Movie Review: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)
I expected a bad movie and I got one. Does that mean I win?
Photo: DreamWorks Pictures
To expect Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to be anything more than a mindless summer film with tons of explosions, CGI and slow-motion shots dedicated to Megan Fox is to go into this film set up for disappointment. In 2007 Michael Bay showed us what he was capable of with this franchise and as a result I left the theater that year extremely disappointed. I wanted more and I expected more and I got less. This time around I expected less and Bay didn't fail me as I appropriately prepared myself for what was to come. This doesn't mean that as a result Revenge of the Fallen was actually good, but it was tolerable and there were moments I actually enjoyed myself.
Most of what was on screen washed over me without any lasting effect. I sat back and watched as Bay once again featured robots taking racial stereotypes to the nth degree and even took a moment to feature two massive wrecking balls as visual representations for exactly what you would think they would be on a 70-foot tall CGI robot. The problem is that this is what I come out of a film like this talking about as opposed to the story being told. As a filmmaker, Bay has proven he can stage action sequences with the best of them, but when it comes to filling in the blanks he is clueless.
The cast includes Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox, Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson, John Turturro, Rainn Wilson, Isabel Lucas, Matthew Marsden, Darius McCrary, Ramon Rodriguez and America Olivo. For more information on this film including pictures, trailers and a detailed synopsis choose from the following menu.
Review
"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" is a DreamWorks Pictures release, directed by Michael Bay and is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi action violence, language, some crude and sexual material, and brief drug material.
However, inside these similarities with the first film there are some interesting changes. One criticism of the first film was that you couldn't see the robot-on-robot action, as battles were filmed too close and didn't reveal enough to make it easy to follow. This time around Bay pulls the camera back and the action is actually quite impressive and is certainly the best part of the whole feature. You will have a hard time discerning which robot is which, but hey look… an explosion! Yeah, that's how it works here.
Next comes the treatment of the female characters, which begins with an introduction of Megan Fox as Mikaela bent over on a motorcycle with just enough clothes on to keep things covered. Newcomer to the franchise, Isabel Lucas, gets a similar treatment following her introduction as Bay damn near shoves the camera up her skirt. I'm not complaining, the ladies are lovely and God bless them if they can look at this as a way of using their looks to earn a paycheck, but sometimes it astonishes me what women will do and I can't help but wonder how the scene is first described to them as Bay is setting up the shot.
The one element of the film that is sure to draw critical fire is two robots referred to as The Twins. Both speak in what I can only assume is a perceived impression of modern day street talk while they stumble around as if they are both stoned. On top of this one boldly features a gold tooth while the two appear to be stepping in as the African American representatives in this robot army, replacing the deceased Jazz robot from the first feature. The two argue and fight, calling one another "bitch-ass" and at one point referring to one of the humans as a "pussy." At times they can be funny, but to say they aren't a racial caricature that could potentially stir up a load of problems would be an understatement.
Without going any deeper, let's just say Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is filled with problems. At two-and-a-half-hours its biggest problem is that it is just too damned long. Moments of exposition are announced before they take place and Michael Bay needs to get a group of editors (there were four on this film) willing to stand up to him and say, "No, this scene featuring the robot humping Megan Fox's leg needs to be cut!" Oh, what, did I forget to mention that part? Yeah, that's in there too. Dogs humping one another are also in there, but you expected that right?
It's all nonsense and overblown, but it's perfect for its PG-13 target audience (Or is it?). I went in expecting nothing more than 150 minutes of mindless noise, bad jokes and breast shots, and that's exactly what I got. After the first film, to expect anything more than that would be silly, and like I said, I ended up glossing over most of what I saw to the point I actually found a way to enjoy some of it.
The question that remains is whether or not a bad movie is still bad if you expected it to be so and it lives up to those expectations? I think the answer to that is an obvious yes, and as a result Revenge of the Fallen is a bad movie I was able to take some enjoyment out of simply because I sat back and laughed at its absurdity instead of focusing my attention on hating its flaws in logic, limited storytelling and bad attempts at humor. Sure, this means I found enjoyment in a way not intended by the filmmaker, but I am happy to have at least not walked away hating the entire experience. Albeit, an experience I don't necessarily want to have again.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 64 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
I just find it funny that you're not very fond of TRANSFORMERS 2 lol How is this a "bad" movie? Even if it's Michael Bay (who is someone I believe gets crapped on a lot more than he should), this movie is just a bigger, badder and beefed up version of Transformers 1. I just don't understand what you saw bad about it. It didn't try to win audiences on dialogue. It's a bunch of talking robots, explosions, scantily clad women and some jokes. What on earth can you be comparing this to call it bad? What movie in this specific genre is better, you know what I mean? It's a straight-up summer popcorn flick, a sequel to a movie where people know what to expect.
