Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) (1 Viewer)

[Diallo B]

exactly. and this made the presentation of jazz in the first movie that much more ridiculous.

 

[Edwin-S]

That attempt at a connection is just ridiculous. It is clear exactly what he means when the context is maintained.

 

[Diallo B]

i am not saying that it is connected. however, the pun is quite ironic.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I have no idea what you guys are talking about now.

What pun? What connection? Connection to what?

I find it quite funny that people are getting all bent out of shape over two very insignificant computer animated characters who at the end of the day will have absolutely no lasting cultural impact on anything and will mean nothing to anyone, that's all.

People see different things, I look at them and see two humorous characters who gave me a chuckle, others look at them and see an agenda on Bay's part to demean a entire race of people.

I liked both twins, Jazz and Sideswipe, they had attitude and I thought the personalities they were given fit them perfectly.

 

[TravisR]

I think they were created to be fun characters (kids and adults were laughing at the screening I saw) but I also think they were stereotypical. Keep in mind that I don't mean that they were intended to be hateful or racist. I just think they perpetuate a stereotype.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Right, they were created to be fun characters, they were funny and I laughed...objective achieved on Bay's part with no further analysis expended on my part.

I just don't get what all the fuss is about I guess.

 

[Edwin-S]

The word "spade" can be used with a racial connotation. That is why I said it was ridiculous because it can clearly be seen in what context the word was being used. I'm not bent out of shape in any way regarding this issue. If Bay had advertently or inadvertently created a character that stereotyped White hill people there wouldn't be word one raised about it because no one would care. People will see what they want to see.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Ah okay, I was not aware that the word had that alternate meaning.

In my case I was using the word to mean a great abundance of.

 

[Paul_Medenwaldt]

Just got home from watching it. First of all its a very stunning movie visually. I think at times there is too much detail when it comes to transformation of the characters. I think if most of the tranformations were done at a distance and not at a close up at times, it would of been easier to take in. When they do the closeups, the eyes are just all over the screen trying to take it all in. Also at times it was difficult to tell Megatron apart from other Decepticons, I also had the same issue with Starscream. Not to counter my comment about details, but these characters needed a more physical definition to give them 'character'.

My gripe about this movie as well as the previous movie is that the Transformers themselves are underutiliezed. You never get to know the characters. Less focus of the fleshlings falling in love and more focus on what we came to see, The Transformers. I hate bringing up the comparison of the movies and original series, but I have to base the characters from that series.

Soundwave had one of the worse voiceovers, yes I realize Frank Welker did the voice. Devestator was one of my favorite characters in the cartoon and they really destroyed the version I enjoyed. They turned Devestator into a mechanical Quasimodo.

I didn't feel any emotion when Optimus was killed. Whereas the move from the 80s, it was almost devistating he was killed off. Maybe because almost right way in this movie the focus was on bringing him back with The Matrix.

I think this is the movie that we were afraid Bay would make, it almost seemed hurried and a lot of the scenes could and should of wound up as DVD deleted scenes section. Shortening the movie by about 20 minutes would of kept the movie tighter. I believe if the series continues, you have to let the bad guys win. This will keep the interest in the upcoming movies and further any future plots. I feel the movie ended where it started, like nothing was accomplished.

The final battle scenes in the end had poor continuity. At times when they focused on the human characters, its like the battles going on outside just stopped. It just seemed like a goddamn mess.

Movies that take risks are the ones we will remember the most. This movie doesn't take any risks, it stayed in the box and never attempted to get out.

Lets hope the next movie further's the stories and isn't stuck with the same rehash of characters from the first 2 movies.

Paul

 

[Diallo B]

i would love to help anyone that doesn't understand what the fuss is about understand why there is a fuss. but i am sure that it will be a violation of htf rules.

but i will say this:

there has been a historical trend of using stereotypical characters in a less than flattering manner in hollywood on the big screen and small since the beginning moving pictures. (i.e. 'birth of a nation') and on print media before that.

the issue is that there are not enough non-stereotypical characters that balances the images that the stereotypical characters portray. this is not new and continues to be slap in the face to those that are fatigued of the same crap time and again.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

John, they are hardly insignificant. Name a robot with more lines. Name a robot that gets that much screentime. You can't, because these are the FEATURED characters. And no one is getting bent out of shape or calling Bay himself racist. But the depictions can't really be defended, when you take a long look at movie history and the representation of African-Americans on screen. The two characters go beyond basic stereotype and into parody more than once.

And Bay has demeaned the entire human race with both TF films. Both use major human accomplishments (20th century advancements, the pyramids) and claim both were alien accomplishments. Why? Does it add anything? No. But it's EPIC!!! Most viewers don't care about that. I don't either. It simply illustrates how little Bay thinks about any element of the script beyond toilet humor and violence.

 

[Felipe S]

something I didn't understand...

there were construction decepticons fighting the autobots in Egypt while at the same time Devastator was already formed.
So you had



So while these robots are fighting the autobots, they cut to Devastator forming and walking.... I thought these robots formed Devastator...

makes no sense... I was totally lost....

 

[John Doran]

saw it last night, and i agree with the sentiment that it's pretty much the same movie as the first one, but on all kinds of steroids, at least in terms of general spectacle on parade.

the single greatest moment(s) of disappointment for me in the whole sordid affair, though, was that soundwave didn't have his voice from the animated series. why would they feel the need to change it in favour of the generic, gravelly i-talk-like-this-because-i'm-an-evil-decepticon voice?

as for the rest, i enjoyed a couple of OP's scraps, and shia's comic timing in the delivery of a few of his lines.

oh, and did megan fox get collagen put in her lips? they looked about 15 times more pillowy than i remember them being from the first film. it really distracted the hell out of me, and not in a good way...

 

[Michael:M]

Ahh, the old "I don't let other people tell me what to see" chestnut. I find this attitude and weird snobby anti-snobbery tiring and puzzling.

Most people do give weight to reviews: when your friends recommend a restaurant, a car mechanic, a band, or an event (be it rock climbing or making pottery), we usually give it some weight and consideration.

I find the whole "I don't pay attention to reviews" approach to moviegoing just weird as hell. I don't listen to just anyone - there are several reviewers whose tastes mirror mine, plus I've found them extremely reliable in pointing films that I would have never heard of without them. When a film reaches a critical mass, whether positive or negative, with my customized circle of reviewers, I pay attention.

Chuck Mayer, here at HTF, has proven to me he has fantastic taste in movies, and he's an intelligent viewer. If Chuck - and others on my trusted listed - tell me a movie sucks, I'm willing, usually to rely on these "friends" opinions.

Life is too short to consistently waste hours and money on movies that suck. I'm happy to have some trusted, proven sources of reviews to help guide my movie viewing decisions. Ultimately, I make them - and yes, sometimes even my vaunted critics are wrong, or at least I disagree with them - but most of the time, making an informed decision has been the more satisfying route.

 

[TravisR]

I get what you're saying but I still think seeing a movie for yourself is the best approach. Obviously, if you only go to the movies two or three times a year, you may want to put more faith in reviews but if you're a regular movie goer, I think seeing a movie for yourself is the best approach.

 

[Brent M]

Totally agree. I don't know anyone with the EXACT same taste in movies that I have. I might agree with someone 95% of the time, but there's still that other 5% where I might like something they don't and vice versa. Sometimes you have to see things for yourself and not just rely on the words of others.

 

[RobertR]

I think it also depends partly on how high your standards are. If you're easily entertained by generic summer "turn off your brain, enjoy the bombast, why worry about quality writing, characterizations and plot" action movies, then you're not going to make the effort required by Sturgeon's Law. You're happy with the lower 90% (or even lower).

 

[Brent M]

Great, now we're getting into "movie snobbery" territory in a Transformers discussion thread. :rolleyes

 

[Chuck Mayer]

It is finding a balance. I appreciate Michael's words (thank you), but what he is saying is not that I have fantastic taste, but that he and I have sympatico tastes. I try to be an intelligent viewer, but we all have blind spots.

No matter my expectations, there are some things I will ALWAYS check out, regardless of reviews. I can be counted on to see Viking movies, and most werewolf movies. I do like big action pictures, and I'll check out big budget historical pictures. These are things that have my interest, so I'll see them no matter what. That does not mean I'll give them a pass. I knew Pathfinder would suck, but I had to see it.

That doesn't mean the reviews are irrelevant. I care what my cohorts here think. It doesn't mean we'll agree on all counts. I agree with john doran on a lot of stuff, but there are exceptions. Tino and I agree a lot, but he HATED Speed Racer, and I LOVED it. That is OK.

But I refuse to accept that I am some sort of snob for expecting a modicum of standard filmmaking nuggets, such as basic plot coherence or scene-to-scene motivation, from a summer blockbuster. If TF2 works for you, great. But I had very low expectations, and it didn't even meet those, so I reviewed it accordingly.

 

[Michael:M]

I wasn't trying to say all of my trusted reviewers have exactly the same taste. But they have shown that they seem to value many of the same elements in films that I do, and indeed have helped me be a smarter and more thoughtful film viewer.

Like Chuck wrote, there are films I will see no matter what, for whatever reason. And most of the time, bad reviews simply mean I forgo forking over $10+ at the multiplex and pay $5 to rent or get it for free from the library several months later. There are a few films, though, that I just drop from even the library borrow list.

But I still find, at the heart of it, this "I don't listen to reviews" attitude just very strange. Recommendations from friends is how we come to know about or try just about everything else, from exotic food to hair stylists. Why is it suddenly a laying down of freewill to give trusted sources weight WRT movies?