comment #1

rr3333 says ...

Wow! Roger hates a movie! Story at 11.

comment #2

bluefugue says ...

Actually, Ebert tends to get slagged for being too forgiving, even (especially?) of Hollywood blockbuster fare.

Few things are as amusing as an out-and-out Ebert pan. The conclusion of his Armageddon review is classic. (Referring to a blurb praising the film and saying it would "suck the air out of your lungs," Ebert drily commented: "If it does, consider it a mercy killing.")

Not that I had the slightest intention of seeing this film anyway, but this review strengthens my resolve a bit.

comment #3

actionman says ...

Wow. I didn't see this one coming. Michael Bay went and made a silly special effects movie about giant fighting robots from another planet. I was expecting Harold and Maude so now I am really pissed!

comment #4

Rich S. says ...

Several of the reviewers I've read that despise this film actually liked the first one. It may do huge boxoffice, but it will apparently be despite the film itself, not because of it.

comment #5

Colin says ...

No one expects Harold and Maude, but the blatant racism is too much.

comment #6

actionman says ...

Michael Bay is a racist and a misogynist. This is news? Really?

comment #7

Geoff says ...

I'm almost through the looking glass here.

I saw the first TRANSFORMERS. It was a piece of shit.

It takes a sequel and millions of wasted dollars to convince everyone else of this?

comment #8

Strictly From Hunger says ...

You people have to remember that Ebert *liked* the first Transformers. In his three-star review he wrote that too much CGI in the final battle caused the movie to lose "a potential fourth star." That's right, Roger was contemplating giving it four stars, or it was at least within the realm of possibility.

I think Ebert was off his game for a while post-surgery, but he's been really sharp lately. I'm glad he seems to be worked up about the shittiness of Transformers 2.

comment #9

mizerock says ...

I thought Michael Bay was proud of the fact that he observed the laws of conservation of mass? That is, the disguised version could plausible unfold into the battle version in real life (even though it's really just a bunch of pixels). Is Ebert confused, or does a Camero really unfold into a 4-story robot?

The explosions look amazing but that's not enough to get me to see this (I didn't see the first one). I am still curious to hear from another party whether this sequel at least gets it right for the intended audience.

comment #10

Travis Crabtree says ...

The reason Ebert's pans are so enjoyable is because they are so rare. It's like I've said before, he unleashes delicious amounts of catty dislike with the verve of someone who rarely gets to do so.

comment #11

actionman says ...

Mizerock -- check this one out: http://www.cinematical.com/2009/06/22/review-transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen/

Sounds 'bout right to me.

comment #12

Pelham123 says ...

One of the most painful, witless moments in recent cinema was when the Transformers had to hide in the backyard at the Witwicky house & the Mom ran around in a panic because of the "earthquake!" There is no power on earth that could drag me back into that hell...and this one may be worse!?!? How is that possible?

comment #13

actionman says ...

Travis -- have you read Ebert's review of North? I read it a few times a year. So f'ing funny.

comment #14

Colin says ...

Michael Bay is a racist and a misogynist. This is news? Really?

I appreciate you enjoyed the first, but really man, you're going to defend the pop a cap in your ass saying, gold teeth having, not knowing how to read "black" robots.

comment #15

Scott Mendelson says ...

Ebert is dead on. Not only is the movie awful and/or racist, but it blatantly picks on Obama by name, blaming him for not letting the troops save the world from Decepticons. It also explicitly has Optimus Prime state one of the primary right-wing talking points for why we should never, ever leave Iraq.

To be fair, if the movie's biggest sin was its politics, that wouldn't be a huge deal, but it's just adding insult to injury.

comment #16

actionman says ...

Colin, I haven't seen the film yet (IMAX on Fri), so I can't honestly say anything specific about the movie. But I know what I'm going into and I know what to expect -- two things that a majority of critics seem to have lost sight of. It's Michael Bay explosion-porn. Again....this is news? I defend the guy because I like his visual style and his relentless pursuit of flawless CGI spectacle. That's about it.

comment #17

Floyd Thursby says ...

Ebert insults the intelligence of staples.

comment #18

Colin says ...

If you enjoy visual flair thank his cinematographer and ILM, but clearly he's shown that he's lost his place when everyone had access to high-quality special effects.

But the racism is unforgivable.

comment #19

Chase Kahn says ...

