Transformers is one of those films that the average person will enjoy, and indeed the critics appear dumbfounded, with most giving it a thumbs-up for being entertaining. Indeed, a strength of the film is its cheesiness and simplicity.

Yet, contrary to the critics who mostly emphasize it being a fun film, it has a very interesting and complex theme about mankind's relationship with technology behind those visuals. Not one of good versus evil, but of survival by adaptation versus victory by strength.

Similar to 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), a squarish object is used to explain the origin of intelligent life. Aptly named, the 'all spark' is covered in hieroglyphics, and has the capacity to bring objects to life, but in doing so fosters mania. It is this object that becomes central to the plot, with the Autobots hoping to destroy it, and the Decepticons aspiring to gain advantage by it.

The contrast between the two sides is clearcut. The strength of the former is that they blend into their environment and represent vehicles that are essentially civilian, whereas the latter take the form of vehicles that are effective at conquering their environment. This reflects the duality of technological advancement, where development has historically been driven by the desire for competitive advantage by solving problems.

The role of the humans in the story is also of particular note, because what we find throughout the plot is the tendency for collaboration being key to victory against adversity. While the Transformers have brute strength, humans repeatedly prove that their strength lies in collaboration. A battle against a robotic scorpion, in an early sequence, is just one of the many points where such a network proves useful. Like ants, the strength is in the numbers.

What's more, the human pursuit of knowledge comes across as a two-edge sword. Seeing a bumblebee at the mercy of humans who intend to freeze him for research is just one of a few sequences that reflect the more grizzly aspects of human nature. In a way, it reflects a moral quagmire which asks us if using another living thing in this way is justifiable if the payoff (knowledge and survival) will be of greater value to the population. Kant wins this one.

The film also takes a materialist stance within its rather Darwinian theme. In the aesthetics, the transformers come across as lifelike by being made up of metallic muscles and the necessary skeleton of helmet and armor. And when the US government attempts to examine the severed tail of the robotic scorpion, they accidentally trip a nerve and cause it to flex uncontrollably.

Curiously, the way the transformers can link themselves to technology appears to suggest something more than a mechanical biology but rather that our technology is 'pre-life.' Being complex but lacking a will in the same way that a most basic virus simply processes a chemical-reaction and replicates itself. All of this reflects the current cultural shifts which are product of increasingly reducing human individuality and will to biochemistry.

Today, the greatest mystery to science remains the very origin of life, which by its nature is self-complicating and counter to chemical equilibrium. Yet the 'all spark' denies the use of spiritual answers by being explainable in a sense. It emits a particular kind of radiation, and the transformers even appear to understand something of how it works.

Truth be told, in Transformers is a lot more than meets the eye. More than mindless fun, Transformers asserts a highly rationalist view of the world.