Transformers 2 Is Just 2 Much

Because I actually have to work today, I want to keep this short and sour. Seriously, going for a short word count here.

Let me just start of by saying that Transformers 2 is not a good movie. I am, for the most part, a Michael Bay apologist. I don't think any of his movies are QUALITY entertainment, but they are ENTERTAINING. Michael Bay knows how to direct action. He can make a blockbuster, special effects extravaganza. But Transformers 2 was any 2 of his old movies slammed together (like so many giant, alien robots within the film itself) and then turned up to 11.

At two and a half hours, Transformers 2 feels too long by at least a half hour, if not more. There are so many parts that could have been scrapped as they serve absolutely no purpose in the movie (besides earning some laughs at the utter stupidity of the situation). We see dogs humping, Transformers humping, a mother whacked out on pot brownies, Transformer testicles, Transformer farting, racially-stereotyped Transformers...the list goes on and on. Sure, I saw a lot of these things and smiled or even chuckled, but it was from a state of shock; I was reacting to all of the asinine imagery in the way the filmmakers wanted, but for all of the wrong reasons.

The plot is...not there? Kinda there? Maybe? I'm not sure. Long story short, Transformers have been to earth before. Transformers arrive, help humans build pyramids, build a machine to steal our sun even though they're not supposed to because it's OUR sun so the Transformers are divided and thus we have Autobots and Decepticons, yeah. Oh, and the Fallen? Why, exactly, is it that he can only be defeated by a Prime (did not realize the Prime in Optimus Prime was actually a last name, passed down the ancestral tree)? Because it's revealed to us in scene of exposition, of course.

A lot of the characters are back, but not necessarily for the better. Shia is still Shia, Megan is still hot, Turturro is still zany, but others are just...there. Josh Duhamel's character now exists to be that guy yelling orders on the battlefield--and Tyrese is there to spout one-liners and act as a wall for Josh to bounce lines off of--the end. A new hottie is introduced but, SPOILER, she's a Decepticon in disguise and gets run over by a Volvo (or something) during the first half. Shia has a roommate who decides to run with Shia and Megan as giant robots attack, and thus becomes a major character in the film--and by major character in the film I, of course, mean he's in the movie ONLY to provide comic relief in a movie that is filled to brim with comic relief.

The action is still big and flashy, but not all that involving. I was never really awed by any of it--unlike my first viewing of the first one. Big, CGI robots bash heads and there's sparks and explosions and fire--your typical Michael Bay fare--but there were a few points where I couldn't tell which Transformers were in the fight. I think everything just went so over-the-top that I stopped caring about anything; instead, I switch my brain to stand-by mode and just stared at the pretty pretties.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen will make lots and lots o' money (the Amigo here in Bemidji had it in 3 screens last night at midnight, and they were all sold out), but that doesn't mean it's GOOD. No, it's the very definition of a summer popcorn flick AND THEN SOME. It's too long, too over-the-top, it's just too much. Dial it back a bit, Bay. Give us a high octane special effects/action flick where we can actually respect the characters and the story, not pity them.

By the way, what is it with Michael Bay films looking like recruitment ads for the military? I understand that Bay gets to save some money because he's got the right friends in the right places--I assume it's one of those "make the military look badass and we'll let you use some tanks, jets, etc"--but at some point, it just gets to be a bit too much.

Can A Terminator Really Offer Salvation?

2:11 AM

I'm going to break this film up into two parts. The first will be a straight-forward, spoiler-free review. The second, not so much.

When it comes to Terminator films, fans can be just as rabid as, say, Star Wars. A lot of people will automatically disown anything Terminator if James Cameron isn't attached as writer/director. So, when Terminator Salvation was announced--with none other than McG at the helm--the jury was understandably divided. The hype has been up and down, the early reviews, eh, not so great.

A big chunk of the nay-saying comes as a response to the film taking place in a future, post-apocalyptic setting--a setting post-Judgment Day; I am of a different mind. So, while a lot of the fans found this to be a suitable reason for anarchy, I was staging my own, personal resistance. I think a future setting is the reason a Terminator film can work, despite being Cameron-less.

Here's how it stacks up. The casting worked pretty damn well. Christian Bale played a fine John Connor, although I couldn't help but hear Batman speaking for a good chunk of the movie. I doubt he'll be winning any Oscars, but he's definitely better than Nick Stahl (John Connor in Terminator 3).

Marcus Wright is played by up-and-coming Austalian actor Sam Worthington. While John Connor is integral to the Terminator story-line, Sam's character steals the show this time around. Although he's the main(ish) character, and even though his character has the most arc, the writing for him is a little off. Still, he's got a screen presense about him, and I can't wait to see him in the upcoming Avatar (under Jim Cameron's direction) and the Clash of the Titans remake (directed by Louis Leterrier). He'll be one to watch.

