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

[MickeS]

I have no idea why you think I am presenting facts. It's my opinion. I am not going to put "IMO" after every opinion, I thought that goes without saying.

What is a fact is that Charles S set up a strawman argument - nobody went in expecting a deep drama. That's not what the criticism is about. What is also a fact is that Charles S is constantly bringing up things he dislikes about the movie, but excuses them because it's a Transformer movie.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Okay, fair enough.

But i've read some bad reviews, and arguments, where it seems as if the composer is trying to get those who like Bay and his films to somehow "see the light" and realize that they're absolutely right.

Argumanets about whether a film is good or bad is an unwinnable situation, neither party will change their minds on it.

It was a wise one who said "Strange game, the only winning move is not to play."

If you can guess who said it i'll mail you a cookie.

 

[MattFini]

I saw it on Friday and was pretty disappointed with it.

I really enjoyed the first Transformers two years ago with reservations. It seemed like the filmmakers were hesitant to put the big robots center stage because they worried whether or not audiences would take them seriously as characters.

When it worked, and worked well, I figured the filmmakers would dispense with some of the human nonsense and give us more of what worked the first time around.

Instead they did the opposite. Don't get my wrong, I liked the opening action sequence and dug the ending (even though it felt a but lazy), but Michael Bay and company seemed to find a way to give us even LESS of the titular characters. What the hell?

Now I wouldn't mind if the actual story was interesting (but it wasn't). It felt like the National Treasure films but with pretty terrible humor.

That said, I didn't find the movie to be a chore to sit through - just messy and unfocused. The Fallen was a terrible villain with almost zero screen presence and Megatron was practically persona non grata throughout (come to think of it, so was Prime).

I would be excited about the Blu-ray, save for the fact that there's no way I would ever watch this thing in its entirety again. Instead, I'll stick with the animated movie that at least had the good sense to present the robots center stage.

 

[David Norman]

WOPR

I guess it's OK to say I had a huge crush on Ally Sheedy since she's almost exactly the same age. A truly underappreciated movie on so many levels.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Totally agree, Wargames is a classic.

Now, all I have are Oreo's, is that okay?

 

[MickeS]

This is exactly what I disliked the most about this movie. Like you, I was OK with what felt like reduced screentime for the Transformers in the forst movie, because I figured it was the "origin" movie and they wanted to use the human characters to anchor it, and build the robot story around that. Also, the robot scenes in that one were of the more "wow"-inducing variety, like the introduction by Optimus Prime, discovery of Megatron in the ice, reveal of Megatron and the whole Hoover dam complex etc.

But when they did the EXACT SAME THING in this one, and still introduced even more robots without extending the total robot screen time, that was a huge mistake (IMO ). Like I mentioned in my post above, I too was really annoyed with the fact that there's a stretch in the middle 1/3 of the movie where the main draw, Optimus Prime vs Megatron, is completely absent, and instead replaced by a poor man's version of "National Treasure" (though I guess technically, "National Treasure 2: Book of secrets", was that, since it was an awful movie too ).

Charles S makes the argument that we shouldn't go there and expect deep drama, and thus should accept what we got. The irony is that the FILMMAKERS are playing up the human drama angle, when I'd actually venture that NOBODY who goes to see this movie gives a rat's ass about Sam Witwicky and his family.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I've decided I would have been willing cut them another point (to make my score 4/10) if they had gotten Soundwave's voice right.

Charles is hardly the first member to defend the film by recommending checking your brain or not expecting The Godfather (though he did it rather politely). Considering the $200M budget, I am fresh out of passes

As usual, no one expected My Dinner With Andre, but Highlander would have been nice.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I've been meaning to ask this for awhile, who was that big-ass two-wheeled Decepticon in the beginning?

 

[Simon Massey]

Well I definitely in the category of people who hate most of Michael Bay films (I do like The Rock

) and I hated the first film.

Yet somehow I found myself in the cinema watching this (at least it was free). I had incredibly low expectations and found myself having to lower the bar further

Then again it is nowhere near as bad as Batman and Robin.

My main problem though with this film in particular is it seems to have got its priorities wrong. Is based on a toy franchise, its made "in association with Hasbro" yet this film IMO is inappropriate for 5-8 year olds with all the sexual references and innuendo. Someone said that Bay is aiming this film at 14 year old boys but surely they are past playing with Transformers toys.

The film is aimed at a teenage audience and above and its a bad film at that. But it should be suitable for younger kids and i dont think it is. Granted for some of the younger ones most of it may fly over their heads but its completely unnecessary.

Cut out the sexual references and innuendo or at least tone it down a bit and I could accept it as a big blockbuster for young kids which adults may enjoy (esp those who loved the cartoon of the 80s). But instead we have a blockbuster which includes elements which are completely unsuitable for what should be its main demographic - ie. those who are going to buy the toys and play with them.

 

[Quentin]

Is there any director in Hollywood who gets the treatment/assistance/cooperation of the military like Bay does? They LOVE him! You get shots of some serious hardware in his movies every time.

I think he may have the funnest job on earth: blow shit up constantly with no limitations, and worship beautiful starlets with his camera.

 

[Shane D]

i felt the first movie was better.

in this one, even though we have twice as much robot action, it felt like we didn't have any more scenes with them in it, just twice as many robots crammed in as many scenes as we had in the first movie. I was also disappointed with the whole optimus story line. i was hoping for more of him in it, and then he was gone half the movie. Same with megatron and starscream. I thought this would be the movie where starscream shined and he was pushed to the back also. I also noticed alot of the decipticons sounded the same, although it was nice to hear frank welker as soundwave again.

It all just seemed rushed. Devastator was rushed in his introduction, he was rushed in his use and just everything. Even the ending, i was sitting there going... wow. thats the end? this is how they are ending the movie? the exact same ending as the first with a message to the stars? I was excited for jetfilre too and then to have a robot that needed a cane.... wtf.

hopefully it will be better on the 2nd viewing cause i'll be taking my nephew to see it later this week. we'll see.

 

[Diallo B]

no doubt this was going to make money even with the critical and popular lambasting it received:

Domestic: $201,246,000
+ Foreign: $186,100,000
= Worldwide: $387,346,000

Production Budget: $200 million



part 3 will make x3 look like citizen kane.

 

[cineMANIAC]

This movie gives new meaning to the phrase "churning out product" - I'm sitting there watching this and I actually wanted to walk out of the theater. If it weren't because I was sitting in the middle of the row I would've walked out. Perfect example of clueless executives wanting to cater to a specific demographic (13-year-olds) but at the same time throwing in everything but the kitchen sink in trying to be all-inclusive. Why can't someone make movies for adults without the MTV-editing? Pure overkill

 

[Charles S]

I'm not making excuses, I just honestly didn't even think about these issues while I was in the theater. Only after reading other people's thoughts did I say, "yeah, I guess I can see their argument on some of these things"...in fact in my post I specifically said that very thing. I was simply taking into consideration other people's point of view and trying to see why so many people hated it. (hence I mentioned some of the dumb comedy, humor the twins, because on second thought, I can see how this would have brought down the movie for a lot of people)

Sorry for trying to put myself in another person's shoes and trying to see there take on things...no wait, I'm not sorry for that!

 

[Brent M]

Saw it last night. Not nearly as bad as all the "experts" are making it out to be and it's certainly not on the level of aforementioned disasters like Van Helsing and Batman & Robin. It was definitely too long and the "twins" were by far the worst thing about the movie(as bad or worse than Jar Jar). I didn't like it as much as the first Transformers, but it's still the second best "blockbuster" I've seen this summer behind Star Trek and I enjoyed it much more than Wolverine and Terminator Salvation(which isn't saying a whole lot).

 

[Chuck Mayer]

The many of us who literally hated this movie did not claim to be experts. And the twins and the length were hardly the downfall of the film for quite a few of us.

Perhaps this FAQ, which coldly lays out the story, will enlighten. We need to redefine blockbuster. Apparently, all it now requires is a visual effects budget.

 

[MattFini]

I'm really sad to see this movie raking in money hand over fist.

The more I think about it, the more I dislike it. While it doesn't quite approach either of the two Pirates of the Caribbean sequels for me (those remain two of the worst films I have ever seen), the sheer laziness of the story just irks the hell out of me.

I found this online today, which is pretty damn funny. It points out just about every inconsistency in the film and the author managed to catch a few that never occurred to me:

The 10 Most Confusing Things in 'Revenge of the Fallen'

I was hoping this movie would sink like a stone but most of the 'casual' movie goers I know (including one of my good friends who loves just about everything - bless him) seem to have no problems with it. This leads me to believe this thing will get to $450 domestically without much trouble.

 

[Brent M]

Originally Posted by Chuck Mayer

The many of us who literally hated this movie did not claim to be experts. And the twins and the length were hardly the downfall of the film for quite a few of us.

Did it ever occur to you that I wasn't specifically referring to "you" as an expert, Chuck? Just possibly I was talking about all of the actual critics on RT that gave this film a cumulative score of 21% or whatever it was. It's not always about you, buddy, but I'm glad to know that you take my opinions so personally.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by MattFini
I was hoping this movie would sink like a stone but most of the 'casual' movie goers I know (including one of my good friends who loves just about everything - bless him) seem to have no problems with it.

I could tell the crowd I saw it with loved it. The movie was always going to be a huge hit. It's a sequel to a huge hit, it had a huge marketing campaign and it had giant robot fighting so good or bad, it's going to make a ton of money.

 

[MattFini]

Originally Posted by Chuck Mayer ">[/url]

Perhaps this