Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Movie Review
"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen"
Review by Eric D. Snider
Grade: D
Rating: PG-13
Released: Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Directed by:
Cast:
Michael Bay's philosophy goes something like this. "Did you like it when I playfully slugged you in the arm? Then you'll LOVE it when I PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE!" If you thought a 25-foot robot was cool, you'll think a 50-foot robot is TWICE AS COOL! (Math confirms it!) If it's funny to see two dogs humping once, just imagine how funny it will be to see it A SECOND TIME!!
This is a man for whom the words "wretched excess" have no meaning -- indeed, for whom all words have no meaning, unless they are shouted over the din of a helicopter or tattooed on the lower back of a stripper. Bay directs with a gleeful love of senseless destruction and a casual disregard for human life, a grown-up 13-year-old who doesn't care if his story makes sense, who doesn't care if his characters are interesting, who doesn't care about anything other than making giant things blow up.
"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" picks up two years after "Transformers" left off. The U.S. military is secretly working with the Autobots, led by Optimus Prime (voice of Peter Cullen), who can change from a semi truck to a robot and back again in under two seconds, except when it's more dramatic to do it slowly while the camera swoops around him and the horns in the orchestra blare, in which case the transformation takes more like 15 seconds. They're tracking down and killing the remaining Decepticons, puzzled that the bad space robots are still here, considering the thing they came to Earth to find -- the Allspark -- has been destroyed.
Wouldn't you know it, the Decepticons are looking for something ELSE this time. I anticipate a third, heretofore unmentioned artifact will be their target in the next sequel. And wouldn't you also know it, Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) is the key to finding it.
Sam is just heading off to college on the East Coast, leaving his chesty, barely clothed girlfriend, Mikaela (Megan Fox), behind in L.A. Don't worry, though: As soon as Mikaela learns Sam's life is in danger, she hops on the next plane and is in his dorm room before sunset the same day, a remarkable feat of travel given the distance and time zones being covered. "Have any strangers given you anything suspicious to carry onboard?" the Southwest Airlines representative asks her at the ticket counter, because that's TOTALLY what they ask when you fly. All of this, by the way, is after Sam's mother (Julie White) accidentally eats some pot brownies and runs around his college campus in a hyperactive freak-out before tackling a Frisbee player on the lawn, and after Sam meets his tech-geek roommate (Ramon Rodriguez) and learns he's a successful entrepreneur, a fact that the movie never mentions again.
The Decepticons learn the whereabouts of some of the things they're looking for by having Soundwave hack into a U.S. government satellite in space. This is an obvious solution, yet apparently it took the Decepticons two years to think of it. No doubt they were busy designing some of their new agents, which include a sexy female robot that I'll call the Seducticon. She fits right in at Sam's school, a college seen frequently in movies and known as Hot Chick University.
The Autobots have been busy devising new toys to sell -- er, characters to explore -- too. You may have already heard about a pair called Mudflap and Skids, illiterate, dopey-eyed, buffoons who speak in exaggerated hip-hop slang. One of them has a gold tooth. They are the "urban" (read: black) characters, as well as the comic relief. We'll call them the Amos&Andybots.
Bay is the kind of filmmaker who will boldly create something utterly incoherent, then somehow make you feel like you're the jerk for pointing it out. "Duh!" he seems to say. "Of course it's incoherent! I meant to do that! Aren't you enjoying the loudness??" And while the loudness is periodically entertaining, it just becomes white noise after a while. Bay wants to impress us with how BIG some of the robots are, then shoots himself in the foot by never pausing long enough to let us be impressed by their grand scale. He seems to think that slowing down for a minute, even to take in the view, would be a sign of weakness. No time to enjoy yourself! Gotta keep moving!
It's that lack of confidence (or, possibly, ADHD) that makes Bay let the thing run for 2 1/2 hours -- because more is better, after all. But he's so intent on giving us more of everything that he neglects the elements that would make that "everything" more satisfying. We'd feel a lot more tension and excitement over the plot if Bay would develop the characters into figures we cared about (and if they didn't just randomly disappear once the movie was done with them). We'd be much more invested in the action if he would sit still long enough to let us SEE it. We would be thrilled by the story if Bay had chosen to tell one that was smart and clever.
Fans of "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" will probably describe it the same way as they described its predecessor. "It's not meant to be Shakespeare!" "It's not supposed to be 'Citizen Kane.'" "Sure, it won't win any Oscars...." "Leave your brain at the door!" "Lighten up, it's a popcorn movie!" All of these defenses -- which sound more like excuses -- are true enough, but they overlook an important fact, which is that testosterone-fueled summer blockbusters can be fun AND smart. It's not an either/or proposition. Since so many films have proven this, why settle for one that treats its audience like idiots? I can't speak for you, but I know I deserve better.
Grade: D
Rated PG-13, a little profanity, abundant action violence and general mayhem
2 hrs., 29 min.
Copyright © Eric D. Snider.
This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.
This item has 47 comments
June 24, 2009 at 9:26 am
Eric, I totally agree with your D rating for this flick. I went to the soldout midnight showing (with the hoard of annoying teenagers) opening night, and left after 90 minutes. I hear the movie picked up right when I left, but at that point, I prefered sleep than my wasted 8 bucks.
June 24, 2009 at 10:02 am
I also attended a midnight screening (it was a spur of the moment thing and absolutely not my idea) and I can confirm that the movie definitely did NOT pick up at any point. The audience seemed to love it; they were oohing and aahing during the many robot-on-robot battles, and I wanted to stand up and sarcastically yell, "Oh my god! Robots are fighting robots!"
Awful movie. And yeah, the "black" robots were never funny, not even once.
June 24, 2009 at 11:07 am
I can't wait to come back and read this thread once the fan-boys have gotten a hold of it, pointing out how you are just no fun, and don't get it and how horrible of a person you are for even suggesting that this isn't the best movie ever made. After your review of the first movie, I'm sure they're gunning for you, and all other ::explitive deleted:: who dare not think that this movie is the greatest thing ever commited to film. I hope you get some funny angry e-mails to post to your blog out of this.
June 24, 2009 at 11:25 am
When the trailer for this movie ran before "Star Trek" and Shia LeBeef said the line "Megatron wants what's in my brain!", I burst out laughing.
Not a good sign if the trailer is already unintentionally hilarious. I'm just sayin'.
June 24, 2009 at 11:50 am
Very nice review all around. The only fault I could detect was your implication that having AD/HD is a bad thing. It certainly makes day-to-day life more difficult, but consider the fact that many creative types have AD/HD... although I would agree that calling Michael Bay "creative" would be pushing it.
June 24, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Megatron wants what's in my pants!
June 24, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Megatron wants your cell phone???
June 24, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Y'know, I enjoyed Transformers more than I thought I would, mainly because I rarely go see high-budget mindless action movies and it was perversely entertaining to see how shallow the characters and screenplay were. I won't bother with this one.
This is a funny review, in a "because it's true!" sort of way.
June 24, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Orson Welles must be rolling in his grave seeing what they've done to his beloved Transformers: The Movie.
June 24, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Another one for the (not worth paying full-price to see it) Netflix que...
June 24, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Another Eric: this is a "not worth seeing it when it is free" movie. I saw it for free. It wasn't worth it.
June 24, 2009 at 4:55 pm
The 13 year old FanBoys will love it...Megan Fox and robots, what more can I kid want right?
June 24, 2009 at 6:28 pm
I'm almost more curious to see this movie now that I was before. I thought there was no way the first Transformers movie could have been louder or stupider. I'd like to see the impossible happen.
June 24, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Let me put it this way, Amp: In addition to it being loud and stupid, it's also BORING.
June 24, 2009 at 10:27 pm
I went to see it because my boyfriend loves transformers. I didn't like the first one, but I actually think this one was an improvement. (I didn't like this one either, I'm just saying, the story was slightly less clunky and there were no random hot Austrailian supermodels or stereotypical fat black guys hacking anything.)
Here's my main complaint about this movie. It's just something my brain can't even come up with any reason for happening the way it happened. Usually when movies are dumb I can use my imagination, but this was an exceptionally stupid plot point to me. (It's not really much of a spoiler, either, because when you get to the point in the movie where you'll understand what the hell I'm talking about, this is all stated pretty much up front.)
Okay, so these six or seven robots sacrificed themselves back in the day to entomb this mystical object. They do this by melting into each other and dying. But when our heroes get to said tomb, the mystical object IS NOT in fact entombed within these dead robots. The mystical object is just laying there, on top of them. UNLESS you count the, what, fourth century Roman fresco that they're hiding behind, but I do not think this was part of the great melty robot sacrifice.
So are you telling me that they actually melted into each other, sacrificing themselves, to form a... pedestal for said mystical object? What the hell, yo?
June 25, 2009 at 9:51 am
Amos&AndyBots :)
June 25, 2009 at 10:28 am
I hated the first one. Loathed it, actually. Even with Rifftrax making fun of it, I couldn't be entertained by it. I was hoping this one would be better, but now I know not to bother. I'll just have to watch Transformers the Animated Movie again. At least the scene in that where Optimus Prime lays the smack down on the decepticons rocks.
June 25, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I hated this movie. I wanted to love it, but it was offensive to my intelligence on so many levels.
June 25, 2009 at 1:07 pm
But I love Even Stevens! How could this movie be bad?
June 25, 2009 at 10:44 pm
I really hate the term "Popcorn Movie." It's unfortunate that the majority of America has the mental maturity of a 6 year old, so this will make tons of money.
I went to see this movie today at a Matinee, mostly because I didn't want to bash it and have people say "You haven't even seen it!"
Something that really brought home the mentality of America to me was an exchange I overheard leaving the theater.
Emptyheaded, shallow blonde chick #1: "I thought it was good."
blonde chick's blonde chick friend: "Yea, especially that military guy! Mmmmm!"
Chick #1: "Yea I'm glad they brought him back again, he's so cute!"
-------------
So there you have it, as long as they give the masses some male eye candy in a uniform to ogle at, this movie will make an extra $50 million dollars, regardless of plot, coherence, or character development.
-------------
The worst scenes for me were the car crashes. I don't think they were all even wearing seat belts, and yet when they crash into a telephone pole at 20-30 miles an hour there are 0 negative consequences, not even whiplash.
I guess it takes being dropped 200 feet through a warehouse for the airbags to come out. The magical airbags that save them from any injury in said 200 foot fall.
Not to mention every other explosion, bullet, or fall in any non-climax scene that also fails to cause injury of any kind to our "heroes." Not to worry though, in the Very Important Slow Motion Climax, a simple shot+explosion behind Sam manages to kill him, showing the audience that he is Not Invincible.
/rolleyes
June 25, 2009 at 11:24 pm
This Movie was pretty bad. At least the first one made a small bit of sense. I mean the reason they through megatron into the Atlantic ocean was because it was deep and cold so that a possible resurrection could not take place but nooo 5 Decepticons dive straight in ignoring the cold freezing water. Yeah This movie failed a lot and there were many random things. Did anyone catch the license plate on that small moving object on the Sphinx's head when Prime was walking back to the camp after defeating what was suppose to be the most feared Decepticon?
June 27, 2009 at 8:36 am
Just watched it in an IMAX theater. This is where theater owners say "Hey, if you like it when Michael Bay punches you in the face, have we got some fun for you! Take this grenade and hold it in your mouth..."
And you know what, they were right. It was (like a grenade in the mouth) totally painless. I guess I'm just a sucker for IMAX because I thought the first Transformers movie was lame but that this one was totally entertaining. Plot holes? Sorry, I couldn't hear those over the fact that on the IMAX, at some point during the movie, many of the Transformers are being shown in actual size*
*Well, you know, I mean that if any Transformers actually existed, it's the actual size they would actually be.
June 27, 2009 at 12:31 pm
You know, one big problem I had with the first one -- beyond the stupid cube thang -- was the WAY the Transformers transform. It may sound petty or nuts, but the way they transform -- million-moving-parts-style -- screams CGI, and kills my suppressed-disbelief. If they had transformed like the toys -- only a few big moving parts, and no cheating -- it could've been a bit more believable for me.
So, yeah, the screenwriters phoned it in, and the director chose shaky-cam instead of something watchable, but the art director really hosed it, too, and shouldn't be forgotten when the damnation finally comes.
Number two looks like more of number one, but with dumber plot, shakier cam, and less clothes on Megan Fox.
