@John: Dude, I'm with Markymark that statement was dead on.

I just went to go see the movie for my second time with some friends (first time for them) in Digital IMAX and even on it's second weekend the theatre was still packed…not sold out mind you but still not many seats open. I went in knowing what happens and still loved it because I caught things I completely missed the first time around, the jokes were still funny, the action was still amazing and the people I went with loved it and we had a 30 minute discussion about it on the way home and which parts were our favorites. I truly believe that it can take Ice Age 3 and Public Enemies this weekend but I guess we will see soon enough.

The plot was fairly rudimentary, but as has been commented earlier, this was always meant to be pure escapist and there isn't anything wrong with that particularly. I just prefer that a movie at least make some internal sense – gigantic machines inside of pyramids that we somehow haven't run into in 2,000 years of exploration? Come on now.

I also thought that the movie, which is marketed as family-friendly, was a bit rough for younger audiences. There are a lot of people getting "blowed up real good", as SCTV might have said, and images of drowned sailors. This is definitely a movie for teenaged boys and young adult males primarily – again, not a bad thing in and of itself.

Still, I would expect better. Star Trek was better. The first Transformers was more entertaining, at least to my mind. This didn't have to be Juno, or The Reader but I tend to appreciate movies that at least take the time to tell a decent story, or at least credit their audiences to be more discerning. That's why great summer movies like Iron Man, The Dark Knight and (eventually) Star Trek will wind up in my DVD collection and it's unlikely that Revenge of the Fallen will.

Funny how the subject turned from how critics don't influence box office to a debate on the merits of Transformers. To the original question, I do think that hype and anticipation tend to affect box office far more than reviews do, although good critical reception may affect smaller, indie-type movies more than big blockbusters that have audiences built-in.

Oh me too, I loved the first Transformers–particularly because the movie ended up being a comedy. I was expecting the same fun in the second one and I didn't get it. On almost every technical level the film succeeds, but the film is poorly written and poorly acted. The jokes are there but they are too crass for the slapstick that the first one had. At times the movie tries too hard to be funny and explosive at the same time.

I think this movie will be up for discussion for a while because of the great schism that it has created between fans and critics. You should free up some time to see it, not because it's "the second coming of cinema" or anything but because you can truly join in on the discussion.

That's the only reason I saw it. I never knock a film until I have seen it.

I'm pretty sure you can bring some valid points to the racist robot accusations against the film–which most of the critics are hounding on. I don't think they are racist for one main reason, the film and its makers were too stupid to realize that the characters were potentially offensive. If Pixar had to jive-talkin', gold toothed, illiterate characters everyone would be up in arms over it. That's the only reason I recommend you see it, just so a good discussion about the state of modern cinema can come out of it. (I have been dying to discuss that for a while now)

Erm, I went to see this on a Monday, and the place was pretty well filled considering it was Monday afternoon. People will talking, joking before the movie and I thought I wouldn't be able to enjoy it in peace. But throughout the whole movie, I didn't hear a single word other than giggles and laughter when the movie had it funny moments from the people around me. Everyone was just watching the show. And considering its an over 2 hr show, that's quite an achievement.

I also felt a sense of awesomeness and uplighting when I saw the military mobilising as the calvary was being called in. I felt a moment of heartache when Optimus Prime was killed trying to protect Sam. Yet another tugging feeling happened when his father didn't want to let him go, but had to. Say what you like, the movie had its moments. It tugged my heart more in some moments like these than some action movies that would probably have been rated more highly by critics. It had all these, plus all the cool unique transforming robot sequences too.

Also, if it was really that bad, people wouldn't have waited until the last 20 minutes for the finale. They wouldn't have had the patience. It was just nowhere near as bad as how many critics made it out to be.

Something that is targeted at kids to teenagers, one of the demographics with the shortest possible attention span, and yet hold it for over 2 hours, and have them come out of it saying they enjoyed it. You got to respect that.

I don't know whether you have kids. I do, keeping kids entertained for over 2 hours is not easy! Keeping them not only entertained, but totally absorbed" Now, that is an accomplishment!

And the laughter. The movie, for an action flick, drew more laughter than I have heard at some comedies before. So, it had its genuinely light hearted moments too.

