Michael Bay / long movie = no surpriseMichael Bay / simple plot = no surpriseThe humor should be fine for me, as long as Bumblebee doesn't start peeing on policemen again.I guess what I am saying is: I assume your review is spot on. In an interview the director of the The Hitcher remake said, that he once asked Michael bay for advice. Michael said: If the action doesn't seem to work, shake the camera.
I liked Bumblepee! But Michael Bay does have a habit of being OTT on stuff like that. Bad Boys II was a mess and most of it very crude. I did read in the Empire review that there's a bit with one of the Decepticons scaling a pyramid with what look like... testicles... dragging behind him...
I watched Transformers 2 yesterday and really have almost nothing to add to Dragonfire's review, that's how spot-on I think it is.The film is clearly too long for what little story it has to tell. The first one wasn't much shorter but it definitely had me entertained much more. It's also a problem that it's all played out too seriously, more tongue-in-cheek would have been good.Besides the testicles of Devestator there is also a little one which farts At least to Jon:I recently started to listen to Mark Kermode's podcast () and he ripped this film a new one, with pretty much all the things from the above review. It's well worth to listen to.
Haven't seen it yet. I kinda liked the first one, but already found the robot battle at the end a bit too much.Anyway, I read some bits and pieces here and there, and what surprises me is that Megan Fox (the hot girl) kinda bashes the movie. Aren't there usual contractual obligations that require a certain amount of promotional lip service from the stars? Even funnier though is the reply from toy master Michael Bay, who thinks MF has a lot of growing up to do.Oh, and just for Jon: Jim Emerson (editor of the Ebert website) said: "Transformers 2 is the Dark Knight of 2009." Heh.Yeah, it's quoted out of context, but it made me laugh.