Features
Headlines
Search
Loading ...
Archives
Embargoes have long since crashed, but the mauling is still to come. And though I don’t feel compelled to write a review of “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” I do feel it a strange duty to get off at least one or two positive remarks before tomorrow’s inevitable critical massacre.
The film is better than the first. The film makes great comedic use of actors Kevin Dunn and Julie White, almost begging for a sitcom spin-off. The film’s action is creative and exciting, more fun than it had any right to be. The kitsch is embraced with less apology than the first film, which takes the movie to this weird artistic level that I can’t even begin to place.
There is a shot that will most definitely make it through to my annual “shots of the year” piece. On that score, there are, in fact, more interesting cinematic ideas in the film than you’d expect. Shia LaBeouf actually gives a damn good performance (seriously). Megan Fox is filmed with delirious invasion to the point that it almost becomes commentary. The “twins” that draw claims of racism could be strangely viewed as a separate commentary, on pop culture, given where the Autobots claim to have learned human communication. And the material proves, once again, to be sound mixing and sound editing pornography.
But…the movie sucks. And that it can be all of those things and still manage to be worthless on so many levels is absolutely amazing to me. Michael Bay is another breed. Dare I say that deserves cherishing?
I’d like to quote Ignatiy Vishnevetsky here, from The Auteurs’ Notebook:
Like in Keaton and Sedwick’s The Cameraman, the camera is a barrier, a link, a hindrance, a force of destruction. It’s something to hide behind and a way to reach out. It’s a pair of binoculars and a glass wall. So we often end up thinking of directors in terms of their relationships to the camera. In the digital age, we can make images without a lens, but that doesn’t mean we’ve gotten rid of “the instrument:” the computer simply replaces the camera, taking on the same qualities.
For Michael Bay, the instrument is a cannon. After all, who is responsible for the most potent images American cinema has produced in the last decade? The Hummer ripping through a shanty town in Bad Boys II, the robot pissing on a man’s head in his burlesque Transformers: who can compete with images that explode on the world in this way? Bay is something like the master of a studio, a man who leads a team, each person devoted to a certain detail, to create an image. It doesn’t matter what the image is of: Bay is a director without intentions. He is an artillerist.
There’s something said for being unique, no matter what side of the spectrum.
27 responses so far
1 6-23-2009 at 1:41 pm
JC said...
So, Kris, is it just down to really bad dialogue, uneven-to-poor acting, thin characterizations, etc., etc.?
‘Cause with a new bridge being built in my neck of the woods, an IMAX screen is only 15 minutes away. And I’d like to see something…anything…filling that gargantuan screen…but I don’t actually want to pay for it in the case of a craptastic film like this. I suppose I’d indulge it (for bad laughs, if those apply) were someone else to pay me in, and I have a few folks who might require company at this thing (yes, they refer to the first one as “Transmaf***ingformers”…heh). Hmmm…
2 6-23-2009 at 1:43 pm
Jonathan Spuij said...
I tried to get into preview screenings tonight. 4 of them all sold out. This thing is damn madness.
3 6-23-2009 at 1:44 pm
Daniel Crooke said...
Oh, God, this film was so awful. I’m over in the UK, so I saw it last weekend. Could very possibly be my worst of the year. I wish I could have been as optimistic as you and grant it such redeeming features.
4 6-23-2009 at 2:00 pm
[thiago] said...
agreed with daniel – the film is awful. i’m here in brazil (it opened today) and there were nine other people in the theater with me. i don’t think it will make a huge splash down here.
5 6-23-2009 at 2:02 pm
Mike_M said...
Hmm, well from stuff I read last night, I am happy you found some good points with the movie. I am looking forward to it – hoping it is a fun popcorn flick. I hope I am right.
Hasn’t the Public Enemies embargo ended or ending soon? Will we be seeing your full review shortly…?
6 6-23-2009 at 2:07 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
soon…
7 6-23-2009 at 2:11 pm
Mike_M said...
Thought so, not trying to rush you of course.
8 6-23-2009 at 2:15 pm
THE Diego Ortiz said...
Well… I’m leaving my brain in the car when I watch this movie. (Hopefully tonight at midnight and at IMAX)
9 6-23-2009 at 2:27 pm
Sound Designer Dan said...
Sound mixing and sound editing porn, eh? I’ll be thinking of you Kris when I’m having my aural orgasms.
10 6-23-2009 at 2:40 pm
Kevin said...
I saw the film last night and I actually enjoyed the hell out of it, even more so than the first film. I think part of my enjoyment comes from a sense of nostalgia. I played with Transformers toys and watched the cartoon in the 80s. And after rewatching some old episodes and the first animated film, I can tell you that Bay’s movies are not very far off form their source material. In fact, I think that these films would have been much better viewed in the 80s. If you watch closely, they give off a definitive 80s vibe. Tongue-firmly planted in-cheek, etc.
Regardless of whether or not the film itself is very good story wise, I found the action so amazing that I just decided not to give a shit. That’s really what it comes down to. The film isn’t trying to be serious, deep, or anything. It’s what I’ve always said it is; giant transforming robots kicking the shit out of each other in amazing CGI IMAX.
Unlike Wolverine or Terminator, the film doesn’t try to have a self-serious tone to it. It’s mindless entertainment at it’s best, and that’s something I’ve been missing this summer.
I gave it a solid 7.5-8/10. Let the flaming begin on how I have shitty taste, but I won’t apologize for loving the hell out of this franchise. :P
11 6-23-2009 at 3:18 pm
JC said...
Wow, even EBERT gave it 1 Star…and he gave 3 Stars to the first one…
12 6-23-2009 at 4:03 pm
Kevin said...
I think a lot of the main criticism is coming form the fact that the first one got a sort of free pass because of the novelty of having a live action Transformers film. Now that that novelty is over, critics are free to trash it to hell like they wanted to last time. That, and they have been waiting to rip Michael Bay a new one for a while, so yeah.
Like I said, I don’t give a shit, I still loved it :D
13 6-23-2009 at 6:18 pm
entertainmenttoday.. said...
I really liked the first one and will see this one on Friday. The hate for Bay is unreal. I loved The Rock and Im a fan of Armageddon. I even like Bad Boys 2. I still think Transformers 2 will be critic proof. It just feels that way.
chuck
14 6-23-2009 at 8:07 pm
red_wine said...
The reviews are out, the gloves are off and Transformers is well on its way to become the worst reviewed blockbuster of the year, in a year already full of badly reviewed blockbusters with a few exceptions(Up, Star Trek).
The critics are getting particularly savage this time, there are many many 0/4 ratings.
15 6-23-2009 at 8:23 pm
RichardA said...
I liked the first one okay. This should be jut as okay.
Remember when Hollywood press was making Shia Lebouf to be the next Tom Hanks. I just rolled by eyes.
16 6-23-2009 at 9:15 pm
Matthew said...
Whenever I watch Bay’s “Transformers”, I always wondering whether it’s, as Vishnevetsky puts it, a “burlesque”. Maybe Bay is just trying to use exaggeration and playful kitsch to wax philosophic about… no. Bay’s an idiot. He likes fucking huge explosions, equally hot women, and moronic narrative.He’s an idiot savant maybe, but an idiot nonetheless.
17 6-23-2009 at 11:38 pm
Chris said...
Some people actually think this will beat TDK’s records. I laughed.
18 6-24-2009 at 12:01 am
Kyle said...
So far, the successful films this summer have been the ones that were critically acclaimed (Trek, Up, Hangover). We’ll see if this holds true with Transformers 2. We won’t know anything though until the 2nd weekend since word of mouth doesn’t usually exert itself during opening weekends.
I would be somewhat concerned though if I was DW/Paramount since moviegoers have been cruel and abandoned movies with bad reviews thus far this summer.
19 6-24-2009 at 12:04 am
Kyle said...
Hmm, let me restate that. Moviegoers aren’t being cruel by abandoning movies with mediocre to so-so reviews, they are, dare I say it, being smart. Another sign of the impending apocalypse.
20 6-24-2009 at 7:11 am
Jordan Raup said...
I absolutely hated it. Here is my 2 out of 10 review: http://thefilmstage.com/2009/06/24/jordans-review-transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen/
21 6-24-2009 at 7:42 am
Jonathan Spuij said...
Nostalgia my ass. This doesn’t even look and feel remotely like the animated series or the toys. What a load of crap this movie is again.
Too long, too loud, too much bang, and I gotta wholeheartedly agree with Ebert’s assessment regarding the “softcore porn”. That was downright awful.
Agreed it’s spectacular at times but it’s simply too stupid to be worth any spectacle or money. Truly poor.
22 6-24-2009 at 8:57 am
JAB said...
Kris, can i ask which shot you’re talking about?
23 6-24-2009 at 9:47 am
Brendan said...
Epically stupid movie. Could easily have been 40 minutes shorter given what little story it has to tell. As to the performances, what is there to judge when all the actors are reduced to running and screaming? Comedy is subjective but to this veiwer 90% of the attempted levity fell flat. Dogs humping? Robot leg humping? Pot brownie gags? Oy.
And to call the “twins” a commentary on pop culture is reading into the film and giving the fillmakers credit on a level that just isn’t possible based on the rest of the movie.
But I will say these few words about Michael Bay, who hasn’t made a movie I’ve enjoyed since the first Bad Boys…
By the time the 2 hour mark hit I was completely pummeled into submission and just gave into the stupid. The final desert battle I have to say is one of the most impressive demonstrations of movie mayhem I’ve ever seen on a screen. Did it make sense? Not really. Was it good? Not really. Did I care at all about any character involved? Hell no. But still, got to hand it to the guy just for the sheer “up to 11″ level of it. I can say I was wowed.
Also, can I go to Michael Bay University? Every girl in every scene at the college looked like a Maxim covergirl. It’s not even remotely real, but you gotta like the way Bay’s shoots the ladies.
24 6-24-2009 at 9:55 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
JAB: You can ask, but I won’t tell. :) Patience.
25 6-24-2009 at 10:30 am
JAB said...
i think i know what it is anyways…
26 6-25-2009 at 10:38 pm
average joe said...
Kris, I’m surprised that any shot in this film resonated enough with you for you to consider putting it on your year end best list. There were some cools shots I guess, but nothing really stood out to me, except one shot that was so unlike Bay it shocked me. It was a a quick shot of Shia’s hand around Megan’s waste at the end of the desert battle. Very intimate, but kind of a throwaway shot in the film
27 6-26-2009 at 12:22 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
It was more for structural and, partly, narrative beauty than thematic resonance.