Megan Fox replaced in Transformers 3

On June 05 2010 05:12 KiLL_ORdeR wrote:And Transformers 3? has this been known for awhile?

On June 05 2010 05:19 Athos wrote:
I never actually watched Transformers 2 but I heard that it was crap. Bummer, because I really liked Transformers 1, and it looks like the movies are heading down the shitty sequel path.

On June 05 2010 05:12 KiLL_ORdeR wrote:
Found this article on Yahoo when i was checking the score of the Celtics game lat night.

http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/celebrities/gallery/2646/new-transformers-3-star-rosie-huntingtonwhiteley/fp#photo0

So not only have I never heard of this "blonde-wannabe-Megan-Fox" but she just is not attractive in any way, shape, or form. What happened to Fox?

And Transformers 3? has this been known for awhile?

Thoughts?

On June 05 2010 05:37 GodIsNotHere wrote:
Am I crazy or is something off about her eyes?

On June 05 2010 05:21 genwar wrote:
Why does there EVEN NEED TO BE A LOVE INTEREST?

On June 05 2010 05:48 BroOd wrote:
She looks really beat up in that first picture, but in a few of the others she looks pretty hot. I liked TF1, in a very non-commited, passive way, but TF2 was pretty bad. It was almost like they hired a screenwriter whose only frame of reference on how to write a movie was based on a single viewing of TF1.

I also don't understand why people call Megan Fox ugly. She might not be your "type" (as in the type of slut/supermodel you'd prefer to masturbate to or dream about), and she seems almost comically trashy sometimes, but physically she's pretty gifted. Sometimes I feel like people go out of their way to let it be known that they think Megan Fox is ugly like it's some badge of honor. I know there are people who probably legitimately don't find her attractive, but the % claiming she's ugly seems pretty inordinate to me.

On June 05 2010 05:48 BroOd wrote:
She looks really beat up in that first picture, but in a few of the others she looks pretty hot. I liked TF1, in a very non-commited, passive way, but TF2 was pretty bad. It was almost like they hired a screenwriter whose only frame of reference on how to write a movie was based on a single viewing of TF1.

I also don't understand why people call Megan Fox ugly. She might not be your "type" (as in the type of slut/supermodel you'd prefer to masturbate to or dream about), and she seems almost comically trashy sometimes, but physically she's pretty gifted. Sometimes I feel like people go out of their way to let it be known that they think Megan Fox is ugly like it's some badge of honor. I know there are people who probably legitimately don't find her attractive, but the % claiming she's ugly seems pretty inordinate to me.

On June 05 2010 05:54 Hot_Bid wrote:
I'm a huge transformers fan, I thought TF2 sucked, but that said I will never stop paying for live action transformer explosion movies. I was hooked since the animated one in my childhood. I'm paying for the robots, not to see Megan Fox, who I can get my fill of using Google search. I don't care which hot girl they use in TF3, or even if it has a hot girl. I want robots, explosions, and that ch-CH-ch-ch-CH transforming noise. Remember, nobody knew who the fuck Megan Fox was before TF1, the movie made her not the other way around. Michael Bay 4 Life.

ch-CH-ch-ch-CH transforming noise

On June 05 2010 05:21 genwar wrote:
Why does there EVEN NEED TO BE A LOVE INTEREST?

On June 05 2010 05:57 Catch]22 wrote:
You guys are all missing the point of Transformers, or more specifically Michael Bay, the Transformers movies, both of them, are great if you like awesome action, which they have plenty of, and comedy.

Sure they aren't deep or anything, but you are watching them from the wrong perspective, and for the love of god, DON'T watch them at home, they are meant to be watched at the cinema, or you'll miss all the explosions and stuff that is what makes this movie what it is, just something to be enjoyed.

On June 05 2010 05:33 Khol wrote:
I watch transformers to see robots fighting, not to see some chicks tits. I know sites for that.

On June 05 2010 05:34 hydroxx wrote:
people saying megan fox is ugly are lying to themselves lol


and this chick isn't bad, that's just a horrible picture of her.

