because the other three were Long Haul, Mixmaster and Rampage, and Hightower's vehicle was on the barge, but no-one's actually identified the guy based on his physical robot appearance (and as a dirty great crane, Hightower would hardly be "the little one"). - Chris McFeely 17:58, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

I paid attention to the "little one"'s silhouette when I saw the movie again yesterday, and it most resembled Scrapper. Particularly its skinny legs. --ItsWalky 18:16, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Let's see, that was about 40 minutes in so... *runs up MP3 of the movie's audio*

No, the 'parts' con doesn't make more than a few Ewok burbles.

Could he be the jackhammer-Decepticon that kidnapped Ron and Judy? -Derik 18:14, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

As it transpires, yes. This interview (search for "Skipjack") makes it pretty clear that Skipjack was the working name for the red bulldozer identified onscreen as Rampage. So it's a Demolishor/Wheelbot situation, apparently. Disappointing resolution, especially since it still leaves us with two bulldozers named Rampage. -LV 12:47, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

I.... theeeenk you may have got your link wrong, there? - Chris McFeely 15:10, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

He probably meant this one. -Derik 15:22, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

THe sad thing is that I can't even come up with a funny rationale for the link to AcipHex here. (I was originally linking it elsewhere because the TV won't stop telling me to try Ass Effects - guess it stayed in my clipboard.) FAiled. -LV 16:25, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

No, Starscream specifically calls him Rampage. (And he is Rampage.) --ItsWalky 18:16, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Wasn't Devastator already formed by that point? -Derik 18:19, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Sure, but there were lots of Constructicons running around the same time as Devastator was formed (the group from the barge turn up with Ravage partway through the fight). --abates 18:31, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

It just sounds like a likely name for his color-swap. (Which in this case, i guess... was forming Devastator.) -Derik 19:16, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

but no-one's actually identified the guy based on his physical robot appearance

Some douchebag posted bootleg screencaps of the Laurentian Abyss sequence on his blog.

While not appropriate for inclusion here as a primary source, useful for IDing nonetheless. -Derik 22:24, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

I should probably post what I did on LJ here. Re: the last photo - those claws don't look anything alike. That's no game-only generic. --ItsWalky 22:53, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

And I should probably post what I did on LJ here. The game-model and movie-model for Constructicon Scout are different (thus the clamps not matching) but Constructicon Scout is definitely in the movie. -Derik 23:13, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

As Walky so bluntly put it-- "It's scrapper."

Or rather- the Constructicon Scout is based on Scrapper. An extra layer of confusion is added because the Scrapper toy lacks the giant arms that the CS has-- and the character in the movie has. But since there's only one Scraper toy that Transformes, apparently we're treating his truncated arms as a concession to toy engineering.

So would it be more accurate to say that Scrapper is a Constructicon Scout? Or is physically identical to them? -Derik 18:06, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

I don't know if this helps, but in the somewhat inaccurate comic version of the movie, Ravage, Long Haul, and Scrapper are clearly seen jumping off the boat, so it may mean Scrapper is "the little one?71.199.127.210 13:37, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

Reviving this, I rewatched the movie recently and the vehicles were clearly Rampage, Mixmaster, Long Haul and a treaded vehicle (which Scrapper is not), which Allspark user Legend-of-Blackout identified as a Volvo excavator. And also, based on the leaked design for Scrapper in that big Devastator pic from a few days back, Scrapper's arms are much thicker than the ones on Scrapmetal. I have no idea what to make of this, but even if he just reuses Scrapper's robot mode model, his different alt mode would qualify him as a new character, would it not? --Detour 04:32, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

So it seems he isn't Scrapper or Hightower. We need an article for ze little one immediately. - Starfield 10:23, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

I just want to point out that there are clearly shown 5 constucticons on the ship's deck but only 4 at any given time. The frontend loader(scrapper) and the excavator(scrap metal) seem to trade spots at times and it is the (Scrapper bot that is shown to jump into the water. You would think that it should have been the ecavator as it would make more sense on thats where Megatron gets the treads from but later in Egypt, just before Devistator merges, if you pause it right as you see Hightower(the large yellow truss crain) you can see the volvo excavator(scrap meatal behind him. 68.20.110.38 12:49, 6 April 2011 (EDT)joe

It's UpGrade Time

So, can we start working on this now or what? User:Eire 12.44 June 24 09

Yes. --ItsWalky 09:36, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Foreign titles

Are foreign titles usually included if they just mean "Revenge of The Fallen" in their own language? - Starfield 11:37, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

They shouldn't be. --ItsWalky 11:45, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

The frensh versin is called "transformers: the revenge"(le révange?)--Sunjumper 11:47, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

That's different enough. --ItsWalky 11:48, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

The Brazilian title (Portuguese) renders as "The Revenge of the Defeated" when I put it through Google Translate. Is that different enough?--Apcog 12:35, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Inasmuch as "defeated" doesn't have the same additional connotations of "falling from grace" or "killed in battle" as the original English, I'd say so.137.195.68.169 10:47, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Trivia cull

