Email here for additions & corrections.

Ishtar
(May, 1987)
The Seven-Per-Cent Solution (OOP)
(Ross, 1976)
The Devils
(Russell, 1974)
The Pirates of Penzance
(Papp/Leach, 1983)
The Fortune
(Nichols, 1975)
-30-
(Webb, 1959)
Betrayal
(Jones, 1983)
Play It As It Lays
(Perry, 1972)
The Outfit
(Flynn, 1973)
Alex in Wonderland
(Mazursky, 1969)
The Legend of Lylah Clare
(Aldrich, 1968)
In The Cool of the Day
(Stevens, 1963)
That Cold Day in the Park
(Altman, 1969)
Thumb Trippin'
(Masters, 1972)
Midas Run
(Kjellin, 1969)
At Long Last Love
(Bogdanovich, 1973)
Brewster McCloud
(Altman, 1972)
Outcast of the Islands
(Reed, 1951)

Reader Submissions
1930's-1950's
The Moon's Our Home
(Seiter, 1936)
Sh! The Octopus
(McGann, 1937)
The Mating Season
(Leisen, 1951)
Bad for Each Other
(Rapper, 1953)
The Phenix City Story
(Karlson, 1955)
Run of the Arrow
(Fuller, 1956)
House of Secrets
(Green, 1956)
Saint Joan
(Preminger, 1957)
Macabre
(Castle, 1958)
The Fiend Who Walked the West
(G. Douglas, 1958
Five Gates to Hell
(Clavell, 1959)
1960's
Key Witness
(Karlson, 1960)
Summer and Smoke
(Glenville, 1961)
The Chapman Report
(Cukor,1962)
Bachelor Flat
(Tashlin, 1962) [on Hulu]
The L Shaped Room
(Forbes, 1963)
The Chalk Garden
(Neame, 1964)
A Thousand Clowns
(Coe, 1965)
You're a Big Boy Now
(Coppola, 1966)
The Whisperers
(Forbes, 1967)
Dark of the Sun
(Cardiff, 1968)
Skidoo
(Preminger, 1968)
Last Summer
(Perry, 1969)
The Comic
(C. Reiner, 1969)
1970-1974
The Revolutionary
(Williams, 1970)
The Landlord
(Ashby, 1970)
Diary of a Mad Housewife
(Perry, 1970)
Tropic of Cancer
(Strick, 1970)
I Never Sang for My Father
(Cates, 1970)
Sometimes a Great Notion
(Newman, 1971)
Marriage of a Young Stockbroker
(Turman, 1971)
The Music Lovers
(Russell, 1971)
Drive, He Said
(Nicholson, 1971)
The Steagle
(Sylbert, 1971)
The Last Movie
(Hopper, 1971)
Made For Each Other
(Bean, 1971)
The Day the Clown Cried
(Lewis, 1972)
Hickey & Boggs (OOP)
(Culp, 1972)
The Carey Treatment
(Edwards, 1972)
Pete 'n' Tillie
(Ritt, 1972)
Slither
(Zieff, 1973)
Man on a Swing
(Perry, 1974)
Open Season
(Collinson, 1974)
The Tamarind Seed
(Edwards, 1974)
Law and Disorder
(Passer, 1974)
Homebodies
(Yust, 1974)
Stardust
(Apted, 1974)
Celine and Julie Go Boating
(Rivette, 1974)
1975-1979
Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins
(Richards, 1975
At Long Last Love
(Bogdanovich, 1975)
Hearts of the West
(Zieff, 1975)
Welcome to L.A.
(Rudolph, 1976)
W.C. Fields and Me
(Hiller, 1976)
Citizens Band
(Demme, 1977)
Twilight's Last Gleaming
(Aldrich, 1977)
Looking for Mr. Goodbar
(Brooks, 1977)
Girlfriends
(Weill, 1978)
Movie Movie
(Donen, 1978)
The Medusa Touch
(Gold, 1978)
American Hot Wax
(Mutrux, 1978)
Hot Stuff
(DeLuise, 1979)
Scavenger Hunt
(Schultz , 1979)
Players
(Harvey, 1979)
Rich Kids
(Young, 1979)
Nightwing
(Hiller, 1979)
Screams of a Winter's Night
(Wilson, 1979
When You Comin' Back Red Ryder?
(Katselas, 1979
1980's
Resurrection
(Petrie, 1980)
The Awakening
(Newell, 1980)
Simon
(Brickman, 1980)
God's Angry Man
(Herzog, 1980)
Fast-Walking
(Harris, 1982)
Twice Upon a Time
(Korty & Swenson, 1983)
Trouble in Mind
(Rudolph, 1985)
When the Wind Blows
(Murikami, 1986)
Housekeeping
(Forsyth, 1987)
The Glass Menagerie
(Newman, 1987)
Patty Hearst
(Schrader, 1988)
Drowning by Numbers
(Greenaway, 1988)
Haunted Summer
(Passer, 1988)
The Decline of Western Civilization Part II: The Metal Years
(Spheeris, 1988)
1990's
Old Times
(Curtis, 1991)
Prospero's Books
(Greenaway, 1991)
City of Hope
(Sayles, 1991)
The Baby of Macon
(Greenaway, 1993)
King of the Hill
(Soderbergh, 1993)
Dadetown
(Hexter, 1995)
SubUrbia
(Linklater, 1997)

Upcoming

January 8

Bitch Slap

Waiting for Armageddon

Wonderful World

Youth in Revolt

January 15

January 22

Drool

Extraordinary Measures

The Girl on the Train

Kickin' Out

email this story
read comments (48)
post a comment

You don't need a review of Michael Bay's Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to know where it's coming from. The soul of the film (if the word "soul" doesn't constitute an oxymoron in this instance) is contained in the trailer's opening bit. Shia "no no no!" Lebouf tells Bumblebee that he wants to "talk about the college thing, okay?" And the amped-up "Bee" starts swaggin' to the sounds of the Pointer Sisters' "I'm So Excited." The mentality is aimed at mall monkeys.

But if you want a review, here's Variety's Jordan Mintzer: "With machines that are impressively more lifelike and characters that are more and more like machines, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen takes the franchise to a vastly superior level of artificial intelligence. As for human intelligence, it's primarily at the service of an enhanced arsenal of special effects, which helmer Michael Bay deploys like a general launching his very own shock-and-awe campaign on the senses.

"Otherwise, little seems new compared to the first installment, except that this version is longer, louder, and perhaps 'more than your eye can meet' in one sitting."

Souls of Serpents<< previous | next >>The Cove

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 16, 2009 at 4:46 AM

comment #1

YRG says ...

I watched the trailer on my iPhone. I'd like to watch the whole movie that way. Somehow it makes all of the explosions more accessible.

Posted by YRG at June 16, 2009 5:28 AM

comment #2

actionman says ...

C'mon, Wells -- you didn't post the best parts of the review, the ONLY parts that matter for product such as this:

"Focusing even more on what auds seemed to appreciate last time around -- that is, the stupefying sight of colossal alien robots morphing quite realistically into earthly contraptions, and vice versa -- the plot serves as merely a pretext to showcase lots of well-designed creations, which run the gamut from a remote-control toy car to an actual Stealth fighter.

"Like the other extensive combat scenes -- including a closing, all-out war that appears to take place in the same desert location as in the first movie -- the sheer amount of ripping steel, exploding mechanical parts and mutating vehicles of all shapes and sizes is something to behold. Industrial Light & Magic's superb handling of these sequences, which are like a little boy's playtime fantasy taken to Wagnerian proportions, are the veritable centerpieces of a narrative that makes little effort to set up the fights.

(Wagnerian!)

"The effects are captured in varying earth tones by d.p. Ben Seresin ("Best Laid Plans"), who does a terrific job matching the CG and live-action sequences, while delving into Bay's usual combo of a few slow-motion dramatic moments and lots of widescreen, airborne pandemonium. Likewise, a new team of editors pieces everything together seamlessly.

But the true stars here are the Transformers themselves, who continually steal the spotlight from the flesh-and-blood cast, even in scenes of tragic death or comic relief usually reserved for real actors.

"'If God made us in his image,' ponders Optimus Prime early on, "then who made him?" If such a question seems to be hinting at a veritable Autobot creation myth, it may explain why humans here have become backseat drivers to these extremely cool cars."

Posted by actionman at June 16, 2009 5:39 AM

comment #3

markj says ...

Bayhem.

Posted by markj at June 16, 2009 5:49 AM

comment #4

Burbanked says ...

It's a fairly positive review, actionman, but even you have to admit that it's pointing out how thin, unimportant and derivative the movie's story is:

"...the plot serves as merely a pretext to showcase lots of well-designed creations..."

"...centerpieces of a narrative that makes little effort to set up the fights."

"...returning scribes Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman...seem to be mining conventional motifs from 'The Mummy' and 'Indiana Jones' series, and even go so far as to name a pivotal object 'the matrix.'"

"'If God made us in his image,' ponders Optimus Prime early on, 'then who made him?'"

Really? No, seriously. Really?

This can't be repeated enough: action movies and mainstream blockbuster entertainment does not have to be stupid to sell. As long as our standards become simply "crap is blowing up all pretty", films are just going to get worse and worse.

Posted by Burbanked at June 16, 2009 5:56 AM

comment #5

actionman says ...

It's a fairly positive review, actionman, but even you have to admit that it's pointing out how thin, unimportant and derivative the movie's story is:

Yes...I can definitely admit that the movie is going to be "thin" and that it will feature an "unimportant" and "derivative" story. But if you're going to this movie for story and character, well, I don't know what to tell you.

I could care f'ing less about the human element to this film. I just want incredible special effects, and as markj so succinctly put it, "bayhem."

Also, the review is nowhere near as mean as most other Variety reviews of Bay's films, and if you all remember correctly, the first one wasn't savaged by the critics the way some people might want to think it was. This was a review written by someone who clearly GOT IT.

Posted by actionman at June 16, 2009 5:59 AM

comment #6

Burbanked says ...

Guess I'm the strange one then. I go to every movie for story and character. Wacky!

Posted by Burbanked at June 16, 2009 6:10 AM

comment #7

Scott Mendelson says ...

The first film got relatively positive reviews by most critics and audiences. I distinctly remember seeing it on opening night with my wife and a friend. All three of us hated it and just couldn't understand the raves. My friend said it made him feel like a progressive priest in 1930s Poland, while my wife to this day swears we saw a different cut of the film than everyone else.

Ironically, I'm seeing the new one at a press IMAX screening, so this time I'll be theoretically be contributing to the critical consensus, be that as it may.

Posted by Scott Mendelson at June 16, 2009 6:10 AM

comment #8

Howlingman says ...

I saw Moon this past weekend instead of The Remaking of Pelham 123. I'll check out The Hurt Locker instead of TF2. Bay/Scott et al don't need my money -- they have enough.

Posted by Howlingman at June 16, 2009 6:18 AM

comment #9

vansmith says ...

I'll see it, on DVD. In the next one they shouldnt even have actors, seriously..who needs them. Let the transformers fight other mutants or robots.

Posted by vansmith at June 16, 2009 6:34 AM

comment #10

Chase Kahn says ...

"...I can definitely admit that the movie is going to be "thin" and that it will feature an "unimportant" and "derivative" story."

No way, this one centers around an eBay auction, too???

Posted by Chase Kahn at June 16, 2009 6:50 AM

comment #11

ZayTonday says ...

I don't give a fuck, I'm going for the mindblowing IMAX scenes.

Posted by ZayTonday at June 16, 2009 6:51 AM

comment #12

DeafBrownTrashPunk says ...

Don't forget that most guys are seeing this movie just to see Megan Fox's ass slinking on that motorcycle. SEXY.

Posted by DeafBrownTrashPunk at June 16, 2009 6:52 AM

comment #13

Scott Mendelson says ...

Indeed DeafBrownTrashPunk, the core of the PR campaign seems centered around Megan Fox above all else. I wrote about this yesterday, but have we ever seen a 200 million+ (or equivalent) tent pole where the marketing was so focused on the token love interest?

For those who care - http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.com/2009/06/main-draw-for-transformers-2-megan-fox.html

Posted by Scott Mendelson at June 16, 2009 7:09 AM

comment #14

RMBurnett says ...

Folks,

Oh c'mon. I loved the first one...and I'll probably love the second one. These are the greatest movies in cinema history about robots beating the shit out of each other.

There's a place for that in the world.

"a little boy's playtime fantasy taken to Wagnerian proportions" perfectly describes this franchise's entire appeal.

Now, if only somebody could figure out a way to do a Transformers/Godzilla team-up I could die a happy man.

That said...watched RED CLIFF 1 and 2 back-to-back on blu ray...and loved 'em both.

And the Criterion SEVENTH SEAL goes blu today. Nice.

Finally, the perfect melding of toys and cinema is now available at the Sideshoy. Got mine yesterday and it's the most incredible action figure of all time:

https://www.sideshowtoy.com/?page_id=4489&sku=9000131

Posted by RMBurnett at June 16, 2009 7:17 AM

comment #15

BurmaShave says ...

Scott, if only Megan had a dead child, the marketing might have something real to focus on.

Posted by BurmaShave at June 16, 2009 7:18 AM

comment #16

Alboone says ...

I don't want to see any human characters in a movie about robots if they're not going to be treated with the same care and level of detail as these giant Friggin ROBOTS. I never understood the theory of some of these execs hold that in order for these blockbusters to work, the audience needs a human face to identify with... FUCK THAT BULLSHIT!

Audiences do not give one lick of spit about human recoginition. Those days are over. Give us a good story and we will be there regardless. Period. As long as the themes resonate you can make a movie about a paper clip wanting to find a place it can call home, and if its well made enough, people will come.

The Planet of the Apes remake had one thing going for it -- THE APES! The human characters, boring and riddled with cliches up the wazoo. Empty shells used as devices for the plot to move from point A to B which just dragged the story down.
Nothing would get more excited than to see a National Geographic approach to a Predator movie or even an Alien movie where its just them. How about them apples?!!!!

Posted by Alboone at June 16, 2009 7:24 AM

comment #17

moneymouth77 says ...

Of course the story will be rubbish, the effects will be amazing... what more were we expecting? This is the way of the world, of Hollywood, and of trashy action movies.

Posted by moneymouth77 at June 16, 2009 7:40 AM

comment #18

Scott Mendelson says ...

I suppose I should be offended, but I did laugh at that. Touche, BurmaShave.

On the plus side, even if the film is terrible, at least Tony Todd will be getting a solid paycheck plus residuals up the butt (Variety spilled the beans, he's voicing The Fallen).

Posted by Scott Mendelson at June 16, 2009 7:44 AM

comment #19

Baron Munchausen-by-Proxy says ...

Actionman, you focused on the wrong 'summarizing' word. It wasn't "Wagnerian"

It was: "stupefying".

Too true.

Posted by Baron Munchausen-by-Proxy at June 16, 2009 8:30 AM

comment #20

actionlover says ...

"this version is longer, louder, and perhaps 'more than your eye can meet' in one sitting."

(breathing heavily... frantically motioning for defibrillator... drooling)

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by actionlover at June 16, 2009 8:37 AM

comment #21

DeafBrownTrashPunk says ...

Scott, yes, the film WILL be terrible, but it'll be entertaining for 2 hours at least. Even Megan Fox herself said that this was nothing more but a fun summer popcorn flick.

Michael Bay isn't asking anyone to take this film seriously.... right?

Posted by DeafBrownTrashPunk at June 16, 2009 8:47 AM

comment #22

Steven Kar says ...

Did anyone read Megan Fox's interview in Entertainment Weekly? Almost every quote was gold.

Posted by Steven Kar at June 16, 2009 9:17 AM

comment #23

btwnproductions says ...

Don't forget this (from the Variety review):

"On his first night out, Sam is treated to a sort of lap dance by a Decepticon posing as a nymphomaniacal freshman -- one of several more overtly sexual nods in this episode (including a shot of John Turturro in a G-string)."

Posted by btwnproductions at June 16, 2009 9:21 AM

comment #24

Abbey Normal says ...

My pick for worst trailer moment is when they get to the college and the mom is like, "can you smell it?" and the bloated loser dad says "yeah, smells like 40 thousand dollars a year!" Ba-dum-dum.

When a groaner like that makes it into the frickin' TRAILER, for God's sake, you know what kind of sparkling dialogue awaits.

Posted by Abbey Normal at June 16, 2009 9:27 AM

comment #25

bluefugue says ...

>I could care f'ing less about the human element to this film. I just want incredible special effects, and as markj so succinctly put it, "bayhem."

Since movies as varied as Jaws, Empire Strikes Back, T2 and Spiderman have shown it's possible to have both story/character and whiz-bang special effects, I don't know why one needs to settle for less. If you like to watch shiny stuff move across the screen without context, knock yourself out, but I get little enjoyment from it.

Posted by bluefugue at June 16, 2009 10:04 AM

comment #26

bluefugue says ...

>Even Megan Fox herself said that this was nothing more but a fun summer popcorn flick.

>Michael Bay isn't asking anyone to take this film seriously.... right?

Entertainment is worth taking seriously, and summer fun popcorn flicks can still have characters, a coherent story, wit, and so forth. I don't think any movie gets a free pass under the guise of being "just entertainment" or "not Shakespeare" or whatever. Same thing with pop music, by the way. Just 'cause it ain't Beethoven doesn't mean it shouldn't be well-crafted.

The only Michael Bay movie I've been able to stand has been the Rock, because there was some clever dialogue and the chemistry between Cage & Connery was pretty good. As an action director, though, Bay is an embarrassment. He composes pretty shots, but that's about it. Greengrass, Cameron, Bigelow, Mann -- those are the sorts of people who know how to direct action.

Posted by bluefugue at June 16, 2009 10:08 AM

comment #27

Pinko Punko says ...

Once again I have to point out the insanity of 90% of critics giving Douchformers a pass, while Speed Racer got the shaft. Actionman, did you even see it yet?

Posted by Pinko Punko at June 16, 2009 10:14 AM

comment #28

actionman says ...

no, still haven't seen it, Punko. just not interested.

Posted by actionman at June 16, 2009 10:25 AM

comment #29

markj says ...

bluefugue: Spot on about Cameron, Bigelow, Greengrass and Mann.

BTW my comment 'Bayhem' was me taking the piss, just in case anyone thought I was supporting this garbage.

Posted by markj at June 16, 2009 10:25 AM

comment #30

Burbanked says ...

Excellently said, bluefugue.

Posted by Burbanked at June 16, 2009 10:28 AM

comment #31

Colin says ...

The only way they could salvage this franchise would be to cut out LaBeouf and Fox entirely. Replace the writers, apparently Abrams wrote all of the good material in Star Trek, they just added the slapstick.

Add Unicron as the main baddie(a Transformer that turns into a planet) Who wouldn't want to see that?

Posted by Colin at June 16, 2009 11:00 AM

comment #32

Pinko Punko says ...

actionman, spark one up or whatever it is you do and see that goddamn movie. You drive me in the the arms of actionmam, or worse, actionlover. Stop the madness.

Posted by Pinko Punko at June 16, 2009 11:30 AM

comment #33

actionman says ...

fine. just for you I'll watch it this weekend.

Posted by actionman at June 16, 2009 11:53 AM

comment #34

efbrackett says ...

I agree with Alboone. After I saw the first one I thought it was entertaining except all the stupid, shallow humans. Cut those scenes and bring on the battling robots.

Posted by efbrackett at June 16, 2009 11:56 AM

comment #35

DavidF says ...

I don't disagree that you can have a summer blockbuster that's also smart but that doesn't mean there's something wrong with big, dumb fun. I wouldn't mind if they produced a Transformers script penned by Michael Chabon or whatever, but if it's big loud and not TOO stupid, most of us who see it will be just fine.

Does it mean it's as good as T2 or Die Hard or Jaws or Raiders of the Lost Ark? Hardly, but it doesn't mean it's shit either.

People are really over analyzing this or seeing the death of cinema with each Michael Bay success.

Me? I'm seeing this shit in IMAX, opening weekend.

Oh, and Speed Racer was an admirable attempt but an utter failure. If you want to cite that as what Transformers could be, be my guest. I think it makes Transformers look like a Terrence Mallick film and makes me wonder what the fuck happened to those two dudes who made that one film about the lesbian gangsters and then the one about the dude who finds out he's actually living in a machine-induced dream and is, in reality, being used as food for the machines. Haven't done very much since.

Posted by DavidF at June 16, 2009 12:03 PM

comment #36

LYT says ...

"seem to be mining conventional motifs from 'The Mummy' and 'Indiana Jones' series, and even go so far as to name a pivotal object 'the matrix.'""

Can't reviewers do their damn homework - like even a look at the original animated movie's Wikipedia page? The Matrix of Leadership was a Transformers plot element back when the Wachowskis were probably playing with the original toys.

Posted by LYT at June 16, 2009 12:42 PM

comment #37

btwnproductions says ...

Transformers hit 57% on the Tomatometer. Not exactly Citizen Kane numbers.

Posted by btwnproductions at June 16, 2009 12:42 PM

comment #38

TL says ...

It's longer than the first? Seriously?

Posted by TL at June 16, 2009 1:27 PM

comment #39

Steven Kar says ...

Yes, it's longer, and the IMAX cut is even going to be longer than the regular-screen cut, according to Bay.

Posted by Steven Kar at June 16, 2009 1:52 PM

comment #40

dinovelvet says ...

Please tell me I'm not the only one who wouldn't touch Megan Fox with a barge pole? What is the big deal here? Why does she look like she's sneering at everyone all the time?

Posted by dinovelvet at June 16, 2009 2:04 PM

comment #41

MovieBob says ...

""'If God made us in his image,' ponders Optimus Prime early on, "then who made him?" If such a question seems to be hinting at a veritable Autobot creation myth,"

Heh. I wonder if they're actually gonna GO there...

Just to give you an idea of how cool this franchise could potentially be if Bay etc. gave a shit: The Transformers' "God" (and creation myth) is named Primus - he transforms into that robot-planet they're all from. There's also a "bad" one, who in the earlier animated movie was "played" by Orson Welles. Really.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primus_(Transformers)

Posted by MovieBob at June 16, 2009 7:39 PM

comment #42

Pinko Punko says ...

Speed Racer was a kids movie for kids and families. Transformers was a kids movies for stunted adults, with cool effects and Meganfoxatron. Both can be viewed as successful in their own way, but I think Speed Racer was an actual family movie that decided not to rely on many usual tropes. For example if I were to compare the kids movie that parents think a kids movie should be but is really kind of a crappy paint by numbers Disney shlock with great production values (Finding Nemo) to Speed Racer in terms of which movie had more heart, and starting with more of nothing (Speed Racer the cartoon was a POS) and made something inventive and blah blah blah blah wtf. I can't believe I am even typing this. I give actionlover props for watching it.

He can shit all over me in this space next week should he wish to denounce the film publicly.

Posted by Pinko Punko at June 17, 2009 12:17 AM

comment #43

actionman says ...

It's "actionman," Pinko -- but I don't blame your for getting confused. Too many posers out there.

Posted by actionman at June 17, 2009 9:50 AM

comment #44

Pinko Punko says ...

Haha. Apologies.

Just remember to watch SR like you were 10, and to think of the logic of the film the way kids would.

Posted by Pinko Punko at June 17, 2009 3:03 PM

comment #45

JaySmack says ...

I know this will piss off all the Bay-lovers, who seem to congregate here, but somebody's got to SAY it.

Michael Bay and his movies are the Tin Man, Scarecrow and Cowardly Lion of movies. They've got no heart, no brains and no balls.
Kinda like the people who watch them.

And the people who see ANY entertainment value in them, or tries to use the "Well, sometimes you feel like having a hamburger instead of health food," defense oughta go get a t-shirt that says, "Proud of Bein' 'Stoopid."

Posted by JaySmack at June 18, 2009 6:36 AM

comment #46

MovieBob says ...

"Speed Racer" is an absolutely perfect realization of EXACTLY what it wants to be. In it's own way, it's every bit as much of an uncompromised-auteur-vision-as-mainstream-blockbuster film as Dark Knight was. It will be appreciated when the rest of film catches up to it.

Posted by MovieBob at June 18, 2009 8:11 PM

comment #47