Revenge of the Fallen Transformers: ROTF User Review Thread

[Sarge 2.0]

Wedding.

The Wedding, with the Autobots present and Bumblebee as the best man, considering the whole thing start out as a story about a boy and his car. After the wedding, the Autobots depart from Earth for good.

WRITE IT DOWN! Going to happen in 2012.

...

I'm...I'm not even sure what to say.

 

[J.Howlett]

Sarge,

It's the sort of cliche thing that works in Bay's film. It's right up Spielberg's alley...and I have to be honest about it, it would be kind of sweet.

Bay'll try and go for the emotion and make it tearful for the audience. And, it may work considering how great Jablonsky is and the way Bay photographs his scenes.

 

[The Original Bamfer]

:unsubscribes:

 

[J.Howlett]

Lol....

 

[terry78]

I doubt the Autobots would permanently leave. They may send out other scouts or things to other planets, but some of them would stay, especially Bumblebee.

 

[SsM]

:unsubscribes:

Same here, I don't think there could be ANYTHING worse than BB as the best man in Sam's wedding.


That is an absolutely horrible, No... Horrible isn't bad enough. That is an atrocious idea.

 

[J.Howlett]

I'm warning you guys now. Just take this one to the bank. It's end game for the development of Sam from a boy with a serious crush to a man who got and kept the girl. It's also the end game for Bumblebee.

Revenge of the Fallen is the middle section from boyhood to manhood.

Heed the warning. The Witwicky Wedding in Summer 2012...

 

[bell110]

I managed to work it out just fine, but what do I know??...Im just a common movie watcher...a plebian if you would

I got the gist of the movie.

bell,

You shouldn't want everything told to you...some, but not all.

Hey, some would work too. Keeping things vague as a story telling element is fine, but that's not what Bay was trying to do.

 

[terry78]

And Judy brings pot brownies for everyone, right?

 

[BlackLantern]

Sarge,

It's the sort of cliche thing that works in Bay's film. It's right up Spielberg's alley...and I have to be honest about it, it would be kind of sweet.

Bay'll try and go for the emotion and make it tearful for the audience. And, it may work considering how great Jablonsky is and the way Bay photographs his scenes.

Bay would do it for the *****es, *****es love weddings.....and then Baysplosion!!!!

 

[J.Howlett]

Lantern,

Not to mention, the women apparently ate this film up. More went to this one than the last one.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Wedding.

The Wedding, with the Autobots present and Bumblebee as the best man, considering the whole thing start out as a story about a boy and his car. After the wedding, the Autobots depart from Earth for good.

WRITE IT DOWN! Going to happen in 2012.

Who said its going to be a trilogy? This cow has much more milk!

 

[The Guardian]

:unsubscribes:

LOL, oh come on have a :heart: guys LOL!!!

 

[SsM]

And Judy brings pot brownies for everyone, right?

Judy is gorgeous... I'll go see TF3 for her

 

[J.Howlett]

Earle,

Just with this cast and Bay as the director. That'll be a trilogy.

 

[BlackLantern]

Lantern,

Not to mention, the women apparently ate this film up. More went to this one than the last one.

and both films tracked very well with women in test screenings....both my mom and my 19 yo sister love the films....

 

[CelticPredator]

Same here, I don't think there could be ANYTHING worse than BB as the best man in Sam's wedding.


That is an absolutely horrible, No... Horrible isn't bad enough. That is an atrocious idea.

They should give him a custom fitted tux......

 

[Balthus Dire]

I could totally see that wedding scenario happening in TF3.

 

[The Guard]

It didn't add any of those things to any satisafactory degree, which is one of the reasons I'm saying the movie would be only marginally different without it.

We've been down the "It wasn't done satisfactorically" road. I don't consider an entire romantic element missing from a film "marginal". Clearly we have different definitions of the word.

You're describing things that should have been in the film; not things that actually were in the film, at least not in any meaningful amount.

No, I'm describing things that were in the film in some fashion. They should have been explored better, and they weren't explored hardly at all, but they were there. There are several moments where Sam has to decide to go it alone, to go with Mikaela, to get Mikaela to safety or not, etc.