One is long overdue in my opinion. Much of this "trivia" is snippets of news on who was cast, and has since been unequivocally confirmed and properly organized in the locations it should be.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 21:33, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Not-Bonecrusher

I'm assuming that the guy who wasn't Bonecrusher was actually Constructicon Scout. Is that a safe guess to go with? -Derik 11:46, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

I didn't see any Bonecrusher in the film. People just say they saw Bonecrusher's altmode, the Buffalo. No robot mode, far as I'm aware. --ItsWalky 11:48, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

I think he was running around during the Egypt battle. You could see him standing behind some pillars. Since there were multiple Constructicons running around, this was evidently was not the very-dead Bonecrusher.67.242.198.238 12:07, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

It was definitely a use of the CGI Bonecrusher model in robot mode. 82.7.126.27 12:09, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

*swears* I was hoping it was the Constructicon Scout, but he has a different robot mode. -Derik 12:14, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

You can definitely see Bonecrusher's vehicle mode rolling in with the other Decepticons. I don't recall seeing his robot mode, but then again, he looks quite similar in robot mode to a bunch of Constructicons. --FFN 12:42, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

So I saw it again in IMAX. That's definitely Bonecrusher rolling in.

His remains weren't among those being disposed of after the first movie.
We've got a toy bio stating he survived.
He's in the ^&*( second film.

Baring Hasbro releasing a redeco and declaring this a new character, it looks like Bonecrusher really did survive. And until that happens, I'm going with the face-value reading and removing the "a Bonecrusher lookalike" note in the cast list. -Derik 00:01, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

Good points! I agree. - Starfield 00:05, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

I disagree. I think "a toy bio stating he survived" is completely irrelevant, as we got one of those for Jazz, too. That was definitely Bonecrusher's vehicle mode in ROTF, but I sure as hell don't think it was actually Bonecrusher, any more than I think that the helicopter was Blackout. --KilMichaelMcC 00:23, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

That is your personal canon. The fiction says otherwise. The toy bio is completely irrelevant iff it contradicts the movies. This time the movies back it up. It is willful blindness to say Bonecrusher isn't in the movie when he is right there. - Starfield 09:28, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

It's willful blindness to assume similar alt means same guy, in a movie where a guy with Blackout's body-type is quite prominent. G1 colourd Jazz's bio says he survives. Brawl's got a ROTF repaint. He was decapitated and had his whole head smashed in. He's dead Jim. Writing a whole section of fiction you made up on Bonecrusher's page is madness. Give the toy bio it's own section and a note that we see his vehicle mode among the protoforms and leave it at that. Eire 15.28 30 June 09 (UTC)

Character profiles

I'm starting to see descriptions of the character's movie role around the wiki. Is this okay yet? Crow T. Robot 14:32, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

So long as you use the proper spoiler tags.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 14:34, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

What about the articles that have the "do not add information" tags? Can we start to take those down? Crow T. Robot 14:40, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

The coming soon tags? Yeah, those were just waiting for the film release.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 14:46, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

Our policy on new releases is that if the media has been officially released in a language you can understand, you are well within your rights to be write up a summary, as long as you put up a spoiler tag. Like Wikipedia, we urge people to be bold, but be smart. -- SFH 14:55, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

More Quotes

What other quotes do you want to use (i.e: "I RISE, YOU FALL." from Optimus Prime)?

I really don't think the umpteenth regurgitation of the TFTM-quote-that-will-not-die is worth singling out for praise. --ItsWalky 01:09, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

What does anyone think about the opening monologue by Prime as one of the captions? I can only remember so much, anybody got it?--AWT88 19:09, 6 July 2009 (EDT)

“Earth. Birthplace of the human race, a species much like our own. Capable of great compassion... and great violence. For in our quest to protect the humans, a deeper revelation dawns; our worlds have met before.”

“For the last two years, an advanced team of new Autobots has taken refuge here under my command. Together, we form an alliance with the humans, a secret but brave squad of soldiers. A classified strike team called NEST. We hunt for what remains of our Decepticon foes, hiding in different countries around the globe.” 122.107.178.246

Exposition is notable?! --abates 23:13, 9 July 2009 (EDT)

Doesn't quite have the ring of "BEFORE TIME BEGAN THERE WAS... THE CUBE." --ItsWalky 23:16, 9 July 2009 (EDT)

Five/Six Contacts Error

Wouldn't this NOT be an error, since Ravge ejected Scalpel from his chest, thereby replacing Hightower? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.179.155.170 (talk • contribs) 07:44, 28 June 2009.

You mean Scrapper, who was the one killed. And yeah, that's what I thought while watching the film, though I wondered if Scalpel was actually large enough to register? --KilMichaelMcC 07:48, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

HAY GUYS - Hightower and Scrapper WEREN'T EVEN THERE. Four Constructicons jumped in - Red Rampage, Long Haul, Mixmaster and Small Excavator Guy. Unnamed dude was killed. Megatron, Scalpel and Ravage make six contacts surfacing.

Ahem, from Scalpel's page "...Using parts "donated" by Hightower..."

Anywho, the point is, wouldn't Scalpel's presence nullify the error? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.179.155.170 (talk • contribs) 08:41, 28 June 2009.

It is neither Scrapper nor Hightower. I have since edited articles and have removed the error. The unnamed is a small Volvo excavator similar to Demolishor's vehicle mode as he was incorrectly depicted in the ROTF adaptation comic. It did not look like Hightower's truss crane. Also, sign off on your comments, it is difficult to know who is saying what. See the signature button next to the crossed out W? Click that. Thanks. --FFN 09:24, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

Adding extra confusion: The possibility that the extra reading was Blackout.

On my second viewing, it really looks like The Doctor strikes the shard in Megatron's chest rather than permanantly inserting it. Maybe they did revive Blackout. -Derik 00:18, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

Grindor's from space. Megatron left the Constructicons, Ravage, and the Doctor far behind on Earth, and he traveled allll the way up to Saturn to visit the Nemesis. And what's he find in the Nemesis? Starscream and hatchlings. And next we see Megatron on Earth, he's with Starscream. And another guy. That guy was a hatchling. That guy was Grindor. --ItsWalky 00:20, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

He's also with The Doctor, who should be with Ravage and the Constructicons.

I don't actually think the Helicopter is Blackout-- I mean he has a different altmode fergods sake. If Bay intended it to be Blackout he'd have used the same helicopter, regardless whether it'd been retired or not. And anyway- HASBRO clearly thinks that's Grindor.

I'm just trying to figure out what might've been goign through the movie production's head with that funny number. -Derik 01:08, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

I imagine they filmed the blips on the radar approximately nine months before animating/rendering/writing the scene of the guys underwater. WHOOPS. --ItsWalky 01:09, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

Given that they went to the trouble of getting Welker for Soundwave and the forgot to put a vocoder over him, I could believe it. -Derik 01:46, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

Though considering Welker apparently didn't like what the G1 cartoon did to his Soundwave voice, it's possible he asked Bay to not process it, and Bay was cool with that. --FFN 14:23, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

Can I ask why it is stated as fact that Scalpel is too small to be detected by the submarine in the trivia section? Isn't that just speculation?Thelastallosaur 15:32, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Considering that sonar and radar work the same way, the smaller the object the smaller the signature. It makes sense that Scalpel--being about a foot long and tall--wouldn't be shown on the sonar. If you look at the screen, there's one small signature going down and coming up, probably Ravage considering his size. It makes sense.--AWT88 21:26, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Scalpel's about the size of a fish. I don't know for certain, but I'm pretty sure if the radar raised a contact alert every time a fish swam towards the sub, it'd be pretty useless. --abates 21:56, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Ravage is the size of a jaguar, which is what? the size of a shark? - Starfield 22:05, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Is he? I don't remember any shots in the movie where his size was even established, offhand. I thought he was pretty big though. --abates 22:18, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Hasbro battle bios say he is "4 ft." but I can't really tell if that means 4 feet tall or 4 feet long or what. - Starfield 22:25, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Starfield, if he was four feet long, he'd be pretty damn small, considering how long his tail is. We see him next to the alt modes of several transformers and we see him on Bee. He's at least as big as a tiger, probably bigger. Eire

Well sonuvabitch, you guys got me second guessing myself. Thanks. Now I gotta go watch the movie again.--AWT88 23:53, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

I think that perhaps Grindor is Blackout revived, which would take care of the 5/6 inconsistency. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.67.21.14 (talk • contribs).

As stated above, Grindor is not Blackout. --abates 02:09, 7 February 2010 (EST)

Graham

Whatever happened to that Agent Graham guy. Was he even in it? He is still in the credits on the official ROTF website. - Starfield 14:21, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Wasn't he that one British guy with NEST? --KilMichaelMcC 15:49, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes, he wore a brown beret. 79.68.235.108 16:01, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

He's the Tom Cruise lookalike with about three lines.--Nevermore 03:25, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

And he wasn't an "agent", he was supposedly a member of the SASF, a fictionalized version of the Special Air Service. --FFN 14:20, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

He is "SASF Agent Graham" on the official movie website. What's SASF stand for? - Starfield 12:54, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Of the various potential meanings for the SASF acronym, the most sensible one for this situation appears to be "South African Special Forces".--Apcog 15:46, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

I don't think "South African Special Forces" is at all sensible for a guy from the UK. --KilMichaelMcC 16:17, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Probably actually means "Special Air Service Forces" or somesuch fictional thing. --Detour 16:02, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

"Synthetic Alien Strike Fighters" or, even better, "Secret Autobot Surveillance Force" (the government wouldn't really let giant robots run around without some spooks watching them, would they?) - Starfield 17:18, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Frenzy's head

This error keeps on getting added/deleted endlessly, some official consensus would be good. His head didn't blow up, it was sliced it half, so it's not terribly unreasonable that the two pieces were glued or welded back together. - Cattleprod 22:06, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Images?