June 28, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Just a quick quip:
Saw the movie for the second time today, this time in IMAX. I found a few things less enjoyable that I knew they were coming, thought of a few more things that didn't seem to make sense, but hey, it IS Michael Bay after all.
Just wanted to point out, the reason it's "Hot Chick University" is because Sam's roomate (Ramon Rodriguez) hacked the university dorm logs and stacked his own dorm with all the best looking girls from the freshmen class.
Cheers.
June 29, 2009 at 11:42 am
Ahhh, I knew you'd agree with me on this one (okay, I agree with you). I went with the "just enjoy it, it's an action show" crowd and had a hard time not rolling my eyes at every "let's slowly pan over Megan Fox with her mouth seductively open" shot as well as the total lack of incoherent storyline. I was lost in all the noise. I'm embarrassed I was part of the opening weekend earnings.
June 29, 2009 at 12:24 pm
$112 million weekend gross indicates that either this review did not come out soon enough or that people do enjoy being treated like short attention span monkeys.
I saw the original transformers on the plane, for free, and felt it was a nice break from my endless spreadsheets and a distraction from the malodorous gentleman to my left. Perhaps for this one I will instead strike up a hygiene-related conversation about how attending Hot Chick University must require a lot of cold showers and plenty of soap.
June 29, 2009 at 10:24 pm
This movie wasn't as bad as you are all making it out to be. I will agree that a lot of things could have been done differently but, I still enjoyed it. It was entertaining and that was what Bay set out to accomplish! I found it a bit long with some parts that the movie could have really done without. I was not impressed with how Devastator transformed, actually I was quite upset! It was like taking all of those vehicles and putting them into a huge blender and bam! Megan Fox is still hot but it was a bit over the top in this movie. I also agree that it really made no sense that Megatron was dropped in the ocean where he was not suppose to be able to be brought back. That was a really stupid idea and they totally failed on that one. Soundwave is in the movie and all he does is hang out in space hacking into a satellite? Come on! There are plenty more things that I could pick apart but unlike Bay I know when to stop!
June 29, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Oh and not to mention a robot that can look exactly like a human! That is just plain dumb! If it was that easy wouldn't they all just do it?
June 30, 2009 at 9:36 am
Michael Bay... karma's gonna kick your **** someday.
June 30, 2009 at 8:11 pm
"$112 million weekend gross indicates that either this review did not come out soon enough or that people do enjoy being treated like short attention span monkeys."
Is what Dave said up there.
And he just doesnt get it either, just like every other holier than thou Bay hater.
Rolling Stone and Travers had the balls to rate the movie a ridiculous and laughable NO stars.
Ebert couldnt get past the point that a car could transform into a robot.
Some people dont get what the Transformers are about... and thats ok. But to crucify what a solid, witty and exciting movie because of a vendetta that these reviewers have on Bay is just absolutely an abomination.
The lot of guys like you, Travers, Ebert and the whole Rotten Tomatoes site should be completely ashamed of yourselves.
You're a bunch of tools to be used by the rest of the holier than thou clowns that read your reviews as gospel and then spew cloned responses out on any site they can.
This movie stands on its own merits. Is it going to win an Oscar? No. Is it the worst movie of the decade?
If you believe it is, you should quit reviewing movies, because your bias against Bay has made you unable to objectively review.
July 1, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Did I just see the words "solid, witty and exciting" used to describe "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen"? Yes, yes, I believe I did. Awesome.
But Paul, did you ever think that it's not that the critics and all their "clones" have a vendetta against Bay, but rather that they simply really, really disliked the film?
But you're right, I'm sure Eric and all those other Eberts and Rottentomatoers are really ashamed of themselves now. You've really shown us all what's what.
July 1, 2009 at 10:12 pm
I don't understand it still, not the movie, this review. Your metaphor sucks, try this one, "If you like when I blow up this soda can, you'll LOVE when I BLOW UP THIS CITY BLOCK!" And you know what, he is correct. You never give credit where credit's due. Michael Bay made the perfect movie of the genre he was creating a movie in. If you want to see a movie with plot and good acting and you decided to see this movie, well then you're the dumb one aren't ya.
July 2, 2009 at 10:48 am
I disagree that "it's a shame people like these movies" because these movies are the other side of the coin. Its great to see an Oscar winner when you go to the theatre, but sometimes you just want it bigger, louder, and with more explosions. I get enough drama through my daily life, and sometimes a dumb action movie is all i want to unwind to. Personally, I think the bigger shame is the praise that movies like "No Country for Old Men" receive, but then again I was never a fan of the overly pretentious.
Its not a good movie, but it delivers exactly what you expect. Yo don't order a burger and complain that its not a steak. And ya, burgers can be pretty darn tasty, but some times I just want some Mc Donalds! So get the guys together and just go see it. And if you need to, have a few beers first.
July 2, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Wow, #32, you just admitted that the movie had no plot or good acting. Awesome.
"Waiting for Godot" as performed by elementary school students must be right up your alley, eh?
July 2, 2009 at 2:20 pm
This movie was the worst movie I have seen in years.
Whats the easiest thing to get right... how about Megan Fox being super hot and yet... I was bored. Do as many slow motion running sequences as you want Mr. Bay... I was bored.
The rest of the movie followed that theme.
Transformers was stupid, sure.
But to make things I like, no... adore, and make them boring.
Since this is a no swearing zone... darn you Michael Bay... Darn you to heck!
Things that annoyed...
Giza and the city of Petra are right next to each other.
God is an alien robot (Xenu anyone)??? There's even a line, "if we were made in gods image, who made them." Apparently Xenu is God and his Theatens are angry.
Robots could look like insanely hot college girls, but choose to look like cars... but really fancy cars. (Vin Diesel should have made a cameo just to knock this point home)
Also Hot girl robots most powerful weapon is a really really long tongue... that looked a little to phallic for my comfort. I was just glad that wasn't on the end of her tail.
Kitchen appliances can blow the crap out of walls, floors, fountains, but hitting a human at all is impossible.
Car wrecks including falling 200 ft into concrete don't hurt at all.
I know I watched Aladdin and I didn't care about the monkey talking, the flying rug, or the genie. Movies set their own rules though, like what world the movie operates in is created in the first ten minutes. When movies break their own rules... that's when a movie becomes stupid.
This movie was stupid.
On a grading scale of A,B,C,D,F this was a Z.
July 3, 2009 at 10:44 am
Hans, youre going to tell me there werent funny parts of this movie? A sophmoric wit sure, but its there. Transformers was never this super serious concept. Not in the comic books, not in the old cartoons. Its campy and at the same time incredibly interesting to everyone who grew up around the time the cartoon and comic book came out.
This movie has great action scenes of giant robots done amazingly.
And then it makes you laugh, and leaves you satisfied that Optimus beats the living crap out of the bad guys before its over.
And thats what I wanted. As a life long fan of Transformers thats exactly what I wanted.
The fact that its the number one movie in the world shows that its an elitist minority (Huge minority) that agree that this movie was so terrible.
Its so terrible people are seeing it multiple times. And we're not all mindless idiots. Some of us can just agree to suspend belief and have a good time for two and a half hours.
July 3, 2009 at 3:12 pm
This is priceless. Keep it coming, fanboy wierdos!
July 4, 2009 at 1:51 am
"Hans, youre going to tell me there werent funny parts of this movie? A sophmoric wit sure, but its there."
I won't deny that there were jokes in the film - but jokes alone don't make a film "witty". The jokes seemed more crude and stupid than "amusingly or ingeniously clever in conception or execution" or "smartly facetious or jocular" (using the Merriam-Webster definitions of "witty".)
"Transformers was never this super serious concept. Not in the comic books, not in the old cartoons. Its campy and at the same time incredibly interesting to everyone who grew up around the time the cartoon and comic book came out."
Well, I'd hardly say that it's incredibly interesting to everyone who grew up around that time... Because, well, I grew up watching the show and playing with the toys and I still disliked the movie. I have nostalgia for the franchise - but that doesn't mean I'm going to necessarily enjoy every incarnation of it.
"This movie has great action scenes of giant robots done amazingly."
Except what you call great action scenes seemed to me to be poorly done action scenes with a lot of rapid editing and somewhat realistic special effects. And slow motion.