Your review was going to be negative regardless, and I know it's just your opinion which is fine, but you shouldn't be so serious on a movie that doesn't take itself seriously.
Come on, guys, it is a bad movie. It has bad dialogue, racial stereotype and a bad plot. You may like it, you can find it to be fun, there is no problem. But that does not make it a good movie.
It's like the opposite of Letters from Iwo Jima; a really good movie, but completely boring.
@Paes:
But what makes it bad though? This movie doesn't require us to really think deep about it you know? That doesn't make sense, that you can enjoy this movie but it's pretty bad. People going to see this, liked the first one. If they leave entertained, they don't walk out saying: yeah that's a bad movie and I loved it.
Honestly I find critics will bash this movie more than it deserves. It's gonna be the biggest movie of the year (in $$) and people will enjoy it. I find it so funny that someone can actually say it's "bad" lol If you truthfully like a movie, you're gonna find it's good. This is not the movie to over analyze details. Geez, it's talking robots from space, who honestly believes this is going to change cinema history here? anyone?
Ease up.
This is what I want to know from Brad or whoever finds this is a "bad" movie: What would have made this "good". How can you make a movie with talking robots and full of explosions and cheesy jokes into something spectacular to your standards. That's what I believe needs to be explained because it's easy to say, oh Transformers 2 was bad because of this, this and that. But what would have made you say: this movie was fantastic. Keeping in mind what this movie is about and it's target audience. It's not like it can go Chris Nolan's route and make it dark and serious.
I agree with the above comments, a proper reviewer must site both the good and the bad concepts. Another and I think a larger point on this, its a movie about cars that transform into robots and it seems like you are looking for a life like story line. Obviously you should be considering I cannot count the number of times my santa fe turned into a robot and started fighting with a fighter jet(sarcasm). This movies entire purpose is to be reminiscent of child hood and to entertain children, if you ever watched the cartoons, the original cartoon movie or read the comics there is complicated story lines which though I have not seen this movie I expect their to be as there is supposed to be at least one more installment.
@Roger: You see, I think that we are not understanding each other, so I'll give you an example.
I really think Amelie Poulin is a beautiful, inventive, wonderful movie. But I don't like it, I really don't, can't finish watching it. On the other hand, I enjoy Adam Sandler's movies, I know they are really bad, but I like watching them.
It's a matter of opinion, you know? I think you can like bad movies, but that does not make them good. You can enjoy Transformers by what it is; a fun movie, with a lot of explosions. But think about it: The Dark Knight had also a lot of explosions, but it was a really good movie.
But that's just my opinion. Everybody else is saying: enjoy by what it is. Sure! And I enjoy it, but I know it is a bad movie.
After all that you still gave it a C?! Completely agree with your review 100% but I can't believe you think this film is better than Watchmen and Terminator Salvation.
RC says that a proper reviewer must cite both the good and the bad…. which Brad did. He praises Michael Bay’s ability to set up action sequences, particularly the shots that allow you to see both robots duking it out, rather than the up-close shots of the first film.
Roger: really? of course this movie could have been fantastic. It could have had…. cheesy jokes that were funy. It could have had better dialogue, and the action wouldn’t have needed to suffer. Sure, if they made the plot more intricate and had long soliloquys by Mr. LaBeouf, we might have lost some action. But they could have made the dialogue that they had better. They could have NOT put in racial caricatures, or robots humping Fox’s leg. To get the target audience, all they needed was the title, and some robots fighting. Having these are not mutually exclusive with the movie being good, and the filmakers failed on that aspect.
What we have here is a lot of people defending their childhood. I don’t see all of you getting worked up by Brad’s ‘bashing’ of “Pelham 1 2 3″. Brad is a critic, and critics critique. Defending a movie that you think is good is perfectly acceptable. That’s why there is a comment box. But going after Brad personally is a little over the line, dont you think?