I happen to have a downloaded version of Revenge of The Fallen (I DID go to the movie, and I AM going to buy the dvd, so stop whining!), would you like me to make some screencaps and upload them? (Particularly Reedman and Arcee miss clear images)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ThiAthEhn (talk • contribs) 13:58, 1 July 2009.

The enthusiasm and offer of help are appreciated, but unfortunately screencaps from a pirated download would get us in deep doo-doo. Thanks for asking before uploading, though.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 14:04, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

To elaborate, we have a policy against using images or information from unofficial, leaked or stolen sources, which obviously includes screencaps from a blurry camjob of Revenge of the Fallen. The DVD will be out in 3-4 months anyway. We can wait. --FFN 14:18, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

We could use screens taken from the trailers and released clips and such though right? Or realsed screencaps? Eire 13.41 July 02 (UTC)

Absolutely. As long as it's a thing that was officially approved and released, go nuts. Hooper_X 08:48, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center location

Regarding the grafting of the Steven_F._Udvar-Hazy_Center to the Boneyard: it should be noted that the UHC is in Chantilly, VA, rather outside of Washington, DC proper. There is actually more space next to the hangar, where Jetfire would have exited if they didn't have the compositing transition to the Boneyard. However, while the area's grassy and flat, it's surrounded by small chunks of forest (see [1], it looks right out over the hangar entrance he would have exited from), and is further connected to Dulles Airport in the distance. :) I can only assume they went with the visual assumption that "hey, it's a museum, they'd have lots of mothballed planes around, and what's there right now is boring", but that's purely speculation on my part. Either way you slice it, it's still an "error"...

I just find this amusing, given that the UHC is one of the IMAX theaters where ROTF is being shown... :) 96.231.155.47 22:31, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

And there's a HUGE IMAX logo in the movie...--Nevermore 13:41, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

I honestly wonder how many people had never really payed attention to the outside of the UHC, and tried to go around the side of the building after seeing it in IMAX. I'm from nearby the UHC, and I thought it was really funny to see a bunch of people in the theatres whisper to the person next to them, "hey, that's not outside the UHC." - Garebear22

Caption theme

Since the first film used a TF:TM theme, why not use the abandoned Star Wars theme here. Eire 13.41 July 02 (UTC)

Specifically, Empire. Kurtzman and Orci even said they were trying to match it in terms of upping the menace and having the Fallen be like the Emperor. --Thylacine 2000 09:01, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Suggestion - lock this article so only registered users can edit.

I am sure we are all sick and tired of anonymous people coming in and making stupid, incorrect, poorly spelled edits to our a article. Let's just lock this down so that we only need to watch out for newbie editors. --FFN 18:09, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Seconded. --Lonegamer78 19:02, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

The motion's seconded. Aye. Does motion carry?--AWT88 20:37, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

French title

Could you add back the fact that the French title has no 2 in it (at least, not in the Quebec version. You tell 'em, Detour), because some IP (80.236.81.91) undid my edit. Probably thought that because all other foreign titles had a 2, French was no different. Anyway I would do it myself if it wasn't for the semi-protection (which I am totally for). I know it's kind of silly to ask other people to do modifications for me, but please. 66.131.29.196 21:08, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Êtes-vous certains? -Derik 21:14, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

We indeed do not have a 2 in our Transformers title in Quebec. Maybe it's just France? --Detour 21:35, 2 July 2009 (EDT)`

Non-teaser trailer supports this: [2] --Detour 21:39, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Les Français sont toujours causé des problèmes. Peut-être qu'ils pensent qu'il est numérotée en métrique? Si le film a utilisé un chiffre romain ils se seraient probablement merde leur pantalon et ensuite les manger. -Derik 21:48, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Please stop butchering my language. --Detour 21:50, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Seconded. --Ascendron 21:52, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Ce n'est pas de ma faute! Il est le poisson vivant dans mon oreille! En tout cas, de véritables langues sont basés sur ECMAScript. -Derik 22:01, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

"English, dude. English." --Lonegamer78 22:33, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Thanks. Oh, and Derik, please stop. It kinda hurts me as a Frenchie-Canuck to see that. Plus, you're probably using internet translation, which as you can see is quite pitiful. Nice one LoneGamer, BTW. I couldn't have said it better. 66.131.29.196 20:45, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Section ordering/technical details

Looking at the 2007 movie page... it's got a LOT of really boring-ass info on it. Formatting, foreign movie board ratings, etc, etc.... all that stuff should be waaaaaaay down near the bottom, if not on an entirely separate page, considering how long the 2007 movie page is.

