The official Transformers:Revenge Of The Fallen movie critics review thread

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by shigsy2003

I feel so sorry for some people. Transformers is not trying to be anything it isn't. It is a big, loud, dumb, immature concept thaat is most importantly FUN. Is that word lost on some critics? I like deep films as much as the next person (American Beauty, TDK, Solaris to but a few) but it is nice to switch off every now and again and have some fun. the three films I mentioned are in no way fun, they can be hard to watch sometimes and I like that but not all the time. The great thing with the first TF film was that I knew what to expect, I knew what the outcome would be and I knew I was going to have a blast watching it. I almost feel ashamed of that going by some of these reviewes, but I won't let that deter me from ROTF. A bigger, longer, louder TF film is not bad IMO. Sure I may not like some of the humour, and some of the new TF might get on my nerves, but hey you have to take the kick ass good with that possible sigh inducing bad.

it's odd, I find

I mean, the movie never presents itself as anything other then a fun ACTION/COMEDY,which understandably would have some of the purists upset, but the reviews seem to treat it like a serious film that is flawed or plagued by missteps

to me it is the equivalent of watching happy gilmore(awesome comedy) and saying it falls short story wise when compared to things of similar subject matter like I am Sam or something.

Terminator S tried to play it straight and failed
TF is playing it fun and is being said to have failed at the same thing

meh

movies need their own categories, otherwise all the comedies that the critics seemed have loved over the past decade need to be re-evaluated.

Wolverine and T4 should have been as dark and straight as DK
and they both failed, off beat humor, um-imaginative action and logic errors, scripting errors...etc

TF2, has something for everyone from comedy to action to date movie cheese.
(cause honestly, kids who went to see DK were lost on so many levels)

[Ace of Knaves]

I don't think you can say Wolverine and Terminator had un-imaginative action. I mean, when was the last time you see some one walk into a room full of machine gun toting goons with only two swords for weapons and start slicing bullets in half? And some of the scenes in Terminator were those long, not chopped up action scenes like in Children of Men.

Compared to giant robots rampaging through forests and city scapes they might seem un-imaginative. But yea, you can't compare them.

[Marvin]

bullets vs swords isn't anything new to live action(especially in eastern cinema)
and it's not so much about it being new but rather it being filmed in a powerful or stylistic way

and apart from 2 seconds of Deadpool spinning cgi swords at guns for 2 seconds Woverine was more of that boring wolverine action Singer made boring after the first one.
especially all that logan vs victor stuff

(honestly the last time anything inventive was done in the xmen franchise was NightCrawlers introduction
unless you count wolverine vs the sentinel

McG indulges in action I'll give him that much, and those long shots made his "nothing nothing really new here" action beats all the more interesting

but really outside of that one big set piece and that interesting t600 in the city it wasn't anything all that new or rather imaginative
especially the stuff in the 3rd act(like we haven't seen that exact scene in that exact location in the 3 previous movies)
whereas in Camerons films, every second felt new and fresh to cinema(T2)

bays TF
on paper is giant robot fights, and sure we've seen that in plenty of things from Power Rangers to Godzilla

but in execution

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

nah
then again, at the cost of half the audience not being able to understand what is going on

you're probably right about not comparing, but imaginative is imaginative

spiderman,equilibrium are
rush hour isn't

[Ace of Knaves]

Spinning CGI swords? That was all real. Reynolds did all that himself. Obviously CGI was used to create the blurring effect, but all of that was practical sword play.

[baerrtt]

Several months ago I posted in a thread that Bay's blockbusters aren't criticised because they aim to be 'fun' and nothing more. They're criticised, and the negative reviews for TF2 are continuing that pattern, because Bay's idea of fun and comic relief quite frankly is lazy and laced with generous helpings of xenophobia, misogyny and an inability to craft an action scene with genuine tension or pace.

When the likes of Abrams' STAR TREK and IRON MAN last year are able to do 'fun' without stuff that quite frankly is more facepalm worthy than genuinely funny I find Bay more and more redundant as time passes. Neither of the aformentioned films were 'deep' yet it's frustrating, imo, that there are directors who appear better at crafting the type of escapist blockbuster Bay's made his entire career.


