Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Review
Jun 24, 2009 by Vic HoltremanHow does Transformers 2 compare to the first film? Find out here…
Short version: Just like super-sizing a McDonalds meal doesn’t make it taste any better, neither does giving us more of what was in the first film improve Transformers 2.
Screen Rant reviews Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Regular readers here at Screen Rant are familiar with my disdain for the first Tranformers movie. While many agree with me and others disagree vehemently – both sides have been expecting me to skewer Michael Bay’s Tranformers 2. I didn’t go in expecting much, and that may have actually caused me to not judge it quite as harshly as a lot of other reviewers are doing.
The (very thin) story here is that of Sam (Shia Lebouf) heading off to college, trying to go back to a semblance of a normal life – where you don’t have giant, talking robots that turn into cool cars. He’ll be leaving behind tough biker chick Michaela (Megan Fox) but they’ll continue a long distance relationship through the wonders of the internet.
Before Sam leaves, he discovers a shard of the “All Spark” is still in his possession – when he touches it, it has some sort of effect on him and is shown to still have the power to animate mechanical objects. Thinking he has it safely secured, Sam heads off to college where he meets his roommate Leo (Ramon Rodriguez), a guy who runs a website dedicated to robot sightings which is not nearly as popular as he imagines it to be.
It turns out the Autobots have been working with the government trying to track down the vestiges of the Decepticon robots that are still on Earth. It looks like the Decepticons have been searching for something, but no one (not even the Autobots) know what that might be.
Of course the last thing that will happen to Sam is a “normal” college experience, and he is soon drawn back into the world of the Transformers. He’s joined by his reluctant roommate Leo and of course soon enough by Michaela and the buffoonish (now ex) government agent from the first film, Simmons (John Turturro).
From here the whole point is to stop the Decepticons (led by the ancient robot called “The Fallen”) from getting their claws on a device that is of course a danger to all of humanity.
And it takes a really, really long time.
In Revenge of the Fallen there’s more of everything that was in the first film: More robots, more explosions, more soldiers, more battle scenes, more juvenile (and inappropriate for kids) humor and more foul language.
In the end it doesn’t make this film any better than the first one – it just makes it feel longer. I was surprised to learn that this film is only 6 minutes longer than the first one… it feels a LOT longer than that. Thirty to forty minutes could have been cut pretty easily – it’s a movie about giant robot battles, does it NEED to be two hours and twenty minutes long? Even the scenes most people go to see, the battle scenes, drag on far too long.
So what was good? I liked the scenes involving the military, great stuff. I liked that Bay pulled back the cameras on the robot battles so you can actually tell what’s happening (although the shots were too tight once again at the end of the film) – and about the best robot fight took place in the forest. Not “awesome” but probably the best thing in the film.
On the bright side, I actually liked Kevin Dunn as Sam’s dad in this one, although the mom annoyed the heck out of me again. Aside from the “humor” I’ll describe below, I thought some of it was actually OK – even Turturro wasn’t quite as annoying. The CGI was excellent, although at this point for a film like this that should be a given.
What wasn’t so good? Well, beyond “everything else,” a big pet peeve of mine about the first film was the juvenile humor that I didn’t think fit with the action. In the sequel, most of the “humor” happens during the first third of the film and thankfully it’s not as prevalent later on (although it still pops up from time to time). In this film, instead of masturbation jokes, robots “peeing” fluid on people and acting like teenage girls hiding in a back yard, we have dog humping (twice), a robot humping Megan Fox’s leg, gigantic robot testicles, farting robots and a college professor who’s introductory lecture is limited exclusively to veiled sexual references.
There’s also TONS of inappropriate language for the under-10 crowd that is sure to show up for this movie – including but not limited to a**hole, pu**y, ball sack, b*itch and sh*t. And of course in addition to the lingering shots of Megan Fox, there are suggestive scenes with actress Isabel Lucas, including an obviously carefully crafted “peek” shot of her rear/crotch.
I only mention all this because over and over and over again I’ve heard in defense of the first film: “It’s a kids movie!!”
Right.
And despite all the action I found myself kind of bored… I actually almost nodded off at one point. Again: TOO LONG.
Oh, and yes, there are a couple of robots in the film (the “Twins”) that talk and look like something out of an old minstrel show – that was pretty hard to fathom. I could possibly see if they acted like rappers (due to absorbing what they’ve seen on MTV or something), but ignorant, Southern, gold-toothed robots who can’t read? It was reminiscent of the two black crows from Disney’s Dumbo (which was made back in 1941). Of course one of the actors providing the voices is black, so I’d be curious to hear his take on all this.
So, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is more of the same. If you thought the first one “rocked” you’ll probably think the same of this one; if you thought the first one was terrible, you’ll probably think this one is even worse. Me, I had such low expectations going in and already knew what to expect based on the first film. I didn’t have such a violent reaction to it – although I certainly don’t intend to ever watch it again.
If you plan on bringing kids, I would highly recommend you check this out yourself before bringing them.
Our Rating:
2 out of 5
Around the web:
Loading ...
if in some u mean few than ya, i totally agree
Rich are you seriously using the Box office to show how great a film was? X3, and SM3 also did very well and were also terrible films. Titanic wasn’t horrible, but it certainly wasn’t the greatest movie ever made. According to you it would be though because of it’s huge Box office.
Let me see if I got this right Rich your top ten movies of all time must be.
1 Titanic
2 The Dark Knight
3 Star Wars
4 Shrek 2
5 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial
6 Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Men
7 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest
8 Spider-Man
9 Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith
10 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Do you hate every single movie that has ever made less than 40 mil at the box office?
@Daniel
that is a great list though. i can’t argue against any of those films because i liked them all. so maybe money does mean something.
ehe you missed the point,
movies dont do well at the box office unless a MASS QUANTITY OF PEOPLE SEE THEM, AND FOR THE majority LIKE THEM.
watchmen is a perfect example.. so much hype,, on so many critics top 5 most anticipated list to begin the year (INCLUDING ALMOST ALL THE PEOPLE WHO voiced a list ON THIS
SITE.) if that movie had been anything close to good it would not be in the 300′s place for the B.O..
Im not saying its the greatest movie of all time. I AM SIMPLY SAYING MORE PEOPLE LIKE IT THAN HATED IT, MUCH MORE.
Why does it matter to you what other people think of something? Do you wait for the box office numbers to come in before you decide if you like a movie or not? I can care less if a movie makes $1 trillion on its opening day, if it sucks and I didn’t like it, then it sucks and I didn’t like it. I don’t like rap music either and that’s like the #1 music, it’s still garbage… I don’t look at others when I’m deciding what clothes to buy, I buy what’s comfortable and suits my lifestyle. I think it’s a pretty sad existence if you base everything you do on what’s popular at the time…
KEN… It doesnt. and i could care less what you or anyone else thinks. please people understand what i am saying.
right now i have set aside my opinion and am simply looking at this as an unbiased analyzer in order to speak for the majority. And ive also thrown in facts to help back my statements.
And truthfullly you can only do this once the movie has come or is about to come out of theaters, thus is why i mentioned transformers 1 not 2 and the people who vioced there opinion about that one last time. I only bring it up because this looks like its heading down the same road. we’ll c though wont we.
Rich that is so far Off I don’t even know where to begin.
“if that movie had been anything close to good it would not be in the 300’s place for the B.O..”
That is by far the most inaccurate statement I’ve ever seen. Most of the time GOOD movies don’t make 300M. The 300m mark or higher is usually reserved for popcorn flicks and not good movie with a few rare exceptions. Anything that high is usually something with no character development a dull plot and lots of explosions. It’s something kind of fun to watch once. Truly great movies usually do better on DVD than they did in the box office and some really great movies have been very limited theaters and don’t even make the top 600 movies at the box office. The Box Office just means it appealed to the masses. That doesn’t mean it’s good it usually means that it was fun for adults to watch and it wasn’t rated R so they got to bring their kids.
I can disagree with a few of those movies as could a lot of others. Look no further than Episode one. Which made as much as it did because it said Star Wars. It was panned pretty harshly and a lot of major Star Wars fans hated which says a lot. The pirates films were just bad movies especially the last two.
1 Titanic
4 Shrek 2
6 Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Men
7 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest
9 Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith
None of those movies should be on anyones top 10. Shrek the first one was cool after that they were dumb. Titanic was good if you were a 13 year old girl. The second trilogy of Star Wars was pretty much just bad and Pirates was nothing but crap and along the same appeal as Titanic tween girls.
Lets not forget that Passion of the Christ was in the top 15 box office and umm not a good film.
Daniel Man wtf, why cant you understand
With the amount of hype, publicity, expectation, and money put into that film it has no excuses
That is the reason it should of been higher.
for goodness sakes look at some of the movies that are already ahead of it.. the hangover ( SOOOOO many people had zero expectation for this film) has already passed it, in fact its not even close.
stop looking to argue if you have no valid attempt
Oh and thats not the money it pulled in DANIEL its the movies place on that same chart YOUR READING
cmon man
Watchmen was actually a good film. There is a difference between good and appealing to the world. Wathmen was Rated R so kids didn’t get to see it. Strike one. Watchmen was odd different and new so people were skeptical and some simply didn’t get it. It was also a smart film it’s really odd for a smart film to do really well. Watchmen lacked a lot of major appealing things for being very successful at the box office. The major hype behind it was from people who are comic fans. Out side of comics most people didn’t know what it was and were not that interested. If anyone expected it to even make 200M they just had no logic. You would be correct if your argument was movies that make a lot of money are appealing to the masses. However your argument seems to be movies that don’t make money suck and movies that make money are the best. Which is very inaccurate and a little dense.
Daniel…
watchmens budget was a little over 100 million
It made a little over 100 million
This would be considered a FAILURE
next brainbuster??
rich, I still see no point in caring how well it does in the box office. Shouldn’t the suits in the movie studios care about that? Why should WE care how many people pay to watch this movie. You claim to not base your opinions on it, so what, you’re just stating a point that all of us already know about how much it’s making in the BO?? Well, in that case, thanks??
Actually know it’s not a failure. It made it’s budget in America not including the nearly 100% profit over seas.
Watchmen $130 million budget
Worldwide: $182,735,282 .
It wasn’t a huge hit, but that’s a profit and a movie that makes a profit no matter how small is never considered a failure. Marvel Declared this last Hulk a huge success even though domesticly it made less than it’s budget as well. It was also widely considered good. I’ll take the opinions of people with brains over money that a film made because of lots of big explosions. Transformers made more than Watchmen. That is a fact that is true. Watchmen however was a much better movie. It had this strange concept where characters changed/ evolved it was real original it had a new unique concept called character development and something pretty fresh called plot. Transformers is dumb joke boom dumb joke boom boom boom boom dumb joke. Even Transformer fans say it’s not a great movie, but it’s a fun pop corn flick.
Just curious rich are you Bays brother? Just seems like something bay would say “my movie made lots of money it is teh greatest!!!11!!!”
Ahaha yes exaclty ken. thats exaclty what im am doing..
and all the rest was just response.. as this is.
i have seen so much negative feedback for this movie and its only true defense is the numbers it can post.
bad movies dont climb to the top, they may have a good opening, but they die quickly.
good movies can sustain.. and again my whole class started in defense of the first one and the negative feedback it also recieved, and the scary similarities.
thank you again ken for being the first one to understand what i was saying.
by the by i see transformers 2 close too one in my view of how good it was.
2 had a 300 million dollar budget compared to 1′s.
i liked 2 a lot but it should of been better knowing this
Rich bad movies do well in the box office all the time or did you miss Spiderman 3 and X3 or even Transformers ? I know you have seen the box office, but have you seen the movies? These types of movies can do very well despite being bad they have a built in fan base and wildly recognized names and accessible to children.
Everyone who is arguing against this film, all you have to do is look to the right of this page and check out the poll numbers for this week’s poll
Nuff said.
Daniel LOL i know that.
You are dropping the expectations for that movie. which were enormus. a movie with high expectations (and if its good) usually blows the cover off its budget. and as you stated , uh it didnt.
and the advertising that went along with it too.
and after the first hulk there wasnt a ton of expectation for the incredible hulk, though i loved that film. but the first one had to have affected that in some way.
but like i said TR1 was 150 mil bud, TR2 was 300 mil lol
should of been fantastic in this case lol but i didnt even think it was close-jus really good
Not only did Transformers 2 make alot of money, but the majority of people loved it.
im not disputing wether or not you like/ dislike those movies daniel
grief you are frustrating, to pull in so much. A lot of somebodys somwhere liked those movies. moreso than the movies you might of loved lower on that list.
in thinking the movie was bad you are simply in the few.
though im there with you buddy casue sm3 was disgraceful lol
@Oscar
That’s good to know, I’m happy for you guys, woot, people agree with you, yay!
lol just sayin. Spider-Man 3 made alot of money but not alot of people liked it, this is the opposite, lots of money and alot of people liked it
Well, enough people are going to see it and probably coming out not too disappointed.
RottenTomatoes has a 21% approval rating and at IMDB they’re showing a 6.8 out of 10.
Are people really liking as much as we think?
I don’t care what Rotten Tomatoes says anymore not after they gave T3 a 70%.
I thought The Passion of the CHrist was a GREAT movie!!
Most people go to movies with friends and they enjoy the experience. Not a lot of people really watch movies to analyze them. That’s where the media hype comes in. The more media hype a movie gets, the more likely people will watch it in groups. Which means the more likely it would result in positive viewer ratings (they are enjoying the experience of being with their friends at a sold out movie). While movies that don’t get a lot of hype, people tend to watch it in smaller groups, by themselves, or just with their girlfriend or boyfriend. Then there’s less of a spectacle, less of the group/party like experience, then people tend to rate the movie based on the movie itself.
Obviously if the movie sucks and wasn’t exciting, group or no group would result in bad ratings, but as long as it has lots of explosions, good special effects, basically as long as it has good eye candy, people will enjoy it when the experience is good.
Movie critics tend to rate the movies, not the experience, that’s why these big summer popcorn flicks tend to have very opposite reactions from fans and critics. While movies like Gran Torino tend to have very similar opinions between critics and viewers…
Just what I’ve noticed about movies and ratings, of course I could be completely wrong…
@Matt Keith
LOL, I’ve said that before, and Crank 2 is in the mid 60′s… lol
And they actually recently went and found an old review that was written BEFORE T2 was released that was negative and added it so now T2 no longer has 100%. Thanks Rottentomatoes.
I agree w/ Greenknight333….”The Passion of the Christ” was an amazing film.
I never saw that, heard you just watched Jesus get whipped for half of the movie. Not sure why I would want to see that, lol.