Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen [Spoilers start pg2]

Rot your brains, then rot our boards

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen [Spoilers start pg2]

Postby GhostWolfe » Wed Jun 24, 2009 1:04 pm UTC

s'ok if I start a new thread, rather than necro one that's been dead since '07?

*fangasm*

I just got home from seeing what I thought was going to be the biggest disappointment of my life, and I'm totally buzzed. That, and I have a major girl-boner for Bumblebee.

Till, I get my thoughts a little more in order (cause it wasn't pure, distilled awesome, there were issues), I'm just gonna say one thing:
Spoiler:
Soundwave: genius! I want to give a medal to the person who came up with that.


/angell
Last edited by GhostWolfe on Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:59 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

Laguna
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:33 pm UTC

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Laguna » Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:40 pm UTC

Heck Yes!

I thought it would be awesome and I was right...

here are my fave things about it.
Spoiler:
Railguns in the military. Spacegate or whatever that teleporting was called. B1 bombers, A10 warthogs, F 16s, F22 Raptors, AH-1Z Cobras, blackhawks, hueys, AWACS jets, That douchebag deployed his chute inside the plane, HOW MANY EXPLOSIONS THERE WERE! I'm going back on friday to Gold Class...thats like booze in the theater and nice seats etc...

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby RockoTDF » Wed Jun 24, 2009 3:52 pm UTC

Just so everyone knows, there is nothing after the credits.

Here we go:
Spoiler:
Enjoyed it a lot, pretty awesome. I have to say that a lot of the decepticons look the same, and it was hard to keep track of who just killed who (unless they were in alternate mode). Glad to say that the Starscream/Megatron conflict was brought out, and thought that the fallen and ancient primes was badass.

I totally knew that the one chick from his astronomy class was a decepticon after she wanted to bang him despite his breakdown in class. At first I thought she was just a source of conflict for the plot. I also thought that the ghosts that Sam spoke to while knocked out were going to turn him into a transformer. Random, I know. Either that or Sam absorbed the matrix of leadership in the same way as the allspark shard.

My brother just finished his first year at USAFA (and we are air force brats) so throughout the whole movie we were like "that's not right!"

Also, the museum shown where they awaken Jetfire is called the Udvar-Hazy annex, it is an extension to the AS museum, but it is a bit outside DC. Oh, and the part outside (with all the old aircraft after Jetfire wakes up) is called the boneyard, and it is in Tucson. They didn't even take out the mountains! There are no mountains in DC. This was the only major screw up I saw in the film that should have been changed and served no purpose in being wrong.

I think it would be hilarious to see Model T or WW2 aircraft transform. That or a horrific "Night at the Museum 3: Battle of Udvar Hazy"

I was expecting it to do the typical trilogy thing, where part 2 leaves a cliffhanger or a clear starting point for the third film. The only major thing left is Unicron. Which would be awesome.

Also, was anyone reminded of Gundam Wing when they jumped out of C17s? (which are actually that maneuverable, btw)
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Adacore » Wed Jun 24, 2009 4:18 pm UTC

I wrote a longish post, but my browser crashed, so I lost it. Yay. I'll try again.

It was pretty much what I expected tbh. It was a decent big-budget action film with a totally ridiculous plot (including holes big enough to drive Optimus Prime through). I wasn't blown away by anything, really, and some of the stuff was so ridiculous and/or annoying that it just destroyed my suspension of disbelief, which is normally pretty good even for shallow action flicks. It does very well at doing what it set out to do, which is be a big exciting movie for twelve year olds. The action sequences were pretty good, but there's only so much enjoyment you can get from seeing big CGI robots beating each other to pieces.
Spoiler:
+ I loved the geriatric Jetfire. He had some great sequences and good scripting.
+ The whole NEST thing was pretty cool. I'm a sucker for black ops stuff like that.
+ The animation of the robots was really damn good, and the battles weren't as confusing as they were in the original (imho).
+ I'm sure there was other stuff I liked... I feel kinda bad that this positives list is so short. The film wasn't that bad.

- I really didn't like the twins. The slapstick comedy was not needed at all and completely destroyed any believability or credibility the autobots had as realistic characters in my mind.
- If the military had this sweet railgun, why did they only fire it once?! It was perfectly lined up to decimate Starscream and Megatron when they were up on top of the pyramid.
- The depiction of college was utterly ridiculous. Maybe college parties are really like that in the US but, uh, no.
- That hot decepticon chick (who I clocked as an evil robot as soon as she appeared), what exactly was she trying to do? If she wanted to kidnap Sam, why not just do it? Why bother going back to his room and messing with his girlfriend? Also, if the transformers can detect each other (the impression I got from the Shanghai sequence), how come Bumblebee didn't notice her?
- For the most critical thing in the world to defend ever, the cube fragment was pretty damn badly defended.
- I wasn't sure about some of the direction, cinematography, editing, &c. There were some cuts that just didn't feel right to me - times where people would be doing something, it would cut to another angle and they'd be in completely different positions.
- The ridiculous timing of stuff. You call for backup at some random location in the world (in this case Jordan) and the US army can have a whole batallion on site in 15 minutes?
- The most over the top cliche ending ever. Not only does Sam get bought back to life, after a white-glowy dream sequence by Mikaela saying she loves him, but practically the same thing happens to Optimus Prime. TWICE. Argh!
Last edited by Adacore on Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:33 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:22 pm UTC

Granted, I haven't seen the first one (yet?).

But that was the emptiest movie I have ever seen. I'm not even sure how to begin to enumerate its many problems...

There was the simple, plain lack of good filmmaking. The continuity jumps smashing the ends of scenes together (has Bay never heard of transitions?), the action sequences where you never got a sense of geography or who was doing what to whom and why, the robots so poorly designed visually that they were just incomprehensible blobs of moving colors, the way the sound is always turned up to 11 so that most of the time you don't actually notice anything they try to do with it...

There were the rollercoaster tonal shifts. For example, in one of the first scenes, a bunch of little robots are about to attack Sam. The movie can't just let an actual emotional sense of tension or fear build, however, and cuts repeatedly outside to Sam's parents being "funny". Not only does it do that over and over again, but even from scene to scene it was so wild. It was like watching a different bad movie every three minutes.

I could go on, but I'm exhausted (posting from work after seeing a 2:45 screening, so I'm on an hour's sleep). I'll just say that the movie's fatal flaw, besides the sweeping tide of inanity that was the dialogue and plot and why do the alien robots speak in ebonics and arrrrrrg, is that it alternates between the Transformers, who are interesting but who I don't actually care about (possibly because Bay was like, "I did that character development shit in the first one! I don't need to do it again in this one!), and the human characters, who I could potentially care about, but who aren't actually interesting in any way (thanks to piss-poor writing, generally bad acting [but can you blame them? ...yes.], and characters I'd compare to cardboard but I don't want to insult cardboard). I spent the (FAR too long) movie alternating between going, "ooo, pretty CG... too bad I don't care if they live or die" and "hey, a human face... too bad I'm bored".

And, naturally, going, "hate hate hate hate WHY GOD WHY" but I can't say I wasn't expecting that as a film student. I only wish that my original plan of going to a theater shitty enough that I could yell at the screen had worked.

There were a few good things in the film, however, and in the spirit of charity I must relate them. Rainn Wilson was a breath of fresh air; John Tuturro actually managed to make lines like "The machine is under the pyramid! If they turn it on, the sun will explode! Not on my watch!" sound almost sort-of acceptable; Shia acted well in one scene (the sequence where he goes all John Nash at the college); the CG is admittedly very pretty; there were two or three funny lines; it was amusing to see a movie simultaneously so gung-ho about the military (to the point where the strawmanning has us going, "Why don't you just leave the military alone, Washington? Clearly they know what's best for us and need no oversight or guidance!") and so uninterested in having them succeed at anything (I was astonished that they kept sending in soldiers to fight the giant robots, when time and again they would just shoot pointlessly and then get stomped); and the robots were cool when they weren't talking.

Also, the costume designer should get an oscar nom; there were several minutes of the movie where I was able to maintain interest due to the female lead's low-cut shirt.

Anyway, I look forward to watching with dismay as this movie makes a metric fuck-tonne of money.
Image

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby RockoTDF » Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:59 pm UTC

Malice wrote:
There were a few good things in the film, however, and in the spirit of charity I must relate them. Rainn Wilson was a breath of fresh air; John Tuturro actually managed to make lines like "The machine is under the pyramid! If they turn it on, the sun will explode! Not on my watch!" sound almost sort-of acceptable; Shia acted well in one scene (the sequence where he goes all John Nash at the college); the CG is admittedly very pretty; there were two or three funny lines; it was amusing to see a movie simultaneously so gung-ho about the military (to the point where the strawmanning has us going, "Why don't you just leave the military alone, Washington? Clearly they know what's best for us and need no oversight or guidance!") and so uninterested in having them succeed at anything (I was astonished that they kept sending in soldiers to fight the giant robots, when time and again they would just shoot pointlessly and then get stomped); and the robots were cool when they weren't talking.



The asshole civilian is often a cliche of these movies, so I don't really think there was an underlying political message. In reality though, some suit from the white house can't be the "operational commander" of a base, nor can he rip the rank off an officers uniform. I am no expert in military law (or even a novice) but Major whatshisface is an officer of the US Government, and the other guy is just a suit. A more realistic end to that situation would have been if the Major had arrested him for assaulting an officer (or something-ish along those lines) and had him thrown in the brig and cut off from Washington. Regardless, tying up the autobots was not a diplomatic/friendly solution, especially when they had agreed to leave if the President gave the order (which I presume he did). That alone might have been an illegal order (arresting without warrent, illegal detainment, whatever) and grounds for disobedience of the military forces.

I guess dropping him out of a plane seemed like a more entertaining solution, however.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

Tofer
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:44 pm UTC

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Tofer » Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:03 pm UTC

I went to the first one not expecting much, as I'm generally not a fan of action movies, and ended up really enjoying myself. It had its problems, but overall it was a fun movie to watch.

I went to the midnight showing last night expecting more or less the same, and came out extremely disappointed. I left to go to the bathroom during the overdrawn ending sequence, which is something I never do when I go to the movies. I must have checked the time on my cell at least four times. The last movie that held me hostage like this was The Da Vinci Code. Ugh.

I don't usually expect much from action movie screenplays, so I'm not even going to bother complaining about the nonsensical storyline, plot holes and dialogue. What I will complain about is the repetitiveness of the action sequences. They went on far too long and always seemed to involve the same thing (robots punching each other for 20 straight minutes... *yawn*). They could have easily cut 40 minutes from the film (and I'm surprised they didn't as that would lead to more money being made which is generally what they're most concerned about). Quite simply, watching the movie wasn't a fun experience, which is all I wanted. I won't bother seeing the inevitable third film.

Spoiler:
I can see why people are complaining about the "black" robots. Wow... how can Michael Bay get away with such obvious racial profiling? Gold teeth? Illiterate? Were they supposed to be funny because I don't recall anyone in the theater laughing at their antics.

User avatar
Jebobek
Posts: 2219
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Jebobek » Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:29 pm UTC

(I was astonished that they kept sending in soldiers to fight the giant robots, when time and again they would just shoot pointlessly and then get stomped)
This. I can understand SOME foot troops (marking a bombing point) But there were too many with assault rifles that did nothing.They've been fighting them for 2 years; they should know better by now. The director put them there to show the bodies flying through the air. This would have been fine if half of them were handed grenade launchers and bazookas or something, OR if the director presented more human-sized transformers which were taken out by some of the ground troops.
Image

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby RockoTDF » Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:23 pm UTC

Jebobek wrote:
(I was astonished that they kept sending in soldiers to fight the giant robots, when time and again they would just shoot pointlessly and then get stomped)
This. I can understand SOME foot troops (marking a bombing point) But there were too many with assault rifles that did nothing.They've been fighting them for 2 years; they should know better by now. The director put them there to show the bodies flying through the air. This would have been fine if half of them were handed grenade launchers and bazookas or something, OR if the director presented more human-sized transformers which were taken out by some of the ground troops.


Yeah, especially since there were human sized transformers at the beginning of the movie fighting the hunter-gatherers.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby frezik » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:56 am UTC

No, no, wrong, no.

My thoughts before seeing this was that it'll be pretty good if they can avoid the silly, needless, unfunny hyjinks of the first one. Instead, they doubled the number of embarrassing characters. Then they put in a literal deus ex machina ending.

No good. Send it back for a rewrite.

Grandpa Decipticon, however, was awsome.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby GhostWolfe » Thu Jun 25, 2009 6:26 am UTC

frezik wrote:No good. Send it back for a rewrite.
Having read the reviews before I went and saw it, I knew that it had been cobbled together at the last minute because of the writer's strike. Next to the stilted dialogue of the first movie, I don't think it was necessarily worse. I wasn't exactly expecting much, so long as there were awesome moments like
Spoiler:
Oh me yarm, did Optimus just stick his hand through the Fallen's chest and crush his skull? Sweeeet
I'll let most of the bad writing slide.

Okay, the whole illiterate thing has been splashed all over the internet, and it's bugging the shit out of me, cause
Spoiler:
I'm pretty damn sure that the twins said the DON'T read, not that they can't. Beside, the glyphs were in the language of the Primes, very few transformers could read those glyphs.


I think my favourite part would have to be
Spoiler:
Bumblebee pretending to cry when Sam tells him he's going away to college and 'Bee can't come. Adorable. As a massive Bumblebee fangrrl, I'm very happy to see him get a whole lot of fan service in this movie.


/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

Hit3k
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:12 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Hit3k » Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:08 am UTC

I actually thought this was a good movie. Not brilliant, not as great as the first one but still pretty good. There were some scenes that had you thinking "Wtf when did that happen?"
Spoiler:
For example: Wtf happened to that little transformer after they teleported?

There was one problem with it:
Spoiler:
It was basically the same plot as the first except they killed one character and changed city to desert.



My favourite part was:
Spoiler:
Those two [stereotypically black African American] robots fighting that giant one.


Other than that I enjoyed it.
Sungura wrote:My mom made me watch a star wars. Two of them , actually. The Death Star one and the one where the dude ends up in the swamp with the weird guy who talks funny.

User avatar
Clumpy
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:48 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Clumpy » Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:53 am UTC

Malice wrote:Granted, I haven't seen the first one (yet?).

But that was the emptiest movie I have ever seen. I'm not even sure how to begin to enumerate its many problems...

. . . lack of good filmmaking. . . continuity jumps . . . [disorienting, incoherent] action sequences . . . incomprehensible blobs of moving colors . . . rollercoaster tonal shifts. . . sweeping tide of inanity . . . ebonics . . . cardboard . . .


Hey, movies are supposed to distract you with expensive swirls of pretty colors and really big things exploding, not doing anything that stays in your mind for more than one second after it leaves the screen, preferably by tripping and falling out of frame or by exploding with a bah-BOOM!

Remember: "Clever things make people feel stupid, and unexpected things make people scared."

What are you, some kind of elitist? If you go naming movies that were special effects spectaculars and still managed to be thought-provoking, moving and intelligent, I'ma go all 4 FAST AND 4 FURIOUS OMGZ TEH SEQUEL on your heinie.

User avatar
Ax Savage
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:17 am UTC
Location: Central Coast. NSW. Australia
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Ax Savage » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:41 am UTC

Mmmk:

(Megan Fox+Isabel Lucas x skimpy clothing) + cars + jets + guns + fighting robots = FUCKING AWESOME TIME.

I couldn't really give a flying shit about the plot, the character development or inconsistencies. Anything besides the hot girls rolling around and mounting bikes sexually; in what looks like a Maxim shoot from heaven, or the massive freaking robots destroying everything.

Shallow, I know.

But boy, I had a good time.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26508
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Jun 25, 2009 2:55 pm UTC

GhostWolfe wrote:Okay, the whole illiterate thing has been splashed all over the internet, and it's bugging the shit out of me, cause
Spoiler:
I'm pretty damn sure that the twins said the DON'T read, not that they can't. Beside, the glyphs were in the language of the Primes, very few transformers could read those glyphs.
So.. what's more offensive - that the robots with gold teeth and African American speech patterns are illiterate [in that particular language], or that they willfully reject the idea of reading even though they are perfectly capable of it?
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
the_bandersnatch
Actually not so frumious.
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:46 am UTC
Location: on a bed in a room inside a TV in a hotel room in a hotel on a Monopoly board

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby the_bandersnatch » Thu Jun 25, 2009 3:20 pm UTC

The first Transformers movie was so bad I have no desire to go see the second one, however this BBC review of it did make me laugh:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode/2009/06/transformers_190609.html

Has to be up there with best film reviews ever :P
In girum imus nocte, et consumimur igni

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Thu Jun 25, 2009 6:49 pm UTC

Clumpy wrote:
Malice wrote:Granted, I haven't seen the first one (yet?).

But that was the emptiest movie I have ever seen. I'm not even sure how to begin to enumerate its many problems...

. . . lack of good filmmaking. . . continuity jumps . . . [disorienting, incoherent] action sequences . . . incomprehensible blobs of moving colors . . . rollercoaster tonal shifts. . . sweeping tide of inanity . . . ebonics . . . cardboard . . .


Hey, movies are supposed to distract you with expensive swirls of pretty colors and really big things exploding, not doing anything that stays in your mind for more than one second after it leaves the screen, preferably by tripping and falling out of frame or by exploding with a bah-BOOM!

Remember: "Clever things make people feel stupid, and unexpected things make people scared."

What are you, some kind of elitist? If you go naming movies that were special effects spectaculars and still managed to be thought-provoking, moving and intelligent, I'ma go all 4 FAST AND 4 FURIOUS OMGZ TEH SEQUEL on your heinie.


Hell, I'm not even arguing for thought-provoking, moving and intelligent. I'll settle for not actively racially offensive, not physically painful, and you can tell what's going on from shot to shot and from scene to scene. If Michael Bay handed this in as an essay, my note at the top would not be "your argument doesn't work", it would be "illegible, plz rewrite when not on crack."
Image

User avatar
Clumpy
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:48 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Clumpy » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:30 pm UTC

Malice wrote:Hell, I'm not even arguing for thought-provoking, moving and intelligent. I'll settle for not actively racially offensive, not physically painful, and you can tell what's going on from shot to shot and from scene to scene. If Michael Bay handed this in as an essay, my note at the top would not be "your argument doesn't work", it would be "illegible, plz rewrite when not on crack."


I watched the first flick a couple of weeks ago after eating bad sushi, and it taxed my digestive system such that I had to call in sick the next day. Now, it may have just been the sushi, but I like to think that "Transformers" was involved in some way.

I enjoyed the movie, if only because I don't watch very many mindless movies, but the only novelty of "Transformers" was how confusing and childish it was. I had thought the Star Wars prequels were as childish as big-budget moviemaking could get, but God bless Mike Bay for setting me straight.

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby RockoTDF » Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:26 pm UTC

I posted this as a comment to the review in the New York Times:

I am first of all, disgusted by the unprofessional ad hominem attacks that many critics are making on people that enjoyed the film. I'm a 22 year old graduate student who usually enjoys film as a work of art. I very much enjoyed Transformers 2 as a summer action movie, as it was meant. For the record, Megan Fox is not my type.

I agree with the critics who attack the twin robots for being minstrel like or racist. Bay has pointed the finger at the voice actors (one of whom is black) for inventing the characters' personalities but this is besides the point. This is a summer action movie. It is not a film. It is not even supposed to be a deeper piece of Sci Fi like The Matrix. Yet somehow critics of all types have panned it. Is it really about the twins? Does the sheer political incorrectness of the those characters overshadow the rest of the movie in the eyes of critics? Would anyone care if they were pick up trucks voiced by Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable Guy and made jokes about not reading? Probably not. I am not defending the inclusion of the characters, but attacking the double standard in question here.

Or are critics just unapologetic snarky snobs that cannot handle action movies any more?


http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/mo ... tml?hpw&em
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Adacore » Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:36 pm UTC

I like summer action movies, in general, but I really couldn't find myself liking Transformers. For example - The Rock was awesome, Bad Boys was awesome. I really enjoyed all three of the new Star Wars movies. Hell, I even enjoy stuff like Universal Soldier and Broken Arrow. A summer action flick doesn't have to have the depth of The Matrix, no, but it does have to have more depth than a puddle in the desert. Something, anything, to engage you - even just a little bit - emotionally and/or intellectually. When I was walking out of the cinema with my friends (who also love action films), they all commented on how the film felt like it went on forever - that's also not a great endorsement.
Spoiler:
When Sam and Optimus died in the movie I was seriously hoping at least one of them would be properly, irreversably dead. I had no attachment to the characters, and I thought it would make the film more interesting. That's not a good thing either.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:59 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:I posted this as a comment to the review in the New York Times:

I am first of all, disgusted by the unprofessional ad hominem attacks that many critics are making on people that enjoyed the film. I'm a 22 year old graduate student who usually enjoys film as a work of art. I very much enjoyed Transformers 2 as a summer action movie, as it was meant. For the record, Megan Fox is not my type.

I agree with the critics who attack the twin robots for being minstrel like or racist. Bay has pointed the finger at the voice actors (one of whom is black) for inventing the characters' personalities but this is besides the point. This is a summer action movie. It is not a film. It is not even supposed to be a deeper piece of Sci Fi like The Matrix. Yet somehow critics of all types have panned it. Is it really about the twins? Does the sheer political incorrectness of the those characters overshadow the rest of the movie in the eyes of critics? Would anyone care if they were pick up trucks voiced by Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable Guy and made jokes about not reading? Probably not. I am not defending the inclusion of the characters, but attacking the double standard in question here.

Or are critics just unapologetic snarky snobs that cannot handle action movies any more?


Two things.

First of all, the mistrel-bots... A: Michael Bay cannot use the excuse of "I could not control my actors, they went out of control, then the mike exploded and we couldn't record any more sound so we just decided to put racist cariacatures in the movie." That is a ridiculous excuse. He is a director who's been working since he was fifteen (he's 44 now). Regardless of whether or not it was invented by the voice actor, he should have either recognized that it was offensive and axed it, or said now, "That was offensive. Sorry about that. My bad," instead of nonsensically blaming his own cast.
B: Jokes about rednecks are offensive but ultimately less harmful than jokes about African-Americans, because the latter contributes to an overall social oppression and the former does not.

Second of all, I hate it when people say "it's just a dumb summer action movie". Summer action movies used to be smart. The first summer blockbuster was Jaws, which, if you look at it now, is well-written, well-acted, intelligent, has some emotion to it, is still plenty exciting, and so on. It will even teach you things you didn't know about sharks.

A few summer action movies that put Transformers 2 to shame:

Raiders of the Lost Ark
Die Hard
Batman
Terminator 2
Aliens
Ghostbusters
Star Wars Ep. IV

I don't really have the inclination to make an exhaustive list right now. But for fuck's sake, last year we had The Dark Knight and Iron Man, two of the best superhero movies ever. Summer action movies can be fun and 'splodey without also being RETARDED and every time somebody says "eh, it's just a dumb summer action movie" they're excusing the retarded films and making it harder for smart, fun, 'splodey movies to get made.
Image

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby GhostWolfe » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:14 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:
GhostWolfe wrote:Okay, the whole illiterate thing has been splashed all over the internet, and it's bugging the shit out of me, cause I'm pretty damn sure that the twins said the DON'T read, not that they can't.
So.. what's more offensive - that the robots with gold teeth and African American speech patterns are illiterate [in that particular language], or that they willfully reject the idea of reading even though they are perfectly capable of it?
"Which is worse" is irrelevant to my argument. The argument is that they were not illiterate, so stop saying they were :P

Whether it was offensive or not..? What level of humour were you expecting from a movie where the Constructicon not only has giant dangling balls, but one of the characters makes reference to it?

Personally, it bugs me more that the twins looked like gremlins, than the fact they they were bad gangsta stereotypes played up for laughs.

I have to say that each time they referenced
Spoiler:
resurrecting Optimus, I thought to myself "it has to work, cause if he dies, we're stuck with Rodimus" :twisted:


/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby RockoTDF » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:53 am UTC

Malice wrote:Two things.

First of all, the mistrel-bots... A: Michael Bay cannot use the excuse of "I could not control my actors, they went out of control, then the mike exploded and we couldn't record any more sound so we just decided to put racist cariacatures in the movie." That is a ridiculous excuse. He is a director who's been working since he was fifteen (he's 44 now). Regardless of whether or not it was invented by the voice actor, he should have either recognized that it was offensive and axed it, or said now, "That was offensive. Sorry about that. My bad," instead of nonsensically blaming his own cast.


I'm not defending Bay. He should have stopped it from happening, yes. But no one is pointing the finger at the black voice actor who actually invented it, and made people of his race look stupid. Nor are they looking at the other voice actor, who was white! That is the most minstrel-like thing about the situation.

B: Jokes about rednecks are offensive but ultimately less harmful than jokes about African-Americans, because the latter contributes to an overall social oppression and the former does not.


Not necessarily. There is way more social interest in helping kids get out of the ghetto than the trailer park. I'm not saying if this is right or wrong. I understand that there are issues like slavery and civil rights that didn't affect white southerners. It is still a double standard, and if you think that jokes about rednecks don't create social problems I dare you to try and get a high paying job in certain parts of the country with a deep southern accent and a name like Billy Bob. (Full disclosure: I'm an agnostic left wing yankee northerner born in the UK, not some right winger on a rant against affirmative action).

Second of all, I hate it when people say "it's just a dumb summer action movie". Summer action movies used to be smart. The first summer blockbuster was Jaws, which, if you look at it now, is well-written, well-acted, intelligent, has some emotion to it, is still plenty exciting, and so on. It will even teach you things you didn't know about sharks.

I don't really have the inclination to make an exhaustive list right now. But for fuck's sake, last year we had The Dark Knight and Iron Man, two of the best superhero movies ever. Summer action movies can be fun and 'splodey without also being RETARDED and every time somebody says "eh, it's just a dumb summer action movie" they're excusing the retarded films and making it harder for smart, fun, 'splodey movies to get made.


You say "used to be" but then cite Iron Man and The Dark Knight. And Star Trek this summer was great. If anything bad action movies will push people away and decrease the competition for the good ones.

I'm not saying summer movies should be dumb. If you read the reviews the critics are attacking it like they were expecting oscar material, or that the original was some epic like star wars and this was worse than episode I. Rolling Stone, which understands the difference between a "movie" and a "film" gave it no stars. None! The NYT review that I link to was offensive to anyone that may have enjoyed the movie for what it was.

Its about robots that are based on toys from the 80s. That is all.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

User avatar
Clumpy
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:48 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Clumpy » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:02 am UTC

RockoTDF wrote:I'm not saying summer movies should be dumb. If you read the reviews the critics are attacking it like they were expecting oscar material, or that the original was some epic like star wars and this was worse than episode I. Rolling Stone, which understands the difference between a "movie" and a "film" gave it no stars. None! The NYT review that I link to was offensive to anyone that may have enjoyed the movie for what it was.

Its about robots that are based on toys from the 80s. That is all.


A lot of people like to watch footage of people falling off of skateboards and BMX bikes and hitting their crotches on rails, or blowing up Barbie dolls with firecrackers. So "Transformers" might be entertaining, in a primal sort of way, and I don't think that people who enjoy it need to defend themselves, but to claim that "movies" and "films" are in different categories - one that needs to be engaging in some way, the other that's exempt from all criticism - is unfair.

Drag Me To Hell - now there's a movie that did one simple thing and did it well. It was about a curse - that's it! - and many of the ingredients were rote, but it did it with so much energy and enthusiasm that it was a thoroughly entertaining experience.

It's all in the execution. Michael Bay's movies think that if one explosion, one hot chick, one fumbling gag is cool, then a dozen must be awesome! He sacrifices context, coherence and characterization to this end. Sometimes it can be interesting how thoroughly he does it, but he can really only do one thing, and giving you something to look at isn't the same as giving you something to watch.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:20 am UTC

RockoTDF wrote:
Malice wrote:Two things.

First of all, the mistrel-bots... A: Michael Bay cannot use the excuse of "I could not control my actors, they went out of control, then the mike exploded and we couldn't record any more sound so we just decided to put racist cariacatures in the movie." That is a ridiculous excuse. He is a director who's been working since he was fifteen (he's 44 now). Regardless of whether or not it was invented by the voice actor, he should have either recognized that it was offensive and axed it, or said now, "That was offensive. Sorry about that. My bad," instead of nonsensically blaming his own cast.


I'm not defending Bay. He should have stopped it from happening, yes. But no one is pointing the finger at the black voice actor who actually invented it, and made people of his race look stupid. Nor are they looking at the other voice actor, who was white! That is the most minstrel-like thing about the situation.


True. I'm just not convinced that it WAS them, because it smells more like a bullshit excuse from Bay. And because, like I said, even if they came up with it, he's still at fault (as well as them) for letting it through. When you direct somebody and you tell them to improvise, you still have to choose which option to take.

B: Jokes about rednecks are offensive but ultimately less harmful than jokes about African-Americans, because the latter contributes to an overall social oppression and the former does not.


Not necessarily. There is way more social interest in helping kids get out of the ghetto than the trailer park. I'm not saying if this is right or wrong. I understand that there are issues like slavery and civil rights that didn't affect white southerners. It is still a double standard, and if you think that jokes about rednecks don't create social problems I dare you to try and get a high paying job in certain parts of the country with a deep southern accent and a name like Billy Bob. (Full disclosure: I'm an agnostic left wing yankee northerner born in the UK, not some right winger on a rant against affirmative action).


Rednecks as a whole are not socially oppressed. This isn't really an argument for the Movies board, though.

I'm not saying summer movies should be dumb. If you read the reviews the critics are attacking it like they were expecting oscar material, or that the original was some epic like star wars and this was worse than episode I. Rolling Stone, which understands the difference between a "movie" and a "film" gave it no stars. None! The NYT review that I link to was offensive to anyone that may have enjoyed the movie for what it was.


I've read several reviews (each more hilarious than the last), and none of them are saying Transformers 2 should be oscar-worthy. Most, like me, are faulting it for being insulting to the audience's intelligence--for jumping as fast as it can to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Oh, and there's absolutely no difference between a "movie" and a "film". What makes one work makes the other work. Whether you're dealing with cancer or explosions, characters you care about are important. No matter what happens in a scene, it's important that the audience understands what the fuck is happening and where things and people are. No matter what you're doing, if you leave the volume on 11 the entire time, you're DOING IT WRONG: pacing is vital, especially in an action movie, because you have to keep topping yourself, and you have to give the audience breaks or they'll get tired and the rest of your movie won't work.

Its about robots that are based on toys from the 80s. That is all.


Yeah, and Terminator is about gun-toting robots from the future. That didn't stop it from being fun and engaging and well-made and presented non-cynically to the audience.
Image

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby GhostWolfe » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:27 am UTC

Clumpy wrote:To claim that "movies" and "films" are in different categories - one that needs to be engaging in some way, the other that's exempt from all criticism - is unfair.
I don't think that the idea is that one category is "exempt" from criticsim is what we're getting at here. The point is one of lowered expectations: Transformers was never going to be the cinema-going equivalent of fine literature, and it shouldn't be judged in the same way.

I mean, I can't speak for anyone else, but I certainly wasn't hoping for anything other than awesome looking cars, some robots killing other robots, and some fucking awesome fight scenes in-between.

In that respect, my biggest complaint about the movie is: not enough robots fighting.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:50 am UTC

GhostWolfe wrote:
Clumpy wrote:To claim that "movies" and "films" are in different categories - one that needs to be engaging in some way, the other that's exempt from all criticism - is unfair.
I don't think that the idea is that one category is "exempt" from criticsim is what we're getting at here. The point is one of lowered expectations: Transformers was never going to be the cinema-going equivalent of fine literature, and it shouldn't be judged in the same way.


I lowered my expectations so much. The movie still found a way to not just disappoint me but enrage me. It's rare that the credits roll and I flip off the director, writers, and cast with both hands, but this movie did it. It literally lowered my bar, so that today I saw things on TV that normally would have had me going "man that's horrible" but instead I thought "well, at least it's not as bad as Transformers 2".

Somebody on a different forum put it best:

It'd be different if people were explaining why they liked it on it's own merits, but almost EVERYONE giving it a thumbs up is doing so by saying "Well, I expected turds, and then they were in my mouth, and they didn't taste so bad, and besides, they were robot turds, and they kinda taste like cake if you chew em right! That's pretty cool."

That's not saying the movie succeeded. That's saying you had no expectations and you're fine with shit in your mouth. Those are two different things, with two different goals. If you liked the movie because of what the movie did, that's cool. If you liked the movie because you told yourself the movie couldn't do anything else, then you're just settling for being the lowest common denominator.
Image

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby GhostWolfe » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:21 am UTC

Malice wrote:I lowered my expectations so much. The movie still found a way to not just disappoint me but enrage me.
If that's the way you feel about it, no amount of discussion is going to change your mind, right? So why do you think telling us how much you hated it is going to change our minds?

To coin a phrase: You can please some people all the time, and all people some of the time; but you can't please all people, all the time.

To rebutt your cross-forum quote: I think the artistic direction on the fight scenes improved this movie. There were quite a few slow-motion shots that I think were excellently done, and I really enjoyed the fight sequences. I *liked* the fact that
Spoiler:
Matrix of Leadership had to be earned, and I'm super-happy about the fact that love didn't save Sam - that whole "you can't die, I love you" shit is tacky, and I'm ecstatic to see it play second fiddle to Sam's meeting the anceint Primes.

Is that enough "I liked in on it's own merits", or should I keep going?

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Clumpy
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:48 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Clumpy » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:25 am UTC

GhostWolfe wrote:
Clumpy wrote:To claim that "movies" and "films" are in different categories - one that needs to be engaging in some way, the other that's exempt from all criticism - is unfair.
I don't think that the idea is that one category is "exempt" from criticsim is what we're getting at here. The point is one of lowered expectations: Transformers was never going to be the cinema-going equivalent of fine literature, and it shouldn't be judged in the same way.

I mean, I can't speak for anyone else, but I certainly wasn't hoping for anything other than awesome looking cars, some robots killing other robots, and some fucking awesome fight scenes in-between.

In that respect, my biggest complaint about the movie is: not enough robots fighting.

/angell


Hey, I don't expect a five-dollar Little Caesars pizza to be the gustatory equivalent of something French-sounding, but it's still good for what it is.

But it's as if everybody on my street started lining up and saying: "Hey, let's drink some lard! Don't be snobby, just down a glass of good old-fashioned greasy, salty lard! It's not supposed to be fancy! And for dessert we'll have maraschino cherries straight from the bottle!"

And note that I did enjoy Transformers for the novelty. I like stupid stuff like The Mummy Returns and Transformers, but at least I have the decency to be shameful about it and never mention it to anybody. Transformers is a budget on a screen and sometimes that's fine. Sometimes throwing enough money at celluloid can make it watchable if not transcendent.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby GhostWolfe » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:31 am UTC

Clumpy wrote:I like stupid stuff like The Mummy Returns and Transformers, but at least I have the decency to be shameful about it and never mention it to anybody.
Well boo to you if you think that liking Transformers is something to be ashamed of :P

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Clumpy
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:48 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Clumpy » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:54 am UTC

GhostWolfe wrote:
Clumpy wrote:I like stupid stuff like The Mummy Returns and Transformers, but at least I have the decency to be shameful about it and never mention it to anybody.
Well boo to you if you think that liking Transformers is something to be ashamed of :P

/angell


I was trying to poke a little fun at myself there, which may not have been apparent since I was so gleefully venomous in denouncing the film earlier. Sorry about that (not sarcastic). If I like something I don't feel ashamed, nor do I feel that I need to explain it to others who may not get it. :)

Honestly, Transformers is bound to get more than its share of venom, much in the same way that Nickelback gets disproportionately trashed by people too uncreative to pick an original target. It's fun to make fun of Michael Bay for throwing so much screeching heartless metal up on a screen, but self-consciously "quirky" indie movies bug me more. To each their own, I guess.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby GhostWolfe » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:12 am UTC

Yus. And it doesn't help when we get too caught up in the defending of it that we're too busy to talk about the awesome.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby frezik » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:01 pm UTC

One thing that just hit me: did anyone notice any big product placement in this one? The first one was pretty blatent about it, but I can't think of any for this one besides the cars.

GhostWolfe wrote:I don't think that the idea is that one category is "exempt" from criticsim is what we're getting at here. The point is one of lowered expectations: Transformers was never going to be the cinema-going equivalent of fine literature, and it shouldn't be judged in the same way.


And I don't. My main complaint with the first one was that it tried to goof off and be serious at the same time. It was to the point that I was ready to buy the idea of alien robots, but not the fact that a concept Camero happened to be going down the road. Their attempts at humor might be funny when taken on their own, but it often broke my suspension of disbelief.

Number 2 made these problems worse, which is why I'm passing on it even as a source of cheep thrills.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:47 pm UTC

GhostWolfe wrote:
Malice wrote:I lowered my expectations so much. The movie still found a way to not just disappoint me but enrage me.
If that's the way you feel about it, no amount of discussion is going to change your mind, right? So why do you think telling us how much you hated it is going to change our minds?


Frankly, I don't expect to change anybody's mind on whether or not they liked it--everyone had the exact same experience on the screen and how they reacted to that is their own business. What I'm arguing over is the surrounding issues, like "how dumb is acceptable for a summer action movie?" and "why are most people who say they liked it taking an apologist stance?"

To coin a phrase: You can please some people all the time, and all people some of the time; but you can't please all people, all the time.


But you can try to have dignity in the attempt. :p

Is that enough "I liked in on it's own merits", or should I keep going?

/angell


Works for me.
Image

User avatar
Jebobek
Posts: 2219
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Jebobek » Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:07 pm UTC

I thought the character fanservice was intact. Megatron and Starscream's relationship was there, Optimus was Optimus.. really, any way the other transformers acted was unimportant. And the two robots did not seem busting on black gangstas, it seemed more like hillbillies that were trying to act like gangstas. Only from reading these posts am I reconsidering it now. Well for what its worth I thought the director played them out a bit too much.

The humor was the same as the last time, for the most part (Read: if you hated the first's humor you'll hate this). Favorite part of the humor:
Spoiler:
Mom tackling the frisbee player. Totally threw me off, I was laughing so hard. I dunno, just the camera angle of her knocking him out at full force.. I could probably rewind it 10 times and keep laughing. Not 11, though. Thats just stupid.
Image

User avatar
pseudoidiot
Sexy Beard Man
Posts: 5100
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:30 pm UTC
Location: Kansas City
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby pseudoidiot » Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:44 pm UTC

Just got back from seeing it. I enjoyed it, overall.

Some of the action scenes definitely dragged on, there's only so many flips a giant robot can do in slow-motion, and only so many ways they can punch another robot in the face. Although,
Spoiler:
Optimus fighting the three robots by himself was pretty fucking awesome, I thought. Definitely my favorite action sequence.