"And then it makes you laugh, and leaves you satisfied that Optimus beats the living crap out of the bad guys before its over."
Except, beyond a bit of nostalgia, I didn't have any emotional attachment to any of the characters, robot or human - and therefore found it difficult to care when Optimus beat the living crap out of the bad guys.
"The fact that its the number one movie in the world shows that its an elitist minority (Huge minority) that agree that this movie was so terrible."
The fact that it's the number one movie in the world in its first week says nothing about the quality of the film and only shows that the studio put a whole lot of money into advertising it and that people liked the first film (and it should be noted that the first film received an at least somewhat better critical response than this one.) From my experience, word of mouth has been more mixed on this one and I kind of expect that it won't quite have the legs of other, more universally liked films (such as "The Dark Knight" and "Iron Man" and "Star Trek".)
And I'm not sure how any of this makes critics elitist - most of them saw the film and wrote their reviews before the film had been released and before it was making any money. It's not a critic's job to predict the box office of a film and to judge it accordingly. Besides, he critics are more than willing to give positive reviews to mainstream, audience pleasing films - they just like to reserve their positive reviews for films that they actually think are good (like the aforementioned "The Dark Knight" and "Iron Man". and "Star Trek".) That doesn't mean that other people can't have a different response to a film than they do, but by the same token they are under absolutely no obligation to like a film just because it makes a lot of money. Nor does it make them elitists if they tear apart a film that ends up making large amounts of money.
"Its so terrible people are seeing it multiple times. And we're not all mindless idiots. Some of us can just agree to suspend belief and have a good time for two and a half hours."
I completely agree that not everyone who enjoyed the film is a mindless idiot. I just think it's a bit silly when those did like the film start accusing those who didn't of being "tools" and "elitists" and "holier than thou clowns."
Here's the thing - I am able to suspend belief and have a have a good time for two and a half hours. Heck, I'll even admit to enjoying some of Bay's earlier films like "The Rock" and the first "Bad Boys". But just because I can suspend belief and enjoy mindless entertainment doesn't mean that I'm going to enjoy every mindless film out there. This film was certainly mindless, but not in a good or enjoyable way.
July 5, 2009 at 11:58 am
If you're still unconvinced of how AWESOME this movie is, be sure to check out this amazing EXCLUSIVE CLIP I found on YouTube!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fqN_wCK9hM
July 7, 2009 at 11:53 am
As I long time fan of the Transformers from the begining, I must say this movie was as horrible if not more than described in the review. I watched hoping for any charactor depth from any of the actors and cgi. That never occurs. I watched all of the previous animations(cartoons) and still wonder hey someone new, now who the hell are they? This attempt by Bays relates to closley to Lucas' attempt with the Star Wars episode one. Not only did the fight scences play out as Autobots are god-like, the scenes were mainly hidden behind other scenary. (Hey check it out those 50 ft tall robots are fighting in the desert and all I see is an arm, a leg and one head from behind a column of stone?). Secondly I did not have any need for a Jar-Jar Binks most less two of them. Lastley if The Fallen is in the film where the hell was Grimlock? I can see adapting the story to make the movie slightly different, but this was more alternate universe by Bays' attempt at making a sequel worthy of the first film.
July 7, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I was disappointed in the film. I really wanted to like as I thoroughly enjoyed the first Transformer film. Unfortunately, this one left me feeling empty and somewhat offended.
I will just go over what I liked and disliked in this film:
Likes:
The sound was fantastic
The new bots were cool
Dislikes:
Couldn't tell who was good or bad half the time.
Poor introductions to new bots.
Shaky Cam fight scenes.
Poor character development, both human and robot.
The use of sex in the movie was over the top.
The use of humping dogs and humping robots was unfunny.
The Jar Jar Binks twins were both offensive and over-the-top stereotypical. Not only that, but they weren't funny.
The 2 main soldier characters were forced into the story and were forgettable.
No sense of amazing wonderment as a robot would transform--this process has been bastardized to the point of boredom.
The use of a testicle pouch on the Devestator was not cool, not funny, just stupid.
The mom getting high on brownies was asinine.
Megan Fox's wardrobe and dialogue lines were cartoonish at best.
