This movie officially heralds the beginning of the new Transformers...

Rating: 3/10 (3 July 2007)

... Or the film-makers have seriously screwed this up.
SPOILERS START
I accept that the designs for the robots have to be updated to reflect the 21st century, but to alter the very meaning of "transform", that is just heresy.
The animation, as a stand-alone, is top-notch, but taken in context, it has failed to understand what it is to convert from robot to alternate mode and back. Boxy and comical the old transformations were, but there was an underlying logic behind their conversion and one can guess what each robot could transform into.
When a Transformer truly transforms, it is like a Rubik's cube unfolding itself into 6 sides of the same colour; not just "open up the cover of the vehicle, flip the chassis over, merge all the 3 million machine parts together, stick some doors and wheels, and pop the head out of the whirl".
While I am impressed by the attention to detail in rendering, I do wonder what the film-makers decided as the themes that differentiate between Autobots and Decepticons. From what I gather, Autobots have humanoid faces and Decepticons with alien faces. Well, they should point out to us where Ironhide's nose is and where Jazz's mouth is. And what Bonecrusher's and Blackout's alien faces look like. I find it atrocious that Bumblebee's face looks like a baby with a pacifier in his mouth!
There was also a distinct lack of emphasis on the characters of the Transformers; why Jazz was "cool", why Starscream failed Megatron the second time. The charm of Transformers was how the Autobots are amazed by the human spirit, and how the Decepticons grow to loathe Earth. We have none of that exhibited, exonerated or explicated in the movie.
Cardinal sins were also committed with respect to the original series: Don't the film-makers know that Starscream must have a screaming voice? What it means when Prime says "Autobots, transform and roll out", that ALL Autobots transform together and truly roll out (and not cut-away to Sector 7). The Autobots call Optimus Prime, "Prime" not "Optimus".
Much of the fault lies with the director; all his films seemed to factor a love story surrounded by the events that the film title relates to, and forgetting to focus on what the film titles says: "Pearl Harbour" is about the terrible attack on Pearl Harbour and the bravery of those who fought, NOT a love story that happens around that attack. "The Island" is about a facility that houses human clones, NOT a love story of 2 clones. "Armageddon" is about the threat of extinction by a meteor strike, NOT a love story between the astronaut and his lover down on Earth.
Transformers is a movie about "The Earth is caught in the middle of an intergalactic war between two races of robots", NOT a love story about a boy, with a robot for a car, who loves a girl.
At least 60% of the film was about humans, where it should have concentrated on the interactions and battles between the robots. Why bother setting things up like "Independence Day" when it is not the destruction of the world.
Other senseless points include: Is it the Cube or the Allspark (be consistent)? Why does Optimus Prime say "We're too late", indicating that the Decepticons reached Earth first, and yet the Autobots assembled together first? Where was the congregation of Decepticons to discuss or initiate the liberation of Megatron? Why does Blackout overpower a fully-equipped base, only to fall to a single bazooka shot to the crotch? Why didn't it use its EMP abilities to decimate the city? Where was Scorponok in the final battle? Where was Barricade in the end? Were Secretary Keller, the techies, and the Sector 7 guy still engaged in a gunfight with Frenzy when everything ended? What was the Sector 7 personnel for? Why the extended screen time only to serve as comic relief? What were the techies for, when they have not cracked any code or conjured up the anti-virus? What was Sam running around in the city for? To hide the Cube in where? Wouldn't Sam be fried when the Cube burned into Megatron? etc.
Another point was the amount of babble that the lead actor had been given. How many "Gimme 5 more mins" can he say in a minute? Does any of the specs-searching / parent-interactions / Mikaela's past served to shed more light the war among the Transformers?
Poor logic, poor dialogue, poor plot, not enough screen-time for robots, too many humans and a blatant change of what the original series is about make this film a big disappointment.
What could have saved the film was a focused animation theme, but yet against a complicated city backdrop with numerous human activity, all the beautifully-rendered frames in the final battle were, sadly, out of focus.
How difficult is it to have a simple uninhabited background so that the viewer can focus on the fighting robots? Why must it be in a distracting city-scape where innocent bystanders inexplicably keep colliding with the robots?
SPOILERS END
Conceptually this movie is flawed; you cannot say that it is a remake when you don't even understand the essence and themes of what is refers to.
If this film is meant as entertainment for the whole family, then it is not about the Transformers, but Robots that transform. And it takes advantage of past reference to create fanfare and drum up ticket sales, but it disrespects the soul of that reference. Come to think of it, it should be called "The Auto-morphers".
It only serves to alienate those who had enjoyed the past series, and forces them to adapt to this out-of-sync new, lest they be branded as not looking-forward.
Unless of course, this movie is meant to officially herald the beginning of the new Transformers...