Transformers 2

Seriously? It strikes me as being pretty fuckin' weak. It's not funny, and he's hardly vicious or even particularly insightful. What's this you say? A summer blockbuster directed by Michael Bay which is a sequel to a movie based on a cartoon based on a line of shitty action figures from the eighties is unintelligent?

That's not what the movie is about, and he knows it. It's a lazy review; I don't fault him for it all too much, but what-the-fuck-ever. I can understand his complaints as being completely valid points, but the complaint itself is neither valid nor interesting. I can understand why someone wouldn't like the movie, but that doesn't mean Ebert wrote anything really worthwhile. Honestly, if all he'd done was post his star rating I would've received the same information.

I enjoyed the movie for what it was. The plot was terrible and nonsensical; the dialogue was, despite all its best efforts, over the top and largely unfunny ; and the in-world logic was inconsistent to the point of being about worthless. But there are giant fucking robots in it kicking the shit out of each other. It's for that reason that I went to see the film, and I enjoyed it for that reason.
 
I don't dispute that, but this is a ridiculous thread premise. Roger Ebert is mediocre at best, and that review was pure hackwork.
 
Stag said:
I enjoyed the movie for what it was. The plot was terrible and nonsensical; the dialogue was, despite all its best efforts, over the top and largely unfunny ; and the in-world logic was inconsistent to the point of being about worthless. But there are giant fucking robots in it kicking the shit out of each other. It's for that reason that I went to see the film, and I enjoyed it for that reason.
Click to expand...


Sounds like an apologetic Fallout 3 comment.

Had a Fallout movie been made and butchered that badly, many here would give the same harch criticism.

We are a Fallout fansite so it makes sense we don't really give that much a shit about a Transformers review. However, I thought the review was valid.

I mean Hollywood did jack shit to cater to the old school fans. Soundwave was supposed to be a fucking boom box, not some starfish lookinbg fucking space floater. The pterodactyl and the cat bot transformed out of the shape of cassette tapes.

And what the fuck with Bumblebee? I mean holy fuck he had an insect sounding name cause he was shaped after a fucking VW bug, not some fancy fucking sports car.

Megatron was supposed to transform into a WW2 german pistol if I remember correctly (Walter P38?).

And Starscream was supposed to be an F15, so why the hell is he an F22? Better yet, if he wanted to blend in better as a newer air superiority fighter why the fucked up markings/tattoo.

Lots of shit went wrong in the movies. Maybe Stag isn't such a fanboy of Transformers like I was but there were problems and Ebert voiced them. I have no problem with that.

I mean I went to see the movie for what it was, but to not like a review for telling the truth, it doesn't make sense to me.
 
I have to agree... Stag's attack on Ebert's review makes no sense to me. Ebert made completely valid points, and his writing was quite enjoyable.

I also do not understand any defense of anything based upon the premise of: "Well, it was supposed to suck. So stop saying it sucks!"

I'm going to see this movie Sunday, because my girlfriend is a fan of sci-fi action flicks, and she enjoyed the first Transformers. I didn't hate the first Transformers. It was kind of fun, but the action was borderline incomprehensible, which made it difficult to enjoy for me. If the action is as bad as Mr. Ebert says, I will probably hate this one. Not to mention the apparent influx of robot scrotum/farting jokes, dog-humping, and sexual innuendo (in a Transformers movie? wtf?).
 
what I dont understand is so many people complain about Transformers 1 and 2 and yet so many still went to "see it for what it is" robots that club each other.

Not that I am some kind of Transformers fan but that reminds me on the friends that I have which bitch all the time about Mc Donalds, but everyone of them knows exactly what is on their menue ...
 
Well your always on firmer arguing ground if you actually see the movie you hate. Though I just wait for the DvD and then borrow it off someone.
My brother saw it the other day and he would barely speak about it, just made a gurgle and looked slightly suicidal.

Anywho a 45 minute review of Transformers 2 up here http://www.spoonyexperiment.com/ and it's pretty good, the review not the movie.
 
Look, what I meant is this: Ebert has written that exact same review a hundred times. That is what I find ridiculous about this whole thing; that someone called a completely generic review "a classic". Anyone who reads movie review on an even semi-regular basis has read this review before.
Me, I read movie reviews. A lot. I write movie reviews; not as a professional and hardly as an amateur, but it's something I do. And I don't find Ebert to be all that great, and especially not in this case. I can enjoy Ebert's writing, but I didn't in this case for the reasons I've listed above. That is what I'm talking about here, not Transformers being a good movie.