The newsflash isn't Ebert's review, it's that actionman is waiting TWO DAYS to see this.

comment #20

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Whatevs. I'm expecting to have a fun time, even if it's not as good as the first one. I just enjoy the spectacle. What is honestly so bad about watching giant colourful robots smashing into each other on an IMAX screen? It is FUN.

comment #21

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

"Their accents are Brooklynese, British and hip-hop, as befits a race from the distant stars."

How should they speak then? Like E.T? What accents are acceptable for aliens?

For fuck's sake, when a critic is quibbling about the accents of the GIANT ROBOTS FROM SPACE THAT TRANSFORM INTO CARS, you know they've missed the point entirely and shouldn't be allowed to review films like this.

comment #22

Markj74 says ...

Saw it last night here in the UK. The film is a DISASTER. The audience booed at the end. Utterly, utterly terrible. Train-wreck bad.

comment #23

actionman says ...

Lots going on right now, Chase. Believe me -- a screening tomorrow would be ideal but I've gotta wait until Friday.

comment #24

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Here's a fun quiz: http://www.empireonline.com/features/michael-bay-quiz/

comment #25

great scott says ...

Anyone else think that if Ebert's review were mixed or possitive Wells wouldn't have posted it?

Nah, I'm sure he would have.

NOT!!!!!!

comment #26

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Wells has no dog in this fight.

comment #27

actionman says ...

8 for 8, Bosh. Thanks for the link -- priceless.

comment #28

Chase Kahn says ...

By the way, has anyone looked at "The Last Airbender" teaser?

The Shyamalan ditch just keeps getting deeper...

comment #29

televisiontears says ...

I don't think anyone here (with the exception of actionman) is expecting this to be anything other than a steaming pile of explosions. The real revelation comes from the opening paragraph of the Empire review:

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=135198

You read that correctly. Now let that sink in a moment while I ponder the deeply rooted psychological issues that have resulted in Michael Bay's perpetual adolescence. Robot balls.

comment #30

Travis Crabtree says ...

With all due respect actionman, the critics that are bashing this film have, for whatever you may think of them, actually SEEN the movie.

As opposed to say you, who (no offense), has decided that it kicks major ass despite NOT having seen it.

comment #31

actionman says ...

Travis -- I never said that the new movie kicks ass. I am EXPECTING it to kick ass. But it might not. We'll have to see. I'll let you know :)

Peace I'm outta here!

comment #32

great scott says ...

I only want to know one thing:

Is this the worst movie ever made with Steven Spielberg's name in the credits?

Worse than Hook? The Money Pit? The Lost World?

comment #33

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

I too expect it to kick ass, with the knowledge that it might well be shit. But if it contains the elements I enjoyed from the first one, I predict it'll be mintoid.

- Robots
- Explosions
- Slow-mo shots of military men against a sunset backdrop
- Steve Jablonsky's kickass score turned up so loud it shakes the shit from your colon
- Some nice soliloquies from Optimus Prime

That'll do nicely.

I'm surprised that a franchise that is so brazenly honest about its intentions still attracts so much criticism. It's based on a range of toys, and helmed by action supremo Michael Bay. It was never going to be Kurosawa. And at least it doesn't pretend to be serious like Terminator 4. I'd rather have a robot shagging Megan Fox's leg than that stupid mute kid with the power to predict when Terminators were approaching.

comment #34

mattn says ...

Seeing the first Transformers movie was about as much fun as watching someone else play a video game. The sequel doesn't sound like an improvement.

comment #35

Moises Chiullan says ...

I had a few critic friends here in Austin looked at me aghast when I told them I still haven't seen the first one. I played with the toys and watched the cartoon as a kid, but I just couldn't be bothered to invest the time. I think I'm skipping a screening of it tonight--no, I am skipping a screening tonight. Decision made. I might give it some time on Friday, but it's far from a top priority for me. Way too much definitely good, not overlong stuff to watch instead.

comment #36

rr3333 says ...

Makes me long for GI Joe.

Just kidding. Wont see that piece of lard either.

comment #37

Wayne says ...

People who stick up for "Transformers" are absolutely adorable.

Michael Bay films are failures even by the "Silly Fun" yardstick that his fans hide behind. His action sequences are poorly constructed and his attempts at humor go over like deleted Larry the Cable Guy scenes. No one in their right mind expects a good acting performance in something like this, but do they have to be so glaringly AWFUL?

Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to just jerk off into a bag of Skittles while reading Maxim? The result is pretty much the same.

comment #38

BurmaShave says ...

For all those trying to brush this off as the reactions of a codger, it should be remembered that Ebert gave the first one three stars.

comment #39

Travis Crabtree says ...

I enjoyed Slinky as a child.

Where's "Slinky - The Movie" with awesome CGI and explosions and loud noises?

comment #40

BurmaShave says ...

Ah didn't see Strictly from Hunger say it much better than I did.

comment #41

DavidF says ...

My fave Ebert pan is Freddie Got Fingered.

"This movie doesn't scrape the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't below the bottom of the barrel. This movie doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels."

Genius.

And I'm STILL seeing this thing in IMAX on Sunday.

comment #42

BurmaShave says ...

Also actionman, does that mean you get married this weekend?

comment #43

Edward says ...

Is this being shown on real IMAX? Was any of it shot with IMAX cameras? Just curious, not that I want to see it.

comment #44

theultimatebiu says ...

I have seen it and it is one of the worst major summer tent poles I have ever seen. It's like being raped by a screwdriver in your eye socket.

comment #45

Baron Munchausen-by-Proxy says ...

Actionman says:

"Travis -- I never said that the new movie kicks ass. I am EXPECTING it to kick ass. But it might not. We'll have to see. I'll let you know :)

Peace I'm outta here!"

Booooooorrrrrrriiiiiinnnnnggggg!!!

comment #46

Baron Munchausen-by-Proxy says ...

Oops - sorry!
(I didn't realize it was *self* parody.)

comment #47

mizerock says ...

I don't care how the robots talk, as long as the choice isn't "broadly stereotypical ethnic accents". What's the motivation behind that? OK, if they lived under the streets of Brooklyn for decades (a la "War of the Worlds"), or if they learned English by listening to distant broadcasts of hardcore rap stations, then fine. Otherwise, you might as well have Mickey Rooney doing his "Breakfast at Tiffany's" character. Maybe Bill Dana can bring back his Jose Jimenez character for Transformers 3. Is Ahmed Best in this?

comment #48

Scott Mendelson says ...

Yes, one entire sequence and sections of the finale are in IMAX film. And they look absolutely gorgeous. I'd almost recommend the otherwise terrible film just for the fight scene at the hour mark.

comment #49

Ghost072 says ...

I really hope this thing fails on a monumental level and forces Michael Bay back to directing to bad commercials and music videos. What a limited tool this guy is.

comment #50

MrTribeca says ...

Jeeze, this looks and sounds awful.I foresee a massive opening weekend and a bigger than average drop-off for the second.

comment #51

MrTribeca says ...

And it's making me look forward to G.I. Joe. No, really!

comment #52

DeeZee says ...

Why do I suddenly feel it was Bay who spread that rumour about G.I. Joe...?

"I find it amusing that creatures that can unfold out of a Camaro and stand four stories high do most of their fighting with...fists."

Grrr..In the cartoon, they had lazers, and Megatron turned into a cannon.

actionman: Ebert's generally more forgiving on popcorn flicks than most critics. So if he hates TF2, it probably does suck to some extent. And Bay is clearly a misanthrope, since he insults everyone's intelligence with his crap.

Rich: It won't do huge box office, because the opening will, at best, allow it to break even before it drops off in favor of Ice Age 3.

Geoff: Bay got away with it the first time, because of the fanbase.

Hunger: I'm sure he liked it for what it was, not for what he had hoped it would be.

Chase: I view Airbender as part of Shyamalan's Howard the Duck phase.

great scott: Shouldn't Casper be on that list?

comment #53

corey3rd says ...

only one thing can save this movie: Medical Marijuana

comment #54

Edward says ...

Since we've been talking about kick-ass action or lack thereof, the trailer makes "Gamer" look very interesting. It's a perfect use for CGI.

comment #55

sumo-pop says ...

Roger Ebert=My Hero. I swoon.

comment #56

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

"Wells has no dog in this fight."

Just as everyone who is not a fascist brute has a dog in the fight in Iran, whether or not the "realists" want to admit it, everyone who is not... well... a fascist brute has a dog in the fight to see this movie lose its studio money and prevent another sequel.

comment #57

DeeZee says ...

Skip: Oh, they'll make a sequel for the same reason they churned out sequels to Jaws and JP, in spite of the second films underwhelming at the box office: These flicks make enough money back to justify the investment. You'll just see a no-name director and cast the third time around.

comment #58

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Haha, so apparently even the geeks aren't liking this one. I am now aware it might actually be dogshit.

Then again, the main criticisms are the same ones that were levelled against Bad Boys II which is a triumph of action cinema.

comment #59

MovieBob says ...

I firmly expect this to suck, I'm just surprised to find so much agreement. Where was ALL THIS hate when the FIRST film was being just as shitty?

In a way, this is the perfect encapsulation of Michael Bay: He cannot even deliver a film that's BETTER than a low-tech 80s cartoon show.

comment #60

Travis Crabtree says ...

"Then again, the main criticisms are the same ones that were levelled against Bad Boys II which is a triumph of action cinema."

"...triumph of action cinema."?

What the..... Ohhhh, I get it. For a minute there I thought you were serious. You're funny.

comment #61

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Crabtree: Bad Boys II is awesome. It is the most deliberately offensive big-budget movie of all time. Bay clearly didn't a fuck, so he took Disney's money and spunked it all over the screen with reckless abandon and produced a phenomenal action spectacular.

Whatevs. On Saturday I'll have a look at Transformers on the IMAX and hope for the best. If it's shit I've not lost anything. If it's good then Michael Bay still rules the action roost.

I'm more pumped for Public Enemies though. That can't get here soon enough.

comment #62

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Oops, I think Bad Boys II was Sony, not Disney.

comment #63

Jeremy Fassler says ...

This is possibly the funniest review Ebert has ever written. I can't wait to see Transformers tomorrow...and mock it relentlessly.

comment #64

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Ugh. I mean, I know this site skews towards the highbrow, but come on lads. It's a mindless action film! And whatever you tell your highminded chums, I bet even if this film is shit you'll still have a better time at the movies than paying $12.50 to see some dreary shit like Wendy & Lucy.

Giant robots fighting or morose woman looking for her dog. No contest really.

comment #65

Pinko Punko says ...

Actionman, please report on your Speed Racer viewing.

comment #66

alynch says ...

Ugh. I mean, I know this site skews towards the highbrow

You're kidding, right?

comment #67

roquentin says ...

Am I the only one who finds bashing M. Bay movies really uninteresting? Everyone who has ever seen one of his movies realizes that the man's paper-thin machismo and "revolt from Wesleyan" pathology is almost always recklessly tossed onscreen. I'm not particularly excited about this movie, but I don't have it in for Bay either. I'll be glad if he ever transcends his narcissism to make a really decent movie, even if I'm skeptical that he will.

But I do love how, as soon as the reviews start pouring in, every talkbacker who hasn't seen the movie suddenly announces it as the disaster that the buzz is shaping it into. Thing is, I get not being interested in another Bay film, or wanting to resist the kneejerk enslavement of needing to see every conceivable tentpole film. If you don't want to see the movie, or think it looks terrible, I understand. But when you assert that it's terrible, and you haven't seen it, you're susceptible to the same hive-mind that, I would guess, you most likely deplore in others who rush to see Transformers.

You might have better taste, but you share the same rottentomatoes-mentality that is crippling the spontaneity of experiencing movies freshly.

comment #68

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

roquentin ftw.

comment #69

Travis Crabtree says ...

You haven't lost anything?

No. Just ten bucks and 150 minutes of your life.

"Transformers" at the IMAX? Why don't you save the ten bucks and just stare into a strobe light for two and a half hours?

comment #70

DarthCorleone says ...

roquentin >> What would you suggest I do then? I know this thing is total crap. Do I have to patronize it - thus perpetuating the cycle of terrible summer movies - in order to be able to say so? Or can I rely on the gestalt of reviewers that I trust? Am I not allowed to be dismayed by audience preference and to want that to change? Is it disingenuous of me to encourage other moviegoers to demand something better even if I don't have firsthand knowledge? How am I going to send Hollywood a message to make better movies if I either am obligated to pay to see this "film" or can't talk about it at all? It is important to me that the bar be raised; how exactly do I help that goal come into being if I don't actively bash this tripe? It is possible to create a fun summer movie that is both popular and not filled with the most inane level of humor that could possibly be conceived. See the summer movies I grew up with: Star Wars, Jaws, Raiders Of The Lost Ark, Batman, Jurassic Park, Ghostbusters, etc.

For the record, I reluctantly gave the first Transformers a chance because so many people I formerly trusted told me how amazing it was. It wasn't.

comment #71

mtgilchrist says ...

Roquentin, mine is the review that someone posted as a link above, and that Ebert quoted at the end of his review. For whatever it's worth, my review wasn't designed to sing the film's praises or excuse it as a piece of fluff but to acknowledge what it is and what it's trying and contextualize that - meaning if you want escapist entertainment it's the MOST escapist, but if you want something substantial, see Away We Go or something else. In any case, Bay's such an easy target for a takedown that it's redundant to rip him a new one, so all of you who are saying it's the end of civilization as we know it, you're right, and those who think it's exhilarating spectacle, you're also right. Because it's your opinion, so gives a shit if anyone else agrees.

comment #72

roquentin says ...