There was no depth, anyway. Mikaela was mad, and then later she wasn't. The end.

I like how you diminish things. It's just...it just is.

Furthermore, why did she have to be romantically involved in order to visit him? She came because they had a problem involving the Transformers--one of whom attacked her in her garage. She would not have come to solve their problem if she had not been romantically involved? That seems a dubious conclusion. She comes, everything turns out the same.

I see. So you assume she would have come to see him had she not been romantically involved?

I don't see how that's fairly obvious. Whether Sam decided he had a place in this war or not doesn't change the fact that he wants to survive.

Can't do that with the sun exploding. If Sam had decided that he would have nothing more to do with the autobots after averting the crisis at hand, what would have changed? He wouldn't have been standing with Optimus at the end, and that's all.

So you're saying that...although he feels he has no responsibility to the autobots in this version of events, he would somehow still go through this autobot-assisted quest to bring Prime back to life, despite the fact that he doesn't even know the Decepticon's reasoning behind wanting him or the details of it until like, halfway through the quest?

That somehow he'd have managed to find the key and go through the other steps to get to Prime and ressurrect him, even though he has nothing to do with the autobots?

How does that work, exactly?

The alternative was "I think I'll wait for death," so you'll understand if I don't consider it much of a choice.

What does "choice" mean to you? To me, it means a decision, and the ability to choose.

When Sam makes a decision to go globetrotting, he is making a choice. And unless you don't believe in free will, you have to admit he has a choice in the matter.

I believe you have described exactly why they are empty framework.

So you've got:
Sam going to college, leaving Bumblebee behind
Sam not wanting to be part of the Transformers war, denying their existence at college
Sam reinforcing this when Prime asks for his help
Sam being affected by the shard, freaking out, realizing the nature of his involvement in events, and trying to figure out what's going on
Sam being drawn into events again after being spied on and kidnapped by Decepticons
Sam seeing Prime die protecting him
Sam realizing his role in events, believing he owes Prime for what happened
Sam making a conscious choice to go globetrotting to bring Prime back
And the rest of the story, where Sam makes like, choice after choice to get deeper and deeper into the Transformers cause out of a sense of duty and responsibility.

And because there's only a subtle realization that he is touched by this war whether he likes it or not, it's an "empty framework"?

That's splitting hairs a bit, isn't it?

To the same extent that showing someone a tree and then showing them a piece of paper is showing them that paper comes from trees, perhaps.

I see. So showing things is not showing things. Got it.

 

[craigdbfan]

I could totally see that wedding scenario happening in TF3.

Would anyone be surprised if Bay decided to do that?

I'm sure the rest of the Autobots will be the in house band playing 80's hits all night long throughout the wedding (all of them wearing tuxedos by the way).

 

[The Guard]

Went for a 3rd time tonight, unfortunately it was ruined by ****ing idiots who wanted to pay money to ruin the movie for themselves and everyone else by shouting and making sex noises

Making sex noises in terms of having sex, or just making sex noises?

I think simply a story that makes sense would help.

The story does make sense. It's just a little over the top.

One of the biggest questions is how this movie ties in with the first? It may seem like a simplistic question, but I’ve seen the movie twice and I don’t know what’s going on. I don’t see a connection.

The first movie, Megatron takes over Cybertron. They lose the Allspark. Megatron follows it to Earth and gets stuck in the arctic.

That is uh, not the story of the first movie. That's Megatron's story, and only up to the point where he gets stuck in the Arctic.

The second movie, the first Primes come to Earth and build a sun-destroying machine during the Stone Age, the Fallen becomes too powerful, and the Primes hide themselves and the Matrix.

Again. This is only the story up to the part where the Primes hid the Matrix.

How do these storylines fit together? This one thing alone kills my brain with questions.

The idea of the Allspark/Energon being needed for the Decepticons to continue to dominate is found in both movies. It's pretty much that simple if those are the parts you don't see how they're connected.

But Sam's story is in both films.

The autobots role develops from film one to film two.

What do you mean "How are they connected"?

Here’s another question, how did the government cover up the massive destruction in the city, with presumable thousands of witnesses, as well as the Secretary of Defense going on TV saying that there’s been an alien attack, yet in the second movie, it’s all just an internet conspiracy? That is some high suspension of disbelief.

They didn't manage to cover it up, as evidenced by Leo and Simmon's websites. They TRIED to.

[quote\What’s the deal with the sun-destroying machine? So apparently, Transformers need to harness such vast amounts of energy that it will kill the sun, so what have they been living off of for the last thousands of years?

Want to see Guard defending the movie on this.[/quote]

The Decepticons clearly, as they did in the first film, want the energy to build more robots, to continue the creation process, not just to keep themselves going indefinitely, though that may be part of it. One assumes there is still some Energon somewhere, since the main characters, you know, keep going and don't stop working and power down in the middle of the movie (unless they die).

If a piece of the Allspark can revive Megatron, why couldn’t the Autobots use their piece to revive Jazz or Optimus?

Because, as you'll notice in both movies, the Allspark turned things into mindless killing machines if they aren't already imbued with life somehow. And I think they also needed a Spark and the Allspark to revive Megatron (or maybe they didn't, and he's just awesome like that). Isn't there an actual line about "Get his spark and parts" or something?

Your points aren't going to get across because you're actually basing them on the evidence provided in the film instead of using fanboy rationalization and speculation. I applaud you for using erudition, but I fear that true critical thought is useless here. The Guard has constructed his argument using speculation and inferences in to things that are just not in the film. You can't budge stubborn fanboyism, even with rationality and knowledge.

Really?

Really?

Do you all understand that you're asking "Why does the giant energy cube sometimes kill if Transformers OD on it and sometimes bring life in shard form, and have inconsistent effects? As if anyone here somehow knows the specific amount of energy it takes to reanimate, kill, or power a Transformer?

You're asking for specific details on...the giant transforming energy cube and the properties of its magic energy shards? What do you want, the exact science of it?

Go read the Transformers mythology. Look at all the random, plot device crap that the All Spark, Underbase, and Matrix of Leadership do. Then get back to me.

Good lord, people. This is borderline ridiculous.

 

[craigdbfan]

Its funny I was just re watching the first episode of G1 and in that episode alone there was a fart joke involving Cliffjumper saying "Eat gas" and emitting smoke off his exhaust.

Yet people viciously attack ROTF when it makes fart references with the bots. When it was done several times throughout G1. The cheesy one liners that come out the Autobots mouth are hilariously funny though (intentionally done, I've always enjoyed G1 humor).

But when Bay pays homage to this type of comedy it is shunned and criticized to the core.

 

[Sarge 2.0]

Its funny I was just re watching the first episode of G1 and in that episode alone there was a fart joke involving Cliffjumper saying "Eat gas" and emitting smoke off his exhaust.

Yet people viciously attack ROTF when it makes fart references with the bots. When it was done several times throughout G1. The cheesy one liners that come out the Autobots mouth are hilariously funny though (intentionally done, I've always enjoyed G1 humor).

But when Bay pays homage to this type of comedy it is shunned and criticized to the core.

Because it's stupid. Also, I don't think there's a "core" to stupid humor because that would imply layers. Having robots that fart is stupid, no matter where or when it appears. Also, I doubt Bay was doing that as an homage to anything. It's the kind of cheap comedy that Bay has always done because he has the mind of a 12 year old boy.

 

[Marvin]

so bay gave the big F_U to critics this summer, perhaps proving once and for all who exactly is out of touch with todays audience...

get ready for the big push by critics to get people to see the new releases of the week and possibly forget about TF

I eagerly await this weekends reviews

 

[Sarge 2.0]

so bay gave the big F_U to critics this summer, perhaps proving once and for all who exactly is out of touch with todays audience...

get ready for the big push by critics to get people to see the new releases of the week and possibly forget about TF

I eagerly await this weekends reviews

I didn't realize that advocating good taste meant that you were out of touch.