First there was "Back to the Future," and then "The Matrix," and then, more recently, "Pirates of the Caribbean," where literally the last thing said on screen during the second film was a cliffhanging new plot point. If you've got a successful franchise, why not link the second and third movies, forcing audiences to wait upwards of a year for resolution?
Because it's friggin "lame," "Transformers" director Michael Bay insisted to us at the MTV Movie Awards, telling MTV News that the second go-round with Optimus Prime would be entirely self-contained.
"You know how those sequels they do the second one so you go see the third one? ["Transformers 2”] is it," he said, indicating that "2” would be its own story free from the duel shackles of set-up or resolution. "First one was just introducing, setting up stuff, so we can go a lot farther. Let's just say [this] is not a lame sequel."
If "Transformers" was all about introduction, then "Transformers 2” will be all about escalation, with reports that upwards of 20 robots will do battle in the blockbuster sequel. But for Bay, it's not the number of robots present, but how they'll be more fully and individually realized that has him excited, he said.
"The robots are going to surprise a lot of people because we go with a lot of different levels," he teased.
Of course, that also applies to returning cast members, as well, who will now get a chance to go further with their characters than they did in the original. Shia LaBeouf will be in college (and taught by Rainn Wilson). But forget transforming robots or finals angst, Megan Fox smiled, the real transformation is yet to come.
"In this one I transform from a girl into a woman," she laughed.
Good enough for us. Is Bay's idea of a self-contained sequel better or worse than linked films? And would you like to see more personality and backstory out of the robots, or is it all about blowing shit up? Sound off below.