Movie critics generally despise director Michael Bay, but after watching his latest movie, “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” it’s clear they’ve viewed him too harshly.
A Michael Bay movie is like an oasis, a chance to catch up on meandering thoughts, recalibrate one’s supermarket shopping list or even mentally balance your checkbook.
After all, there’s absolutely nothing happening on screen that has a chance of engaging the brain, the heart or any other organ beyond the ears.
This is one loud sequel.
“Fallen” reteams stars Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox with those shape-changing robots – Autobots and Decepticons.
Shia’s Sam Witwicky is off to college, but he still carries a torch for his grease-monkey galpal (Fox). But before he can settle into his dorm room he learns a vital piece to the Transformers puzzle was left in his home.
That draws the interest of the remaining Decepticons, who are regrouping as the story opens in an attempt to revive The Fallen, a long-buried robot who hopes to snuff out the sun.
Confused yet?
Beyond trotting out a plot far more complicated than even a skilled director could untangle, Bay takes the incoherency which marred the final half hour of the first film and ups the ante beyond even what his detractors thought possible.
Nothing makes sense here. Nothing. It’s all but impossible to figure out the good robots from the bad robots when they fight – which happens plenty. A crush of new robot characters are either absurd, ill-used or downright Jar Jar Binks-like in their annoyance.
We’ll leave the racially insensitive, ghetto-talking ‘bots for other cultural critics to chew on.
LaBeouf’s Sam is no longer the likable high school geek. Now, he’s a cucumber cool hero who spends the entire movie running. Here. There. Everywhere. He runs and runs and runs, and those nasty Decepticons can’t seem to stop him.
Sam keeps running, all the while explosions go off all around him. It’s never clear what’s happening on screen, or why Bay keeps cutting to U.S. military forces who spend more time fighting government bureaucrats than evil robots.
At one point a tiny robot confronts Fox’s character and says, “you’re hot, but you ain’t too bright.”
Somewhere you gotta think every gaffer, grip and best boy on set is chortling just off mic.
“Revenge” does offer one cinematic first. One of the soldiers cries out, “the Jordanians are here,” when that country’s military forces enter the fray. The moment could be a sop to international film audiences, but since absolutely nothing makes sense in the film it’s silly to even guess about the subplot point.
The first “Transformers” was near perfect popcorn entertainment before devolving into one long, loud, utterly absurd finale.
“Revenge of the Fallen” isn’t nearly as cohesive as that slam-bang finish.
(Photo: “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” revisits the fight between the Autobots and Decepticons.)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
Why do I get the feeling that they started with the title, then wrote a plot around it?
I didn’t know Michael Bay movies had plots.
All well and good, Christian, but can I take my 7-year-old to see it? I mean, I expected it to be senseless, FX-driven rubbish — just like the first one.
Will be posting later about the language and sexual content in the film … it’s not appropriate for young viewers.
@Ben Boychuck
Here are more details on why parents REALLY need to keep their kids from this one:
*Debbie Schlussel:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2009/06/transformers_2.html#comments
*Plugged In:
http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movies/movies/a0004696.cfm
@Christian Toto
The following Breitbart.com article weighs in on the ” racially insensitive, ghetto-talking ‘bots”:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9915KR01&show_article=1&catnum=6
Also, Blacksuperhero.com takes the pulse of Black sci-fi/comic fans’ view of the “ghetto bots.” Images of the robots are included:
http://www.blacksuperhero.com/bsh/viewtopic.php?t=12685&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
As a Black sci-fi/comic conservative, the previews of these characters look beyond Sambo.
I can agree that their are always negatives to every single movie but to make the movie seem like the biggest piece of [expletitive] is [expletive] in itself considering the A graded reviews of the actual people watching it. As for the kid endangering, that’s fine to say your kid can’t watch it after all that is the parents opinion but don’t go out and trash talk the movie because they didn’t make it to your kids specifications.
Movies are made to entertain people and that is it. Not supposed to be a real event that will change our lifes, Just a movie that if we allow ourselves to look past the fake effects and fake plots maybe we can start to enjoy them.
Graham:
A. I’m allowed to give my review of a movie. This is a movie review site.
B. My review is not based on how other people liked or didn’t like it.
C. I’m allowed to point out that the material in the film is coarse enough that most parents would consider it in poor taste for their children. Some parents bring their toddlers to R-rated movies. I’m sure those parents will ignore my advice.
D. Can we all retire the ‘it’s just a movie, it’s there to entertain us’ line of reasoning? Does that mean that any movie I see is good simply because it exists to entertain me? Nonsense.
E. Thanks for not calling me names — although I did clean up the language in your post. I do my best to keep this site free of profanity. Nothing wrong with cussing … it’s just a personal choice I made about this site.
F. Did you see the movie? Please share where we disagree. That would be far more constructive.
Graham: if it’s “just a movie” that’s “made to entertain people and that is it”, why do you seem to have been upset by a negative review? In fact, why did you bother reading any reviews in the first place?
The first film began with an explanation of ‘the cube’ – as the giver of all things life in the universe. After that, anything goes and Bayhem ensues so who’s looking for a plot, continuity or logic? The critics whores panning this are old Trekkie’s who cannot see or hear beyond Spock’s earlobe to understand this series is delivering exactly what it’s audience wants. Babes – bots – explosions.
Maybe fanboys should be disappointed that the film makers put out an inferior product, rather than mad at the folks who point that out.
For what it’s worth, I remember being OUTRAGED about the poor review “Masters of the Universe” received when that movie came out. I was probably 9 or 10 at the time…
Great feedback, pmm … I bet if the web existed back then you would have let those critics have it!
Remember how geeks couldn’t criticize The Phantom Menace when it came out, no matter how lousy it was?
I don’t remember that at all. Instead, I remember the horror that sunk in after I left the theater. I was depressed for three days. I seem to recall a fair bit of criticism from others, too, but that may be a trick of my brain.
But by the time Attack of the Clones rolled around, I was mocking it during the show, to the amusement of the people I was with.