Indeed I'm only going to see this because my girlfriend (who loved the first one) is dying to see it.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Originally Posted by baerrtt

Several months ago I posted in a thread that Bay's blockbusters aren't criticised because they aim to be 'fun' and nothing more. They're criticised, and the negative reviews for TF2 are continuing that pattern, because Bay's idea of fun and comic relief quite frankly is lazy and laced with generous helpings of xenophobia, misogyny and an inability to craft an action scene with genuine tension or pace.

When the likes of Abrams' STAR TREK and IRON MAN last year are able to do 'fun' without stuff that quite frankly is more facepalm worthy than genuinely funny I find Bay more and more redundant as time passes. Neither of the aformentioned films were 'deep' yet it's frustrating, imo, that there are directors who appear better at crafting the type of escapist blockbuster Bay's made his entire career.


Indeed I'm only going to see this because my girlfriend (who loved the first one) is dying to see it.

I'm sorry, but the action in TF wiped the floor with both Star Trek and Iron Man. Both of those were better movies overall, sure, but their action scene's, especially IM's just dont compare to the one's in TF.





Anyway, it seems Total Film was right, they predicted that any critics who didnt give the first movie a good review wouldnt for this one either. They predicted no one would be converted, but people who loved the first one would love this even more. If thats the case, colour me happy.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by baerrtt

Several months ago I posted in a thread that Bay's blockbusters aren't criticised because they aim to be 'fun' and nothing more. They're criticised, and the negative reviews for TF2 are continuing that pattern, because Bay's idea of fun and comic relief quite frankly is lazy and laced with generous helpings of xenophobia, misogyny and an inability to craft an action scene with genuine tension or pace.

When the likes of Abrams' STAR TREK and IRON MAN last year are able to do 'fun' without stuff that quite frankly is more facepalm worthy than genuinely funny I find Bay more and more redundant as time passes. Neither of the aformentioned films were 'deep' yet it's frustrating, imo, that there are directors who appear better at crafting the type of escapist blockbuster Bay's made his entire career.


Indeed I'm only going to see this because my girlfriend (who loved the first one) is dying to see it.

I agree with you. There is humor, and there is toilet humor. Bay just cant handle good and sensible humor. His idea of funny is family guy and people throwing feces to each other.

Originally Posted by AVEITWITHJAMON

I'm sorry, but the action in TF wiped the floor with both Star Trek and Iron Man. Both of those were better movies overall, sure, but their action scene's, especially IM's just dont compare to the one's in TF

We werent talking about the action.

In any case, I found IM boring to be honest. That whole prologue-desert thing was too long and it didnt have the intesity or the grace that Wayne's training had in Begins (i found the first part of the movie just as good as the final act).
But in my opinion, IM was a better movie than TF. The humor was great and sardonic, the dialogues and script were handled with care and the acting was great.
In TF, the humor was for kids only and there was barely any plot. The only good plot ideas were the "boy and his car" thing (spielberg's idea) and "frozen megatron" (which gave the audience a tension and fear about him waking up and when he did, he was handled very well. He was really scary). But other than that, the movie was ****. Orci and Kurtzman are probably retarded.

I suppose if the movie is directed towards kids more than Ironman, then i can forgive some things. But i cant forgive Simmons, i cant forgive how they spent half the movie on the ridiculous black guy and i wont be able to forgive the hick Twins or Devastator's balls. I am sure i will be pissed.

Its nice to have a carefree action movie. No worries, no grimdark, no overly complicated plotlines (like TDK) that tire your brain. Sure... But lets not have a monkey write the script.

[Mantis Rapture]

Originally Posted by baerrtt

Several months ago I posted in a thread that Bay's blockbusters aren't criticised because they aim to be 'fun' and nothing more. They're criticised, and the negative reviews for TF2 are continuing that pattern, because Bay's idea of fun and comic relief quite frankly is lazy and laced with generous helpings of xenophobia, misogyny and an inability to craft an action scene with genuine tension or pace.

When the likes of Abrams' STAR TREK and IRON MAN last year are able to do 'fun' without stuff that quite frankly is more facepalm worthy than genuinely funny I find Bay more and more redundant as time passes. Neither of the aformentioned films were 'deep' yet it's frustrating, imo, that there are directors who appear better at crafting the type of escapist blockbuster Bay's made his entire career.


Indeed I'm only going to see this because my girlfriend (who loved the first one) is dying to see it.

Quoted for nearly hitting the truth.

But...retarded as the first film was, it was still fun. I can criticise that film all day for its retardedness but it's still a fun, fun ride. Iron Man, compared to Transformers, is leagues ahead in terms of character and story and rewatchability (real word?), but Transformers trashes it in the action stakes.

ROTF will suffer from this too, we all know it, but i'll still be there friday night, slightly high, with a tub of popcorn and a drink so big i could have a bath in it, watching this big retarded film on the biggest 'normal' screen in Britain and loving every minute of it.

[Ace of Knaves]

^Agreed 100%. Apart from the slightly high part. I'm gonna be off my nut

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by baerrtt

Several months ago I posted in a thread that Bay's blockbusters aren't criticised because they aim to be 'fun' and nothing more. They're criticised, and the negative reviews for TF2 are continuing that pattern, because Bay's idea of fun and comic relief quite frankly is lazy and laced with generous helpings of xenophobia, misogyny and an inability to craft an action scene with genuine tension or pace.

When the likes of Abrams' STAR TREK and IRON MAN last year are able to do 'fun' without stuff that quite frankly is more facepalm worthy than genuinely funny I find Bay more and more redundant as time passes. Neither of the aformentioned films were 'deep' yet it's frustrating, imo, that there are directors who appear better at crafting the type of escapist blockbuster Bay's made his entire career.

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by Mantis Rapture

Quoted for nearly hitting the truth.

But...retarded as the first film was, it was still fun. I can criticise that film all day for its retardedness but it's still a fun, fun ride. Iron Man, compared to Transformers, is leagues ahead in terms of character and story and rewatchability (real word?), but Transformers trashes it in the action stakes.

To me personaly TF1 wasn't fun to at all..besides the opening scene with Blackout (which was great) the rest of those action scenes lack'd...for example 1. couldn't see what the robots were doing...that's the main thing..how the heck could i even judge the action scene if i can't even see the robots going head 2 head...2. The over use of slow motion..how many times do we need to see "ratchet" flipping over bullets..i mean yeah i got it..a tranformer was flipping..oh lets add a innocent bystander screaming in there to show how closet the robot was to her...wasn't impressed...guns and explosions..i can see that, and have seen that in any film..personally the "crash chase scene" in bad boyz 2 was a lot better, more epic, and better handle then some of the action scene in TF1..(scopnok in the desert was cool too....he's probably my fav. TF in this live acton film)

[Ace of Knaves]

To be fair mate I think you are talking nonsense.

How did you not see what was going on? Are you blind or something? I saw everything perfectly and my eye sight isn't exactly tip top.

The part where ratchet jumped over that woman who was screaming in slow mo? That's just pure fun. What's wrong with it? It wouldn't look out of place in the cartoons.

Seriously man, it's pretty obvious you are hating just for the sake of it. And I'm not even a massive fan of the first one, but your criticism are bordering on OCD.

[terry78]

Originally Posted by baerrtt

Several months ago I posted in a thread that Bay's blockbusters aren't criticised because they aim to be 'fun' and nothing more. They're criticised, and the negative reviews for TF2 are continuing that pattern, because Bay's idea of fun and comic relief quite frankly is lazy and laced with generous helpings of xenophobia, misogyny and an inability to craft an action scene with genuine tension or pace.

When the likes of Abrams' STAR TREK and IRON MAN last year are able to do 'fun' without stuff that quite frankly is more facepalm worthy than genuinely funny I find Bay more and more redundant as time passes. Neither of the aformentioned films were 'deep' yet it's frustrating, imo, that there are directors who appear better at crafting the type of escapist blockbuster Bay's made his entire career.


Indeed I'm only going to see this because my girlfriend (who loved the first one) is dying to see it.

I never thought I would see the day a dude didn't want to see a Transformers movie but his GIRLFRIEND did. What a time to be alive.

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by The Ace of Knaves

To be fair mate I think you are talking nonsense.

How did you not see what was going on? Are you blind or something? I saw everything perfectly and my eye sight isn't exactly tip top.

The part where ratchet jumped over that woman who was screaming in slow mo? That's just pure fun. What's wrong with it? It wouldn't look out of place in the cartoons.

emm...u seen it just find..but there's been complaints from many people who couldn't see what the robots were doing when engaged in battle. ...aka why the whole shaky camera thing came up..so all these people who have complain'd about it (and had been recognized by the film makers)..they are talking nonsense too? I'm not the only person u have read address the same issues..come on..u like it fine..but dont sit there like the issues that haven't come up aren't the same for many

and again...it wasn't impresseive. The slow motion done repeatedly..sorry i have seen it done so many times..u have this film and u couldn't think of a more inventive way to "capture" an action scene??? ex of being inventive...in spiderman 2...when doc. oct. and spiderman were falling from the building fighting..there was a brief sec. where the music was turn'd off and the audience was able to hear the sound effects of the two characters fighting then the music comes back on..that was great in my opinion..i never seen that done..the slow mo..with ratchet was done half heartedly in my opinion...

[Ace of Knaves]

It was done for comedy value. Seeing and hearing people scream in slo mo is funny.

And it's not as though the entire scene was done in slo mo.

But hey each to his own. But I just think you are looking too far into it.

[shigsy2003]

Originally Posted by The Ace of Knaves

The part where ratchet jumped over that woman who was screaming in slow mo? That's just pure fun. What's wrong with it? It wouldn't look out of place in the cartoons.

Not meaning to be a dick but it was Ironhide

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by The Ace of Knaves

It was done for comedy value. Seeing and hearing people scream in slo mo is funny.

And it's not as though the entire scene was done in slo mo.

But hey each to his own. But I just think you are looking too far into it.

got you, but i didnt see anything funny about it, nobody in the theater laughed? It would of been funny or perceived to be funny if something funny happen'd......and yeah it (the scene) was...go back and watch the movie..ratchet flipped like 4 times..and all of it was in slow mo..


i'm not hating on bay...i'm just sayin what's already been said..

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by shigsy2003

Not meaning to be a dick but it was Ironhide

i said ratchet...he was just replying...

[Ace of Knaves]

Originally Posted by CEREBRAL....

got you, but i didnt see anything funny about it, nobody in the theater laughed? It would of been funny or perceived to be funny if something funny happen'd......and yeah it (the scene) was...go back and watch the movie..ratchet flipped like 4 times..and all of it was in slow mo..


i'm not hating on bay...i'm just sayin what's already been said..

YOU are not everyone.

Seeing as these movies are mainly aimed at younger people, humour like that will ALWAYS be in there.

And I don't think I have ever met anyone who doesn't find slo mo screaming funny to be honest.

[CelticPredator]

Originally Posted by The Ace of Knaves

Sounds ok so far. The only thing I'm worried about is the constant "HOOO-RAAA! TEAM AMERICA! **** YEA!" elements one of the reviews is alluding to. I've always hated that about Bay's films. But I guess that is to be expected, as long as it isn't blatant it won't ruin my enjoyment of the film.

He's American. He makes movies in America only. HE loves America...and so do I.

Watching a Bay movie makes me proud to be an American. So **** YEAH! WOOO!

[Ace of Knaves]

Originally Posted by CelticPredator

He's American. He makes movies in America only. HE loves America...and so do I.

Watching a Bay movie makes me proud to be an American. So **** YEAH! WOOO!

There's nothing wrong with that. But when it gets to an insulting level and is spanking people round the head with it, it will piss people off.

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by The Ace of Knaves

YOU are not everyone.

Seeing as these movies are mainly aimed at younger people, humour like that will ALWAYS be in there.

And I don't think I have ever met anyone who doesn't find slo mo screaming funny to be honest.

Never once said i was everyone, but you are completely fooling yourself..to think from the time the first film came out..that there hasn't been many people complaining generally about the samething....

and plz..TF is for all who like TFers and summer blockbusters..u have no idea how old i am to even use this as an excuse

slo motion screaming i guess if done right..but just like u said..i'm not everyone...so to you..NOT EVERYONE sees slow motion screaming everytime as being funny.....

[CelticPredator]

Originally Posted by The Ace of Knaves

There's nothing wrong with that. But when it gets to an insulting level and is spanking people round the head with it, it will piss people off.

Not AMERICANS!

[CelticPredator]

Originally Posted by CEREBRAL....

.u have no idea how old i am to even use this as an excuse

You are between the ages 12-14, because no human over 14 should be using "u" in a sentence.....**** that ****.

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by CelticPredator

You are between the ages 12-14, because no human over 14 should be using "u" in a sentence.....**** that ****.

message board...not english lecture....and thanks for adding to the age limit by trying to critize another poster....good job!