So, unique transforming action sequences, heart tugging "drama" moments, plus laughter inducing light moments all drawn together over a 2 hr show that wasn't boring. I can think of a lot of action shows that were far less unique (yay, more car chases and gun fights) with little laughter (too serious for their own good), and no heart tugging moments even (trying too hard at a plot and failing).

In the end, I stand by my original point. It didn't have oscar winning plot, humor, etc. But what it did have was good enough such that the true stars of the movie, those amazing and unique transforming action sequences then just brought it to a whole new level such that it went from just average or above average, to good.

Some critics I read bemoan the lack of creative story. Then what about the many mediocre action shows that have a lack of creative action sequences? And since this is obviously an action show, which do you think should carry a much bigger weight, unique plot or unique action sequences?

I went to see with a friend, and she liked it a lot, but I didn't, I don't know, kinda lame and predictable the ending at the same time.

Yes, "Breach" with Chris Cooper. Very good movie.

I was excited to see the movie. I love Transformers the series and even the animated movie. I even enjoyed the Michael Bay original. But I was hoping for more. And I got a lot less. Spectacle can have story, and once you're bored with the transforming robots, well, it we need something to make up for it. I'm guessing that there is about thirty minutes of actual transforming, which is generous number. So, what do we do about the rest of the film.

If you go back to summers of old and look at Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, these were spectacles that had story and great characters, and that's why these films are still remembered to this day. Now, I've already forgotten much of what happened in the second and third Pirates of the Caribbean movie. Hollywood gets the wrong idea. The spectacle and cool robots from the first Transformers is what made it a cool, unique film at the time. But it doesn't hold up anymore. Why? Lack of character and story. This one will do the same thing. By next year, we'll be all excited about the next spectacle and put this one in the history books, forgetting about even seeing the film.

I'm not angry that this is doing well. It was always going to do well. I'm angry that this is what Michael Bay thinks of us. It's lazy writing, surprisingly coming from guys who wrote Star Trek nonetheless. And as a comedian, I'm insulted that they would just throw out horrid jokes that would get booed at a comedy club. I was waiting for the bad airline food joke to be added. I think I was insulted.

Of course, taste is all subjective. What I loathe, others will love, and what someone loathes I could very well love. I don't think I overanalyze the movie too much. I just want one that entertains and doesn't insult me. Transformers 2 did not do that for me. Color me disappointed.

"Breach" the one with Chris Cooper? I've seen it, don't remember it. That's my biggest problem with people my age and the stupid "lol" and letter replacing, really gets my goat.

Good point buddy, someone who enjoyed it for what it was and didn't over analyze.

However, I have only seen giant robots that can transform realistically into a car once, and that was in 2007. And that was really cool.

And since no other movie has been able to do that except the sequel. I watched that too. And did it deliver? Sure, because I got to see even more robots that can transform duking it out.

In that sense, the transformers series visually is pretty unique as an action series. Its got no competition! Which other action movie can give me giant transforming robots other than transformers?

Maybe at some point, people will get tired and jaded enough with transforming robots that they will demand that other than that, such movies have to come with stuff like plot, etc. But until then, that alone is enough to keep people like me going back!

The average movie goer sees this clearly. Transformers offers them a visually unique experience. Are movie critics recognising this?

Ok, but there are some who liked the first and liked the second, some who liked the first and disliked the second. People's tastes go every way and I don't think some left that theater forcing themselves to like it just because they liked the first movie.

I remember reading Brad's review for Fired Up! A few months back. And even though I just saw it last night, I personally found it boring and I remember Brad enjoyed it. The last paragraph of his theatrical review sums it up perfectly:

"On a whole, the good outweighs the bad in Fired Up!, much to my surprise and satisfaction. You can never go into a film like this expecting too much because it will always manage to disappoint, but if you go into them expecting the same-old same-old they can surprise you every so often. This film is by no means a revelation, but I at least had a good time while I watched it, which is all you can really ask for from a film of this ilk."

I believe that's exactly how I viewed Transformers 2. I was expecting the same stuff, I ended up enjoying it more than I thought I would but I had a good time watching it "which is all you can really ask for from a film of this ilk."

