Does this explore Bumblebee's WWII service?
...and the countless hopelessly-outgunned humans he effortlessly slaughtered?
shareNo. This movie takes place in 1987, and this is meant to be Bumblebees first time on Earth.
Whilst some people think this is a prequel to Bays Transformers movies, some of the events in Bumblebee mean that isn't possible.
Make no mistake, Bays Transformers series is dead, there will be no conclusion about Unicron, assuming Bumblebee does well (and it only has to better The Last Knight), Transformers will be rebooted into a new series.
This isn't even the same continuity as Michael Bay's "Transformers" films???
LOL wtf...
No, and why would they?
Your response of "lol wtf" makes no sense whatsoever. The Last Knight did nearly $600million LESS than Age of Extinction, the audiences were speaking "we're not interested in this series or the future of this series".
Why would Travis Knight or Paramount even remotely consider making Bays series part of the continuity when so many people appear to be unhappy with it?
"Why would Travis Knight or Paramount even remotely consider making Bays series part of the continuity when so many people appear to be unhappy with it?"
Easy answer.
Because Michael Bay's long-running series of films are the ones that everyone recognizes ... which is why most people don't know that "Bumblebee" is a reboot, why the film's Wikipedia entry describes it as "the sixth installment of the live-action Transformers film series and a prequel to 2007's Transformers", why producer Lorenzo Di Bonaventura doesn't call it a reboot, etc.
Your response of "lol wtf" makes no sense whatsoever.
Engage your brain next time. "lol" and "wtf" aren't difficult to understand... share
Everyone might "recongnise" them, but that doesn't mean that they appreciate them, which the drop off in box office for The Last Knight would attest to.
And Lorenzo Di Bonaventura is an ass and clearly didn't pay attention to any of Bays movies nor Bumblebee, because its physically impossible for them to be part of the same series and impossible for Bumblebee to be a prequel.
And yes, I know what "lol" and "wtf" mean, just in the context of a franchise that was going down the shitter, you bemoaning that Bumblebee goes in a direction opposite to Bays franchise is why your response was meaningless.
Next time just say "lettuce" and "Manilla", because they would make as much sense as what you wrote!
"And Lorenzo Di Bonaventura is an ass and clearly didn't pay attention to any of Bays movies nor Bumblebee"
So, you are more of an authority on the position of this film in the Transformers franchise than it's own producer? Okay, random guy on the internet who loves transforming robots LOL
Everyone might "recongnise" them
It's "recognize". If you are going to quote a single word of what I wrote, at least spell it correctly.
jfc... share
You think the producer of a movie series based on toys transforming is an "expert" on it do you?
Of course he must be, so by that admission William Panzer and Peter Davis, producers of Highlander are the experts, which is why as producers of Highlander 2: The Quickening they destroyed the franchise because they didn't bother to note the rules laid out in the first movie.
Bonaventura is likely covering his ass. If Bumblebee fails, its a continuation of Bays franchise, if it succeeds, then they can continue in the direction Bumblebee has hinted at.
Either way, it doesn't matter, because for those of us that have seen the movie, what Bonaventura says can't possibly be true.
And I love the dig at "random guy who loves transforming robots... LOL", coming from the guy that writes on a movie forum about a movie with a transforming robot, you're taking the piss out of yourself fella, thats some achievement.
And actually its "recognise", but I made a typo, i'll pretend that nullifies my point, and you'll pretend you've won some minor skirmish on the interwebs.