1) Why would anyone ever trust Michael Bay to direct a movie? Has he ever made a movie that could objectively be considered good? A quick imdb search reveals that his past directorial efforts include:
- The Island (2005)
- The Lionel Richie Collection (2003)
- Bad Boys II (2003)
- Pearl Harbor (2001)
- Armageddon (1998/I)
- The Rock (1996)
- Bad Boys (1995)
So why would anyone put the reins of a long anticipated franchise in Michael Bay's clearly demonstrably incapable hands? Why not just go to the home of every single person who grew up watching Transformers and take a dump on their front door step? It would have been less painful. You're telling me that there wasn't somebody in Hollywood who had made a decent film who could have done this?
2) Optimus Prime saying "my bad" was the cinematic equivalent of taking a beautiful girl to a Celine Dion concert that lasts three hours, then sitting through four encores, driving the girl home, going in for the good night kiss, having her stop you as she says, "By the way, I'm gay." Not only was it painful and a waste, but a little piece of you just dies. Cram all of that into two words. If you think I am taking this too seriously, then I question your childhood devotion to Optimus Prime. Optimus Prime is the greatest animated character of all time and millions of kids in the 80's would have gladly fought and died for him, not to mention buy whatever carbohydrate packed cereal he happened to recommend that week. The animated movie where they killed Prime off to introduce new toys was less traumatic than having him say "my bad." Michael Bay should be tried for crimes against humanity.
3) Crime against humanity #2. They (MASSIVE SPOILER ALERT) freaking killed Jazz. You don't kill Jazz. You just don't do that. You kill off that Timmy Olyphant look-alike from Las Vegas who added nothing to the movie, you kill off Sam's annoying parents, Heck, you kill off Sam's annoying dog BUT YOU DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES KILL OFF JAZZ. Michael Bay, nerds everywhere are plotting your death.
4) Who on earth makes a movie that should clearly be marketed to a family audience, a movie that kids are clearly going to want to see, and then put all kinds of inappropriate subject matter for little kids? A masturbation discussion, in the middle of a kids movie? Nothing brings families together like a talk in the SUV on the way home in which parents answer awkward questions from children who are far too young to understand the answers.
5) John Turturro wins the prize for "Appearance in a movie most clearly motivated by a need to pay a gambling debt. Is this really the same guy who played "The Schmada" in Miller's Crossing? This performance is downright embarrassing. John, get help for your gambling problem. You're lucky you appeared in one of the greatest films of all time otherwise you'd be lucky to walk away with a career.
6) I actually rented this movie. A dollar from redbox. I feel like I paid too much. Hollywood, this is why people download. Because you don't kick yourself later for spending money on a turd of a movie.
7) Apparently there is a screenwriter strike in Hollywood. If "talented" people wrote this movie, then boy oh boy, this next year of movies written by less talented people would be real fun.
8) In a movie about giant robots, with a built in fanbase who want to see giant robots beat up on each other on screen, with a director who has zero concept of how human beings interact with and relate to each other, maybe it would be a good idea to, I don't know, focus on the giant robots. Instead, this movie opted to insert roughly 645 human characters that no one cared about and in no way related to the story. Was there any need for the army characters? The sector 7 characters? The hackers? Was the australian chick even necessary?
9) Re: The Hackers. You know that a movie is going to go off the rails in the next five minutes whenever a character utters the line, "There's only one hacker in the world who could possibly handle this!" Almost invariably, that line serves to introduce an unbelievable character generally played by a throwaway celebrity that serves no purpose other than to wedge that celebrity into the movie (See also: Kevin Smith in Die Hard 4). Did Anthony Anderson's character even do anything? He didn't "hack" anything and didn't really contribute to the movie at all. He just ate some donuts. Also, no offense, but if there is only one hacker in the world who can handle a problem, I'm guessing it's not some dude who lives three blocks away and plays Dance Dance Revolution. Face it, if there's only one hacker in the world who can handle an earth-shattering problem, it's probably some Asian kid who has Lord of the Rings posters on his wall and spends his nights either playing Dungeons and Dragons or debating the philosophical shortcomings of the Matrix sequels. Also, not to stereotype, but Hackers do not look like hot Aussie Chicks with nose rings. Aussie chick with nose ring looks like she spends an abnormal amount of time doing pilates and being bulimic. She does not look like she spends time programming and defragmenting hard drives.
10) Shia LeBeouf is actually not half bad. In fact, he did a surprisingly good job of carrying an otherwise mediocre movie. Coupled with his turn in the surprisingly watchable "Disturbia" and I'm starting to feel okay about "Indiana Jones IV, the Search for Metamucil." I still can't believe the kid from Even Stevens has turned into a decent actor. Add this to the latest list of people who turned out to be surprisingly credible actors along with the guy from Newsies who turned into the next DeNiro, and guy from Remember the Titans who is rapidly becoming the next Brando.
No comments:
Post a Comment