If we can have a rail gun that can kill the Devestator in one shot, how can the Autobots not have developed this technology? I know we are to suspend our disbelief for this flick, but this is just insulting.
I don't want to sound like a funhater, but I was expecting more. To my disappointment, I got more of the wrong things and less of the things that made the first movie great.
July 7, 2009 at 2:27 pm
So, I'd make a joke about being psychic, but it almost doesn't seem worth it. The only thing I've noticed is that it really is disingenuous to call critics elitist when they dislike one movie you liked, while ignoring the fact that they did like make main-stream movies (as Hans pointed out, "Iron Man", "Dark Knight", "Star Trek"). If they were elitist snobs, they would hate all main-stream movies that were easy to understand and fun with lots of explosions. They don't, so they aren't elitist snobs. They just are willing to admit a bad film is bad. You can like a bad movie. That doesn't make it a good movie, it just means you like a bad movie. You can see it a million times until your eyes bleed, but you can not make it a good movie. And, I'm sorry, but it seems to me that a movie that makes you shut your brain off entirely (I'm not talking about a couple small things, I'm talking about major gaping plot holes), it can't be an objectively good movie. Plot is a core part of what makes a movie good. So is pacing, and characterization. And special effects. But if a movie is all special effects to the detriment of everything else, it is unbalanced and not good. I'm sorry, but there it is.
July 13, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Just came home from the movie.
First ; these comments are hilarious !
But more importantly ; The movie was a mindless,'lets watch robots blow things up' movie. And in the summer, personally I don't want to .. think about my movies, so this kinda worked.
But I agree with the comments that the actors weren't very good.
Personally, I would up the rating to a C, but only because I like when things get blown up. ;D
July 15, 2009 at 12:51 am
This movie wedged it's way in to the number three position for worst movie i've ever seen in my life.
Number one spot? Bad Boys II.
This movie was so bad it was stunning. I was genuinely laughing throughout most of the second half of the film at how flatly stupid it was.
God bless the Matrix of Leadership.
August 11, 2009 at 12:38 am
As a lifelong Transformers fan, I must say, this movie was awful. I liked the first movie a lot, and I wanted to like this one, but I simply couldn't. I got desensitized to the explosions ten minutes in, and the rest just became a loud, stupid, nonsensical blur.
Another point worth mentioning: I often couldn't tell the robots apart when they were in the heat of battle. They all look alike in the midst of all the smoke and explosions.
I run the projector at my theater, so I got PAID to see it. It wasn't worth it.
Paul (#30): If you'll recall, Ebert actually gave the first Transformers movie a very favorable review. Just sayin'....
October 29, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Although I did to some extent enjoy this movie, it was not very good at all. The first one was actually a very fun movie that actually had a plot and relatable characters. In addition to the lack of character development and the convoluted plot, the potty/perverted humor was overused to the point that it was being bludgeoned into the ground. Even funny jokes aren't funny if you do that to them. Moreover, it was too much about the humans, the twins were damn annoying, and the worst of all was The Fallen. He is NOT the Decepticon leader. MEGATRON is. Seriously--in pretty much every Transformers series, Megatron is one of the best villains ever, right up there with Dracula and Darth Vader. Having him subordinate to anyone is a crime.
Keep in mind that this is coming from a huge Transformers fan. I think that a lot of the hate towards the movies comes from the fact that half the TF fanbase are G-Whiners and hate anything that isn't the original G1 cartoon series. I honestly have yet to watch G1--I got into the fandom watching TF Animated before I saw either movie--and what a lot of them forget is that the original cartoon G1 movie was just as bad, with half the characters dying for no reason and a wonky, convoluted plot. Stuff like that makes me kind of grateful that I never lived through the 80s.
November 9, 2009 at 9:36 am
Surprised to say, I liked this one better than the first (though I can't say I actually enjoyed it). The movie was about the Transformers who got almost as much screen time as Shia. It was still a dumb movie that had annoying parts that were supposed to be funny, but it's still better than the first movie where the Autobots show up almost an hour into the film, do nothing until the very end of the movie, where they pretty much fail at everything.
Why people think we want to watch annoying humans do stupid things when we go to see a movie about giant robots?
Also, the rifftrax for this one is awesome. It will make you laugh and makes the movie bearable to watch.