Transformers: Revenge of the Foul

18-Jun-09 5:35 PM by
Filed under Films, Humor; 3 comments.

This Friday, the sequel to the 2007 film Transformers will land. Based on my experience two years ago, I am confident in my decision to not support the new movie. It's not that the original was bad (though it was); it's that it deviated too significantly from my expectations. Lowering my expectations helped me enjoy the second Fantastic Four film more than the first, but in the case of Transformers, my expectations are fixed not in terms of quality, but of subject matter. I grew up on the Eighties cartoon (which is soon to be re-released on DVD) and consider it the quintessential version of giant, extraterrestrial, shape-shifting robots fighting each other in our own backyard. I respect that changes need be made when adapting this story to a new medium, but making it into an adolescent, anthropocentric comedy crossed the line.

I'm amazed that these movies are written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, who brought us not only the entertaining (but predictable) Mission:Impossible III, but more significantly, the recent reboot of Star Trek. How can the same team produce such divergent quality? But then, if my idea of a good movie is Orson Welles playing a toy, then maybe my perspective is skewed.

Regardless, I expect Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to not be this summer's only disappointing film about robots. What if those two movies didn't just morph, but merged? Would they form… Transforminators?

Or maybe Transformers on its own already has more robotic characters than even we realize:

Though obviously a spoof, this concept isn't altogether foreign. The movie S1m0ne suggested something similar, in which the protagonist created a completely artificial actress whose performance indistinguishable from authentically wooden acting. Though the film was fictional, the recent 'Emily' image metrics demonstration showcases the ability to generate a computerized face from a real one.

Now if only they could make computerized computers that can change shape, act, and star in a critically successful film…

(Hat tip to Blake Patterson)

3 Responses to “Transformers: Revenge of the Foul”

  1. Ken Gagne adds:

    CNN doesn't like this movie:

    Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen — the most terrible revenge since Montezuma's — is louder, longer and lamer than the 2007 hit it succeeds. Which is saying a lot. … [this film] is a grotesque exercise in hyperinflation. At 149 minutes, it's longer than 2001, Close Encounters of the Third Kind or Star Wars. In fact, this may be the emptiest epic ever made.

    And, encapsulating what I didn't like about the first film was the continued effort at being a comedy:

    Here's a sample of what Bay throws at the wall in the hope of generating some stray laughs: small dogs humping. Hysterical middle-aged women. Autobots with effeminate voices. A miniature Decepticon dry-humping Fox's leg. John Turturro improvising. Tasers. A cowardly Latino. A short Arab. Snails. None of these things is funny. Not in this movie, anyway.

    The film currently has a 21% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, compared to the original's 57%.

    0
  2. Ken Gagne adds:

    Here's "the most depressing photograph ever", according to Blake Patterson.

    0
  3. maginnis adds:

    And they're already talking about a third installment.

    Although, Bay has been quoted as saying he's not interested in doing any more Transformers films. So maybe the next won't be so bad.

    0