On June 05 2010 06:04 IndecisivePenguin wrote:
Never thought Megan Fox was all that attractive anyway.

On June 05 2010 05:59 BroOd wrote:

No, I think most of us have a very good idea of what to expect from a Michael Bay movie. TF2 didn't deliver it.

On June 05 2010 05:23 On_Slaught wrote:
Don't make the War of the Worlds mistake. Not a single person on the planet cared what happened to Tom Cruise. We wanted to see the FIGHTS!

On June 05 2010 06:41 Djzapz wrote:
Megan Fox was an icon of beauty for a long time so people started saying she's ugly because it's trendy to say that... It's pretty cool to not agree with the popular opinion isn't it kids?

Truth is whether or not she's your "type", she's very attractive. It's a shame they're getting rid of her because she was the only redeeming element of Transformers... Now that girl they're replacing her with isn't even in the same league. That picture in the OP is especially bad so don't judge her with that, she's actually decent... But for a Hollywood girl, she's nothing special, unlike Megan Fox who's up there with Kate Beckinsale, Jessica Biel and other sweet sweet muffins.

On June 05 2010 06:51 condoriano wrote:


Now what was your opinion on Avatar, cpt. Obvious?

On June 05 2010 06:52 Djzapz wrote:

Sorry are you trying to be clever? If you want I can give you some tips.

On June 05 2010 06:53 condoriano wrote:


Can you answer my question?

On June 05 2010 06:57 condoriano wrote:
Avatar was an amazing movie so people started saying it's stupid because it's trendy to say that... It's pretty cool to not agree with the popular opinion isn't it kid?

On June 05 2010 06:59 Djzapz wrote:

I said I liked the movie, beautiful. Nice try though.

On June 05 2010 07:02 condoriano wrote:


No, you precisely said the plot was stupid unless you have no idea what that image means.

On June 05 2010 05:26 GX.Sigma wrote:
Jesus Christ, she's even uglier than Megan Fox.

On June 05 2010 07:08 condoriano wrote:
How do you people get the idea that everyone is bashing Megan for her looks here, I don't think anyone said she's ugly besides this wonderbread:



And sorry djzapz, not going to read.

On June 05 2010 05:23 On_Slaught wrote:
She looks pretty trashy in that pic.

I agree with genwar... why does there have to be a love interest? This is about an intergalactic battle between robots. Nobody gives a shit if the random guy is getting laid or not. Don't make the War of the Worlds mistake. Not a single person on the planet cared what happened to Tom Cruise. We wanted to see the FIGHTS!

On June 05 2010 07:01 mlee wrote:
anyone that says Megan Fox is ugly.. is full of shit.
or am i mistaken... since obviously everyone here on TL dates models and celebrities.. right?
+ Show Spoiler +

On June 05 2010 07:17 crimsn wrote:
Who is that ugly skank... bring in some real bitches like jessica alba from 5 years ago and shiiit mkay kthxbye

On June 05 2010 05:12 KiLL_ORdeR wrote:
Found this article on Yahoo when i was checking the score of the Celtics game lat night.

http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/celebrities/gallery/2646/new-transformers-3-star-rosie-huntingtonwhiteley/fp#photo0

So not only have I never heard of this "blonde-wannabe-Megan-Fox" but she just is not attractive in any way, shape, or form. What happened to Fox?

And Transformers 3? has this been known for awhile?

Thoughts?

On June 05 2010 07:08 condoriano wrote:
How do you people get the idea that everyone is bashing Megan for her looks here, I don't think anyone said she's ugly besides this wonderbread:



And sorry djzapz, not going to read.

On June 05 2010 07:18 BroOd wrote:
I used to use the name MeganFox on iccup and people were killed telling me how ugly and overrated Megan Fox is.

On June 05 2010 07:24 condoriano wrote:


Lol, I wouldn't claim she isn't overrated, but she definitely is hot. I can see how people can hate her acting though, there's nothing besides tits.

On June 05 2010 05:37 GodIsNotHere wrote:
Am I crazy or is something off about her eyes?

On June 05 2010 05:47 OneOther wrote:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

On June 05 2010 07:13 d_so wrote:
i mean i love transformers and all but you can't deny that sexual appeal is part of the movie's core strategy to attract viewers

On June 05 2010 05:47 OneOther wrote:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



+1 T__T

On June 05 2010 07:32 whiteLotus wrote:
We lost a Golden Girl today…Golden Girl she was marketed as…she’s just smoke and mirrors and hopefully we’ve lost the general consensus that she was anything but that. Let’s hope this is an RIP to her career…..may her journey back to her white trash suburban life be as fun as her climb away from it….and for our sake…let’s hope for lots of sex tape desperation…cuz we all know it will get to that level and we’ll love participating in it…..

On June 05 2010 07:25 Djzapz wrote:

Shia is the same thing without tits.

On June 05 2010 07:25 Djzapz wrote:

Shia is the same thing without tits.

On June 05 2010 05:44 Irrelevant wrote:
Never found megan fox to be that good looking on a hollywood level, wouldn't put her in top 50 of hott actresses

On June 05 2010 11:06 Dozle wrote:
Megan Fox is ugly and so is this new girl.

I stopped caring about Transformers when they announced a sequel. I never liked the first one anyway. Michael Bay.

On June 05 2010 07:17 7mk wrote:


dude, no person looks the way she looks in the first pic in real life.

On June 05 2010 07:26 Stropheum wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
You think toethumbs is sexy?

Huntington-Whiteley previously worked with Michael Bay in a commercial he directed for Victoria's Secret, but she has no other acting credits to her name.

On June 05 2010 13:12 synapse wrote:


Well, it doesn't sound as bad as it actually looks.... :/

On June 05 2010 13:12 synapse wrote:


Well, it doesn't sound as bad as it actually looks.... :/

On June 05 2010 13:51 fearus wrote:
She bit the hand that fed her. Thats what happened.

On June 05 2010 14:10 nicoaldo wrote:
is funny how this people says in a inet forum that megan fox is ugly, if they saw her in person they would jizz and shit their pants at the same time no doubt.

On June 05 2010 11:06 Dozle wrote:
Megan Fox is ugly and so is this new girl.

I stopped caring about Transformers when they announced a sequel. I never liked the first one anyway.

On June 05 2010 12:19 Jibba wrote:







You people are unbelievable.

On June 05 2010 06:43 ZeroCartin wrote:
The pic on that article doesnt do her justice

On June 06 2010 00:58 despite wrote:

So they are going for the anorexic type looking as old as a schoolgirl again? Not a big surprise. I notice a lot of pedophilic trends in movies nowadays.

On June 06 2010 01:36 7mk wrote:


Geez, she's one year younger than Shia Le Beouf, born in 1987, what on earth is wrong with that?

On June 06 2010 02:00 despite wrote:

I never said anything 'bout her age. What I meant is how she looks. Go see some old school 80s action movies and see how women in movies at that time looked more grown and not like girls.

On June 06 2010 00:58 despite wrote:

So they are going for the anorexic type looking as old as a schoolgirl again? Not a big surprise. I notice a lot of pedophilic trends in movies nowadays.

On June 06 2010 03:03 Pads wrote:
Rosie isn't actually an actress.. at all. She's a super model. I have no idea how this is going to work out but eh, i'm sure it will be OSM!

On June 05 2010 23:40 Dozle wrote:
I just don't find celebrities attractive. I prefer looking at women that I could actually talk to and get with then admiring someone who I'll never meet in real life. I like real women.

On June 05 2010 22:24 Dr.Kill-Joy wrote:
Almost every chich with zero make-up has flaws... jessica simpson, jessica alba and megan foxx. So who ever is impling she is ugly, nasty or unattractive you have personal problems.

Side note that one bitch replacing her... now she is ugly. Her face is a little fucked up.

On June 06 2010 03:16 Reason wrote:

Just because she is way out of your league and lives in another country does not mean she isn't real.

On June 05 2010 07:18 BroOd wrote:

I used to use the name MeganFox on iccup and people were killed telling me how ugly and overrated Megan Fox is.

On June 06 2010 03:44 AmstAff wrote:


lol the animal looks so happy on that picture^^

On June 06 2010 03:46 BlueRoyaL wrote:


and backtoback, you definitely need to put a that picture in a spoiler with a nsfw tag. im lucky i wasnt at work when i saw this cuz my manager can see what i'm doing on the computer for most of the time

On June 06 2010 03:54 Hazard wrote:
Ok tastes differ but an interesting fact is that doctors say current standards for a model equals first degree of malnutrition or smth. so they should be allowed to gain a lil' weight.

On June 06 2010 04:17 Reason wrote:

I don't think anyone can reasonably ask a woman to weigh less than the following picture, this woman is beautiful and most certainly not malnourished.
NSFW
+ Show Spoiler +
I think they can go a good deal bigger as well and still look great..

On June 06 2010 04:21 7mk wrote:


I'm pretty sure that that woman youre showing there is well above the weight of the average supermodel

On June 06 2010 03:44 AmstAff wrote:
titts in spoiler
+ Show Spoiler +


lol the animal looks so happy on that picture^^

On June 06 2010 04:27 Reason wrote:
Yes 7mk my point exactly.
What I'm saying is that woman is pretty damn skinny yet very attractive.. I don't think it's reasonable to expect women to be slimmer in fact it's downright unhealthy and unnattractive..
If I could have that girl in that picture as she is or with 10-20lbs extra I'd choose the larger girl.



Lol yes it does!!! I'm jealous

On June 05 2010 05:15 mity wrote:
Megan fox called her boss (Micheal Bay) Hitler....

I never liked Transformers it just another sci-fi movie with no plot and tons of boobs/explosions. Can't forget the slow motion robot fights for 1/3 of the movie. ;D

On June 06 2010 05:14 omninmo wrote:
she must have not been down with the disney-mind control.

On June 06 2010 05:27 Severedevil wrote:
They're both probably very attractive in real life (if they'd wipe off the damn makeup) but it's nearly impossible to judge from a photo.

On June 06 2010 04:27 Reason wrote:
Yes 7mk my point exactly.
What I'm saying is that woman is pretty damn skinny yet very attractive.. I don't think it's reasonable to expect women to be slimmer in fact it's downright unhealthy and unnattractive..
If I could have that girl in that picture as she is or with 10-20lbs extra I'd choose the larger girl.



Lol yes it does!!! I'm jealous

On June 05 2010 05:35 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
megan fox is the most overrated girl ever anyways.

and i really dont care about the girls in transformers . all i want is a fun to watch movie with shittons of explosions and fighting robots.

On June 06 2010 05:58 Jibba wrote:

Just because a woman is skinny doesn't mean she starved herself to get there. Many probably do, but not all. A forum full of asian Starcraft players should be the first to realize that there's multiple ways to be skinny.

On June 06 2010 06:07 Reason wrote:

Regardless, the point is that a lot of supermodels are underweight.
1. It's not healthy.
2. It's not attractive.

On June 06 2010 06:34 Djzapz wrote:

Disregard what I personally believe right, but if you think supermodels are not attractive, I would suggest you ask yourself, why are they supermodels then?

They're supermodels because they're just about as attractive as it gets as far as public opinion goes. So it's your opinion that they're not attractive. It's far from objective.

On June 05 2010 05:35 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
megan fox is the most overrated girl ever anyways.

and i really dont care about the girls in transformers . all i want is a fun to watch movie with shittons of explosions and fighting robots.

On June 06 2010 07:40 LuckyLuke43 wrote:
Transformers 1 was actually pretty good I thought. Just like 95% of the other sequels to various movies that hollywood churn out every year, Transformers 2 was no exception - it was less than horribly awful. So there was no surprise that it sucked on so many different levels; I mean even the hardcore transformers fans were like: "serioulsy?..."

By the looks of it - having a victoria's secret bimbo model(Huntington) trying to fill the shoes og Megan fox, Transformers 3 will - if possible - be even worse than it's big brother. This momentarily makes me a little sad, because transformers is so cool(if you're an oldschool transformers/power rangers/turtles nerd like me) and nostalgic. With these productions however, it sorta ruins the whole legacy of it.

BoXoFFiCe_NuMBeRs_ftW -_-

Oh yeah and, I wasn't at all saying Megan Fox is a good actor. She's not. But I mean atleast she's an actor and not merely a lingerie model with amounts of botox in her lips that makes me wonder if the girl has some kind of lipstick allergies.

On June 06 2010 07:40 LuckyLuke43 wrote:
Transformers 1 was actually pretty good I thought. Just like 95% of the other sequels to various movies that hollywood churn out every year, Transformers 2 was no exception - it was less than horribly awful. So there was no surprise that it sucked on so many different levels; I mean even the hardcore transformers fans were like: "serioulsy?..."

By the looks of it - having a victoria's secret bimbo model(Huntington) trying to fill the shoes og Megan fox, Transformers 3 will - if possible - be even worse than it's big brother. This momentarily makes me a little sad, because transformers is so cool(if you're an oldschool transformers/power rangers/turtles nerd like me) and nostalgic. With these productions however, it sorta ruins the whole legacy of it.

BoXoFFiCe_NuMBeRs_ftW -_-

Oh yeah and, I wasn't at all saying Megan Fox is a good actor. She's not. But I mean atleast she's an actor and not merely a lingerie model with amounts of botox in her lips that makes me wonder if the girl has some kind of lipstick allergies.

On June 05 2010 05:21 genwar wrote:
Why does there EVEN NEED TO BE A LOVE INTEREST?

On June 06 2010 11:13 XKiller wrote:

for boobs retard, you really dont know hollywood do you?

On June 06 2010 00:58 despite wrote:

So they are going for the anorexic type looking as old as a schoolgirl again? Not a big surprise. I notice a lot of pedophilic trends in movies nowadays.

On June 06 2010 14:46 tobi9999 wrote:
I'm still confused how the plot can go on without megan fox.

I'll probably watch Transformers 3 and be like What?!?! doesn't add up

I have no idea how this is going to work, I hope megan fox comes back!

On June 06 2010 15:15 Klogon wrote:
How did this thread make it to 11 pages...

On June 06 2010 15:29 Myxomatosis wrote:
i would impregnate megan fox

On June 06 2010 15:29 Myxomatosis wrote:
i would impregnate megan fox

On June 06 2010 15:37 Loanshark wrote:


I thought he got banned just for posting this and I was like "wtf?"
Then I checked the Closed forum

On June 05 2010 05:21 genwar wrote:
Why does there EVEN NEED TO BE A LOVE INTEREST?

On June 06 2010 15:15 Klogon wrote:
How did this thread make it to 11 pages...

On June 21 2010 20:30 Subversion wrote:
sigh i hope they dont try pretend shes the same person in the movie. thats always rly lame.

On June 06 2010 19:00 sob3k wrote:
This chick is ugly as fuck....Fox was looking a little gross is T2 though as well.

On June 05 2010 05:21 genwar wrote:
Why does there EVEN NEED TO BE A LOVE INTEREST?

On June 22 2010 09:49 ooni wrote:

Why does this movie EVEN NEED A STORY LINE?

On June 22 2010 10:06 MangoTango wrote:


Excuse me, but your post implied that Transformers 2 had a story line. This was not true.

Incidentally, Megan Fox's acting was so awful that they could replace her with a tin can and improve movie, imo.

On June 22 2010 10:45 Manit0u wrote:
Just get rid of all the human actors.
WE REQUIRE MORE ROBOT FIGHTS!!!