Home » Movies & Entertainment » Why the critics are WRONG about “Revenge of the Fallen”

Why the critics are WRONG about “Revenge of the Fallen”

Blog Stats

  • 244,578 hits

By no means am I a professional film critic (although I could be) so I do not know what criteria critics use or what they look for when they  critique  a movie but the reviews for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen — if believed — would make you want to save your money for gas.

— Roger Ebert, “A horrible experience of unbearable length.” 1-star

— Katherine Brazzell, Memphis Movie Examiner: “Entertainment wise, it was great.  Film wise, it’s not Casablanca.”

— Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: “It’s tempting to dismiss Michael Bay’s long, loud and ludicrous sequal to 2007’s Transformers with one word — hunkajunk.”

Rotten Tomatoes gave the movie a 21 percent rating.

At least one critic, Ray Bennett of the Hollywood Reporter, had a little more of a positive review.

Official movie poster for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Official movie poster for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

“The film is not likely to attract moviegoers who seek something more than a screen filled with kaleidoscopes of colored metal.”

However, I went to the Thursday matinee showing of Revenge of the Fallen and came away with the thought that the critics are dead wrong about the movie.  Here are a few explanations as to why.

Contrary to what was said, there is a plot to Revenge of the Fallen: The plot is that the Autobots and the humans are in a race to stop the Fallen from seeking his revenge on the humans — on earth.  Sam (Shia LaBeouf) and the others have to figure out clues from ancient mysteries much like Tom Hanks character in The Da Vinci Code.

Yes, Revenge of the Fallen is 147 minutes long: but what is the point?  Everyone seemed to have forgotten that the first film was 143 minutes long which isn’t much of a difference.

To make this short, it is simple age difference: of the critics to the pure fans of Transformers to which is why the reviews, um, sucked.

As a person who grew up on the original cartoon, I fully understood what Bay and his crew was doing while the older, non-fans may not have.  Bay increased the fight scenes between the robots because frankly — that’s what the cartoon was about.  Every episode climaxed with the Autobot and Decpticons fighting one another.  The fight scenes meant more action and less dead time during those 147 minutes.

Besides the Twins (Mudflap and Skids, which I can not explain), the robots were again excellent.  I understood Soundwave’s role, Ravage was done beautifully and Optimus Prime’s “twist” was reminiscient of the cartoon movie.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen may not be great (neither was the original) but it’s far from a ‘hunkajunk.’


1 Comment

  1. […] previous two movie reviews that I wrote (“Revenge of the Fallen” and “Iron Man 2″) were to discredit the critics. They were written to flat out […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: