@Sprizmo: Sir, as I've found in most of real life, the fate of anyone or anything hinges on a bimbo and a douchebag. Why? They're the only ones considered important enough for people to listen to, even though they're retarded as all Hell.
RHCP, I understand what you mean about Michael Bay. I mean, for fuck's sake, the guy made PEARL HARBOR!!! What a tragedy of a film. Nonetheless, he also happens to be very good at one thing: blowing shit up. When it comes to Transformers, that's what I'm going to the movie for: to watch shit get blown up in crazy spectacular ways. That's why we all watched the cartoon series. We wanted to see giant robots that we thought were cool blowing shit up and kicking each other's ass. Did anyone actually give a FUCK about the humans? I didn't! Therefore, I don't see why people make a big deal out of them. As long as John Turturro is in there somewhere giving me a laugh once in a while, and Megan Fox is standing there looking hot, then I see a bunch of giant robots kick each other's fucking metallic grills in, then I'm set.
Transformers is about escapism. The best part is that Michael Bay KNOWS that! Sure, the guy is a pompous arrogant ass, but so is Quentin Tarantino, and everyone loves his retarded ass. Bay knows that all you need in a Transformers movie is explosions, robot fights, a hottie to look at, some dimwit fucktard of a dood that gets the girl because nerds need confidence that Megan Fox will hook up with them, and of course...the voice of Optimus Prime.
So unless those aspects just aren't present at all in Revenge of the Fallen, I'm just unclear about how this movie could be B-A-D. Is it "bad"? Sure. The first one was as well. However, just because something is "bad" doesn't mean it sucks. Just because it's mindless fun doesn't mean it's stupid.
I don't know. Maybe I just understand the idea of escapism at a cinema more than some...or maybe I've just got a hard-on for destruction in cinema.
Log in to comment