Most of the comedy was heavy-handed, especially the twins. There were parts that made me generally laugh (mostly the bits with Jetfire -- there's something really amusing about a crotchety old transformer), but most of the time it seemed like Michael Bay was hitting me on the head, yelling "LAUGH!"

Plot-wise, the two things that bothered me most:
Spoiler:
1. Megatron at the bottom of the ocean. Okay, obviously they thought he was still dangerous, seeing how they had a fleet guarding his body. But was that really the only solution? Surely they could have found something more permanent. Hell, drop him in a volcano or something. I'm sure the autobots would have some thoughts on how to accomplish it.
2. Like someone else mentioned, for the shard of the cube being so important, it didn't seem that well-guarded. Sure, it was in the middle of a secret military base, but still. No guards in the room? No guards at the door? Nothing more sturdy that a glass container holding in it? I suppose it may not have been glass, but surely they could've had something not so easily cut through, robot alien technology or not.
Derailed : Gaming Outside the Box.
SecondTalon wrote:*swoons* I love you, all powerful pseudoidiot!
ShootTheChicken wrote:I can't stop thinking about pseudoidiot's penis.

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby RockoTDF » Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:29 pm UTC

pseudoidiot wrote:
Spoiler:
1. Megatron at the bottom of the ocean. Okay, obviously they thought he was still dangerous, seeing how they had a fleet guarding his body. But was that really the only solution? Surely they could have found something more permanent. Hell, drop him in a volcano or something. I'm sure the autobots would have some thoughts on how to accomplish it.
2. Like someone else mentioned, for the shard of the cube being so important, it didn't seem that well-guarded. Sure, it was in the middle of a secret military base, but still. No guards in the room? No guards at the door? Nothing more sturdy that a glass container holding in it? I suppose it may not have been glass, but surely they could've had something not so easily cut through, robot alien technology or not.


@ #2: As a military brat, I can honestly say that you'd be surprised at how not-guarded a lot of things are. As a kid my dad was a stealth pilot, and I could ride my bike to the squadron building which was full of classified information, and if no one was looking I probably could have made it to the flight line and hangar area. I learned to drive a car on the taxiways (weekends, of course, but I did once nearly crash into a jet. How many teenagers can say that with a straight face?). If they aren't in an exercise, only the nukes and main gates are guarded. Having said this it is all different in a war zone.

Also, the desert/flight line action sequences in the first one were filmed at Holloman Air Force base in New Mexico, where I lived for three years as a kid. Kind of weird seeing the aforementioned hangars and such being wrecked by decepticons.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

BigBoss
Posts: 398
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:35 am UTC

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby BigBoss » Sun Jun 28, 2009 12:51 am UTC

I really enjoyed the movie. The twins' antics reminded me of my twin-brother and I.
You don't give up hope just because something's hopeless. You cover up your ears, and talk really loud.

Tampons could be used to stop a nosebleed! - Tillian

User avatar
DreadArchon
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:29 pm UTC
Location: Detroit, Michigan

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby DreadArchon » Sun Jun 28, 2009 3:18 am UTC

First, my own opinion: I got exactly what I was expecting. I enjoyed it somewhat. The assertion that "big robots punching each other for 20 minutes straight gets old" is pretty thin; I mean, Hell, it's an entire genre in Japan. :P Besides, what about "average-sized humans firing guns at each other for 20 minutes straight?" That doesn't seem to be going out of style. Why is that different? (Rhetorical question. It's not.)


Spoiler:
Adacore wrote:- I really didn't like the twins. The slapstick comedy was not needed at all and completely destroyed any believability or credibility the autobots had as realistic characters in my mind.
At least they seem to have died offscreen.

- If the military had this sweet railgun, why did they only fire it once?! It was perfectly lined up to decimate Starscream and Megatron when they were up on top of the pyramid.
That's a real weapon, and those can really only be fired once at this point in technology.

- That hot decepticon chick (who I clocked as an evil robot as soon as she appeared), what exactly was she trying to do? If she wanted to kidnap Sam, why not just do it? Why bother going back to his room and messing with his girlfriend? Also, if the transformers can detect each other (the impression I got from the Shanghai sequence), how come Bumblebee didn't notice her?
I think she was trying to probe his mind (which would require some time alone and unharassed), and they can block each other's scanners (they specifically said this).

- For the most critical thing in the world to defend ever, the cube fragment was pretty damn badly defended.
Apparently, that was caused by the humans refusing Autobot help, due to some sort of trust issue.

- The most over the top cliche ending ever. Not only does Sam get bought back to life, after a white-glowy dream sequence by Mikaela saying she loves him, but practically the same thing happens to Optimus Prime. TWICE. Argh!
Yeah, I was really hoping Optimus would stay dead. I actually expected some sort of "Bumblebee Prime" ending.


Malice wrote:A few summer action movies that put Transformers 2 to shame:

Raiders of the Lost Ark
Die Hard
Batman
Terminator 2
Aliens
Ghostbusters
Star Wars Ep. IV
...The Dark Knight and Iron Man...
In like 40 years of movies, that's all you can come up with? That's not very convincing.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Postby Malice » Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:13 am UTC

DreadArchon wrote:
Malice wrote:A few summer action movies that put Transformers 2 to shame:

Raiders of the Lost Ark
Die Hard
Batman
Terminator 2
Aliens
Ghostbusters
Star Wars Ep. IV
...The Dark Knight and Iron Man...
In like 40 years of movies, that's all you can come up with? That's not very convincing.


I didn't want to do an exhaustive list. It would be much faster to make a list of films that TF2 actually surpassed.
Image


Return to “Movies and TV Shows”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests