Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Emerald Hill. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Transformer Bashing; No, not you anya XDDDD
Topic Started: Jun 27 2009, 01:27 PM (356 Views)
L Lawliet
Member Avatar
Apparently more annoying than Foxby. o.o
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I enjoyed the 2007 Transformers film. It was entertaining-not the greatest in plot, but the effects were awesome, the fight scenes were fantastic, etc. It was pure entertainment, and I enjoyed it for that.

Now, I recently saw the sequel, Revenge of the Fallen-since then I had gotten more into Transformers, but I went to see it as a film-but still, doubled on the action, effects, and the plot was interesting. It had its problems, plot holes and such, but overall it was the same type of deal-pure entertainment, and I loved it.

I got home after seeing the movie and decided to check out reviews, to see how it was looking overall in the public eye. It was panned. Apparently it was incomprehensible to some (looking at you Ebert) and shit to others (looking at you Spoony.) Let me provide some quotes from the more negative reviews.

"The plot is incomprehensible. The dialog of the Autobots®, Decepticons® (before editing he said Deceptibots) and Otherbots® is meaningless word flap.

This isn't a film so much as a toy tie-in. he day will come when "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" will be studied in film classes and shown at cult film festivals. It will be seen, in retrospect, as marking the end of an era. Of course there will be many more CGI-based action epics, but never again one this bloated, excessive, incomprehensible, long (149 minutes) or expensive (more than $200 million)."-Roger Ebert.

"But I do accept that Bay is unique. No one can top him for telling a story with such striking, shrieking incoherence."-Rolling Stone

First off, to Ebert-What did you think Transformers started out as? The whole concept is that it's supposed to advertise-say it with me now-toys! The original series started out that way and it hasn't stopped now. You didn't seem to have any problems with that in the first movie, which you gave 3 stars. How the hell does that work? And you saw the first movie, yet you find this incoherent?

The end of an era? Ebert, this isn't meant to be a cinematic opus or anything. It's a movie about robots, not The Dark Knight. The robots won't spend time worrying about morals-they're blowing shit up XD

And to Rolling Stone, maybe it wouldn't be so incoherent if you tried to see it as a moviegoer instead of a reviewer. To the writer-take a couple hours out of your day to see the movie on your own, without worrying about writing anything. And incoherent? It's spelled out plain and simple: Autobots wage their battle to destroy the evil forces of the Decepticons. Sure, there's plot holes, but it's damn easy to follow.

So yeah, to the people bashing the movie, just think of it this way.

It's a Michael Bay film.
It's about giant robots fighting each other.

You get what you pay for. XD It's pure entertainment, a popcorn flick, not Citizen Kane.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Foxby
Member Avatar
Emerald Guardian
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Your rant basically says (and repeats) this:

"Everything they're complaining about DOES suck, but they shouldn't care."

They're critics. The entire reason for their existence is to point out two things:
1. The flaws
2. The strengths
and rate it on that. You're asking them to ignore a major part of their job because there's giant robots.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Flames
Member Avatar
Stuff. :o
[ *  *  * ]
I understand your compassion for the series, L, but I have to agree with Foxby on this. That IS their job, their job is to find the flaws in movies, and rip them apart.

That's like yelling at a video store employee for allowing you to rent a movie from their store.

You can't really rip on them.. sure, you may not agree, but they don't care, it pays the bills and that's all that matters.

=\
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kappy
Member Avatar
LOL!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I do agree with Foxby and Flames. And you have the right to disagree, but remember that it's their job - they're paid to write opinionated reviews about movies. That's why reviews should be looked at, but not taken as fact.

When you take a review as fact..well, yeah, I think you get it XD They're opinions: everyone's got one - not a single one is absolutely correct.

Only tried and true facts, like box office sales and polls, can say whether a movie is good or not: those are statistical data, and they're right or wrong, but in the case of movies, they're usually right XD

That's my 2 cents!
My DeviantArt page
My YouTube page
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
L Lawliet
Member Avatar
Apparently more annoying than Foxby. o.o
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I was trying to point out that some people were being contradictory in their reviews in comparison to their ones from the 2007 film. Thought I posted a link to Ebert's 2007 Transformers review, but guess I didn't. I don't mind negative reviews, but I was just irked at some of the statements people like Ebert made when they had been somewhat praising the same things about the other one.

Guess it didn't end up looking that way.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Foxby
Member Avatar
Emerald Guardian
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
For the record, Ryan, there ARE very specific things (situational, naturally) that make a "good" or "bad" creative work to begin with, and popularity does not make something good (slavery was mighty popular for quite a few years...). Whether it makes it enjoyable or not...

Critics (at least the better ones) are paid to look at a movie critically, looking for certain kinds of flaws-- plot holes, Mary Sues, character derailment-- and the things that make a movie great-- character development, characters with realistic problems (realistic for the situation, anyway), that sort of thing.

But yeah. L, I haven't seen the movie itself so I can't tell you if the critics are in the right or not.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Rants · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Theme by tiptopolive of Zetaboards Theme Zone