Transformers: Dark of the Moon

A perfect example of complete dementia, which does not make sense for even a moment. Fortunately, this is not meant to be watched for its dialogues or logic, but rather because for the technological computer masturbation and the possibility to enjoy the action scenes, which are once more ball-busting. The first twenty minutes are good, the last hour is as exciting as it should be, but the hour of filler in between is totally boring. The first Transformers therefore remain the best part of the trilogy. (02/09/2011)

I have bad with disruptive elements when it comes to Transformers. After a terrible experience with part two I went to the Imax, in the morning... but still I encountered kids. They were chatting away and kicking my seat from behind. And I think they didn’t even notice the movie going on. The screenplay... ehm... is some super serious conspiracy nonsense where there were fewer dumb jokes than last time, which is good, but at the same time so much happens that 154 minutes was just too little. Perhaps the director’s cut will be more satisfying in this respect. So that’s that. Now to the action, which is awesome as always, much more synoptic and the final action sequence that takes up the last fifty minutes of the movie is actually in 3D, just incredible. I actually had the feeling that Bay made Transformers 3 just to push the boundaries of 3D technology even closer to perfection. The highlight is probably the paratrooper mission in Chicago. Otherwise, the actors give their standard performances, Malkovich was really quite entertaining, and Rosie Huntington-Whiteley (one of the most beautiful new faces) is a perfect example of an accessory to the main character to the fullest (it’s quite funny how the situation is “supposedly" the other way round). The only new robot to get any space is Sentinel Prime, the others are here to make up numbers for the action. (12/07/2011)

Finishing epic trilogies is traditionally an ungrateful job. Michael Bay managed to bring Optimus, Bumblebee, and the other Autobots to the end of their journey in the weakest installment, but that is not a disgrace after the mesmerizing first film and the fairy tale-mythological sequel. The third Transformers are occasionally funny, occasionally less so, occasionally frightening, but above all, they are so grandiose from about one-third of the runtime that it almost tears apart all the senses. What unfolds in Chicago is an audiovisual experience that leaves the viewer stunned all the way home. But what elevated the entire trilogy for me is mainly the fact that this story was never about the largest number of scrapped metal. Yes, it will always be a battle between Autobots and Decepticons, but many people forget that amidst all the adventure, a young boy grew up. The one who first rode in a yellow Camaro three films ago and ultimately saved the world because of it. Three times. (12/07/2011)

Wow, Michael Bay uses long takes (well, by his standards, don't expect any De Palma rides) and it's one of the best ideas he could have gotten. Similarly, the cameraman has apparently stopped or started drinking and his hand no longer shakes as if he has Parkinson's. This makes the action scenes in Transformers 3 really spectacular and clear. Seriously - compared to the previous two films, this time I even knew which robot was hitting which every time. So that would be the biggest plus. Another positive is the first twenty-five minutes or so of the film dealing with the moon and Chernobyl. Negative aspects? Everything else. Especially the script. It's not so much that it's stupid, I expected that, it's just that it's terribly boring. I mean, almost nothing happens in the first hour and a half (except for the aforementioned beginning), for God's sake! What about John Malkovich and Frances McDormand's characters? Completely unnecessary. Neither of them needed to be in Transformers, not to mention the main character's new girlfriend is as attractive as she is unlikable. At least the action ending was good and there was something to watch in the movie theatre. (18/07/2011)

There aren't many movies where you can see exploding skyscrapers in Chicago for 200 million USD. Michael Bay's visual sense cannot be denied, and together with James Cameron (although going in a slightly different direction), they are the most advanced “technicians” in Hollywood. However, where Cameron can do that for the good of the film and people praise him for it, Bay has been struggling lately, like in this Transformers sequel. A joke? Why not, but purposeless fooling around for an hour is a bit too much. The hour-long action that follows is okay, with a monumental, visually stunning style, and this time it's also more comprehensible. But after a while, it leaves you with a headache. Transformers 3 is quite a mess. The first one was so much better. (09/07/2011)