And likewise for this one. Why is cast before the synopsis? Why do we need a list of foreign titles taking up the entire first screen of the page? Etc. etc.? -- Repowers 20:37, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

Appearance Order

Minor error, but still an error. Both Sam and Sideswipe are ordered as the ninth characters to appear in the film. Article locked, so I can't make the correction. --TheGoodman 04:56, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

Edit

Okay, I understand by the edit button's been switched to OFF but it there anyway to add to references? It came to me last night that the epic forest show down might be a reference to Code of Hero.

That is a perfect example of why the edit button's been switched to off. --ItsWalky 10:31, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

then they should turn it on so we can edit some stuff

Main cast order of appearance numbers

Do we really need them? Our Transformers (film) article doesn't have them. Some anonymous idiot took it upon himself to number the characters in a pretty horrible, incorrect fashion, and while people have since repositioned the names, the order of appearance is still wrong. And we're missing a character from the list. I would think people here who actually care about the accuracy of the wiki (ie, the staff and regular contributors) don't have the time and money to go see the movie again just to jot down when characters appear, so may I suggest we remove the numbering nonsense and restore this box to the way it was before whichever staff member opened up the anonymous floodgates? --FFN 06:34, 15 July 2009 (EDT)

We should probably add a flag to {{featuredcharacters}} to suppress the "(Numbers indicate order of appearance.)" message where it wouldn't be logical. --abates 07:00, 15 July 2009 (EDT)

I agree. If there wasn't a "(Numbers indicate order of appearance.)", people wouldn't try adding the numbers when we don't need the numbers. --FFN 07:34, 15 July 2009 (EDT)

Pigs/Meat locker error

I don't get it, so if the owner is jewish that doesn't mean they can't supply pig meat to those who aren't jewish. Is this really considered an error? 68.9.247.42 00:49, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

Other goofs

~~You could fairly state that the Gulf of Aqaba does divide Egypt and Jordan, because those two countries could share a border if that body of water was not there.~~ Never mind this one, I misunderstood the nature of the error.

Joran and Egypt do have an area where the two countries do meet, on land, and it is possible that they do have at least one border between them. The area is small, it is roughly the size of Montreal and would likely only have one or two borders. Raiderdline61 18:11, 7 June 2010

One to be added is that the Predator drone is depicted two different ways. The Predator has a propellor, and you can see this when it takes off since it's footage of the actual vehicle. When the CGI model of the Predator approaches the battle, it has no propellor. I think the first film had the same goof. I'd add it myself, but due to semi-protection I can't do that yet. Added. Hellbus 17:45, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

When Mikaela uses the tongs to grab Wheelie, a mirror mysteriously appears on the workshop floor and reflects a lot of sunlight into the camera. When the sunlight fades away Wheelie can finally be seen. I suppose it helps make the CGI look more seamless. -Anonymous, 24 July 2009

I have a theory about one of the scenes. When Sam got picked up from the party it was night, when they got to the scene in the graveyard it was daytime. What if the trip to the cemetary took all night so that the autobots could stay out of sight, and the conversation took place in the morning? just a thought. -Anonymous, 27 July 2009

transforming pen/light

It just hit me that when i went to see the movie, that i got a promotional item on the night i saw the movie; a transforming pen/light with the movie's logo on it. Is it worth noting somewhere that such a thing exists?--Sunjumper 11:41, 2 August 2009 (EDT)

The Serbian title (lol)

The alleged title "Transformersi: Najveće govno ikada" actually means "Transformers: The Biggest S**t Ever". :D It should be "Transformersi: Osveta Poraženog" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Prokletinick (talk • contribs).

Some might say that was a more accurate title! Thanks, I've corrected it. Any idea if there's a "2" in the official Serbian title? --abates 07:10, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

Well, I've looked it up, and no, there isn't. --Prokletinick 11:17, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

Anti-Arab subtext

...How is destroying and damaging various Middle Eastern landmarks anti-Arab? -- SFH 15:57, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

As someone who is dating an Arab, has met a LOT of Arabs, is comparatively familiar with Arab culture, and has become pretty sensitive to such things over the years... I have no. freaking. clue. I added it primarily 'cause I think the notion is hilarious. Of all the things in the movie to fixate on... -- Repowers 16:08, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

Alice tearing up Princeton is an obvious sign of anti-intellectualism. And Blackout's attack on the military base in the first film demonstrate a clear anti-military slant. And lot's not forget Bay's previous film, Armageddon, and its obvious anti-Earth agenda. - Cattleprod 16:12, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

When large amounts of a movie take place in Arab countries but the only Arab characters we see either exist to be laughed at (the border guard) or as cannon fodder (the Jordanian helicopters), people seeing an anti-Arab subtext strikes me as perfectly reasonable. --KilMichaelMcC 13:31, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

To be fair, most every other human in the movie was also a redshirt or comic relief. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheMZone (talk • contribs). 15:40, 24 October 2010 (EDT)

Jewish deli?

