Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Hm. I saw a lot of action, but sometimes I just didn't know who was with who, where is what. The beginning was decent, I enjoyed it, but then it went downhill, although the action and noble gestures increased. Too bad, I just wasn't enjoying it. Anyway, if I were a guy I'd add a star for Megan Fox's cleavage, those running scenes, they really could have used some slow motion, eh? X-) But then again, I didn't expect more from it, so no disappointment. Definitely worse than the first one. The message "love and peace and memories" was sent again, so I'm expecting another installment. (22/07/2009)

I would deserve a slap for expressing everywhere that the other Transformers cannot be great. Because they, in fact, once again gave me a sense of absolute happiness that cinema has given us blockbusters. The revenge of the defeated may not rewrite history and will never be anything other than a thrilling ride, which surpasses the story with its visuals (even though it is irresistibly fairy-tale-like). Those who were so captivated by the adventure of the boy and his protector are suddenly disappointed when Bay's vision brings something even more magnificent. Not me, I bow before the story of the same boy, who, however, has much more to do this time. Enthusiasm, wide-eyed and touched by how intoxicating a film can be. I go to the cinema because of this, and I'm sorry that the series never reached this peak again. (27/06/2009)

Michael Bay has transformed himself into his own genre, where he has made his own rules that physics, logic, and even Spielberg himself cannot affect. On the other hand, no one else has such perfectly stitched visuals with slow-motion shots of the characters' hellishly serious faces, military formations, and the setting sun with heroic music blaring. It’s off the rails, without a drop of judgment and a sense of calm. And with the overblown runtime, it hits the viewer with the vigor of a little cheeky brat whose rich parents bought him a lot of toys from Hasbro and he doesn't know what to do with them out of mischief. So there are explosions everywhere and in between all this we have Shia and Megan, who just happen to look good again. I admit that I have probably never felt so awkward after leaving the movie theater for having actually liked this. But I don't want to see it a second time, not without the assistance of the big screen. PS: Even after a second viewing, it's still surprisingly entertaining. In a perversely demented way, but it's fun. :) (23/06/2009)

Bay likes to escalate. This means that the second film is bigger, more explosive, more infantile, stupider, more lobotomized... maybe a little funnier. Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman used most of their intelligent ideas in the Star Trek prequel script, so in this Hasbro mishmash they have no choice but to dilute the really demented plot with decent gags and self-parodying one-liners. Which is nice - otherwise Revenge of the Tinsmiths would seem really unbearable to me. Even so, watching two and a half hours of destruction, confusing action and rushing concrete mixers is a solid impact on the nervous system. Especially because, compared to the first film, it's no longer ballbusting - it's hackneyed. The moment of surprise is there, so we get Emmerich's recipe "if you don't know what to do, blow up as much of the world's ropes as possible". At the end, the divine Michael Bay prepared his much-loved pathos in a raw state for me, for which I thank him and send him a tin kiss. I know that Michael Bay lovers will be drooling with happiness, but for a viewer, who, in addition to a ton of steel armor, also likes a little bit of thought put into things, this year's blockbuster is Star Trek. And that won’t change no matter what Michael Bay does. (19/06/2009)

This series has never grown on me since the first installment. However, I have seen all three of them. I watched the first one out of interest, the third one because my brother wanted to go to the movies after years, and they happened to be showing it, which could have looked cool in the cinema. As for the second one, I watched it to fill the gaps between the first and the third film. It's not worth it. Michael Bay just confirmed that he's a freak for technology, and that's the only conclusion the film brings. The robots may look cool, the effects are actually good, but the story disappeared somewhere with the jokes that are inserted into the main character's mouth. Shia LaBeouf should be the catchy cool guy who carries the whole film, but he's just a clumsy person who got his hands on super toys that he loves. "Transformers" are actually like adult "Toy Story", but with the difference that this is pure masturbation over super awesome technology, grand action, and completely dumb story. And Megan Fox? I definitely won't be one of those who daily search the internet for her new photo where she shows at least 20% of her left nipple. If Megan is compared to Angelina, someone has made a big mistake because Angelina, as far as I know, can act excellently when she wants to. Megan just has a pretty face. As soon as she left - in the third film, she had to be replaced by a model who didn't play any role - I immediately gave the film 10% more. And I wasn't the only one. But the second one is simply a travesty. Summer blockbusters like this should be banned. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/06/nebezpecne-znamosti-jak-ztratit-kluka.html (21/02/2013)