It doesn't mean I defend bad movies or should start liking good movies, I just don't need to analyze something like plot for this kind of movie when I know it's weak before even walking into the theater.

There are well-made movies I have not particularly enjoyed and there have been terrible movies I've enjoyed for one reason or the other. Those opinions are entirely different from an objective appraisal of movies that form part of a cultural heritage of a society.

Just like there are foods we love to eat and majority enjoy but we don't promote them as good food.

Having said that, critics sometimes can be subjective in their opinions and their opinions can be influenced by their particular tastes but they do more good than harm anyway and as someone said, they serve to point out things for consideration and encourage discussions or more scrutiny but we can choose to agree or disagree, no big deal.

I saw the first transformers, really enjoyed it but thought the story was weak and it was very cheesy and corny with the whole US army stuff. Still I left with a good feeling and felt I spent my money well. Not seeing this one, just because. I somehow it will have long legs, but I could be wrong. Whatever, no need getting all personal, at least we all agree it was dumb, fun or not.

And yes, "then" not "than". If you've seen the movie "Breach," when Eric O'Neal meets the master spy he's been tasked to get the goods on, Robert Hanssen, they play a game called "4 Truths and a Lie" during which Eric says, "There are two words I consistently misspell." Well there are two sets of words I consistently interchange when typing very fast and one set is "then" and "than." (The other set is "you" and "your.") Mea culpa.

As for your statement saying, "90% of the people who are bad mouthing this movie will be talking about it as one of the greatest!" I actually think the exact opposite will happen, but only time will tell. Thanks for commenting and visiting.

PS. – If you haven't seen the movie, don't trash it. Go see it and make up your own **** mind. And 2 things Brad…Have you even seen the movie yourself? And Yes I will argue with the fact that this movie was not overlong and defintiely not underplotted, we didnt even realize how long the movie was until we saw it was almost 3 am walking out. The forest scene in the middle of the movie rocked me and the ending clearly pointed at a third movie which I am now eagerly anticipating. The movie was also pretty funny, anyone who has seen it has to admit that the two little redneck-gangsta-lookin robots and John Turturro were funny as ****.

"If you find a bad movie unavoidable than try to read" It's "then," no?

Moreover on the critic-proof theory, don't good reviews tend to help the smaller movies like Away We Go, Juno, and Little Miss Sunshine?

Personally, there was a part of me that thought this film was absolute shit and another part of me that kinda enjoyed myself. I gave it a mixed review overall but I think my opinion on it is just going down.

Not really, I have plenty of friends that saw the movie with me and preferred the first movie.
But no one will ever like the second one and hate the first one cuz it's just more of the same.

That also goes the other way around.

The movie did have a plot. Not the STRONGEST plot, but there was a story involved, so don't play dumb.

@laremy:

I do enjoy good movies, what you said made sense. I'm not praising this movie, nor am I glorifying it any more than it deserves. I just believe that it doesn't need to get ripped on based on plot because this movie obviously has a weak plot and storyline, my question is why are people so shocked about that? The first one had a weak story, the second builds from that. Kinda saw it coming no? It's like biting into a rotten apple then complaining that it isn't sweet enough you know? That movie is what it is, and if people don't like it that's perfectly fine.

And I'm not buying that you were "forced" to see what was one of the most talked about movies of the summer…you would have seen it at one point.

@TheCheckSpot:

I agree with you, but then going with re-tooling characters as well, you're gonna have to re-create a story with Transformers 1 because 2 built off of 1. And hey, maybe they could have come up with a stronger story with the first movie which would have made the second movie a little more tolerable for some.

But I find "big, dumb fun" isn't a cop out if that's what you're going for. I mean they used the same exact formula as the first movie. You can't blame these guys for making a stupid movie if that was what they were aiming for (like Laremy said, they aimed low and hit it).

All I'm saying is that you can only go so far with this movie. Talking robot aliens from space can only have so much of a deep story or plot.

And besides the fact, the people/critics who ripped on this movie (Brad, Laremy, etc…) were going into the theater with negative thoughts already. If you disliked the first Transformers, there's no way in hell you'll like the second one, and that goes for anyone.