Are we sure the Simmons family is Jewish? Seymour was wearing a friggin' cross around his neck in the first film.--Nevermore 08:23, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

The novelization says he's Jewish, but that's just the novelization. (More specifically, at the road check somewhere Egypt, Simmons calls these folks "his people," to which Sam is surprised, since he thought Simmons was Jewish. Simmons responds: "I'm one thirty-sixth Arab. Hey, Kosher, halal - it's the same thing.") --ItsWalky 09:03, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

Well, as it stands, there are no Jews in the movies. Israel doesn't even exist.--Nevermore 11:47, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

His mother's name is Tova, which might as well be Jewette. Of course, that's no guarantee they'd run a kosher business. --Thylacine 2000 12:03, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

So why was he wearing a cross in the first movie, then? Also, is her name confirmed for the movie?--Nevermore 13:20, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

Obviously he was a wearing a cross in the first movie because they didn't decide to make him Jewish until the second. --KilMichaelMcC 13:32, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

But is he definitely a Jew in the movie? Or is that only in the novelization? Maybe Alan Dean Foster's Seymour Simmons is a Jew, but Orci/Kurtzman's Simmons is Catholic? Can we tell for sure?--Nevermore 19:46, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

Jews for Jesus? *is half-kidding* --Jeysie 13:54, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

He converted. Broke his poor mother's heart, he did. Seymour, why didn't you become a doctor like your cousin Morty? A government agent? You'll never get a nice wife that way! Hooper_X 14:09, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

"Pretending to be protestant to get ahead." It's a game as old as America, and presumably well-in-force in good-old-boy secret organizations like Sector Seven. (Which in some versions is run by Freemasons.) -Derik 16:17, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

Tova can be a Norwegian name (albeit usually a male name). He was definitely wearing a cross in the first movie. As for the Deli, I recall it had some sort of Italian name, along with Simmons. Maybe his mother's (Italian) last name?

Also why would a Jewish deli have friggin' pigs being butchered there? --G1MarvelBlaster 10:32, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Name

The name for Brazil is "A Vingança dos Derrotados" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.25.169.239 (talk • contribs).

Changes before, during and after production

According to Paul Ozzimo's art gallery, the attack on the aircraft carrier was originally planned to be a Decepticon Submarine attacking the carrier. Is this worth mentioning?

Another Transformers reference

Maybe the following reference should be added to the page: On board the Nemesis, Megatron says "yesss...", which is a trademark habit of the Megatron of Beast Wars.--172.129.64.182 12:45, 5 October 2009 (EDT)

You mention Changing Gears, but not Sun Raid?

I notice that the episode Changing Gears was mentioned as having a device like the Sun Harvester, but how about the same kind of device Megatron tried to use in Sun Raid? 68.61.240.172 09:54, 23 October 2009 (EDT)

The Solar Harvester is not a reference to either one, but "Changing Gears" is the one people will absolutely not shut the hell up about. It's listed there in its current format because my preferred version ("Anyone who thinks the incredibly generic notion of a device to suck energy out of the sun is a reference to a random forgotten Generation 1 episode, and not just an incredibly generic idea that's been done a billion times before in science fiction, is an absolute freaking moron") probably wouldn't go over so well. -- Repowers 20:16, 23 October 2009 (EDT)

Yes... well... anyway. I, for one, wasn't aware of a similar device in Sun Raid. Now I have a reason to listen to the story. Thanks for the info 68.61.240.172. But the "Transformers references" section is generally reserved for items we imagine the writers looked to past fiction for inspiration for. In the case of the Solar Harvester, they probably did not have the cartoon episode in mind. - Starfield 20:35, 23 October 2009 (EDT)

I'd support that revision, Rob! - Chris McFeely 06:25, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Airport security error

When errors are listed in the form of a question, I sometimes have the urge to answer them. "How on Earth did the big metal box containing a complex electronic mechanism shouting to be released ever make it through airport luggage screening?" I don't know about the film, but in the novel it is Mikaela's Epic Hotness that distracts the guard into just letting her through. That and she said there were expensive mechanic's tools inside so it might look strange in an x-ray. Sure I have my doubts that would happen in the real-world, but that is the in-fiction explanation. That is the same fictional universe that gave us... well, this movie. That is hardly the least believable thing. - Starfield 11:35, 25 October 2009 (EDT)

I probably should be more disciplined about avoiding question-style notes, if only for this very reason. It's an open invite for anons to do stupid shit like posting speculatory answers. -- Repowers 23:56, 25 October 2009 (EDT)

Reception section

Yea, but what does the fandom think? - Starfield 23:00, 5 November 2009 (EST)

They are 100% in agreement, I assure you. --ItsWalky 01:22, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Shockwave (G1) appeared in Revenge ERROR!!!

G1 Shockwave actually appeared in Revenge of the Fallen as in the newspaper danggling in between Skids and Mudflap, meanwhile, holding for dear life from Devastator.

Surprisingly, Shockwave's also holding for dear life too.

Shockwave. --ItsWalky 10:34, 18 November 2009 (EST)

Location of final battle

I've been planning on writing a detailed account of the final battle in the film, starting with the Decepticons landing as protoforms and ending with Optimus killing the Fallen, like we did with Battle of Autobot City and Mission City. However, I have no idea where to place this article. Should I write it up in Giza? Aqaba? Egypt? Or should I just place it in some other article, like "Battle for the Matrix" or "Battle for the solar harvester"? Any thoughts? -- SFH 15:33, 26 November 2009 (EST)

Seriously, any thoughts? -- SFH 16:44, 3 December 2009 (EST)

Aqaba sounds good. - Starfield 17:12, 3 December 2009 (EST)

Late, but Operation: Firestorm TheMZone 23:32, 2 October 2010 (EDT)

Very late. I ended up writing Operation: Firestorm because I couldn't decide where to put it. -- SFH 23:54, 2 October 2010 (EDT)

Well then, issue resolved. TheMZone 20:33, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

Not an error

I don't think that Optimus' mouthplate being restored is an error when he's seen taking off after being merged with Jetfire's corpse parts. I really shouldn't have to point out why, but I will: A new mouthplate was slapped on him too. You can even see it if you watch carefully. ZeldaTheSwordsman 13:15, 18 December 2009 (EST)

Frenzy

Should there be mention of Frenzy's cameo? Would it go under "Transformers references"? NCZ 16:39, 11 January 2010 (EST)

He should be in the cast list. He isn't dead. Simmons wasn't shown killing him since The Veiled Threat, and I seriously doubt he would kill him. He likes having a captured living Transformer too much. - Starfield 18:44, 11 January 2010 (EST)

Frenzy died in the first movie. Simmons has his dead head in a jar. This is what the movies show us. He should not be in the cast list because he is not part of the cast. He's a prop. I had no idea he was depicted as being alive in "The Veiled Threat," but regardless of that I find the thought of listing a severed-head-in-a-jar as if he's actually in any way a character in the movie to be ridiculous. --KilMichaelMcC 19:54, 11 January 2010 (EST)

The dead head cameo doesn't work with "Veiled Threat" anyhow. The book describes it as half a head, still bisected from Frenzy's fate in the first movie, while the head is pristine in the film. --ItsWalky 20:00, 11 January 2010 (EST)

The pristine head doesn't work with the first film either. If it can't be alive because it was cut in half in the novel, then it can't even be Frenzy's head because that was cut in half in the first movie. The novel is the "official prequel", so Frenzy's head being alive is official and everything. - Starfield 20:27, 11 January 2010 (EST)

Alive or dead, he's still really not a character in this movie. --KilMichaelMcC 23:20, 11 January 2010 (EST)

Star wars quotes? What in the name of Primes?

What is it with the corny star wars quotes for the image captions? I mean seriously...86.170.40.126 16:41, 14 January 2010 (EST)

Go look at the article for the '86 movie. It is perpetuation of a gag. 98.119.124.232 23:36, 13 March 2010 (EST)

Technical errors

Could there, by a slim possibility, be a spiderweb in the Tomb of the Primes? I put it in the errors section, and noone's taken it down yet, but I wonder. TheMZone 15:42, 24 October 2010 (EDT)

Mouthplate error not an error

I removed the comment in technical errors about Optimus gaining his mouthplate again because it shows, very clearly, that before he was boosted by Jetfire-parts, he had no mouthplate, and he was also clearly shown that a new mouthplate flew onto him while he was upgrading.

Reflector was first wasn't he?

Reading through the tf references featured in ROTF I noticed that somebody said Devastator was the first combiner in the G1 cartoon. Surely Reflector, assuming we agree that Reflector counts as a combiner, was the first combiner featured in G1- albeit less of a famous one. I don't appear to be able to edit this so could somebody just modify it to 'devastator who was a combiner in g1' rather than 'devastator who was the first combiner in g1'. Cheers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.85.166.143 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 11 December 2010 (EST).

Reflector wasn't a combiner. He was one dude with three bodies. Or something. --abates 18:30, 11 December 2010 (EST)

Three dudes who combined to form a gestalt altmode no? Not as famous as devy but theres certainly some combining at work there —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.85.131.165 (talk • contribs).

Please sign your posts, by typing four tildes at the end. That aside, you may have a point. Our Combiner page explicitly mentions Reflector as a combiner. JW 11:41, 12 December 2010 (EST)

Why is Scavenger not in the character list?

He was in the movie so why is he cut out? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.131.248.230 (talk • contribs).

It's a Decepticon!!

This part has always left me kind of confused. At some point in the movie, as also written in the synopsis in here, "[...] in order to read the symbols, they may need a Decepticon. Mikaela then interrogates Wheelie, who identifies the symbols as the Language of the Primes, and suggests they may track down one of the ancient Seekers [...]"

So, if they already knew that they needed for a Decepticon, what reason did they have to freak out like that when they reawakened Jetfire and saw his Decepticon symbol? --Sharky7 03:23, 6 March 2011 (EST)

I think it's that they probably weren't expecting the Seeker that they're looking for to be also a Decepticon. Wheelie's the only Decepticon they've somewhat gotten along with fine without fear of loosing any body parts. Being Cybertronian he might not understand the Language of the Primes itself but he is able to recognize the origins. Like how some people are able to recognize the general look of Egyptian hieroglyphics but not understand what it means or how it's pronounced, be it from research or a simple trip to the museum. --Lonegamer78 03:52, 6 March 2011 (EST)

Yeah, according to Transformers: Exodus, Jetfire is with the Autobots from the beginning. So, why is he a decepticon in the movie?

Exodus is part of the Aligned continuity family while ROTF is part of the Live-action film series continuity family. There is no link between the Jetfires in these two pieces of fiction. --Khajidha 14:46, 7 December 2011 (EST)

More Detail on bethlehen pa shooting.

I just wanted to point out that the site the filming was done was the old Bethlehem Steel plant primary around the blast furnaces to provide scale for the robots size. you can actually not visit the site since it's now an sands hotel and Artsquest set up an concert and art center near the site.

Lamppost

Mikela slammed into a lamppost to get rid of alice. Not a tree.

Matrix 1999 reference

Is the interrogation scene of Sam by Megatron and Starscream at the foundry a reference to the Wachowski movie's interrogation scene of Neo ?

A powerful character, an authoritative figure played by Hugo Weaving, in grey, probes the protagonist (the protagonist who will later turn out to have some destiny in ressurection and being of special status like Prime or being the one) to get information about how much he knows of the Matrix and this kept-secret society that guards it. (the primes/those who got disillusioned about the virtual reality.)

And well, the two little metallic slimy monster insects with super slender tentacles who obey Hugo Weaving penetrate the wiggling protagonists, that was what set me off to draw the parallels.

--SnipinScientist (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2018 (EST)

...no? Honestly, that's a pretty common/tropey scenario. The only loose connection compared to every other interrogation scene like this is Hugo Weaving and the word "matrix", and that's not enough to consider it an intentional reference. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 19:48, 16 December 2018 (EST)

Editing issues

I keep adding to the errors section but it keeps going away! What the heck?! Skywarp Prime (talk) 22:53, 10 June 2019 (EDT)Skywarp Prime

It keeps going away because it's not an actual error, so other users keep removing it. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 23:07, 10 June 2019 (EDT)

I said things like how it's an error that they call the Arcees twins instead of triplets and Megatron's magically moving blast wound which I have seen multiple times and they are very real errors. Honestly, the fact they keep removing them is very annoying. Skywarp Prime (talk) 10:24, 12 June 2019 (EDT)Skywarp Prime

A: Lennox says "Arcee, Twins!" He's calling for Arcee and Skids and Mudflap. B: Both I and Jalaguy have watched that scene and there is no moving blast wound. Escargon (talk) 11:02, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

I didn't think he was addressing the twins, too. It's also that people occasionally refer to them as twins. Also, the scene when Megs gets blasted is a little fast paced so I didn't see it right

Error with the article

It says in the geographic discontinuities section that the museum Jetfire was at is in the middle of DC despite being 30 miles away from the city in reality. Might wanna fix that. Skywarp Prime (talk) 11:57, 8 July 2019 (EDT)Skywarp Prime

Fix what? The note ALREADY covers the problem you mention. The note says that the movie calls it the "National Air and Space Museum" (which is in Washington, DC) but actually uses the Udvar-Hazy location (miles outside DC in Virginia) and then has it depicted as next to a facility that is actually in Arizona. --Khajidha (talk) 13:24, 8 July 2019 (EDT)

Rampage VS Skipjack

Alrighty, so for the sake of not repeating myself, here is a link to the discussion that was had on Skipjack's personal page and I recommend anyone reading this should have a look before commenting here, but I reckon there are a couple of things that could be done, but for the sake of relevance towards this page, I'm specifically talking about my note towards the end that suggests an edit that would affect this page, any discussion towards the edits to the actual Skipjack page should be made on that talk page. So without any further ado, let the discussion commence! Fanofcoolstuff27 (talk) 06:30, 24 October 2020 (EDT)

Should this treatment be added to the wiki?

https://issuu.com/maqtanim/docs/tf2_100207 It seems the treatment above is official since the head admin of the Michael Bay forums confirmed its validity: https://transformerslive.blogspot.com/2007/10/transfomers-2-leaked-script.html?m=0

https://www.tfw2005.com/boards/threads/nelson-says-leaked-script-is-real-but-wont-be-used.153681/

Furthermore, there are some pieces of concept art by Massive Black seemingly based on this treatment. Especially the Ultra Magnus one seems very similiar to his depiction in the supposed treatment. The dates given in the concept art pictures also seem to roughly match when the treatment was written: https://www.tfw2005.com/boards/attachments/11182_image_863508-jpg.29285472/ https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkuZAZqUUAAV5wR?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FmoOxFGX0AAL2F9.jpg:large

If the fact that the Michael Bay forums head admin outright confirmed its validity is enough, can I add information from the treatment to this site? --Primestar3 (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2024 (EDT)