The Transformers brand has and always will be for kids, however, there is a difference between being child-like and being childish. Movies for kids (of all ages) can be fun, thoughtful, respectful, and enjoyable; Brad's review simply points out that Bay's movie misses the mark.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find any Transformers source material (series/comics/toys) that resort to finding enjoyment in offensive humour or the exploitation of sex or race. I grew up with Gen2 and later with Beast Wars/Machines and I'd much rather watch 140mins of those episodes than Bay's poorly adapted films. Unfortunately this is the only live action vision we have been given so it'll have to do, for now.
Do you think if Michael Bay ever directs an intense character piece that he might die?
Like if there was an adaptation of "Ham on Rye" like he took on the challenge to prove his worth as a real director, I think he might actually die if he couldn't have gratuitous explosions, and breasts, breasts and breasts.
I see so many comments on movies like this that basically say: "it's just a popcorn flick, lighten up and enjoy." I'm getting kind of tired of that sort of comment used as an argument. To be honest I don't even completely believe there is such a thing as a "popcorn flick" and i'm not sure i even know what it means… If it means just lots of explosions and special effects then I'm baffled how anyone could actually be entertained by such a movie.
Personally those kind of movies don't really do anything for me, when i watch a movie like transformers i'm not entertained at all. If i'm going to be entertained by a movie it's going to have to connect with me in some way and make me actually feel like i got something out of it. Then again with transformers i actually got kind of angry at how bad it was so i guess that could be seen as a plus for it.
@Fin: Popcorn Flick– A movie that you pay your money to waste time and watch either: explosions and special effects and/or breasts. With the latter lacking in taste. On rare occasion, a popcorn flick might actually become a classic piece of cinema, Jurassic Park, Star Wars etc. When most of these movies are done poorly, they will garner huge box office returns but will eventually be forgotten in about twenty years or so.
Ya critics hated transformers also. But it was good. So this one might be good too. I'm seein it 2moro
@Dan
Watchman garnered a C+ from Brad. Transformers 2 a C. How is this grade better than Watchman?
Wrong, he gave it a C-. Get your facts right.
@Paes:
I respect that, I understand. See, I get what you mean, but even though a movie might be entertaining to me, but considered "bad" by many, I still find it good you know? Cuz if I laughed, cried or whatever, that means I enjoyed the movie, so it had to be good regardless of how it's viewed. I've honestly never seen a movie and said: it's bad but I love it. I either like it or don't, but that's just me. I see how you view movies you watch, but hey, everyone's different when it comes to movies lol
But I would still like to know what all the haters would change about the movie to make it good. I mean if dialogue or a better storyline is what's making this movie bad for someone, they're watching the wrong movie.
Firstly, critics can only speak for themselves, they can't speak for you. We all see things our way, we base our experiences on our own lives, what we have done etc…
So, I have to disagree with the review. BIGTIME! I thoroughly enjoyed it, and yes I am still a big kid!
Iv'e seen it twice and I saw something entirely different, it had a tonne of action yes, but, you had a lot humour, heartbreak, twists and more action and without question the best visuals you are ver likely to see, the scene when the robot was humping Megans leg made the entire theatre laugh out loud, even me and I'm a miserble English man! It did it's job. It was funny!
It was better than the first, better that the Hangover! (what rubbish did I see on the back of your review! UTTER TISH! I should send you an invoice for the return of my life and dosh wasted!!! ;-)
This is just your opinion, not mine or anybody else’s, we can and will make up our own minds, thanks!
For a real alternative review go here.
I agree with this one but you may not…
look everyone i have been coming to this site for 5 years and in truth i trust brads reviews veyr much because most times i agree with him. The first transformers had amaizng CGI and fun fights (although not enough Jazz or Starscream) but it was a very poor film and this one looks to be the same so just because he didnt like the movie you enjoyed doesnt mean he is wrong. he is paid to tell his point of view on films thats his job and if you dont like it then i think you should not read them its real simple. But you have to know that mindless action bad acting (megan fox is crap the CGI acts better than her) and poor story is what happens in most Bay films when you look at last years summer flicks with Iron Man Hulk The Dark Knight and even this year with Public Enemies most of us want good stories but point is dont bash another persons point of views just state your own instead.
Jesus christ guys. Face it. It IS a bad movie. I actually found it boring at some parts. It truly sucks. It actually has the worst screenplay i have ever seen in a movie. Makes me want to barf.
Just being 'entertaining' doesn't make a movie necessarily good. Unless you're 4 year old who watches Pixar movies 'cause they're cute', not because they're wonderfully conceived.
