Revenge of the Fallen First reactions from Japan premiere coming in...

[Marvin]

By "sesame", I assume you mean Sesame Street

An invalid comparison since even though that show contains some jokes to entertain parents its aimed squarely at only small children

While the new TF movies try to entertain a larger audience


But fails when it attempts to portray adult humor or non-robot interactions


But of course those who don't expect much from their sci-fi movies


and gravitate towards broad comedy and simplistic dialog in any film genre



probably won't mind

Yes sesame street, and no it a wonderfully valid comparison...

you seem to miss the parameters

simple PG rated G1 cartoon ---- G Rated Sesame Street show

Pg13 TF movie ------ Pg 13 S Street movie


the g rated SS show has kid themes and kids doing kid things all day

in the Pg13 movie they would be doing the same **** thematically but with raunchy college humor jokes(for arguments sake)

just because it's PG13 that doesn't warrant the issues all of a sudden being about world politics and virture ethics

it's still for the kids, there are just raunchy jokes added


TF doesn't need to become a study of the complexities man and machine and their place in the universe, just because it's PG 13...it's still about the same tangible childish toy selling themes it always was

pg 13 means quite literally that the jokes can be at college level


not sure which theater you were in but TF garners big laughs in the comedy department
(the human jokes anyway)
read all the reviews you want but I challenge anyone to find a theater that dead pans when a comedic beat drops

and maybe i'm just drawing a blank here but how many live action sci fi films can you recall that don't have any non robot interactions?

(how many sci-fi films don't have a huge human element?)
honest question

 

[Marvin]

lol dude your an idiot. giving dark knight a run? get real

sure

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/06/01/box-office-tracking-transformers-2-could-take-175-million-in-first-five-days/

with numbers that close anything could happen

now all that needs to happen is one of the Transformers, probably starscream in the supporting antagonist role, die of a drug over dose or rather a mixed up persciption and watch the money roll in

-these are opening numbers I'm talking about
-heath is a great man, rest his soul
-don't call ppl idiots on forums, that's something cowards do

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

Learn to use capitals, and pick the right "you're" before calling anyone else an idiot.

Don't worry man, posters like that don't stick around for long.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

that's nice

(if you know your not going to enjoy it, why give it your money?)

emm...."i'm going to see the movie to get my complete review"...i don't know about you..but by me saying that, it basically means....before i pass judgement..i would like to see TF 2 first...i think that is fare..again..i mostly made comments about TF1..which i did see and was able to give my opinion on it, and not just go by what others had to say....is that not what u would ask of someone??

hater simply means you hate or don't like TF...
what else should you be called? a "not liker?" )

sorry but that definition by you seem very narrow mind'd or misguid'd... a hater is somone who does not like you for no good reason, just jealous of your success....again..it's a two side coin when we talk about peoples views and opinons...u have people who like it, and u have people who don't like...if u calling anyone a "hater" cuz they don't like it..i think that's pretty pompus of you given that there will always be a difference of opinions and views.....

I've read your comments in the past, your really don't like the film, and it's direction...

I'd go so far as to say you hate it.

and you're right, you don't have to play the minority, just another person on a forum that has ppl disagree with him.

I dont know where u get your numbers from..or how much you pay attention on these boards..or are you only using these boards for your judgement..but there are plenty of people who didn't like TF1 and have voiced theirs opinons about it..on these boards and elsewhere...so no by no means am i a minority in that fact.....try again....

the point being made wasn't you getting on anyone it was one of a hypocrisy I see happening alot on the TF forums

ppl seem awfully talkative about what other ppl think of their views

claims that ppl that like the film are attacking you for hating it and vice versa

forums used to be about ppl liking or hating a movie not so much about what ppl thought of ppl liking or hating a movie

I only point you out because most of your posts have this theme

sorry bud..i'm not self concious to where i gotta wonder or feel i'm being attack'd. I ask'd a pretty legit question not about me but for anyone who voice their opinion that is diff. from those who like TF!.

plz do not try to labe me like anyone or any theme from these forums..i dont post here that often....so whatever the norm. is, i'm not the one to be judged by that norm...and if u read'd other post.....before mine..u would see..other people making comments that differs from those who like the movie..and what u got back in return was, yes OTHER PEOPLE MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT PEOPLE HATING THE FILM....

so your grap seems 2 be with the overall approach to posting on these boards and not anyone's opinion that differs from yours (and ppl like you)...and plz stop talking like i dont like TF2, i haven't seen it yet to like or dislike the movie....i have read'd some reviews that i don't lke, but it's not gonna stop me from seeing the movie and given my own opinion...

 

[Marvin]

emm...."i'm going to see the movie to get my complete review"...i don't know about you..but by me saying that, it basically means....before i pass judgement..i would like to see TF 2 first...i think that is fare..again..i mostly made comments about TF1..which i did see and was able to give my opinion on it, and not just go by what others had to say....is that not what u would ask of someone??

in other words (it seems) that you want to be able to back up your opinion (whatever it may be) which seems fair enough

I guess that's forum culture

i'm pretty sure bay is bay and his direction of transformers will be the it always was, I assume you wouldn't kid yourself into believe for one second that that's going to change

-busy designs
-kinetic (point break inspired) camera work
-non robot interaction
-teen choice devised jokes
etc

if you truly "didin't like" the first film I can anyone and their mother can tell you that you won't like this one, unless of course, it was simple the all spark plot device that irk'd you.

me personally I don't buy chocolate mint ice cream cause i think it tastes like toothpaste
when they make chocolate mint part 2, I think i'll pass

there is something honorable about someone not "passing judgment" on a film they haven't seen yet, I just don't believe judgment hasn't been passed yet that's all.

sorry but that definition by you seem very narrow mind'd or misguid'd... a hater is somone who does not like you for no good reason, just jealous of your success....again..it's a two side coin when we talk about peoples views and opinons...u have people who like it, and u have people who don't like...if u calling anyone a "hater" cuz they don't like it..i think that's pretty pompus of you given that there will always be a difference of opinions and views.....

I'm sorry, from now on i'll call you something more appropriate

for the record tho I did mean in it it's more traditional literal terms
I call vegans meat haters...simply because they hate (eating) meat.

I dont know where u get your numbers from..or how much you pay attention on these boards..or are you only using these boards for your judgement..but there are plenty of people who didn't like TF1 and have voiced theirs opinons about it..on these boards and elsewhere...so no by no means am i a minority in that fact.....try again....

I agree, the "not likers" are not in the minority

when it comes to forums, they're the majority imo

but they tend to play the victims from time to time

sorry bud..i'm not self concious to where i gotta wonder or feel i'm being attack'd. I ask'd a pretty legit question not about me but for anyone who voice their opinion that is diff. from those who like TF!.

plz do not try to labe me like anyone or any theme from these forums..i dont post here that often....so whatever the norm. is, i'm not the one to be judged by that norm...and if u read'd other post.....before mine..u would see..other people making comments that differs from those who like the movie..and what u got back in return was, yes OTHER PEOPLE MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT PEOPLE HATING THE FILM....

so your grap seems 2 be with the overall approach to posting on these boards and not anyone's opinion that differs from yours (and ppl like you)...and plz stop talking like i dont like TF2, i haven't seen it yet to like or dislike the movie....i have read'd some reviews that i don't lke, but it's not gonna stop me from seeing the movie and given my own opinion...

don't mean to single you out but, your posts stand out to me as having that theme...


hey maybe you'll love the film

but until your a professional critic and you get paid to watch films for free, don't come back here and act like you were robbed of your money.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

in other words (it seems) that you want to be able to back up your opinion (whatever it may be) which seems fair enough

I guess that's forum culture.

Wow....u dont know me, so plz dont not assume anything of me, no matter what my view is......i dnt make a living on hating or loving anything...i post cuz i have an opinon...

if you truly "didin't like" the first film I can anyone and their mother can tell you that you won't like this one, unless of course, it was simple the all spark plot device that irk'd you.

me personally I don't buy chocolate mint ice cream cause i think it tastes like toothpaste
when they make chocolate mint part 2, I think i'll pass

again u dont know me, and i'm not the norm here...i didnt like "armageddon", but i like "bad boyz", i didn't like TF1...but i like "the rock" plz dont prejudge what my views are gonna be...cuz u are very much at fault at assuming.....

there is something honorable about someone not "passing judgment" on a film they haven't seen yet, I just don't believe judgment hasn't been passed yet that's all.

again..u dont know me, and it seems that is exactly what u are doing to me..passing judgement...

I'm sorry, from now on i'll call you something more appropriate

for the record tho I did mean in it it's more traditional literal terms
I call vegans meat haters...simply because they hate (eating) meat.

one thing your terminology fails at...is with you not liking mint ice cream..and vegans not liking meat....they and you won't eat those things again...i for one, never said i wouldn't watch another m.bay movie again...or tf 2.....call me whatever u wanna call me...but plz get the terminology correctly..thankx

but until your a professional critic and you get paid to watch films for free, don't come back here and act like you were robbed of your money.

u must be like that other kat who didn't know bad spelling and grammar comes with message boards..cuz u seem to think....i can't come in here and say what i feel when i feel so...and i didn't know i had to be a profeesional critic to do so..so that means u are one, or you're in film school too..cuz by this notion...i have no right to speak on this movie..so i wonder what is your profession?

 

[omgwtfbbq]

the reactions of gooks:

 

[rashad]

IGN UK Review - 3 out of 5 Stars | 6/10
Sequel proves that sometimes you can have too much of a good thing.

UK, June 13, 2009 - The biggest movie of the summer is finally here, but that's the problem with Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - it's just too bloody big. Epic, spectacular but unfortunately far, far too long; the film proves that when it comes to Michael Bay blockbuster movies, you can have too much of a good thing.

Indeed the film reaches its pinnacle with one such action set-piece that takes place in a forest - a brilliantly crafted sequence that is kinetic, emotional and genuinely thrilling. Unfortunately however, it is a climax that comes only an hour or so into the movie - the remaining 80 or so minutes just never quite scale the same heights.

That's the one BIG problem with ROTF; the movie stops dead halfway through, and then spends the rest of its overlong run-time building up a head of steam again, painstakingly setting up the eventual climax.

Bay takes an age meticulously manoeuvring all the film's protagonists into place for a vast, epic confrontation in the middle of the Egyptian desert. But by the time this all-in royal rumble between the Autobots, Decepticons and US Army finally arrives, you are too numbed, exhausted and inured to actually give a damn about the outcome.

Don't get us wrong, we love Michael Bay and the particular grab-bag of delights only he can bring to blockbuster movies; huge explosions; quick, intense dialogue; lingering , pornographic shots of both girls' asses and military hardware. 90 minutes of Bay-ness makes for a thrilling flick, but if the clock starts ticking past the two hour mark and beyond, it all becomes just too much; your mind and senses need a rest.

Bay could have cut 40 minutes from the bowels of Transformers 2, and it would have been a far more effective movie. Unfortunately, the director fell into the same trap with Pearl Harbour and Bad Boys II - each filled with spectacular moments, but both becoming bloated, arduous cinematic experiences that ultimately outstay their welcome.

Is this issue going to place the franchise in any kind of trouble? Of course not; ROTF will make gazillions, and it still deserves to. The team behind the Transformers movies have hit upon a formula that mixes E-number-fuelled Saturday morning cartoons with '90s-style military action movies, and it works in a spectacularly un-ironic, gloriously juvenile way.

It is just kind of inexcusable that with such a ridiculously enjoyable formula, viewers of ROTF still spend the movie's final half hour nursing a numb head and arse, and willing the noise to stop. Transformers 2 proves that sometimes less is more.

http://movies.ign.com/articles/994/994427p2.html

 

[Marvin]

Wow....u dont know me, so plz dont not assume anything of me, no matter what my view is......i dnt make a living on hating or loving anything...i post cuz i have an opinon...

again u dont know me, and i'm not the norm here...i didnt like "armageddon", but i like "bad boyz", i didn't like TF1...but i like "the rock" plz dont prejudge what my views are gonna be...cuz u are very much at fault at assuming.....

yea man i liked those too
the thing is
TF2 being the 2 year apart sequel to TF, it will be less like Bay's the Rock and more like um you know...TF one.

just saying

again..u dont know me, and it seems that is exactly what u are doing to me..passing judgement...


oh plz by this notion...now let me call u a hater for not liking ice cream.....i think by the amount of ice cream sales that min ice cream does..u are in the minority...how many times have u ate mint ice cream..You're just passing judgment on mint ice cream......

I've had a summer job selling ice cream once, it was fun
(lol mint ice cream does taste like toothpaste, yet it was the highest seller)

I'm not sure where you're going with that one but ok, when I made my Ice cream analogy it was reinforcing the idea that

if they made chocolate mint ice cream part two, I'm sure the the things that made it a success and different from the other ice creams...the things I personally don't like about it will be present

call it what you will, I call it reasonable patronage

u must be like that other kat who didn't know bad spelling and grammar comes with message boards..cuz u seem to think....i can't come in here and say what i feel when i feel so...and i didn't know i had to be a profeesional critic to do so..so that means u are one, or you're in film school too..cuz by this notion...i have no right to speak on this movie..so i wonder what is your profession?

oh no you can, anyone who says you can't is missing the point of forums

what I said you shouldn't don is come back here and say like so many ppl before you say

and I paraphrase

"bay did me an injustice, i gave him my money and he gave me a bad(or rather film i didn't like) back in return"

if you were a professional critic and you got to watch movies for free, then it would make sense to watch movies all day and then critique them and back up your critique by the fact that you watched it(for free)

but if the film isn't free, and you know your probably not going to like it, then just watch it at home,

at least that way you can have less contempt in your review.

you missed my point, i wasn't saying you have to be a professional critic to have an opinion(that would be silly)

I was saying they get paid to watch movies and thus they can do what I was assuming your gonna do
(which is watch a movie not so much because you've been waiting for it for 2 years and what not, but to be able to provide a review about it)

like you said I don't know you

something you must know is that there are a whole lot of ppl going to see the movie who spent the last two years criticizing the DIRECTION, for no other reason than to sit in the theater planting their face in their hands and murmuring jokes to their dates(guy or girl) only to be able to come on the forums and have an opinion that is legit

 

[The Guard]

I look forward to the various numbnesses. That's the sign of an intense movie.

You all need to meet more computer hackers/experts. The really good ones tend to be pretty insane. And the whole point of the hot one and the black one...isn't it obvious? It's the same with Sam and Mikaela, and to some extent, the soldiers.

"More than meets the eye"

Assuming Soundwave doesn't transform in this movie...what the bad place did people want Soundwave to transform into in the first place so badly that him not doing so is a crime? A giant 80's tape recorder?

We had all that in a film about a dude that dresses like a bat. Why cant we have it here?

There wasn't great character development in THE DARK KNIGHT on any real level. Harvey Dent went nuts and became Two-Face, and it's titular character had almost no development beyond a sudden decision to be the enemy of Gotham by the end of the movie. And while THE DARK KNIGHT certainly had a plot, and a good one, it was no less rambling and point to point as anything TRANSFORMERS featured. It's not like the key story stuff that happened in TRANSFORMERS was not relevant to the story.

And am I really seeing people whine about why a Transformers movie isn't as deep as a Batman movie?

I like Transformers. I like the saga, and the mythology, and the ins and outs of it. But I have never, ever, EVER seen a Transformers comic book that was as deep as the best Batman comic books. I've seen some where they present character development, where the robots take on generic hero personalities, etc, and it's usually an excuse for a slugfest between Prime and Megatron, or Starscream and whoever else. But nothing in it that I've seen compares to the best Batman material.

When did transformers ever have personality? The the movie characters have about the same amount of personality as TF's have ever had.

The Transformers have always had relatively generic warrior/hero personalities. Which, near as I can tell, they still have in the movies.

This is an unpopular opinion...but the best story and character material Transformers ever had to offer...is cool and all, and a bad place of a lot of fun, but STILL really derivative and cheesy. If they ever make TRANSFORMERS BEGIN, you might get to see this amazing character development you all keep clamoring for, where Bumblebee, Prime, and the others "change" somehow instead of just, you, being themselves.

In these movies, however, which are clearly more about the interaction between humans and Transformers than pure Transformers soap opera stuff, look for character interaction developments, IE, a development of the robots role on Earth, their relationships with humans, etc.

You cannot act like these robots don't have personalities thus far. They just haven't been incredibly fleshed out. And that's a product of one, there just flat out being so damn many of them, and a second, obvious limitation of having to have much of the movie devoted to humans because Transformers are so freaking expensive to render.

The Heath Ledger design for the Joker works because it melds perfectly with Heath Ledger's interpretation of the character. The acid/fire change to Two-face was superficial. I didn't say everything had to be exactly the same for an adaptation. I simply stated that if your going to make changes, embellish and reinforce the best that source material had to offer (much of which could be found in Transformer comic books) rather than transfer the silliest elements the way Joel Schumacher did.

Not all Batman fans believe that to be the case.

What great stuff should they use that the source material offered?

If it's that easy...please...someone. Thrill me with your version of Transformers.

 

[Bunker]

So I guess this isn't any darker or better than the first one. I think Star Trek will be the only blockbuster this summer that doesn't disappoint.

 

[Johnny Drama]

the reactions of gooks:

With comments like that, it's no wonder you are a banned user at only 13 posts in. Good job, guitar...

 

[CEREBRAL....]

I look forward to the various numbnesses. That's the sign of an intense movie.


Assuming Soundwave doesn't transform in this movie...what the bad place did people want Soundwave to transform into in the first place so badly that him not doing so is a crime? A giant 80's tape recorder?

emm...the fact of the movie being named "transformers" and the uniqueness of alien robots with ability to transformer into diff. things to disguise themseleves..and u not have some of them tranformer...yeah that's kind dumb...

You cannot act like these robots don't have personalities thus far. They just haven't been incredibly fleshed out. And that's a product of one, there just flat out being so damn many of them, and a second, obvious limitation of having to have much of the movie devoted to humans because Transformers are so freaking expensive to render.


What great stuff should they use that the source material offered?

If it's that easy...please...someone. Thrill me with your version of Transformers.

You're making excuses...if they can't do the job then don't do the movie, if you can't control a how bunch of robots on screen..then don't have so many robots on screen...i mean the creators of the movie have already agreed with other viewers who point'd out the flaws in the first movie..so obviously the flaws of the first film are legit and not just people graping about the movie..

 

[J.Howlett]

Not having some of them transformers=not enough money to do it.

Seriously, 200 million for this film sounds like a lot but it really isn't, considering how much it cost to do the visual effects.

In order to have a real, live action transformers film that meets the perfect standards of the fanbase, you'd essentially have maybe two humans and a total of 15 to 25 robots. That film would cost 500 million to make, easy...and for any studio, that's not fiscally responsible to do so.

Not saying there aren't any flaws in the first film but truly, a real live-action Transformers film isn't possible.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

the reactions of gooks:

With comments like that, it's no wonder you are a banned user at only 13 posts in. Good job, guitar...

Right? WTF is wrong with some people? What did he hope to achieve by doing that? Getting some e-cred or something? Pathetic.

And what is everyone arguing about? Are people saying you must be stupid to like films like this? If so I'll give you a e-slap *slap*

But no, this film won't beat TDK box office wise. I don't think any film will for quite a while.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

Not having some of them transformers=not enough money to do it.

Seriously, 200 million for this film sounds like a lot but it really isn't, considering how much it cost to do the visual effects.

In order to have a real, live action transformers film that meets the perfect standards of the fanbase, you'd essentially have maybe two humans and a total of 15 to 25 robots. That film would cost 500 million to make, easy...and for any studio, that's not fiscally responsible to do so.

Not saying there aren't any flaws in the first film but truly, a real live-action Transformers film isn't possible.

then u dont have 15 to 20 robots...budget and know your abilities..quality over quantity....it has nothing to do with prefect standards..nobody wants dry comedy, what's wrong with better robot designs, what's wrong with a little less humans...since the movie is about TRANSFORMERS, what's with asking for better dialogue between the robots, miss using names of robots, etc... better camera work.....these things aren't perfect standards..these things are what we should expect from a big budget director given what he has to work with..plan n simple...

 

[Ace of Knaves]

You haven't seen this film yet have you? So you have no right to pass judgement on it yet.

And before anyone starts saying I'm a Bay defender and I accept mediocrity...I'm not a big fan of the first film. I'm saying this as a complete neutral.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

Right? WTF is wrong with some people? What did he hope to achieve by doing that? Getting some e-cred or something? Pathetic.

And what is everyone arguing about? Are people saying you must be stupid to like films like this? If so I'll give you a e-slap *slap*

But no, this film won't beat TDK box office wise. I don't think any film will for quite a while.

no!!

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well good. Because that sorta BS belongs over at IMDB.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

You haven't seen this film yet have you? So you have no right to pass judgement on it yet.

And before anyone starts saying I'm a Bay defender and I accept mediocrity...I'm not a big fan of the first film. I'm saying this as a complete neutral.

Is anyone passing judgement on the 2nd film???? This is a first reaction to what others have seen about the 2nd film...3 reviews have been the same..so we are commenting on them....

 

[Ace of Knaves]

OK I understand that. But things like camera work are all down to opinion. One person might not like the "shakey cam" (the reviewers you are talking about for instance) but some other people really like that style.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

OK I understand that. But things like camera work are all down to opinion. One person might not like the "shakey cam" (the reviewers you are talking about for instance) but some other people really like that style.

If it effects our view and actually seeing what they are doing..i say that's a problem....cuz after all we are trying to watch the film..but i have no clue what the camera work is gonna be cuz i haven't seen the film yet..but i am concern that these 50-60 robots do nothing, there's no point to having devastator there, or ratchet an ironhide have no purpose as well as acree..that to me is an issue...but i will find out for myself in 2 weeks

 

[Ace of Knaves]

That camera style is SUPPOSED to leave you disorientated. It makes it seem like you are right there in the thick of the action, like you are in the movie. I think when used right it is a brilliant style.

 

[J.Howlett]

Cerebral,

Do you have a better idea of the robot designs? From Bay's perspective, the designs make sense. Realistically (which is what Bay is going for with the designs), you can't have that many parts on a vehicle not accounted for when it comes to the transformations. Actually, I give the designers and artists at ILM much respect for going the extra mile when they really didn't have to. You could've simply done some serious cutting corners for those transformations and designs. And, people would've caught notice how the corners were crossed to achieve a specific look. Personally, I thought the designs were leaps and bounds the best designs for the Transformers in a realistic environment. You can make a case for the camera work have the most to do with the inability to decipher between the robots but I've never had an issue with the camera work in the first film. Just based on the trailer, it looks like this sequel has pulled the camera back a bit....which is a good thing.

In terms of missing using names, that's something only true fans of the franchise would really bicker about. It's not that big a deal.

Dialogue? It is what it is. Could it be better? Sure...but we are dealing with a strike movie after all. Not to mention, Bay specifically prefers ad libing with this actors. But, better dialogue could be achieved if you had better writers.(The same issues arise in the new Star Trek film as well, yet both that and Transformers do what they were meant to do.)

In terms of humans vs. robots...again, this has more to do with budget than anything else. Say you just had Sam, Mikalea, Epps, Lennox, and Simmons as the main human characters and 5 Autobots and 7 Decepitcons as your cast for the film....you'd still have to budget of 300 million plus to have a real transformers film. No matter what get rid of, it still costs alot to do a real transformers film. The robots screen time is just too costly. The creators of this franchise have to basically pick and choose their spots. I'm sure they would like to have it the other way around but to make a viable film, this is the only option they really have. If the cost of visual effects, especially ones so complicated, wasn't as expensive, I'm willing to bet that they would do the film in a manner that I think everyone believes it should be done in...which is all robots and basically one or two humans.

But again, no matter the plan, a real transformers film is too expensive in the live action realm.

Better plot (which I think is more opinion than anything else...can't ***** at Bay for not using the lore this time around, no matter how different), better dialogue can be achieved with just better writers. But, the other aspects for a live action transformers film, Bay has those in spades...with the money has to work with in order to turn a profit.

 

[CEREBRAL....]

Cerebral,

Do you have a better idea of the robot designs? From Bay's perspective, the designs make sense. Realistically (which is what Bay is going for with the designs), you can't have that many parts on a vehicle not accounted for when it comes to the transformations. Actually, I give the designers and artists at ILM much respect for going the extra mile when they really didn't have to. You could've simply done some serious cutting corners for those transformations and designs. And, people would've caught notice how the corners were crossed to achieve a specific look. Personally, I thought the designs were leaps and bounds the best designs for the Transformers in a realistic environment. You can make a case for the camera work have the most to do with the inability to decipher between the robots but I've never had an issue with the camera work in the first film. Just based on the trailer, it looks like this sequel has pulled the camera back a bit....which is a good thing.

If a fan can design "long haul" w/o a problem , then the talent that was hired should of done a better job with the look of "starscream" , "megs", and "devastator"; along with "ravage". It has nothing to do with being realistic...a lot of those tranformers look like trash cans put together, and the lack of color also adds to the visual issues with the first film. It was hard to see two almost same color robots fight......

if james cameron (for instance) way back in '83 (i think) with his crew could construct a very likeable robot with the terminator, then michael bay and his crew could of done a better job with today's graphics...this excuse about them being "realistic" to me is just an excuse..come on..we are in 09..We have been able to remake history with such movies like jurassic park, parol harbor, and titantic along with capturing the imagination of other comic books such as x-men and spiderman...There's more then enough talent'd people in hollywood that could of done a better job with the budget. "Realism" should not be the issue in this day and age of computer graphics...we have see fans make robot designs look better then what we have seen for some of these robots..

Dialogue? It is what it is. Could it be better? Sure...but we are dealing with a strike movie after all. Not to mention, Bay specifically prefers ad libing with this actors. But, better dialogue could be achieved if you had better writers.(The same issues arise in the new Star Trek film as well, yet both that and Transformers do what they were meant to do.)

If u are acknowledging the lack of dialogue then u see my point..what bay prefers or doesn't has nothing to do with the overall point...the writing wasn't good...

In terms of humans vs. robots...again, this has more to do with budget than anything else. Say you just had Sam, Mikalea, Epps, Lennox, and Simmons as the main human characters and 5 Autobots and 7 Decepitcons as your cast for the film....you'd still have to budget of 300 million plus to have a real transformers film. No matter what get rid of, it still costs alot to do a real transformers film. The robots screen time is just too costly.

again if you can't manage what you have for money (which was alot) then you are incapable of doing the film. To me you are making an excuse again....their budget was just fine..they miss used it if that's the case...again.."quality over quantity"..i dont care if you only use 3 robots (and as u look at TF1...only 3 robots anyways got enough quality screen time) like one of the critic wrote...cut the movie shorter and u will have a better effect....money should never be an issue especially since u have a big budget to work with already..nobody is gonna grap if u do it right...