Sir Edmund Burton (Anthony Hopkins) stands over a table covered with ancient artifacts
Film review

Transformers: The Last Knight

2017 · Directed by Michael Bay · 2h 34m

In a sentenceAnthony Hopkins explains the plot with the confidence of a man who will not be taking questions

Two worlds collide, and only one can survive. Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg), Viviane Wembly (Laura Haddock) and Sir Edmund Burton (Anthony Hopkins) feature alongside Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen) and Bumblebee (voiced by Erik Aadahl). The science-fiction adventure also includes Colonel William Lennox (Josh Duhamel), Izabella (Isabela Merced) and Quintessa (Gemma Chan). Cogman is voiced by Jim Carter, and Stanley Tucci plays Merlin. Michael Bay directs, with Art Marcum, Ken Nolan and Matt Holloway sharing the screenplay credit.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Michael Bay finds occasional striking images and gives Anthony Hopkins room to enjoy himself, but the muddled action and overworked story make Transformers: The Last Knight a long, unrewarding evening.

Michael Bay directs Transformers: The Last Knight with an appetite for spectacle that the storytelling cannot support. It is a poor science-fiction adventure, intermittently inventive to look at and persistently difficult to enjoy. Across 154 minutes, the film keeps adding explanations when it ought to be giving us a clearer reason to follow its characters. We can accept the absurdity of two worlds colliding; the problem is how much work the film makes of following the collision.

Art Marcum, Ken Nolan and Matt Holloway share the screenplay credit, and the writing never makes its competing demands feel manageable. Each new explanation seems to require another, while the people delivering them get little chance to become more than carriers of information. A film this keen on urgent business needs to make the next objective simple, even when the larger story is ridiculous. Here we spend too much time wondering what we are supposed to be following.

Mark Wahlberg gives Cade Yeager a useful bluntness, and his exchanges with Laura Haddock’s Viviane Wembly have some life. There is enough chemistry to suggest how much easier the film might have been to enjoy with fewer distractions. We laughed at the relish Anthony Hopkins brings to Sir Edmund Burton’s explanations; he treats them as an opportunity to have some fun. His performance is welcome, though the amount of information he has to deliver remains a problem.

Jonathan Sela’s cinematography occasionally conveys the enormous scale that makes this sort of spectacle worth attempting. Jeffrey Beecroft’s production design contributes to the crowded images, but the camera and cutting give us little chance to inspect the surroundings. Michael Bay fills the image with movement, then too often hurries away before the action has become clear. Some shots deserve considerably longer than the film allows them.

Roger Barton, Adam Gerstel, John Refoua, Mark Sanger, Debra Neil-Fisher and Calvin Wimmer share the editing credit. The finished film seldom lets an action develop clearly before cutting to another demand on our attention. We were exhausted by the fighting, because we kept having to work out where everyone stood when we should have been enjoying ourselves. An imaginative move needs a pause afterwards so that we can take in what happened.

Steve Jablonsky’s score contributes to the pressure, pressing for a response when the scenes have not earned one. A little less insistence might have helped the jokes, which already struggle to find space between explanations and action. Jim Carter brings an enjoyable comic edge to Cogman. Elsewhere, the humour is frequently too juvenile to offer much relief, particularly across a film of this length.

An action film can survive a daft plot when each pursuit or fight gives us something clear to enjoy. Knowing where the danger is, and who is in its way, is a reasonable expectation even when the plot makes little sense. Admirers of frantic spectacle may get further than we did, but even they deserve action they can follow without so much effort. We would spend the evening elsewhere.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

42
Positive
1
Mixed
11
Negative
15

Most critics find Transformers: The Last Knight exhausting and incoherent, with praise concentrated on isolated action sequences rather than the story. Even several negative reviews acknowledge the visual effects, stunt work and Michael Bay’s command of scale. Bumblebee’s action scenes draw particular approval, while Anthony Hopkins supplies some welcome wit amid the exposition. The broad complaint is that convoluted plotting, thin characters and excessive length make the spectacle hard to enjoy.