Earlier this summer we had Star Trek, an entertaining popcorn flick with a silly/weak plot, but very well directed, acted and a nice balance beetween action and storytelling.
Last year we had The Dark Knight, which also had all those things and a powerful story and dialogs that actually made you think what the characters were saying.
That's entertainment!
Just robots and explosion may be enough to guarantee an admission for some, but you can't say a movie is good (let alone perfect!) because it only have that. Come on, we're all grown ups here, we can have fun with our superhero movies and still see that they aren't good just because they're superhero movies, but because they're well made as a whole.
Transformers has nice action shots and that's it!
Sounds like they are finally releasing a summer movie (other than Star Trek)
Brad's review is spot on. If filmmakers are given $200m to make a film, and they want money from the general public… then they are accountable to critics, fans, and everyone. You don't get to make a "popcorn" film to avoid real criticism. Stop defending billion dollar corporations who attempt to dumb down your expectations. Demand good films. When people try for something interesting you get DARK KNIGHT. When people mail it in you get TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN.
It's possible to make an entertaining AND smart film. It's just that Michael Bay didn't do it here. Calling him on it doesn't make someone a bad person, as he's actually standing up for you. Wanting good movies isn't ever going to be a bad thing, and championing mediocrity is never going to be a good thing. You work hard for your money. Demand that directors respect you.
Humping dogs, humping robots, testicle jokes, and blatantly racist voices? C'mon fellas. Stop defending ignorance.
if anything the humor in this movie ruined it for me, whats the whole point of it, its an action movie, even if someone makes a case that it is based on a childeren's toy, even then most of the jokes are filled with sexual ideas, and clearly targeted towards adults, special effects are by far the best ive seen, but i couldnt stomach the corny dialogue, and could have done without the stupid jokes. D+ from me, i think the negative aspects of the film outweigh the positive ones.
and now i think its safe to say that star trek was the best offering of summer 2009, perhaps the dark knight of 2009, or maybe not that good. well
Reading the review, I think Brad went into the movie with the most forgiving of all standards, "This time around I expected less and Bay didn’t fail me as I appropriately prepared myself for what was to come. This doesn’t mean that as a result Revenge of the Fallen was actually good, but it was tolerable and there were moments I actually enjoyed myself." Yet, even with such low low low standards,The movie managed to do the seemingly impossible, and go even lower.
I totally agree with Laremy. In order for a movie to be good, it has to not only be entertaining, but it needs to be clear that as much time was spent on constructing a good movie as was special effects and action. We saw this with Star Trek and Up, both wonderful entertainment, but also provocative, funny, and, in Up's case, moving. A bunch of explosions and a fast pace doesn't make a good movie, even if it entertains you. I was thoroughly disappointed by Transformers 2, and I am struggling to understand why so many people here defending it as a good movie.
Has there ever been a group of fanboys that demanded less of their favorite franchise? I've been critical of Star Wars and SpiderMan fanboys, but I actually tip my hat off to those guys because they are NOT afraid to call things as it is. Star Wars fanboys ripped The Phantom Menace and pretty much the rest of the prequel trilogy, and Spidey fanboys who were high as a kite with SpiderMan 2 (a very good film), were not trying to fool themselves into thinking SpiderMan 3 (which was atrocious) was actually good.
Just because people ask more of Transformers, that doesn't mean they are asking for "Best Picture" caliber quality. Trying to defend it by saying "It's based on a cartoon" is preposterous. IronMan, SpiderMan 2, and Star Trek won't be sniffing any Best Picture awards or screenplay awards, but those movies did not shed all standard elements that makes a good film.
It's a brain dead CGI action sequel, what did you expect you were gonna get, you may think its a bad movie but i thought it was a pretty decent sequel, It was a helluva alot more fun than the first plus we got more screen time for megatron and starscream, and the last half hour is pretty kickass although the last scene before the credits i thought that was a bit of a letdown. The Film isn't the best movie of 2009 but in all fairness it's the best CGI live action next to Star Trek this year.
critics always sucks,nobody listen to their shouts….. the movie was incredible… just watch and enjoy!! don't expect much
This movie will open big, though we'll see if the trend we've been seeing with word of mouth hill hold with this one. Bad word of mouth has pretty much killed the other big blockbusters so far as proven by their huge falls in their 2nd week and so on.
Maybe I'm in the minority nowadays, but I really prefer some ounce of side story and characterization with my "Brain dead CGI action sequel." While at times I do enjoy a greasy sloppy burger from the drive thru, I prefer a well prepared substantial home cooked meal anyday.
What baffles me is that the writers of Revenge of the Fallen are the same writers who wrote Star Trek. I guess the trump card is having a good director who actually respects what true filmmaking is all about.
Good grief. Quit whining about the "racial stereotypes."
I'll watch Transformers 2 tomorrow, but at the ticket booth, I'll be buying a ticket for Up or Trek.
@Quazyflip:
Well, think of it this way: the same writers that bring consistent humor to "The Office" are also directly responsible for the script to "Year One". You win some, you lose some, but sometimes a directer can elevate a weak script. See the aforementioned "Star Trek"- too many plot holes and bad dialogue points here and there yet it still worked because Abrams has a knack for the material- Bay however, we all know, is more concerned making a film look cool as opposed to making it legitimately entertaining.
@Tim:
Watchmen actually got a C- from Brad. Just a tidbit, but your response brings up a good point. Honestly these grades are relative to how the film meets certain expectations. For example, I would give something like "Benjamin Button" a C+ myself and something like "Marley and Me" a B. That doesn't automatically mean that Marley and Me is a better film, it just means that relative to what "Marley and Me" set out to do (which is to make people laugh and cry about a dog's tale), it performed better than what Button set out to do.
So comparing "Transformers" to "Watchmen" would be a canard. "Transformers 2" was better at making an entertaining film than "Watchmen" was at trying to be a gripping adaptation of the graphic novel, according to Brad.
@Paes:
To the people saying some boring movies or movies u cant sit through being really good doesnt make much sesnse, since the main purpose of the film is to entertain and keep your attention then if a movie is boring and cant be sat through then realisticaly it cant be very good. Movies are made to entertain the veiwers and keep us coming back.
I'd also like to add that if a movie can do very well even with really bad reveiws that must be saying something. I plan to head to the threate tonight and im sure I will end up being entertained by transformers even tho the dialog probly sucks and there will most likely be some pretty stupid parts.
Cnn.com was brutal…
" "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" — the most terrible revenge since Montezuma's — is louder, longer and lamer than the 2007 hit it succeeds. Which is saying a lot."
And
"At 149 minutes, it's longer than "2001," "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" or "Star Wars." In fact, this may be the emptiest epic ever made."
well this is a guys action flick, maybe u should base it for its genre, not overall movie of ALL genres, maybe we should all help make a review and vote on a grade , one that this movie actually deserves.
Wow, some of these things mentioned sound a hundred times worse than Bumblebee peeing in the 1st movie.
After a few extra viewings, I've really grown to love the 1st transformers movie. The whole part at the house with the hiding in the room and all that was pretty stupid, but as a whole it was pretty good. Michael Bay actually does a good job developing the human characters, even if they are ridicoulous ones.
I think a lot of people misunderstood what he was trying to establish here.
However, if the best thing he could come up with for a plot for the sequel is the decepticons trying to blow up the sun or whatever, and someone humping Megan Fox, and two Robots more annoying than Jazz, I think this movie is in serious trouble.
It'll be a huge shame if this is movie as bad as it sounds, because the trailer was great and the special effects look beyond excellent.
To be honest, this year has been filmed with bad, or weak movies. On DVD, Friday the 13th: Killer cut saw the release of the worst horror movie ever. Theaters had the lackluster Wolverine, Last House On The Left, the interesting but kind of boring Watchmen, and…just about every other movie besides Star Trek hasn't been very good. I honestly think the best thing I've seen all year is the pointless sequel Underworld 3: Rise Of The Lycans.
Oops, I forgot to mention the bad Terminator (Salvation) movie.
I just saw it and it's simply silly entertainment. The way the cinema was, I have to say that A LOT of people want to see the movie. I would give it a C.
I would like to ask some of the people commenting here: have you seen Indiana Jones? Star Wars? Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon? Pulp Fiction? Up and Star Trek, even?
Every single one of these movies were action packed and entertaining, but they also had interesting plots, excellent screenplays, brilliant acting and great cinematography and editing. On top of this, they all were fun and action-packed.
In response to some of these defenses as Roger's, an action movie with unusual plots and talking robots (Star Wars) can be made good with originality, quick wit, and an actual plot. Just because a movie may entertain you and keep your attention (which was not my case, but I digress) does not make that movie a good movie. Transformers 2 has no excuse for being mindless and average. If less time was spent on explosions and more time was spent on the screenplay and actual direction (getting Megan Fox to lie across a motorcycle with a breast shot is not direction, people), then it could've been good. I actually liked the first one alright, but this one was just a huge disappointment for me. It makes me sad that it will probably be hailed as the highest-grossing movie of the year.
My wife and I are seeing Transformers 2 tomorrow and neither of us can wait. The first one was great and from what I've seen in trailers, the second looks good.
You don't want to see nice breasts? Hmm. Alright.
Such a long list, but I have to add what I think: I'm just expecting to have fun. I like Shia Le… well, however you spell his name. I don't really care about critiques about movies such as this, because critics look at movies objectively. If it doesn't meet certain criteria, it will be given a poor rating. If they even enjoy it a little bit, it doesn't matter, because those criteria weren't met. I don't think I've read any critic that gave a movie a thumbs up simply because he/she enjoyed it a little. That's just the way it works.
The only thing I'm not looking foward to in this movie is something that others have already mentioned before: the exploitation of the women in this film. How about we get some "up the skirt" shots of Shia, Josh Duhammel or Tyrese? If women are going to be objectified, why not the men too? It's only fair.
if you expect a movie to be bad and it lives up to the expectations of being bad… then its bad. I'm tired of people saying that movies were entertaining because the computers were able to make fake explosions look real. The reason this movie is going to be bad is because anyone with the right amount of money can make it. Its like watching athletes playing sports with the same talent level but superior equipment. The storyline is crappy, the acting is crappy, but the CGI is good? Sounds like a movie I could make with the right amount of money. Whats the point of having a director or actors when there part of the movie is mindless and made to fill-in the parts of the movie not consumed with special effects. I dont see the spiderman storyline being realistic either, but they figured out how to make a movie out of it. Transformers was garbage, Revenge of the Fallen will live up to my hype of dogs**t movie of the year, mayb decade.
I can't wait to not see this movie.
i just got home from transformers and really enjoyed it, it was a popcorn movie for sure, but it was just a fun watch for me
@ Vince
Your right, my fault. I was going off memory, didn't do me well did it. Sorry for that.
Here's how I sum up the movie: It's overblown crap with some great action.
Saw it, LOVED it!! Was it a great film – no. Was I entertained – heck, yes!!
Then again, I enjoyed Terminator Salvation, so what do i know…
@Angel: That's simply not true. Sure, critics often look at criteria, but it's not always enough to explain the movie as a whole. Brad gave this movie low scores because he didn't find it entertaining, not in spite of finding it entertaining. If you've never read of a critic giving a movie a thumbs up for "enjoying a movie a little", then go read the reviews for Snakes on a Plane, which got a "fresh" rating of 69% on rottentomatoes. And that's just the first one that popped in to my head, there are plenty more
I absolutely hated it. 2 out of 10
saw it last night and enojoyed it. For everyone that thinks it does not have good enough plot or did not improve humanity then i suggest you watch doubt or milk haha. People tend to forget this is based on a cartoon from the 80's not the bible. it is what it is *robots kicking ass* nothing more and nothing less.
Don't worry, there are far too many reviewers that love Milk, Brokeback, etc…
We all know those people won't like Megan Fox and therefore not like this movie.
I'm watching it to see the main characters, the transformers. Megan Fox is just a nice looking bonus.
Just like Knight Rider (KITT) or Airwolf(The Helicopter) The stars are the transformers themselves and that's what I want to see. This movie isn't meant to have some in depth plot, it's meant to be a popcorn flick.
If I want to emerse myself in deep stories, I read a book which I like to do.
I had several words to say, but sadly I read the posting rules and it seems I cannot say them, so I'll keep it clean. I think that the movie-critic business is pointless. We are all independent people here, so why go on someone elses word about whether a movie is good or bad. I like to think for myself. Kudos to all of you who do the same!
Since, however, this is a forum of opinions about the film, I'll give mine anyway. I think that the first TF film was excellent and this one is even better. From what I've read from the article, people are judging based on dialogue, overanalyzing everything, and worring about 'racial stereotypes'. Honestly, this movie is for the fans. I am a rabid TF fan and the last thing I cared about was what "race" the voices sounded like. I reveled in the Transformers that were featured, they even had Arcee in this one. And wheelie! And if you naysayers get over yourselves, you will see that there really is a good story to the movie, and it continues from the first movie. Anyone that hasn't, do yourselves a favor and go watch all the old cartoons. Then you will see how this movie really stacks up. Then you will be better able to give an opinion about this movie.
Hmmmmm…I think im going to agree with Roger on this one, because it seems to me that everybody here is in someway trying to compare a movie based on a toy/cartoon to "Dark Knight"? I don't understand that whatsoever! I'll tell you all what your arguement reminds me of, It's like comparing a "Garfield" movie to "The Matrix" you see what im saying? it's a pointless arguement, Transformers is what it is…A POPCORN MOVIE! Like comparing Hip-Hop to Rap, true hip-hop produced artist like Public Enemy,KRS-One,Rakim etc, Rap produced artist like Mc Hammer,Vanilla Ice, 2 Live Crew! You see what I mean, you know one is gonna be deep and thought provoking while the other well most definitly be mindless music to have fun with and dance to! The same applies to this movie, this movie is rap, dark knight could be considered in some way to hip-hop, Garfield is rap, The Matrix= Hip-Hop. Just sit back, stop taking some films so personal and enjoy boobies, barely hidden crotch shots, leg humping, fighting robots, shiny things etc!
Enjoy some rap music for a few hours of your life, And this is coming from a "Hip-Hop head!"
this movie blew…………………..nuff said
I think it's a matter of looking at the fact the Bay took characters like Optimus Prime and put them on screen. I caught myself in awe that these Robots were "brought to life" in a sense. I will complain that i did not like Megan Fox and how they had to exxaggerate the use of her vagina,ass, and breasts as a way to lure people to see this movie.
The movie was designed for people who love explosions and seeing Robots destroy one another…But cinema and the audience now days crave the latest and most edgy film and are never satisfied.
Bay kept fairly faithful to his first movie…and that was good because if he had not done that..many people would be dissapointed.
Honestly, it's hard for me to take a critics opinion on a movie…because most critics watch the movie to find their faults…and i find that no movie is flawless…so it's understood that movies are going ot have parts that as dissapointing….
About the twins: Back in the 80's (which i do not know if these guys were int eh 80's cartoon or movie) if these guys existed…no one would have said a thing..they would have merely laughed and found them as comic relief…and i don't really see it as a racial caricature. I see it more as a cultural caricature….we find people of all races behaving similar to those 2 robots…not that exxaggerated…but that's why people refer to it as a caricature.
Bottom line…the movie entertained me and will entertain a lot of people…it was a bad movie…but there were things that could be fixed.
Totally agree with you!
The movie just SUCKS…it's funny that the people who liked it are the only ones here who have to write some long explanation to justify why they liked it crap.
@kewlikeelvis: Word, man.
I think we would all agree… Transformers 2 was way better than Pearl Harbour.
I grew up watching the G1 transformers and I've hated whatever Hasbro has produced beyond that. Transformers the animated movie was the starting point for the franchise and the current two Transformer films embody that spirit. Its supposed to be about robots with personalities that teenagers and kids can relate to. The film is epic and successfully capturesthe feeling of the huge universe TF is. The score is brilliant and fresh.
The plot was interesting and also new for TF fans as well which is the film's strength. Ofcourse its every person's own opinion when he/she dislikes a film and I personally do not agree with this system of critique. I have seen some pretty trashy movies but Bay's films are far from trashy. TF 2 was way better than the first one and had some amazing moments like the animated series did. Thats all it should be.
ROTF deserves alot more credit than people are giving it. But then again all we see are people complaining and cribbing about how bad every movie is. It was definitely better than the first one which felt rushed and put up together. Maybe for regular movie goers who're looking for cinematic masterpieces, this might not be the A+ film but for a transformer fan like myself this was a great watch and I'd recommend it to anyone who's in for the ride.
Maybe Bay should've had Optimus in a tub nude with all his mechanical goods shinin' thinking about his life's dirty little secrets. That would've earned the film an oscar ;).
I saw Transformers 2 over the weekend and was able to enjoy it more than the first film, though that's not saying much.
Question:
Why weren't the hologram drivers on the Arcee bots wearing helmets? Can anyone explain to me the reason for showing the heroes not promoting the use of helmets on motorcycles? I would like to know, since knowing is (or was) half the battle.
So frankly, I'd like to say Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is quite likley the worst film I have ever seen. I can understand that some people just wanted plain, dumb fun. But it wasn't fun. It was just dumb.