A lot of the other characters are played by some fairly well-known actors. Kate Connor is played by Bryce Dallas Howard, a respectable actor, and yet she barely has any screen time and doesn't do a whole lot with the time she does have (not her fault). Moon Bloodgood plays Blair Williams, whose part is important insofar as she sets certain events in motion and offers eye-candy. Michael Ironside shows up as pain in the ass General, and, while I love seeing Ironside in flicks, his part could have easily been covered by pretty much anyone else (not that I'm complaining; his appearance was kinda like extra frosting on the cake for me). Helena Bonham Carter also shows up in a role that has a heavy impact on the overall film, but, again, could have been performed by a lesser-known. Anton Yelchin (recently seen in Star Trek , you may recall) also steps into the boots of Kyle Reese, Johnny C's father-to-be. While I was skeptical of this casting decision at first, the more I watched the film, the more I saw Michael Biehn's (the original Kyle in the original Terminator) Kyle coming out. Something about him just clicked. Awesome.

The fact that some of these actors are of a higher caliber causes a moment of pause. Is it good that they have such fine actors doing so little? To have the talent even though that quality of talent isn't necessarily needed? Or is it just overkill? I'm not sure. Maybe I'm looking too deeply into it. Moving on.

The story is pretty straight-forward. Man, machines, war, post-apocalypitc future, yadda yadda yadda. Seriously, it's nothing groundbreaking, but it does the job, IMO. True, there are some plot holes (which I'll get into in the spoiler section), and it gets to be a little over-the-top at times, but it's a summer blockbuster and it does take place in the future; over-the-top is pretty much par for the course.

The special effects are fan-fucking-tastic...for the most part. Yeah, there are moments when the CG is noticeably CG, but, overall, I was damn impressed. The explosions are massive, the machines are shiny, the action is fast. It looks good.

Harry Knowles saw it the other day, and to say "he wasn't pleased" is putting it lightly. I respect the guy a lot, and I usually trust his opinion, but this is one time where I've got a disagree. It's not the greatest film ever, but seeing as there's only one "greatest film ever", I feel like that isn't really a bad thing (for this or any other film).

Maybe it's because I never watched Star Trek, but I enjoyed Terminator more. Both are great summer blockbusters (and I will say Star Trek is the higher quality of the two), but this was more fun.

I'm not going to say that everyone will enjoy this film. If you're a fan of the originals, be aware that this isn't Cameron's work. Sure, it's based off of his ideas, but beyond that, he didn't have a hand in baking this pie. It's different from everything that came before it, but that doesn't mean it's bad. If you want to see action and effects and, yes, Terminators, give it a go.

8.5/10

And now, I present the spoilers. This will cover some of the plot holes I noticed and story choices that were made.

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

So, I'm sure you're all aware from the trailers, but Marcus Wright is a machine. He's a machine who, in the beginning, doesn't know he's a machine. Why? Because he's an infiltrator. So, is he good or bad? Well, I'm not answering. This isn't about his motives, it's about what he is. He's a hybrid, both man and machine, but not like Arnie in the original films. It's not just soft tissue over a metal endoskeleton; he has organs. So while all this is cool for the film, I had to ask myself a couple of questions (mostly because I can't ask the writers). In the trailer we can see Marcus being carried, injured. If he's metal, why doesn't anyone realize he ways hundreds of pounds more than he should? The question is raised again when Marcus ends up in a river and starts floating down it. WTF? Again, not world-ending stuff, but worth noting.

Also--MAJOR SPOILER--John Connor was, at one point in the screenplay-writing process, going to die. The film was to end with the resistance removing John's skin and stretching it over Marcus' body, effectively "keeping John alive" in the eyes of the resistance. That was abandoned (thank whomever) due to negative testings. Instead, they have John stabbed through back by a T-800, dying. To save his life, Marcus offers up his human heart. Although this is more believable than the skin fiasco, it's still a stretch of the imagination. It isn't just for shits and giggles, there IS a point to it, but I almost feel like the entire movie was written around the idea that comes with that point. (I know I'm being vague and, thus, confusing, but I don't want to give absolutely everything away. Hopefully, you'll see what I'm talking about if you watch the film. If not, ask me about it)

As a tie-in to the paragraph I just finished writing/you just finished reading, I want to comment on what I like about the Marcus/heart idea. Making Marcus a machine who still kept his humanity, who actually believes he is human, is interesting to ponder over. It shows the machines really don't understand what it is to live. Yes, they have A.I., but they're not really alive. Skynet has a plan in Terminator Salvation, and that plan actually works, but only to an extent. Marcus' unwavering belief in his humanity allows him to be naive and do things with the best intentions at heart. Still, things get fucked up. And yet, that same flaw that causes the problems for the resistance becomes the undoing of Skynet. Marcus, because the machines left him his "humanity", is able to choose which side he is on. Skynet may have built him, but helping the humans reminded him that, no matter where he came from, where he went was in his hands.

