Escape to the Movies: Transformers: Dark of the Moon

[Condor219]

Can somebody, anybody, explain to me why the US was apparently the only country with any kind of military force whatsoever in the final battle? Or why they disregarded physics entirely in the last segment? I suppose this is the norm in Michael Bay films.

 

[cthulhumythos]

but the real question is, is this as good as transformers: the movie?

and is transformers ruined FOREVER?

http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Ruined_FOREVER

transformers: the movie wasnt that great
honestly its a good movie, stop whining and go see it.

i was joking.

hence the link to a page showing that some transformers fans can be overly-dramatic.

and also transformers the movie was great, with its terrible 80s music, and main characters who weren't there before, dude it had IT ALL.

 

[Still Life]

All of his points were opinion and opinion only.

No, the movies suck. That's not opinion. They're a glorified show-reel and U.S. military showcase.

 

[Podunk]

Are you serious? Do you know how much of an unintelligent intolerant douche bag you sound like? I'm plenty grown up and tolerant of a lot of things. Just because someones opinion is different doesn't make them any less of a person, or less intelligent. It makes him, and you, sound like elitist snobs when you say shit like this.

In the first 2 minutes of this review, before he even began to review the movie, Bob was already insulting people who enjoyed it. Insulting their intelligence because his snobby ass doesn't appear to like the content of the movie. What kind of credibility does this guy deserve?

His opinion is different than mine and he openly states that since his opinion is different then mine, I'm automatically a moron who doesn't deserve to drive a car or vote. Seriously? You want to defend this guy and expect me to have tolerance of his opinion? I'm the one that needs to grow up?

All of his points were opinion and opinion only. What concrete points did he make? He spends 5 minutes crying about how he didn't enjoy the movie, how he hates Micheal Bay and his movie making style. He ranted about how the movie didn't spend 40 minutes on every character so he could decide if they are likable, and then rants about how he didn't like the characters that they did spend time on.

He cried about how he doesn't like the designs of the robots. He cried because he already has to review too many military/gun toting movies. He cried because the plot used a betrayal twist. He even cried because he is tried of reviewing "summer blockbuster" movies. The end of the video he made sure it so ridiculously clear that he came into the review with bias against it to begin with.

Not one of those things is a text book, concrete, factual, or technical reason a movie is "bad." He didn't like them. Not they are "certifiably" or universally agreed upon to be "bad." What evidence, or concrete proof did he provide? What evidence do you provide to support his claims? I didn't know movie reviews had provable criteria? Must have missed that memo somewhere.

Boo hoo hoo he is tired of reviewing movies he doesn't like. Get used to it, it is your job a reviewer. That doesn't give him the right to insult people for differing opinions. Review the movie, not the audience.

I will admit that Bob does seem to be a bit weary and cynical. I'm frankly a bit disappointed he even bothered to review the movie at all, as anybody could tell he was just going to say the same thing and tread the same ground he covered in the reviews of the earlier Transformers movies. The bit about driving or voting was a bit much of a hyperbole but I see where he is coming from. If somebody absolutely unapologetically likes this movie and can see absolutely no fault (or even the possibility of flaws) in it then that is a person I would very much like to avoid. A movie with weak cinematography, poor artistic design, lackluster plot and writing raise issues that you cannot defend without being wrong. The Intermission article Bob wrote for the week is a good start and underscores a lot of issues in regards to the plot and story. I don't think the issues being raised about this series are about preference in this case, there are basic principles of art, film, and writing that this film breaks and defies and it does not work. I can respect your anger at feeling 'called out' by Bob's comments, I think that is completely understandable. I just can't handle people who defend things that seemingly have no redeeming quality without giving clear and concrete reasoning for their opinion. I'm all for a lively debate, but the 'just cuz' argument has never held any weight with me and probably never will. Also I am sorry for calling you a name in my previous post. That wasn't cool.

 

[koroem]

All of his points were opinion and opinion only.

No, the movies suck. That's not opinion. They're a glorified show-reel and U.S. military showcase.

You want to argue semantics?

opinion (əˈpɪnjən) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]

? n
1. judgment or belief not founded on certainty or proof
2. the prevailing or popular feeling or view: public opinion
3. evaluation, impression, or estimation of the value or worth of a person or thing
4. an evaluation or judgment given by an expert: a medical opinion
5. the advice given by a barrister or counsel on a case submitted to him or her for a view on the legal points involved
6. a matter of opinion a point open to question
7. be of the opinion that to believe that

 

[octafish]

Heh, I got an ad before this vid. It was an ad for Dark of the Moon. Rude coincidence. I do agree with Bob, not on That awful piranha movie but it hurts when these ordinary films make bucket loads and good films barely break even.

 

[digital warrior]

My "friends" dragged me to this one. Oh god thank you MovieBob for putting what i think of this movie into words. This movie is terrible in every sense of the word and watching people laugh at this bs is enough to make me want to punch something. even for "i want to see robots fight" argument this is bad, the robots do very little fighting and were left with human military while the autobots get captured off-screen, I wanted to see that fight not these people who we have only just meet and never cared about.

 

[Illithidae]

How ironic, the advert before the review was for Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

Quite right, though - agree with most of what you said. I watched the old Transformers.
Somehow I can't get any of my mates to think of it the same way ... they all love the movies. :/

 

[Still Life]

--

There's no semantics to argue over. They're poorly constructed films; there's literally very little to defend them over. The only thing that ties the narrative together is wafer thin exposition that jumps from one convoluted extreme to another, followed by bombastic hero shots and action sequences. Those are facts.

 

[Johnny Impact]

Also if you can find me evidence of any of those plots that you point out actually appearing in the old cartoon then maybe I'll see that as a legitmate way these movies could have gone.

You probably won't find the examples you demand. A twelve year old boy doesn't care about diplomacy, he just likes robots. The cartoons were made for twelve year olds, therefore they were simply plotted and full of robots.

A thirty year old man who likes robots might also like something a little more complex than ninety minutes of overwrought transformation sequences and pew-pew. I guess you missed the part where I said the movie should have been written for people who loved the toys/cartoon when they were kids, but who are now adults capable of handling more mature subject matter.

You have to consider that the source material might not be good or well-thought out idea in the first place because it was just meant to sell toys to kids.

A race of living machines disguising themselves as vehicles here on Earth for the purpose of continuing a millennia-old conflict over control of their home planet and the resources of the universe? Works for me, man. There have been *way* worse premises made into successful entertainment.

Maybe you and MovieBob don't like having that thrown in your face that you were basically sold the exact same thing as a child and you actually fell for it in your youth.

I am aware they wanted to sell toys. That doesn't make the toys worthless. I am aware the cartoon was an extended advertisement. That doesn't mean it had no entertainment value. People watch the Super Bowl just to see the commercials. Why? Because it entertains them.

"Fell for it" isn't the right phrase. I had fun. I spent my money the way I wanted to. If I had it to do over again I would do the same thing. Falling for it implies I was somehow shortchanged, victimized. It implies if only someone were to explain the scam to me I would be outraged. Sorry, no. Transformers was a part of my childhood. I did not give up my fond memories upon learning the meaning and implications of the word "franchise."

If you are really going to make the claim that all the toys and entertainment ever made are nothing more or less than the physical manifestation of corporate greed, the distillation and packaging of evil, worthless glitz pushed on us by soulless money-sucking megabusinesses out to pry lunch money from the fingers of little children, then I would like to take this opportunity to call you on your hypocrisy. Can you honestly say you have never felt the magic that comes from playing with a cool toy? Can you honestly say to me you have never purchased a single game console, fancy cell phone, pair of brand-name sneakers, or hideously overpriced cup of gourmet coffee? Can you honestly say you have never seen a toy or piece of entertainment you wanted for yourself, whether advertised or not?

I very much doubt you can.

 

[Jetsetneo]

*major spoilers ahead*

Can somebody, anybody, explain to me why the US was apparently the only country with any kind of military force whatsoever in the final battle? Or why they disregarded physics entirely in the last segment? I suppose this is the norm in Michael Bay films.

First question: It was in the United States of America? and earlier the Decepticons threaten the rest of the world into a stupor. If sh!t wasn't going down in your country, and an apparent truce was made why would you bother sending troops? Plus it was only a handful of seals and 'bot' specialists (minor correction: there where apparently U.S. infantry, I'm assuming National Guard that were already stationed in Chicago, which I will remind you is fairly towards the center of the U.S.). And all the action was in Chicago.

Second Question: They vaguely established that the portal already BENDS THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AS HUMANITY KNOWS IT. Yes, the second Cybertron showed up it should started smashing earth or vice versa, gravitational pulls, yadda-yadda. In a movie where GIANT TALKING ROBOTS WHO TRANSFORM INTO MOTOR VEHICLES. I can suspend my belief that the portal system (which exact name escapes me atm) can sustain another world in a pseudo force field that won't destroy the other local planet. They did this in SW:Return of the Jedi, why are we arguing this now?

 

[Dastardly]

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Bob actually has a few good things to say about Transformers 3.

Watch Video

Sorry, Bob. Just can't go with you on this one. And we agree on nearly everything else... except your irrational (and yeah, man, it is) hatred of Michael Bay. This movie, like Cloverfield did something terribly right in my eyes:

Sorry, but new audiences just aren't going to relate to archetypally "heroic" robots... but that's what the robots needed to be. So the movie connects us to the human drama instead. We see things through the eyes of the men and women on the ground. And you know what? It worked.

Not because it broke new ground or really made me think. But because when Shia is telling everyone off at the beginning, I know I've been that frustrated--and I know I would be if I'd gotten done saving the world twice and was still a mailroom clerk. The fight scenes are confusing and overwhelming because that's what I would see if I were watching two giant robots from space fighting.

I'm not saying they're great. I'm not saying your criticisms aren't well-founded, in most cases. I'm saying the degree to which you hate these movies is unwarranted, which means it can only really be fueled by personal bias. The problem you're having with these movies is that they're not being told from the point-of-view that you would prefer, and that creates an irreconcilable difference from the get-go.

Rather than try to engage this movie on its own terms, you've chosen to stubbornly hold your ground. That's your right, sure... but it's just not always productive. Bay made a strategic choice--will more audiences relate to the robots, or the people? The people--so we'll go with that.

The movie is a blast to watch. The characters aren't groundbreaking, but they feel real. The peril is pretty perilous, and the victories satisfying. It's not as awful as you want it to be.

 

[UberNoodle]

well, let's see if this thread breaks the record set by the Expendables.

Also, did you cry a bit when Ehren Kruger (yeah, the guy who brought us Scream 3 and Skids and Mudflap) raped one of the most iconic Star Trek lines EVER? The only thing worse than that is Bay constantly exploiting imagery of the WTC incident and even the fucking Challenger explosion. Fuck you, Bay, I hope you get raped by hobos.

This entire YEAR has been terrible for movies. Like Travers over at Rollingstone said, if we had the Oscars right now it would be a disaster. It's like a reverse version of 1982; there's a lot of product being shown at theaters, but it's ALL CRAP (except for X-Men: First Class)

Yes, 1982 was the greatest year for genre film ever. It shall never come again.

http://www.imdb.com/year/1982/

Beautiful.

 

[UberNoodle]

What did Nimoy do?

He apparently makes a cameo in this film.

And that got a dis from Bob? Not cool Bob, not cool.

He voiced Sentinel Prime. I guess Bob thinks since Spock is now in someway pushed into Bay's movie it's a disappointment.

Nimoy was Galvatron in the first and 'only' Transformers movie. It's a step down to be in this current one.

 

[Condor219]

*major spoilers ahead*

Can somebody, anybody, explain to me why the US was apparently the only country with any kind of military force whatsoever in the final battle? Or why they disregarded physics entirely in the last segment? I suppose this is the norm in Michael Bay films.

First question: It was in the United States of America? and earlier the Decepticons threaten the rest of the world into a stupor. If sh!t wasn't going down in your country, and an apparent truce was made why would you bother sending troops? Plus it was only a handful of seals and 'bot' specialists (minor correction: there where apparently U.S. infantry, I'm assuming National Guard that were already stationed in Chicago, which I will remind you is fairly towards the center of the U.S.). And all the action was in Chicago.

Second Question: They vaguely established that the portal already BENDS THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AS HUMANITY KNOWS IT. Yes, the second Cybertron showed up it should started smashing earth or vice versa, gravitational pulls, yadda-yadda. In a movie where GIANT TALKING ROBOTS WHO TRANSFORM INTO MOTOR VEHICLES. I can suspend my belief that the portal system (which exact name escapes me atm) can sustain another world in a pseudo force field that won't destroy the other local planet. They did this in SW:Return of the Jedi, why are we arguing this now?

The physics part, I was referring to the lack of gravitational effect the giant freaking planet mass was having on the earth. I can accept the fact they built a portal, but that doesn't mean every law ever is suspended while it's active. And for that matter, how did Cybertron get back? Sentinel was the only guy who could operate the thing, and nobody set the portal in reverse. Which also begs the question, who was the smart guy who decided that killing the only guy that could rid the planet from this giant hulking mass hovering over Earth that was inevitably bound to hurtle into the surface of the planet was a good idea?


And even though the battle was in the US, how did the rest of the world possibly get entirely frozen by the decepticons? All of its military force was completely brought down in utter shambles by these relatively few robots? There weren't enough to sustain that kind of takeover, given they said their numbers were about 200. Assuming they had 50 or so at Chicago, the countries of the world easily outnumber the decepticons. I suppose we just decided to forget about each other countries' respective extensive defense systems and highly trained operatives. The US is the only country with people capable of fighting whatsoever (I live in America, just clarifying that I'm not someone with huge amounts of hate towards them).

And that doesn't excuse a lot of the other plot flaws. Why does the robot race that can make a machine capable of creating a space-time rift seem to lack even basic targeting systems, heat vision, or simple radar? Why do these machines, capable of turning into my grandma's left buttcheek if they wanted to, decide to adopt the incredibly vulnerable humanoid form? Why do they communicate in English when talking to each other when no other humans are around? How do 6 slow-moving, obvious planes with radar signatures clear from miles away get even remotely close to Chicago, let alone land in it? Why do they need to get close to shoot the main pillar down? They should be able to shoot a dragonfly's wings off from 20 miles away using a box of Cheerios, given their technological advancements. They are a ridiculously advanced race, but they seemed to have left their common sense back on Cybertron.


Note: I enjoyed most of this movie. The plot flaws just started to bug me when they arose at the end.

 

[[The]Rock]

Fair points their bob-o

 

[UberNoodle]

Bob's nº1 rule: "You can make a good movie out of anything"
Bob's nº2 rule: "Whenever I review a film I don't like I have to blatantly insult whoever may like it at least once"

I think you are being far too sensitive. If anybody is insulting demographics, it's the producers of these films. For most part, I think what Bob is referencing is that, it is THOSE people who the producers are 'trying' to hook, and it is those producers' OWN view of us all that he is reflecting. It is THEY and not Bob, who employ the stereotypes and think that we are all breast addicted, hormonal man-children just wanting to see more breasts, more cars, more guns and more things blowing up, and not much else.

 

[Cojon]

great reference to Histeria! at 1:30. Might I suggest a Big Picture episode dedicated to the best educational cartoon of all time?

 

[Jetsetneo]

*major spoilers ahead*

*SNIP*

From what I saw the portal had some beam effect that was containing the entirety of Cybertron, I'm sure at that point we can just assume its holding Cybertron to a point that the natural effects of another planet being so close to another don't exist. As for smashing the guy and the portal control. I think we just have to chalk that up to movie logic, sometimes things are not going to be re-explained, just in reverse and a fully thought-out solution also brought to the front. Basically there were going to be 2 options: press a button on the thing, and it will have cybertron sent back with no fuss, or smash it, and the same thing happens. 'Smart' movies make this type of leap all the time for sake of dramatics. TDK's 'cell phone sonar' was just similarly ridiculous to me, but I rolled with it.

I think I better understand your military question now, it wasnt't " why were there no other countries' forces in the U.S.?" But "Why didn't we see any other forces fight said decepitcons? in those places (which was clearly seen in the movie)" I think the answer to this is mostly 'they were sneaky enough?' Besides, all they had to do was be in those places momentarily to set up, and then send up those portal pieces. The main control center was in Chicago, that was the important one, sure the rest of the world could probably break a few no problem, but there were hundreds, and the thing that controlled them was in Chicago, plus I'm assuming that only all the necessary parties knew the control was there (The Autobots, Section 7, Deceptions etc.)

For the last bit: We'd more than have all those same issues if we had a movie that was closer to the source material. How do those blocky legs move? Where did that gun come from? Why ARE they humanoid? Why trucks when they could've all picked something that could fly? Why aren't more humans going with the Decepticons(something I REALLY enjoyed in DotM was a minor exploration of this.)? Why wouldn't the Autobots or Decepticons arm the humans with similar weapon tech?
A lot of this is just suspension of disbelief. How serious or NOT serious do we want them to be? Thats kinda my problem with all three of these movies, but I still enjoy the action scenes. I love the CG, its incredible, as an aspiring animator I was in awe at the end part of this movie. But testicle jokes? oil leaks? along side Robot 'blood'? Humans being shot into ash? Idk, something tells me that I could edit these down into more comprehensible movies actually, and that THAT is more of the problem than anything else. Also ROTF was written during a writers strike so...it was destined to be all sorts of terrible