DarthCorleone:

You are right about one thing: we speak with our wallets, however small the ripple that may or may not create. Transformers is unique, in that it's nearly a guaranteed hit, so maybe that's the reason for all the impotent bile being spewed around here - rage against the machine[s] because there's nothing you can do to stop them.

Like I said, I have no problem with not wanting to see this because it looks terrible, or speculating as such. The problem is that you're rigidifying your prejudice, and you're apparently doing so because you think your talkbacker revolt has some bearing on the way things will be. I'd offer that Hollywood Elsewhere's talkback forum isn't culled on a daily basis for business or creative decisions by eager studio execs. Your voice, in this forum, is another veiled anonymous shout in the din.

As for trusting the gestalt of reviewers, I think we all let the critics in on decision-making process to some degree, but anytime you accept another's critical opinion, no matter how seductively phrased, before you've seen the movie yourself, you've entered into the entropy of the rottentomatoes mindset.

Paul Blart: Mall Cop looks abysmal to me, but honestly, I haven't seen it, so a ripping critical elegy offers me amusement, and perhaps insight, but it doesn't give me claim to their opinion. Your intuition might prove right, and you might have nailed the movie by the preview alone. But unfortunately the price of authentic opinion is the price of admission. So goes the viewer's dilemma.

comment #73

actionman says ...

Burma -- yes -- the wedding is Sunday. You've got a sharp memory.

Pinko -- Speed Racer is sitting on the table, ready to be watched. I've just been so damn busy.

comment #74

Ghost072 says ...

Yes, of course, bashing Bay is easy; he's a misogynistic, empty, loud, pompous ass and he makes sure he reminds of you of that with every frame of his films. But does this mean it is wrong to expect something more from an action film?

We know great action films can be made...The Hurt Locker and Star Trek, while vastly different experiences, are two recent examples of very good films (IMO, of course) that are primarily designed around action set pieces, yet they also traffic in humor and interesting characterization. Why does Bay get a pass from successfully delivering either of these elements in his films? Because he can frame a shot that looks like it is taken from a Marine's recruitment commercial? Seriously, I could do that and so could anyone else with a half-way decent eye and the gobs of money that studios throw at Michael Bay to produce his soulless craptaculars.

comment #75

Cde. says ...

It will be interesting to see if actionman likes Speed Racer, the only true action masterpiece produced in Hollywood over the past five years or so.

comment #76

DarthCorleone says ...

roquentin>> You had no answer to my question. That's o.k. I knew it was a futile one, and I enjoyed your response. :- )

Anyway, I do agree with you on all counts, although I'm not as quick to decry the usefulness of Rotten Tomatoes. I only have so much to give in this life, and if a movie does not achieve a minimum level of some shared regard, I'm unlikely to give time or money for it. (Transformers is 23% right now on the old Tomato meter; that's fairly abysmal and well below my usual requirement.)

I'd also add that you need not worry too much about my limitations with this Hollywood Elsewhere microphone. I make my uninformed anti-Transformers bias well known in other forums - both cyber and beyond. Yes, mine is a "veiled anonymous shout in the din" (love that phrase - bravo), but I can change just one mind...

comment #77

DarthCorleone says ...

"if" I can change just one mind, that is...

comment #78

Pinko Punko says ...

Just try to enjoy it for what it really is, am. The opening few minutes are actually extremely sophisticated. Actually, jesus H. this is not wedding weekend material! Just have a nice time. Watch the movie later.

comment #79

Marty Melville says ...

"this is not wedding weekend material!"

maybe actionman is marrying actionwoman. in any case, congrats.

comment #80

YRG says ...

I'd like to go see Transformers 2 in a theater filled with screaming children throwing popcorn and candy while I blare my iPhone on shuffle with noise cancelling headphones just so I can overcomplicate the story and feel like I got something out of it. Like the time I watched an illegal download of Fast & the Furious that was missing sound.

I feel like if I pay for it I'm just encouraging the industry to produce more. If only there were a way I could get into the movie for free. Watching it on my 36" TV at home 6 months from now just doesn't seem the same... I want to see it on the big screen...

@Travis -- slinky the movie? I lol'ed.

Re: robot accents-- it makes me laugh that all the effort Lucas put into sound design in the Star Wars prequels is being subverted by a film that most likely made their voice casting decisions based on a dozen outsourced focus groups with 12-14 year olds two weeks before the release. I'm speculating here, but how far off could I be?

@roquentin -- it's guys like Bay that contribute to the lowering of the common denominator. I'm not waiting around until he sees the light and makes his Schindler's List. I hope he goes supernova in Wells's fantasy Hollywood meteor attack.

comment #81

Terry McCarty says ...

Betsy Sharkey, with her tepid nonoffending "Well, SOMEONE will like this even though I didn't" review, hits her first new low at THE LOS ANGELES TIMES:
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-transformers24-2009jun24,0,7325313.story

Devin Faraci's arguably-more-scathing-than-Ebert review: http://chud.com/articles/articles/19948/1/REVIEW-TRANSFORMERS---REVENGE-OF-THE-FALLEN-/Page1.html

comment #82

Ray says ...

Just back from seeing this thing. Easily the worst summer film I have seen since the infamous VAN HELSING. In fact, it might even be worse than that simply because the story is absolutely incomprehensible. I defy anyone to explain the plot in any detail.

The most troubling part was the fact that my American audience laughed at all the racist innuendos and testicle jokes ... and then clapped at the end. Unbelievable. You truly cannot go broke underestimating your audience.

I am trying to write a review ... but words are failing at this time.

comment #83

Bob Violence says ...

a horrible experience of unbearable length

This is a fantastic auto-critique if I've ever seen one

comment #84

actionman says ...

thanks for the words, marty. she's a damn fine actionwoman; i'm a lucky actionman.

manohla dargis rightfully stated that Bay is an "auteur" in her review.

comment #85

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

All the AICN reviews are negative too. Knowles seems to find it offensive, which is odd coming from someone who likened Blade II to cunnilingus.

comment #86

Howlingman says ...

Actionman -- May you find the perfect occasion to leap over the buffet table firting twin Colt automatics Chow Yun-Fat style as the wedding cake is pierced by gunfire and the champagne glass pyramid shatters into a million pieces by your uninvited enemies. Congrats and best wishes on your impending nuptuals,

comment #87

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Faraci's comments about the IMAX are making me reconsider whether I can be arsed to pay the extra to see it there. I might just go at regular price and see it tonight instead of waiting to see it on the IMAX because of the mental screening times. I'll get my IMAX fix from Potter later on this summer.

comment #88

Ghost072 says ...

Auteur theory, at least as embraced by Truffaut, says that a director's films reflect their personal vision. So what should we infer from Michael Bay's films regarding his personal vision?

1. He likes fast cars
2. He likes hot women (with you so far, Michael)
3. He likes frequent, loud explosions
4. He likes fast, incomprehensible editing
5. He likes ultra-wide, iconic shots, usually of military or nationalistic imagery
6. He likes to use s-l-o-w motion to indicate something important! is happening
7. He likes extremely juvenile and/or misogynistic and/or racist humor

And...that's about it. Is this really all it takes to make an "auteur" anymore?

comment #89

Steven Kar says ...

People who speak of auteur always seem to forget that an auteur, a true one, also has something to say, preferably something profound or insightful. What does Bay have to say with his movies? That the USA rocks?

comment #90

rr3333 says ...

John Frankenheimer must be rolling over in his grave.

comment #91

Pinko Punko says ...

Howlingman- that was a great toast. Of course, there will even be an appropriate release of white doves instead of a non-sensical one. actionman, defend your bride in glorious slo-mo!

comment #92

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

I have booked a ticket for tonight, just a regular screen. I am nervous. Please don't be shit!

comment #93

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Bosh is back! Slight spoilers ahoy.

Actionman can relax - reports of this being a disaster are way off base! True enough, it's a step down from Transformers 1, but it still remains a kickass action spectacular with all the Bayhem you've come to know and love.

The plot is entirely comprehensible to any child. A young boy sat next to me and never once asked his father what was going on. In fact it's almost simpler than the story of part 1, with no eBay auction or secondary team of web geeks to muddy the waters. It is, as the title suggests, a revenge film, with Megatron and this new chap Fallen out for some juicy vengeance.

There are some WTF? moments, agreed. For example, the Decepticons send down a Transformer that disguises itself as a sexy lady. Why don't they send down loads of disguised humans and infiltrate the White House or something that way? Never explained, but whatever. It's a minor quibble, akin to the contrivances that you'd overlook in Star Trek such as the magical cave that Kirk happens to find old Spock in. WHATEVS. It's a summer movie, get over it.

It's definitely overlong. It could be trimmed by 30 minutes and be a far leaner, meaner machine. And yet at the same time it never drags - the pace is relentless, almost too much so on occasion, and the whole thing does feel louder and more shrill than the last. There's precious little downtime. Even the comic relief is usually delivered in raised voices, or in the midst of an action scene.

And the initial spectacle of the Transformers themselves is of course diminished. Some of the cooler moments of the first film were seeing them for the first time and watching them do their thing. This time we're plunged right into the thick of things, and even though the robots have more screentime than the last, the existing characters feel a bit sidelined by all the new additions. It was a mistake to keep Optimus absent for most of the mid-section of the movie. But whatever; the audience applauded his eventual return. He's a clear favourite and Peter Cullen deserves credit for giving a robot such gravitas and character.

The accusations from the likes of Fat Harry that the film is "foul mouthed, racist & misogynistic" are completely and utterly absurd. The fact that a decent number of critics seem to be grasping at this pathetic thread is ridiculous. Yes, there are wise-cracking black robots. But there are wise-cracking black people in real life, and in 99% of all other action blockbusters. To somehow suggest this this film is like a minstrel show is completely ridiculous. In fact, the two comedy black robots are in many ways far more true to the original cartoons than any of the robots in the first film. The animated movie, for example, had a wide array of eccentric and madcap robots with funny accents. The black robots in this film are heroic, brave and play a pivotal part in the climax. There's also a British robot who says "bollocks" a lot - should I find that robot racist? Fuck no - it's a robot in a daft, silly movie. For Fat Harry to find fault in this film when he wanks himself silly over explotation flicks daily is patently ridiculous and suggests he has some sort of agenda.

The epic military vs. bad robots fight at the end is Bay at his best. Wet dream shots of every plane and tank he could get his hands on. And as the music swells and the goodies do their thing, you'd have to be a right boring old fart not to find it somewhat entertaining.

It's definitely flawed and I doubt I'll watch it more than once again on DVD, but the critics who are lining up to shit on this thing are evidently just dismayed by the fact that it's going to make a shit-ton of cash and there's nothing they can do about it. Idiotic proclamations of it being a disaster and silly one-star or 1/10 ratings are just attention-seeking absurdity. It's a solid 3/5 summer popcorn flick. Turn off your brain and enjoy things going boom.

Oh, and Shia was good. So fuck you.

Yours in Christ,
Bosh
xoxo

comment #94

DeeZee says ...

I dunno. Usually, these geek flicks get an 8.0 or higher on IMDB the first week, but TF2 only got a 7.2...

"The animated movie, for example, had a wide array of eccentric and madcap robots with funny accents."

But the ones in the cartoon were just played by black voice actors. They didn't sound like they were extras on UPN.

"it's going to make a shit-ton of cash and there's nothing they can do about it."

You sure about that? TDK had a longer running time, and it still had a better first day take than TF2. http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/14491/transformers-scores-16m-first-night Don't underestimate Ice Age 3, either.

comment #95

Jonah says ...

I hate it when people say to turn off my brain and enjoy it. Why?

I love action movies, comedies, big summer tent pole films. When they're done right. When they're done right I don't need to turn my brain off. I can watch the explosions, the shoot outs, the chase scenes and still enjoy a well told, well edited, well written story.

To say you have to turn your brain off tells me this is a jerk off movie, for people that will excuse anything as long as something goes BOOM every 10 minutes.

I've heard disaster from too many people that enjoyed the first one to think this is anything different than that.

comment #96

Steven Kar says ...

Jonah,

I feel your pain. The people who say "turn off your brain" think that they've just come up with the be all and end all of all arguments, but they just don't realise that having fun and using our brain are not mutually exclusive.

How am I expected to enjoy something if I don't have a brain that will help me enjoy it?

comment #97

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Yes, but the fact is that there's always been a dearth of genuine benchmark blockbusters that reward the brain and the boner. T2, Jurassic Park, The Matrix - they don't come around often, so to dismiss all the dumbass action flicks means you'll miss out on at least an entertaining couple of hours because you're always searching for more.

Believe me, I'd LOVE it if all summer movies were of the standard of the first Star Wars trilogy, or Back to the Future, or even high-octane hits like Die Hard and Top Gun. But even in the '80s/'90s heyday for these event pictures we still got shit like Last Action Hero, Hudson Hawk and The Avengers.

Dumbass action spectaculars like Transformers are just a fun way to unwind in the summer time. I went to see it yesterday after an 8:30-6 stint in the office and I was knackered and just wanted to, yes, switch my brain off. I love a proper film as much as anyone, but there's space in my life for stupid action nonsense and intelligent, well-crafted masterworks. I like them all.

comment #98

bents75 says ...

I agree with you BoshBarnet. There's plenty of room out there for more than one type of movie. I went to see the film after work yesterday myself - it was loud, dumb, fun, and mildly amusing. And tonight I'll go home after work and watch Waltz with Bashir - and I'll enjoy that even more, and those viewings and perceptions will remain mutually exclusive.

I used to hate Michael Bay with a passion, and in most respects, I still do. But the first Transformers was easily the first movie he's ever made that worked for me. If there's any subject which, i'm sorry, but really "doesn't" deserve or require a more intelligent examination - it's a story about fucking alien robots fighting a civil war that transform into cars - based on a cartoon - based on toys.

Anyone who even wants a smart and well thought out take on that is delusional and/or retarded - because it's not inherently possible. If you want to argue against the film being made in the first place, then I get that, but suggesting it's not what it could be is simply naive.

I wouldn't expect any more or less from a movie based on GI Joe, My Little Ponies, or Supersoaker water pistols.

The popular argument to that is Iron Man, but frankly, I don't consider them to be comparable at all. I think stories revolving around fleshed out human characters with relatable issues (i.e. most comic book properties, for example) can and should be intelligent - but I'm not going to relate to a talking truck no matter how smart it is, so the filmmakers might as well not bother trying.

On another note - I was excited to hear Soundwave was going to be in this movie, because I thought he was a cool character. After he didn't show up as a giant boom box, it took me half the film to recognize his voice and even realize who he was. But I really didn't give a shit about the change, and I enjoyed it in spite of that, because it's only Transformers.

comment #99

DeeZee says ...

Bosh: The Avengers had a good cast. It was just everything else about it which sucked. [Though, to be fair, the show jumped the shark long before the movie came along.] But I'm hoping the success of Wanted might encourage a decent reboot one day.

bents: I'd like TF, if it was about said robots, and they weren't just guest stars in Shia's movie. And it's bs that you can't come up with a smart version of that series. Anyone who's read the 80s comics will tell you differently.

G.I. Joe and My Little Pony were just gender-specific collect-a-thons, but TF actually required some creativity to work, since you'd have to guess how those mechs would be able to hide in human society and not destroy it while getting their energy fix in the process.

And it wasn't specifically Prime's intelligence which
made the show work. It was the ability to bond with him and the other robots. What people who defend the movie don't seem to get is that TF was a sci-fi series first, and an action-oriented series second. That's why the Dolph Lundgren version of He-Man also blows-because the studio decided to sacrifice the genre elements in favor of b-movie action.

comment #100

alynch says ...

Yes, but the fact is that there's always been a dearth of genuine benchmark blockbusters that reward the brain and the boner.

The fact that most films are shit is no reason to embrace shit.

comment #101

gafi says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of sql high availability

comment #102

zukaholic says ...

they look absolutely gorgeous. I'd almost recommend the otherwise terrible film just for the fight scene at the hour mark. nice post !

5770 benchmark | Iphone cases carbon fiber | Difference between Iphone 4 and Iphone 5 | What does jailbreaking an Ipod Touch do | Ipad writing stylus | Ipad design cases | Blackberry design cases | Emoticons for BBM | Iphone design cases | 5670 benchmark | 5850 benchmark

comment #103

cheap credit card processing says ...

nice post! That's right, Roger was contemplating giving it four stars, or it was at least within the realm of possibility.

comment #104

Kodak Sport zx3 says ...

great post! There is no power on earth that could drag me back into that hell...and this one may be worse!?!? How is that possible?

460 sli benchmark | 580 benchmark | 570 benchmark | 560 Ti benchmark | 6990 benchmark | 590 benchmark | 480 benchmark | 6970 benchmark | 5670 benchmark | 4670 benchmark | 6850 benchmark | 6870 benchmark | 6950 benchmark | Black Ops benchmark | 5870 benchmark | 5850 benchmark | 5830 benchmark | The Witcher 2 benchmark | gt 240 benchmark | 295 benchmark | 5450 benchmark | 5570 benchmark

comment #105

Earache Cure says ...

very great post! Dumbass action spectaculars like Transformers are just a fun way to unwind in the summer time. I went to see it yesterday after an 8:30-6 stint in the office and I was knackered and just wanted to, yes, switch my brain off. I love a proper film as much as anyone, but there's space in my life for stupid action nonsense and intelligent, well-crafted masterworks. I like them all.

vga cards benchmarks | earache remedies