The reviews differ most over whether Bay’s images offer enough compensation. The Los Angeles Times finds moments of visual beauty and an exuberance that makes the film surprisingly bearable; Slant Magazine argues that the chaotic action destroys any sense of place. That is a wide split over the filmmaking, though even the more sympathetic notices concede substantial weaknesses. Some find absurd fun in the excess, while others see action that lacks Bay’s usual energy and invention.

Los Angeles Times
20 June 2017 · Justin Chang
70*

Chang finds the film surprisingly bearable, praising Bay’s exuberant visual command despite its incoherent plot and juvenile sensibility. He especially singles out moments of startling visual beauty amid the chaotic action.

Read the full review →
Variety
20 June 2017 · Owen Gleiberman
65*

Gleiberman finds the film’s over-the-top, dystopian excess makes it a better, more badass entry, though it remains hectic and empty. He praises the lively chemistry between Mark Wahlberg and Laura Haddock, which gives the spectacle some human spark.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
20 June 2017 · Tim Grierson
64*

The accessible text identifies this as a review but does not reveal the critic’s full verdict. Its standfirst describes the film as a loud, assertive return for the franchise.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
63*

The URL identifies this as a review of the specified film, but the page content is unavailable. The critic’s verdict and any specific praise or complaint cannot be determined.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
17 November 2017 · ★★★ · Charlotte O'Sullivan
60

O'Sullivan finds the film convoluted and mostly piffle, but not the worst entry in the franchise. She singles out Bumblebee's character arc and a nifty chase sequence for praise.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · Alan Jones
60

Jones finds the film an exhausting, mind-numbing spectacle, despite its lavish action. He criticizes its convoluted, largely incomprehensible story and its jumble of Arthurian legend, undersea adventures, and space battles.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Transformers: The Last Knight worth watching?
Transformers: The Last Knight is difficult to recommend, and we score it 34 out of 100 for muddled action and an overworked story. Anthony Hopkins has fun with the explanations, and occasional images impress, but even admirers of frantic spectacle may find 154 minutes of hard-to-follow fighting an unrewarding evening.
How long is Transformers: The Last Knight, and what is it rated?
Transformers: The Last Knight runs 2h 34m. It is an action and adventure film.
Where can I watch Transformers: The Last Knight in South Africa?
Transformers: The Last Knight is available to rent from Apple TV from R34.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How violent or frightening is Transformers: The Last Knight, and is it suitable for children?
Transformers: The Last Knight carries a UK 12A certificate, so children under 12 need an accompanying adult at the cinema. The fighting is frantic and sustained, and we find its muddled staging exhausting rather than enjoyable. That makes it a poor choice for children sensitive to prolonged action; the certificate does not mean it suits every younger viewer.
How does Transformers: The Last Knight compare to Pacific Rim?
Transformers: The Last Knight is the weaker choice beside Pacific Rim, which we recommend for giant-machine action with weight and readable movement. Both struggle to give their human characters enough to do, but Pacific Rim shows more affection for its operators and stages its fights with greater care; The Last Knight too often makes the action difficult to follow.
What should I watch after Transformers: The Last Knight?
After Transformers: The Last Knight, try Pacific Rim (2013, Fi1m 70): Giant machines fight with weight, readable movement and affection for their operators. Then The Iron Giant (1999, Fi1m 88): A robot story that gives its human friendships time to matter; and The Castle of Cagliostro (1979, Fi1m 80): Mechanical ingenuity and clear action, with room for people to be funny.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. Pacific Rim (2013, Fi1m 70)Giant machines fight with weight, readable movement and affection for their operators.

  2. The Iron Giant (1999, Fi1m 88)A robot story that gives its human friendships time to matter.

  3. The Host (2006) · not reviewed yetA creature spectacle with a family worth worrying about between the attacks.

  4. The Castle of Cagliostro (1979, Fi1m 80)Mechanical ingenuity and clear action, with room for people to be funny.

  5. Attack the Block (2011, Fi1m 84)Alien trouble on a smaller scale, with clear geography and properly drawn neighbours.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever