Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
i am lowering my expectations in light of the overwhelming negative reviews.
not that i expect very much from michael bay. the man hasn't got very much to offer as a filmmaker. as a purveyor of pure spectacle however, he sometimes succeeds. i loved the rock, liked bad boys, was ok with the armageddon, indifferent to/hated everything else.
 
Okay, so I gotta say that this take from Empire Magazine is a first:

Transformers: Robots In Denial
Posted on Tuesday June 23, 2009, 13:12 by Chris Hewitt




BEWARE: SPOILERS ABOUND. DO NOT READ THIS UNLESS YOU HAVE SEEN REVENGE OF THE FALLEN!










A few hours ago I became the last Empire-ite to slap my eyes upon Michael Bay’s mega-sequel, Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen. And, as my interest rapidly waned ‘neath the relentless barrage of robot punching, robot kicking, robot smashing, robot leg humping, robot farting, robot incomprehensible exposition and ROBOT LOUD NOISES, I noticed something that piqued my interest.

In short, Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen may be the gayest mainstream movie since Top Gun, with its talk of wingmen and tails and whatnot. Not, as Seinfeld once said, that there’s anything wrong with that. In fact, it’s quite audacious and subversive. After all, Transformers is a giant, toy-shifting, popcorn-shovelling buster of blocks, a movie designed for parents to take their kids along to, safe in the knowledge that it won’t turn out to be a paean to the joys of love between two men. Except…

Revenge Of The Fallen is all about man-love. Specifically the man-love between Shia LaBeouf’s Sam Witwicky and Optimus Prime. Don’t be fooled by the presence of Megan Fox and her near-pornographic hot pants. She’s a red herring, a great big beautiful beard designed to take your eyes off the central couple. After all, there’s clearly more to the Sam/Prime relationship than meets the eye. Or maybe I’m madder than a bag of snakes playing ping pong on the surface of Jupiter with a giant dragon wearing the face of Esther Rantzen…

But consider the evidence: the movie conspires to keep Sam and Optimus apart for long periods of time, but when they’re together, the sexual chemistry is there in spades. Long, lingering looks. Clandestine meetings in windswept locations. Meaningful dialogue laced with subtext: “Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing,” says Prime at one point. Read between the lines, and it sounds like Optimus is trying to find the right words to express feelings that can no longer be contained.

Consider, also, the curiously chaste relationship that Sam has with Mikaela. For a guy with a girlfriend who redefines the term ‘smoking hot’, he doesn’t seem that keen to put his lips on hers – in fact, the only time he even begins to display any sexual excitement is when he has Mikaela whisper, ‘camshaft’ down the phone. Is it a coincidence that Optimus Prime has a killer set of camshafts? Probably not.

And when Sam is briefly killed near the end of the movie, what brings him back from the brink… is it Mikaela’s grief-stricken cries of ‘I love you, Sam?’ Or is it a bizarre dream sequence where he’s transported to early-era Cybertron, and effectively meets the parents of his one true love, Optimus? No prizes for guessing it’s the latter. Poor Mikaela – you get the feeling that by the time she’s 40, she’ll be a sad drunk with bags under her eyes, a cigarette in her hand, and a contemptuous look in her eyes as Sam tells her he’s out to spend yet another Friday night with… him. “There are three people in this marriage!” she’ll scream, before flinging the last piece of the All Spark at their wedding photo – a photo with the giant legs of the Best Man, Prime, dominating the frame…

That’s, of course, if it gets that far. After all, we’re also constantly told, throughout the movie, that Sam and Mikaela haven’t said, ‘I love you’ yet, despite the fact that they’ve been going out for two years. When I was at college, I was telling girls I loved them after two weeks and, as you might expect, I didn’t know any girls who looked like Megan Fox. Heck, I didn’t know any girls who looked like Neil Fox. And yet Sam has this goddess by his side for 104 weeks, and doesn’t once use the ‘L’ word? Dude. Has. Serious. Issues.

Issues that are compounded when we see him interact with evil Decepticon spy, Alice (Isabel Lucas). From the off, Sam is uncomfortable in the face (and ass) of her overt sexuality. Recognising this, Bumblebee – his Autobot guardian (and, perhaps, something more?) – virtually assaults Alice and degrades her by dumping brake fluid, or Transformer urine all over her. Or could he be marking his territory? Needless to say, Alice turns out to be a stone-cold killer, reinforcing the notion that Sam is better off in the warm, welcoming Transformers’ boy club.

Haven’t you noticed? Oh, Transformers 2 may introduce token female, Arcee, but otherwise there’s more enough kugelsack at an Autobots meeting to put Bruno out of business. Same with the Decepticons – at the end of the movie, seven of the evil bastards cast off their inhibitions and literally come together to form the giant Devastator, a 130ft tall behemoth whose USP is the ability to suck other robots into its enormous mouth. It even swallows – and then spits – one of the annoying Twins. All of this explicit action in a PG-13, just waiting to corrupt the minds of our youth and turn them all into gay robots. Chris Tookey of The Daily Mail is going to dig out the ‘Careful Now!’ placards when he gets wind of this…

Ultimately, though, it all comes back to Sam and Optimus and the consummation of their forbidden love. When Optimus is slain in the heat of battle, Sam is lost, consumed with grief, racked with remorse, insert your cliché here. But when he hears that there’s a chance that Optimus might be resurrected, immediately he gets his game-face on. And it’s virtually impossible not to notice that the language surrounding Optimus’ resurrection would give Freud, not to mention sixth-form humorists, a field day. “Put the Matrix into Optimus’ spark,” Sam is told, while later Jetfire pleads with Prime to “take my parts and you will know power that you’ve never known before.” I had to check the credits to make sure he wasn’t voiced by the ghost of Kenneth Williams.

And, of course, the final act of resurrection is committed when Sam, finally free to express his feelings for his fallen flame, literally penetrates Optimus’ chest with the phallic-shaped Matrix Of Leadership. It’s in this act that Sam is finally free to express his true feelings, and bond with Prime on a level that human society just won’t be able to accept.

Of course, this sudden lurch into homoeroticism shouldn’t come as a surprise, for Hollywood’s been doing it for years. The previously mentioned Top Gun, as memorably laid out by Quentin Tarantino in the indie film, Sleep With Me, is a treasure trove of gay subtext, while Bryan Singer’s X-Men movies, particularly X-Men 2, use mutation as barely-disguised metaphors for homosexuality. And, as Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg noted so adroitly in Hot Fuzz, Bay’s previous sequel, Bad Boys 2, is really about two guys who are so afraid of their love for each other that they routinely cover it up with homophobic banter.

But action cinema has lacked an openly gay hero, so perhaps Bay can push Transformers 3 even further. Will Optimus Prime finally come out? Well, it’s unlikely – but perhaps it’s time for these robots in disguise to stop being robots in denial…
 
From CHUD:

This isn't one of those negative reviews where the critic bemoans how stupid the big summer blockbuster is (although Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is stupid beyond belief. Screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman claim that Michael Bay locked them in a hotel room for a month to write this movie; they obviously spent 29 and a half days watching pay per view porn and ordering room service); those kinds of pans are from sticks in the mud who either don't get blockbuster films or who are fighting a battle we lost back in 1985. No, this is one of those negative reviews that looks at a two and a half hour movie about giant robots fighting each other and asks just one question:

How can this movie be so ^^^^ing boring?

It's astonishing. Coming off of the very successful (and highly entertaining) Transformers, Michael Bay had the opportunity to make a movie that delivered chaos and destruction to his heart's delight. Instead he reveals a fetish for comic relief characters (there are SEVEN OR EIGHT comic relief characters in this film, many of whom spend most of the running time hanging out together) and a profound inability to create any sense of pacing. Sitting through Revenge of the Fallen is a tedious experience, a slog through absolutely meaningless bull^^^^ to get to action scenes that are so sloppy that they seem to have been improv'ed on the spot. If the action scenes in the first film struck you as hard to follow you'll likely have no idea what's going on in the action scenes in this film. ILM has created photo-real giant robots that are fantastically detailed with thousands of moving parts and then failed to come up with any way to let the audience tell them apart. There are scenes in the final battle where I had literally - without hyperbole - no idea if the one robot hitting the other robot was a good guy or bad guy, let alone which character was which. The action scenes become semi-impressionistic melanges of metalic parts and explosions. Fights take place in featureless landscapes to hide the fact that not even the director has a single clue who is doing what in relation to which characters.

It seems so simple: deliver more and bigger robot action. But Bay keeps coming back to the human characters, not a single one of which are interesting or otherwise diverting. The film sidelines the Autobots (who are now working closely with the US military) for nearly the entire running time, and instead we're forced to hang out with a team of unfunny, irritating misfits. When John Turturro's returning Sector Seven agent is your most nuanced character you know you've really ^^^^ the bed.

And the action, when it's decipherable, offers nothing new. There's not a moment in this movie that threatens to even come close to the set pieces in the first, forget about topping them. In fact the lengthy final battle (which is like a fractal element of the entire film, as it is stuffed with filler and irritating comedy) appears to completely recycle the location of the Scorponok scene in the first movie. There's a fight in a forest that could have offered up some exciting possibilities, but besides the obvious pummeling with trees, the scene is forgettable. Walking into a movie like Transformers you must have your expectations lowered, but the one place that you hope to be impressed is with spectacle. Michael Bay fails at this, the most basic part of his job as a junk food director.

I never want to see Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen again, but if I did, I would like to bring a stopwatch. I would want to time the interminable filler scenes to see if they are as long as they feel. Does the scene where Shia's mom accidentally eats pot brownies and freaks out (which in no way, shape or form advances the story OR the characters. It's the actual definition of filler) really go on for as long as it seems? Does the movie really take an almost hour long break from any action to have the characters sneak into the Smithsonian and get an exposition dump from a robot before wandering in the desert for a while? The middle of the movie, about an hour where the film simply treads water, is the cinematic equivalent of the event horizon of a black hole, where time just slows down and a second lasts an eternity.

Critiquing the actors in this film is almost a waste of time. Shia LaBeouf is given nothing that even approximates a character; at the junket Orci and Kurtzman gave some lip service to this being his character's Refusal of the Call story (any time a writer references the Monomyth, tell them to ^^^^ off), but that's not present in the movie. There's nothing in the movie; the character of Sam Witwicky simply moves from location to location and from scene to scene as... well, I was going to say as the story dictates, but Revenge of the Fallen has almost no story at all. It's simply a series of events that are interconnected but never really add up to anything. I know that saying an action movie 'has no story' is pretty cliche by now, but I think Revenge of the Fallen is almost literally plotless; there are a couple of vague ideas about plot - the Fallen wants revenge and Sam has info in his brain that he wants - but that's just about it. It's like a movie based on a TV Guide description.

Everybody else ranges from servicable to horrifyingly bad. Ramon Rodriguez, who plays Shia's new (comic relief) roommate (who could be erased from the film without altering one single tiny piece of the story. At all. The character embodies uselessness), should never again be allowed to act. Or at least he should never be allowed to start acting, since the hideous mugging he does in this film shares no DNA with what we know as acting. Megan Fox remains attractive but as long as Michael Bay is her director we'll never know if she's capable of anything else. And everyone else: most embarrass themselves and their families, but they have paychecks to comfort them. Tyrese Gibson and Josh Duhamel have such small roles in this film that they come across as master thespians in their few moments of screentime.

I hated this movie. Despised it. During the screening I turned to Aint It Cool News' Mr. Beaks and said 'This is grueling.' He checked his watch and less than an hour had gone by - and we hadn't even gotten to the real filler yet (there is enough filler in this movie to provide the entire runtime of another film. There's about 90 minutes of absolute nothing smack dab in the center of Revenge of the Fallen). And we hadn't even gotten to the point where it became obvious that no one involved in the film cared enough to craft even the most rudimentary of stories or to be concerned about even the most simple of continuity: at one point the characters walk out of the back door of the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington DC and end up blatantly in Arizona at the Sorona Desert Airplane Graveyard. It's a breathtaking moment of not giving a ^^^^, one that gives you an idea of how little thought and care went into the construction of the film.

What bums me out is that there's not even much to laugh at in this movie. There's a scene at the end where Shia dies and goes to robot heaven (and I am not making this up), but that's too little too late. If the rest of the movie had featured that kind of inane absurdity I might have been able to take the ride, but the rest of the movie is just dull.

The thing about Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is that it's an objectively bad film. The comedy doesn't work (and there's oh so ^^^^ing much of it), the characters are so flat you can't see them from the side, the plot has so many holes you begin to think surrealism was the point, the actors are bored, the action scenes are incoherent, the finale is a staggering anti-climax, the villain makes cyphers seem fully rounded, the pacing perfectly replicates the concept of 'death march'... there's nothing that works in this film. The fact that the illusion of movement is created onscreen may be Michael Bay's greatest and only triumph in this movie. Terry Schiavo would have been bored by this bloated, ponderous piece of ^^^^.

Note: I saw the film in IMAX. Only a few minutes of the film are shot in true IMAX, and those minutes are not complete sequences. Random shots will appear in IMAX, meaning that the aspect ratio for one shot will change. Take into account how quick your average Michael Bay shot is and you'll understand how bizarre this decision was. Another sign that nobody making the movie gave a ^^^^.


1 out of 10
 
I found it hard to see during the robot fights in the first one...and they are saying it is worse....crap
 
I am just kidding, glad you enjoyed it..it definitely is much better then the first one..just a little more mature then the first as well.

LOL

More mature?

I guess you missed the lame sex jokes every 10 minutes.

I still cannot understand how anyone could have approved the script....

There was so much lame comedy in it I wanted to puke.

This movie was not nearly as mature as the original.

The CGI animation of the robots was also really bad at times in this one. It looked like the "B" team worked on a lot of it and I thought the first movie's animation was flawless.
 
There is certainly nothing in this movie you could seriously classify as "mature". You have to explain that one, Valfar.
 
And, to deal with the token objections of the film's defenders, I have an inner child; he's just not an inner idiot. And if how much money something made had any correlation to how good it actually is, doctors would recommend you get more cocaine instead of more leafy greens. And no, I can't shut my brain off and have fun, anymore than I could rip out my tongue and enjoy a meal, because my brain is where I feel fun.

I thought that was funny, from MSN's review.
 
Sounds like everything that I hated about the first one was amplified in Fallen. I was going to see this tonight but I think I'll just wait for the dvd.
 
Damn, I just found one even worse on RT:

Putrid, offensive and life-sucking. Early word is describing this woebegone fiasco as the next Batman and Robin. Having seen both, Joel Schumacher has every right to protest the comparison.

:google
 
I LOVED the first one, especially the last 40 minutes or so.

That said, this one was AWFUL on so many levels. How in the hell did this script get approved?

Here we go:

-The college chick Transformer?!?!?! WTF!??!! A wannabe T-X and the tongue...God.

-Oompa Loompa guy and them saying we're from NYC so he lets them pass...WTF!?!?

-All the gay references...WTF?!?!

-The Mom - was ok at first but after a while...WTF?!?!

-all the little Decepticons, acting silly all the time...WTF?? And I thought the one from part 1 was bad....jesus.

-CGI was downright awful at times, everything looked so real in part 1 but it seemed the B Team worked on a lot of part 2.

-The Prime Brotherhood?!?! LMAO

-The Fallen - Oh God...don't even know where to begin with this one.

-the two cars acting like gangsta' black people...LMAO WTF?!?! So stupid...


- Soundwave - Why the hell not use his badass original voice??!?!? In polls, that was the number 1 request from fans.
He was not even in it that much but still....

- Devastator acting like a big dog?!?! and one of the twins escapes him? LOL Come on.

- the Transformer balls - WTF?!?

Overall, I hated it.

Plus, there were so many forced jokes I could never get into the movie or take it serious.

This is as bad as Indy IV for me....maybe worse.

This coming from a Bay fan!!!!
 
Just got home from seeing this and I have to say I wasn't that impressed.
Sam's parents just kept popping out of know were and after a while really
started to piss me off and also to much lovey s^^T going on.
And to top it off the story line was piss weak.
Movies these days just seem to get worse, release after release.
Classics just dont get made anymore.
 
There's some morbid curiosity welling up inside me after Grusons's review. :lol

Must...resist...Time...too precious...to waste...
 
Back
Top