Roger Ebert: Transformers 2 ‘a horrible experience of unbearable length’

2009_transformers_revenge_of_the_fallen_0051
The reviews are in for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and not only do most people say that it’s not even a mildly amusing or slightly entertaining action film, it’s also confusing, cumbersome, and way too long at well over two hours. Veteran critic Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun Times has some choice words for this epically bad movie, and other reviews are similarly scathing:

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is a horrible experience of unbearable length, briefly punctuated by three or four amusing moments. One of these involves a dog-like robot humping the leg of the heroine. Such are the meager joys. – Roger Ebert, The Chicago Sun Times

Revenge of the Fallen is two-and-a-half hours of top-shelf special effects deployed indiscriminately; a roaring, plotless, character-less mess that sees mainstream moviegoers as money-spending, barely sentient automatons. I want to emphasize the two and a half hours, because that running time seems downright criminal. It filled me with despair. At some point — probably around 100 minutes in, though I didn’t have a watch — I became convinced that the movie would never end. – Eugene Novikov, AMC TV

I hated every 149 minutes. This is so bad it’s immoral. Michael Bay is a time-sucking vampire who will feast off your lost time. This is why the movie is so long. – Victoria Alexander, FilmsInReview.com

Revenge of the Fallen is almost literally plotless. It’s like a movie based on a TV Guide description. A bloated, ponderous piece of s**t. – Devin Faraci, CHUD

Despite having lowered the artistic bar to Death Valley levels, director Michael Bay has somehow managed to figure out a way to slither beneath with the flexibility of the pole dancers-in-training that he prefers to hire as his female extras. – Peter Sobczynski, eFilmCritic.com

Putrid, offensive and life-sucking. Early word is describing this woebegone fiasco as the next Batman and Robin. Having seen both, Joel Schumacher has every right to protest the comparison. – Dustin Putman, TheMovieBoy.com

The first film was a summer action movie masterpiece, this one can’t even make giant, transforming robots stay interesting for its entire running time. – Matthew Razak, DC Examiner

[via Rotten Tomatoes]

Some fans on Rotten Tomatoes say the film had great action scenes and cool-looking robot cars and you can’t expect it to have a meaningful plot at all. According to just about all the reviews, it doesn’t. Many critics independently use metaphors to describe the film-going experience that involve getting hit on the head and listening to repetitive loud noises. There’s also the issue of the stereotypical portrayal of two annoying Transformers that are earning comparisons to Jar Jar Binks. Transformers 2 will undoubtedly make enough at the box office for filmmakers to justify putting out such crap. Journalist Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel perhaps best summed it up “Is it the worst movie of the summer? Possibly. Will everybody see it? Probably.”

Photos thanks to AllMoviePhoto.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

36 Responses to “Roger Ebert: Transformers 2 ‘a horrible experience of unbearable length’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kath Jaynes says:

    I’m surprised people see films like this anyway.

  2. ash says:

    Can the critics be more dramatic? Geez. I will go see it, because I liked the first one, simple as that.

  3. Bob Lawblaw says:

    Michael Bay did Meatloaf’s music video for “I Would Do Anything for Love.”
    need anymore be said.
    Critics should be going in there expecting something at least as good as the first, IMO. I mean, it’s an action flick about robots, c’mon, you can be consistent.

    And no offense, but seeing a movie simply because you saw the first one, especially after someone tells you:

    “probably around 100 minutes in, though I didn’t have a watch — I became convinced that the movie would never end.”

    well, how about you just pay me 20 bucks to come over and repeatedly smack you in the face– because it seems like that’s what is taking place in the theater.

  4. Yae says:

    These articles are the closest I would ever get to that movie or anything else Megan Fox is involved in anyway. I’m not giving that human a penny of my hard earned money until she works on her ego and gets therapy for her woman-hating issues. She’s not a person young women should look up to at all. I actually spoke to my teenage son about her in a “this is the type of woman you AVOID like the plague” talk.

  5. ash says:

    lol, well, alright Bob. I really liked the first one. I love action movies and Shia Labeouf, and I usually always disagree with critics – I will go see this movie. IMDB comments were actually pretty good. It all comes down to what you like, and these types of action movies are something I enjoy. It may be mindless yes, but it’s all in good fun and a break from being bored.

  6. Vibius says:

    So basicly it like the first one?

  7. justathought says:

    Elbert is the master. I’ll wait for DVD.

  8. Grandizer says:

    It will get my money, not today or this week, but maybe in 2 weeks.

    But then I have a collection of Transformers that features more than 400 of them. And I am old, 44…

    And sorry, Megan Fox is hot, so I will watch her for that. Hopefully her speaking roles are not so long.

  9. Zoe (The Other One) says:

    I’m with Ash – the first one was easy watching, good fun and chronically entertaining PLUS it has the gorgeous and edible Shia in it and Megan ain’t too hard to look at either.

  10. Renee says:

    Bob… Wow, I had no idea that Bay was responsible for the Meatloaf video that still haunts my dreams.

  11. Sauronsarmy says:

    Its a movie about robots fighting each other, thats what the TV show was about! I pay $10 to be mindlessly entertained for 2 hours. I’m not paying to see some indie movie BS, that what Netflix is for. I wanna see robots destroying, and blowing stuff up.

  12. Giz says:

    This film will make tons of money on the fact that the average American movie goer is devoid of taste.

  13. Toe says:

    I saw it yesterday and I liked it. It’s a movie about robots fighting, things exploding etc. If you want to get entertained then go see it, enjoy the SFX. It’s a cartoon they made a movie of….they are robots….it’s not like spiderman where he can have feelings etc.
    Fox is HOT!! Enjoy it for what it is…robots fighting.

  14. Trillion says:

    My husband, who loves robot battle movies with explosions, walked out on this. Yes, it’s that insultingly stupid. (he thought it was racist too) He should’ve known better, since we saw the first one, also agonizingly horrible. Micheal Bay must be high.

  15. Iggles says:

    “Revenge of the Fallen is almost literally plotless. It’s like a movie based on a TV Guide description. A bloated, ponderous piece of s**t. – Devin Faraci”

    Truer words have never been spoken. I have absolute NO desire whatsoever to watch this piece of crap.

    I hate movies that are all special effects without a plot. It’s a waste of time. I’d rather see Star Trek for the 5th time, because that movie had action, special effects, and excellent character development.

  16. karen says:

    Hey just a thought…

    Don’t you think Megan Fox and Bradley Cooper would make a HOT couple..

    I say Yummy…. think about it.. Bradley and Megan..

    CooperFox… Medley.. ok not good with the couple names but still they would be super hot together..

    OK Bradley get on this quick.. Brian is not competition… She is ripe for the taking.

  17. wow says:

    I don’t mean any disrespect by asking this, but is he (Ebert)still able to comprehend things enough to give reviews anymore? I only ask this because the last time I remember seeing or hearing anything about him is that he was recovering from surgery (brain?) or something. And there was something going on with his face. It was sad to see him like that.

    But if he’s reviewing again that is awesome!

  18. Celebitchy says:

    Roger Ebert had surgery for thyroid and jaw cancer, which required the removal of part of his jaw bone. He never lost the ability to think clearly or to type but can no longer speak. He is mentally completely aware, as you can tell from his excellent writing. He still makes appearances and is hanging in there with the support of his wife.

    -edit- according to Wiki he is now cancer free! He uses a computerized voice system to talk.

  19. Annie says:

    I doubt this will stop people from seeing it. I mean, there are at least a million men out there who will see it just to jack off to Ms. Fox.

    *shudders* I’d hate to be in THAT theater…

  20. Because I Say So says:

    I’d rather see Public Enemies, The Terminator movie, and Harry Potter…

  21. viper says:

    Im not watching this rubbish when it gets here. Im saving my money for public enemies.

  22. TaylorB says:

    I have felt for a long time that Mr Ebert is far too kind and gives ‘thumbs up’ for some pretty paltry excuses for films, so to read him rip one to bits is pretty telling, if that man hates it I suspect it pretty much blows. Granted eventually I will rent it and mock it from my couch, just not gonna drop $10 to go see it at the theatre.

    I have to say I just adored Shia in ‘Holes’, cute little film and Fonzie was in it to boot.

  23. billysgirl says:

    Ugh. These reviewers must have gone into this movie expecting some sort of cinematic masterpiece. It is a summer popcorn movie. I saw it last night and it did not feel 2 1/2 hours long, the special effects were great, there was most certainly a plot, and it had a lot of funny moments. Megan Fox needed to deflate her lips, but that is another story.

  24. kitty says:

    ugh please please PLEASE don’t go see this piece of trash. Putting your hard-earned money in to go see this filth, gives people like Michael Bay excuses to make more of this drivel. Megan Fox, though she may be hot, (for a frankenstein’s monster-type creation) is no reason to see this movie. For god sakes she speaks in this. We really don’t need any of that.. Don’t let Hollywood play you for a fool, tell them we want movies with substance.

  25. Wonder Woman says:

    I LOVED TRANSFORMERS before the movie was made. the first one was Okay… but this one justs seeems… it was well said here:

    ” a roaring, plotless, character-less mess that sees mainstream moviegoers as money-spending, barely sentient automatons.”

  26. eddy says:

    I’ve been a Transformers fan for the past 25 years. Was this film as good as the first one? Nope, but that first one holds a special place in my heart (right next to the original 1986 animated movie). But for what it is, it’s great.

    If you don’t like it, fine. Go see the latest Wong Kar Wai film or something if you want “art” (which personally, I think, is overindulgent garbage masquerading as something “deep”, but I guess the intellectuals would disagree).

  27. TaylorB says:

    Eddy,

    I love crappy movies, but I am cheap so I would rather rent them than go to the theatre. Matter of fact my spouse is known for picking the worst films possible, not on purpose, and recently he got possibly the worst I have ever seen “Satans Little Helper”, if you have a chance to rent that one I suggest you go for it, cocktails and beer will enhance your viewing pleasure.

  28. Lisa says:

    I don’t think you can overanalyze movies like this..this is more like a “turn your brain off and have a good time kinda flick”..I liked the first one, but I do agree that the 2 and a half hours is going to be brutal. And they are right..it may suck, but it’s been hyped up so much, that everyone will see it…including me

  29. aw! says:

    I’ll see it no matter what the critics (or anyone else) says. I grew up with them, liked the cartoon on TV, and liked the first movie. The CGI is great.

  30. Ashley says:

    I wasn’t going to see the first one but then one day I was bored and it was the only thing on HBO on Demand I hadn’t see so I hit play and I was plesantly surprised. I didn’t expect to like it and while I couldn’t stand Meghan Fox, it was a pretty good action film, much better than Iron Man which got tons of hype.

    It’s not going to be an Oscar contender for Best Picture. Do you really expect it to excel at dramatic acting? Just enjoy it as a comic book film and stop taking it so seriously.

  31. Ashley says:

    I agree aw! the CGI was fantastic. I usually can’t stand the fake look of CGI movies but the frist one was great. I’m sure the second one will be just as good.

  32. Jenna says:

    I saw it last night. There were parts I was turned off on and others that were actually pretty good. I was surprised at the amount of cussing in the movie. Very. Granted it’s a PG-13 movie I was still shocked.

    It’s a movie to see on a summer day in which you have nothing to do. Plus if you need a Shia fix. That man… The things I’d do to him.

  33. Because I Say So says:

    @ Ashley== seriously, you thought Transformers I was better than Iron Man? Not to be rude, but now I’m just questioning your tastes in movies all around

  34. Ben says:

    I saw having liked the first one and let me tell you, DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE. It is absolutely horrendous and I am angry at myself for having supported this film. Please don’t make the same mistake I did and give you money in support.
    People say you can’t expect a masterpiece from a blockbuster and I fully know that but I can at least expect something.
    It’s like Batman and Robin. Noone says well that’s based on a comic and it’s a blockbuster what do you expect, because it is terrible and Batman Begins showed it can be good.
    Transformers 2 has made me truly see the criticism others have had for Michael Bay all along, I get it now.

  35. geogiagirl says:

    I have not seen this film but I did like the first okay because I like Shia, but I will not pay 13.00 (that’s how much the movies are here) to be offended by goldteeth, simian(sp) feature having, illiterate, supposedly “hood”(meaning black) transformers as well as many other racist incidents in the film. On top of that the movie is 2 1/2 hours long with no plot. No thank you. Explosions and noise become tiresome without character development after a short time. Sometimes you can smell it from a mile away, why pay to step in it?

  36. Chris says:

    Yea I’m ganna have to say that I won’t see it due to the overwhelming conclusion that it is horrible. If for example, the reviews said something along the lines of: It’s not that great or.. It’s pretty bad but it had some good aspects, then maybe I would see it. But since the conclusion is what it is.. no thanks. I may see it but god help me if it’s my money that’s going to be wasted.

    And I’m sorry, but Iron Man was FAR better than Transformers.. like, c’mon now.. You probably thought “The Happening” was amazing.

    I’d like to add that yea.. the racism is pretty prominent in Transformers I so I’d expect the same from the second… I’d explain it but I really don’t feel like it.

    P.S: For anyone who says they’d see the movie just because of Megan Fox: wow. Just, wow. Waste your money if you want to but I’ll say this: Please don’t EVER waste your money on her or any comparable person (and I refuse to call her an actor).