Comments on: Defending Transformers From Roger Ebert… Again… Sort Of

By: 2012 Movie Review

2012 Movie Review — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:19:16 +0000

[...] may recall my posting defending Transformers from Roger Ebert and his Brainiac post on his blog, and here is another example to add to that [...]

By: areyouscreening

areyouscreening — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:45:41 +0000

Thanks very much for the comment. I appreciate you taking the time to add a thoughtful response to the conversation.

By: Clifftothemax

Clifftothemax — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:14:56 +0000

BRAVO.
Revenge of The Fallen, was a bad movie (and I absolutely loved the first one), but the reaction to it has quite frankly... been absolutely ridicoulous. If a film is poorly done, then by all means, criticism is the best thing available. BUT, complaining that the film is poorly done whilst liking other questionable material for reasons less than the other is honestly not only hypocritical, but not especially intelligent. Not that Revenge of The Fallen was an intelligent movie mind you, but that is beside the point. ALOT of reviews I have read and watched about it; I could barely call reviews at all. There was one by escapist magazine I believe stated that the movie was a movie made by a retard (Mr. Bay of course) FOR RETARDS. I'm sorry; but if you are going to insult the viewer MORE than the film itself supposedly does, you ARE NOT doing your job. A reviewer is supposed to inform the viewer, not tell them they are idiots and rub it in their faces. And Roger Ebert's behaviour is quite honestly disgusting. Writing more than three articles to go with his review and then call people that enjoyed the movie (or parts of it) ''not sufficently evolved'' is appaling. Yes, it was a bad movie. Was it the worst ever made? NOT. EVEN. CLOSE. From what I gather, a review is supposed to balance the pros and cons of the work in question and then come to a conclusion of which it sits closer to on the scales; good or bad. From my perspective, a good deal of reviewers for the film have not been doing their jobs right. And whilst I was hugely dissappointed with the film; were there elements I enjoyed? Yes. Although the negatives outweighed the positives. And I can understand exactly why others might like it more than I. But saying it's bad (or worse) than films that have been reviewed as having the same qualities going for them and then saying the audience has no right to like this movie for the same reasons is bordering on the absurd.
There was one review I read by someone who gave the film a reasonably favourable rating and got lambasted for it because of it. He then mentioned Roger Ebert in defense of his review, who has given higher ratings to films that are arguably, far worse. One of them being Speed 2: Cruise Control.
Honestly, I haven't even seen this much criticism directed at movies like Meet The Spartans, but if someone strapped me to a chair for two hours and shoved that or Revenge of The Fallen in front of me; guess which one I would rather view and just happens to be the better film (FAR better) as well?

So, thank you for such a well written response to Ebert's opinion.
There is a line in subjectivity for what a film equals; but going so far as to denounce the viewers, is neither intelligent, nor helpful.
Bad film; yes.
Worst film ever; NO.
And anyone who makes statements as such, is not especially knowledgeable of film at all.

By: Name

Name — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 06:09:07 +0000

I agree with Ebert. Transformers was a long, boring and stupid movie. As much as I can enjoy special effects, I do not enjoy being BOMBARDED with EXPLOSION after explOSIon and BIG mechanical THINGs falling down after big MECHanIcal thiNGS falling dOWN and LOTS of DUst in THe air after LotS of dust in the AIR and PEople SCREAMING after people scREamInG and PRODUCT placement after product PLACEMENT and BOgus history aftER boGus HIstORY and Slow MOTioN afTER slOW moTIon anD PeopLE scREaming In slOW Motion after PeopLE scREAming in SlOW MOTION........ get my drift.

There are also many other things I did not like about that movie (like how budy climbs up the pyramid after the monster and says "remember what I'm doing for MY COUNTRY (America)" while he's in the Middle East fighting aliens trying to destroy the planet... and finally reaches the monster only to call on his radio and say "the monsters at the top of the pyramid!" and climb back down).

While Starwars (all of them are pretty much the same to me, but I do refer to the new ones) and the Davinci Code had similar idiotic plot's, it is not the plot that made me dislike Transformers 1 and 2. The special effects action scenes in Starwars were considerably shorter, less frequent, and in my opinion better done (not technically, but much more intriguing). Also Starwas had better dialogue (duh), there was better character development, and they were made in anticipation of their highly acclaimed predecessors. I could go on forever.

Oh, and I love Papillon, but I am emotionally attached to "prison" movies for some reason.

By: Name

Name — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:09:07 +0000

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 01:29:34 +0000

Likewise.

By: areyouscreening

areyouscreening — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:46:28 +0000

LOL. Seriously? The movie started and then you couldn't piece together what was happening?

Whatever. Nice chatting with you.

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:29:34 +0000

Likewise.

By: areyouscreening

areyouscreening — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 23:46:28 +0000

LOL. Seriously? The movie started and then you couldn't piece together what was happening?

Whatever. Nice chatting with you.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:31:42 +0000

I'd be hard pressed to name five. I can usually find at least a couple of redeeming qualities in any movie. But this one? Zero.

Flow of the story? Meaningful connection? Plot? If you are seriously using these terms in reference to this film then I am afraid it is you that is being obtuse.