Should've been called "Explosion: The Movie."

Rating: 4/10 (25 June 2009)

Simply put, this second Transformers flick should've been called Explosion: The Movie. There are more scenes of destruction, shooting, bombing, exploding, fighting, jumping, punching and running than in any other Bay movie, war movie, science fiction movie, action flick or any of the actual World Wars. If this film hasn't broken any kind of destruction records, then I don't know what can. And this kind of exaggeration could indeed be thrilling - or even funny - were it not for some of the silliness Bay and his team of writers decide to include. The first Transformers worked because, when compared to the sequel, it was pretty nuanced. (Never thought I would say something like that about a Bay movie.) Revenge of the Fallen has too much of everything, and on top of that, it's definitely too long. Not a completely bad film - although most of the North American critics will definitely state the contrary - but, in my book, an inferior movie to its predecessor.
Michael Bay is the master of all things action, and he certainly shows his skills here, blowing up everything that could possibly explode. I kinda liked the action, I guess - there are tons of explosions - duh -, tons of scenes of the military trying to shoot at the bad robots, using missiles, bombs, tanks, machine guns, guns and aircraft, and a lots of scenes featuring robots trying to beat the crap out of each other. The thing is, there comes a moment when it's all too much, when it all becomes too repetitive and over-the-top. I guess I could say there are too many explosions, too much shooting and too much use of a shaky cam - and yes, that's precisely the way the movie makes you feel: that there's too much, and that it all should have stopped like ten scenes ago. During the first 2/3 or so of the movie the action is relentless in the sense that it doesn't cease to entertain, but during the last 30 or 40 minutes it's relentless in the sense that it just keeps coming. Come on, Bay, you of all people should know when to stop.
Other problem? Just like there's too much action, too many explosions and too many scenes - the film is definitely about half an hour too long -, there are too many robots. Guys like Optimus, Bumblebee, Megatron and even The Fallen we can recognize. The thing is, there are like twenty other robots in the movie, and Bay doesn't even have the decency to show them without shaking his camera. Moreover, they don't have any personality - they just have names or colors. I liked the bickering between Megatron and Starscream; I somehow liked the little robot which turned into a toy car, and I definitely enjoyed the way the old transformer with a beard and a walking cane was presented, but what about those two that turned into bikes? Or the annoying twins that make Jar Jar Binks seem hilarious? Or that big one that ate all that sand in Egypt and seemed to have a pair of big, metallic balls between his legs? (Yes, that's Bay's idea of sophisticated humour.) I'm sure the movie could have done with ten or so robots less.
It's not like Bay cares about acting, but some of the actors that participate in his movies at least care about their performances. Take Shia LaBeouf, for example, who tries to inject some humanity into his character despite the fact that the screenplay uses him only to run and shout. If Sam is charismatic and worth rooting for - and ultimately works as a compelling leading character - it's because of LaBeouf, not due to the filmmakers' work. I also liked Josh Duhamel, and Kevin Dunn and Julie White as Sam's parents were pretty funny. John Turturro, reprising his role from the previous movie, gave a memorable performance as always, although his character has somehow changed. On the other hand, I didn't get the point of Megan Fox's character. Okay, so she's incredibly hot, but she was also incredibly useless. Pure eye-candy, no substance. (We're talking about Megan Fox here, guys, not the movie... or are we?) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is all right because, despite all its flaws, it definitely never bored me, and because from a visual and technical standpoint, it's certainly a marvel, something worth taking a look at. The film is a mix of the good, the bad and the ugly, and one of the hardest films I've ever had to review, only because I was terribly entertained by it, but also - very frequently - terrified by it. And not because it's a scary movie, but because it can be a very bad movie. Still, it's got some terrific action sequences - which kind get old during the last half an hour or so of running time - and some very funny parts, so those who liked the first - superior - movie should have a blast with this one. The rest of us puny humans, though, will be left exhausted by the time the end credits start to roll. I wonder why three writers - two of them being responsible for the screenplay of the amazing and decidedly smarter Star Trek - were needed to pen the movie's screenplay. I don't even remember if there was any dialogue... and if there was, was it really needed? Wasn't this a series of action sequences, CGI scenes and shots of Megan Fox running in slow motion with the camera focusing on her breasts?