Transformers: ROTF

b-man1 · Post by **b-man1** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:51 am

wow...sounds like a bust. such a shame...but i'll skip paying $12.50 to see it on IMAX.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/transfo ... he_fallen/

wvjohn · Post by **wvjohn** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:44 am

from CNN

"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" -- the most terrible revenge since Montezuma's -- is louder, longer and lamer than the 2007 hit it succeeds.
Both Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox run away a lot in new "Transformers" -- she in slow motion, says Tom Charity.

Which is saying a lot.

Long story short: The Decepticons are back, fixed on destroying Sam (Shia LaBeouf), Optimus Prime and the Earth, in that order.

Produced by Hasbro -- the accompanying trailer for "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra" suggests that the company's not-exactly-subtle strategy is to mass market war toys for boys -- "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" 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.

Director Michael Bay is famous for blowing things up, but you could invade a small country with less firepower than he expends on this extended-length commercial.

Err · Post by **Err** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:19 am

[quote="wvjohn"]
Director Michael Bay . . .QUOTE]

That's really all you need to know when deciding to see a movie or not. He has to be one of the worst directors of all time.

normalicy · Post by **normalicy** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:57 am

It (the preview) looked a bit cheesy & I've heard a few negative reviews from previewers (one was a woman & said that maybe she just didn't get it). I'll probably still see it for the action though.

G.I. Joe looks even wose from the previews. Now Surrogate on the other hand looks pretty neat.

Pugsley · Post by **Pugsley** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:02 pm

Every time I hear Michael Bay all i can think of is this:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KRS90V8BQGo&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KRS90V8BQGo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

normalicy · Post by **normalicy** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:55 pm

Every time I hear Michael Bay all i can think of is this:

LOL, that's great. Never saw that.

Executioner · Post by **Executioner** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:15 pm

Wow, sounds like it sucks. I liked the first one though.

DoPeY5007 · Post by **DoPeY5007** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:25 pm

I saw it at 12:25am today and loved it

I think it was better than the first, and they hit more of the origninal storys

normalicy · Post by **normalicy** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:32 pm

Goes to show, one man's trash is another man's treasure. I'm likely to watch it anyhow after the crowds die down just because I liked the first & even if the story is crap, I expect there will be good effects.

ZYFER · Post by **ZYFER** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:40 am

Movie critics are the least useful source of information when you judge how good a movie is. They seem to pound on action movies more nowadays and love those repetitive drama types.

DoPeY5007 · Post by **DoPeY5007** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:54 am

normalicy wrote:Goes to show, one man's trash is another man's treasure. I'm likely to watch it anyhow after the crowds die down just because I liked the first & even if the story is crap, I expect there will be good effects.

There were!

One that they NEED to fix though, she is running "slow" and you can see the CGI explosions INFRONT of here when they should be behind her

Pugsley · Post by **Pugsley** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:13 am

Speaking of movie critics, What crack were they smoking when they reviewed the happening? That was a crap move.

On the same token, I would like to see a Michale Bay movie with no explosions. it would be like the Happening (no twist!)

normalicy · Post by **normalicy** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:09 am

Movie critics are the least useful source of information when you judge how good a movie is. They seem to pound on action movies more nowadays and love those repetitive drama types.

Most of the consumer reviews gave negative feedback as well. Many people said that they loved the first movie, but hated the new one. Makes me worry when even the consumers don't like it.

Pugsley · Post by **Pugsley** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:07 pm

normalicy wrote:Most of the consumer reviews gave negative feedback as well. Many people said that they loved the first movie, but hated the new one. Makes me worry when even the consumers don't like it.

Yes from what i have been reading this is true, but still, gonna go see it.

FanTum · Post by **FanTum** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:01 pm

Great flic! Good action, still some delinquint teenage humor, but all around sweet!