Finally, I want to make mention of something that even you--yes, YOU--may not want to read. This is a big spoiler. A BIG SPOILER, goddammit! It's already been talked about around the intrawebs a bit, but some of you may not have seen those conversations. Perhaps some of you did, and didn't believe it. Or didn't want to believe it. Well, I'm going to tell you the truth. So if you want to witness it with a virgin mind, go back to your porn or social networking or whatever it is you do on your computer. For everyone else, here it goes.

[drumroll]

There has been talk of a certain actor making a cameo as a certain character. It is 100% true...kinda.

Last chance to bail. No?

Arnold Schwarzenegger (I spelled that right without even looking! Go me!) reprises his role as the T-800, but not in the way people would expect. Because of his political duties, Arnie had a very limited amount of time to contribute. Like none. So, instead of having him act out a part, they did a full 3D model of his face, and the filmmakers applied it to Roland Kickinger's body. This allowed Arnold to take his rightful place once more, and in a much younger body as well. Surprisingly, it looked really, really good.

I was aware that it could be coming, and when it finally happened, I geeked out a little bit.

So that's pretty much it. My review. Non-spoiled with a side of spoilers. I do recommend seeing it. Again, I just want to remind you: it's different than what we're used to, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily bad. And hey, we can always go back and watch the originals.

/3:40 AM

Update: I think it's only fair that I should post a link to Harry's review since I brought it up during the course of my own article. Also, I just read it in it's entirety, and although he does have some valid points, I still think it's better than he gives it credit for. Especially since Terminator Salvation isn't meant to be the end of the franchise.

KNOWING that SPOILERS may follow is in your best interest

So I went to Knowing tonight. Sure, I'm a couple of weeks late, but oh well. I was thinking the movie looked good from the trailers, and I've liked Alex Proyas' other films (The Crow, Dark City, I, Robot), so I finally drug myself into the theater. I've gotta say, I'm glad I did.

The film has an interesting enough premise: a girl in 1959 writes a shit-ton of numbers on a sheet of paper and adds it to her class' time capsul. 50 years later, the time capsul is dug up and the paper uncovered. Nic Cage, being the super genius we all know he is, discovers that the numbers relate to every major disaster that has happened over the past 50 years (with 3 yet to occur). From there it's a little mystery, some cool effects, some distubring situations, and holy fuckness.

The acting isn't too shabby. A little bit of over-the-topness from Nicky, but what do you expect? The guy has had something of a losing streak lately, and it's nice to see him in a movie I'll actually admit to watching. Rose Byrne is in the film and she's a little--excessive at times, but for the most part acceptable. But let's face it, I didn't go to this movie for Oscar-worthy acting, and I don't think anyone else did either.

So what DID we go for? Glad you asked. The shit hitting the fan, to put it bluntly. This is a sci-fi film, but it's also a disaster movie. As such, there has to be some cool scenarios. Rest assured, there are. The effects kind of flip-flopped between being excellent to being "just decent", but the content of the scene as a whole really kept me from being overly critical of the CG and whatnot. There's a plane crash that looks badass (and, to be honest, I was a little shocked by the brutality of it), a subway crash that has it's ups and downs, and, well, I won't spoil the final hoorah...yet.

Note: Major SPOILERS follow.

Now I want to get into the part of this movie that really made me appreciate it. I think this movie did an excellent job of appealing to both sides of a never-ending debate: science or mircales, evolution or creation, chance or divine power.

Although on the surface they say that the events in this film are the result of chance or science (mechanical malfunctions, weather, and solar flares, to be precise), one could also watch Knowing and see all kinds of religious symbolism. Towards the end, the aliens (yes, there are aliens involved) take on an angelic appearance once they revert to their true form (a type of wing can be seen), and it can also be interpretted that the aliens act as the voice of God (a higher power is speaking to the chosen). On top of that, they create a type of "Noah's Ark" to save the human race from total destruction (Armageddon).

And then, of course, if there is a God and if He created the entire universe, it would stand to reason He created the aliens. So, thinking back to Dogma, we remember that hearing God would kill us puny mortals, and therefore an intermediary would be needed to speak on God's behalf. Thus, the aliens bring a message from God to save humanity just before the End. Like I said, religious symbolism.

The film has its flaws, but it was entertaining, and it walks a line similar to the one The Exorcism of Emily Rose did--it gives the audience, who is divided by their beliefs of spirituality and science (or however you want to say it), a scenario, and then allows them to draw their own conclusions, find out what it means to them. Some see a freak natural occurance and aliens, others see God's wrath and the angels He has sent to save the chosen few. Two sides of the same coin? You decide.

I may be agnostic, but I can definitely appreciate a film that is put together in such a way as to not choose one side over another, but instead to work towards uniting--or at least accepting--both sides. Just because I'm not religious doesn't mean I abhor all things religious.

Anywho, Knowing is well crafted and entertaining. Definitely worth a watch.