Quit being so reactionary. I got from it exactly what I wanted, and I saw exactly what I expected. I think it's perfectly fine to complain about it, and I already have in conversations on and off the web. Again, to me, this is about Ebert's review being called "classic", not Transformers 2.

About the movie, though: I don't think it's good, I don't think it's for everyone, but I had a good experience with it. To use the same analogy as someone else in this thread whose name I can't remember so sorry about that or whatever: sometimes you just want to eat some fuckin' McDonalds. Doesn't mean McDonalds don't fuckin' suck, but sometimes you want something easy and you want something big and you want something that's engineered in a laboratory in order for you to like it. Sometimes I want that, at any rate.
 
Most movies are derivative, how can the reviews not be?
Anyway Ebert, NYT, Washington Post, whatever, this movie got shredded like no other by the critics.
People who patronize this rubbish have no reason to complain, they are the reason shit like this keeps getting made.
 
yeah I gues CN is right, I mean I would not be surprised if one would for a review about T2 just digg up some review he wrotte about T1 already and add in some more words like "awesome" "more effects" "lots more robots" here and there to let it sound different.

I mean what to expect from the movie anyway. I seen the first one for the fights and effects (plot? in a Michael Bay movie? youre kidding right). And I definetly will see the next one at some point for the exact same reason. The effects. Novadays you can anyway not expect that big quality of dialogues or writting in block buster movies anyway particularly not after the writers strike. Well with a few exceptions of course here and there of course.
 
Meh, I never cared for the original Transformers movie while I was a fan of the toys, comics and cartoons, the fact that it would be made by the Hollywood of today already said enough.

Plus the concept doesn't work well as a movie.

Well they did it anyway and most of the movie was focused on boring cardboard characters rather than the robots people wanted to see.

Now we have a sequel that is more of the same and suddenly people acknowledge that its bad.
 
well if you come from the comic side than you have to somewhat agree that it was alrady confusing already from that part since I cant remember about how many "different" Transformers versions and alterations have been out there already for who knows how long already. I mean from what I can gather is that it started as japanese toys with comics and TV shows later as promotion for the toys. So its not like the comics for it self are really all that consistent and would make a "movie project" anything easier. I mean have not there been already quite a lot of animated movies out even that suffered some of those issues ?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju_DYBmDX7o[/youtube]
 
Oh definitely Crni Vuk, and often when the franchise changed publisher the background and details were changed, leaving things in a deep mess.
 
As far as I remember, Transformers have always been about robots beating the shit out of each other, and the storylines have been crappy all along. It's not like the movie turned a high-level intelligent classic into a mindless action flick - it just changed some things around. The rest of the stuff that makes it suck comes from the fact that it's a Hollywood movie, and each of them comes with cheese, and corny jokes.
 
I am not sure why, but I always got the Idea Optimus would be a "gay" character in real you know or at least bisexual. Might be cause of his super friendliness dunno (and maybe with a secret love I mean from somewhere the huge admiration of Bumblebee to Optimus has to come no ?).
 
1) the movie had a plot, if you dont think it had a plot period, you fail english comprehension.

2) it may not have been the awesomest plot ever, but its a 2 hr movie based on 30m cartoons and comics. the plot for the shows were always simple, if the movies did not have simple plots, it would not be transformers.

3) in the cartoons, it was always about the autobots trying to save humans/planet from plans of the decepticons.

4) they did change a bit on the robots on how they look both pre and post change, but in some cases its more coherent, and in some its not.

bumblebee could work as either sports car or VW, but looks cooler as sports car no?

yes, im dissapointed as well about soundwave. he always had much larger roles in the cartoons from what i remember.

constructi-cons was horribly done. biggest dissapointment after soundwave imo.

about starscream, pfft, i never really paid attention to what kind of military fighter plane he was, just remember that he was. never paid attention to the f16 vs f22 thing.

5) ebert is wrong, there are multiple SCI-FI franchises where human guns hurt aliens. stargate for one. the cartoons were always primarily about the transformers fighting, and sometimes with help from the humans.



overall, i thought the movie was good. was worthwhile to see in the theatres. in some aspects it was very much like the cartoons, and in some aspects it was very much so not like that.

i found the plot and story easy to follow and without any real twists and turns. action scenes were well done and its obvious a lot of forethought and planning went into the action scenes. there were the rare scenes without plot/story/action, but they didnt distract much from the movie because they were more about the romance.

if you go to this movie expecting legends of the fall or shawshank redemption... you sir are a fucking idiot.

if you go to this movie expecting something like die hard, terminator, eraser or the like, you wont be dissapointed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top