Transformers: Kaatudeiden kosto

Michael Bay’s lack of taste and sense of proportion in the magical, polished world of the first Transformers?! Transformers has undergone a similar shift as Bad Boys. Spielberg's touch has disappeared and Bay has gone rogue. The first instalment was great thanks to several pleasant, well-proportioned aspects – the visual celebration of Megan Fox’s beauty, the sparks between her and the shy Shia LaBeouf, getting to know the cool robots, with each of them having their place in the script and rousing astonishment and fondness. The film didn’t hurry, but rather took time to relish every scene and its only weak spot was the chaotic action climax. In the second film, Megan and Shia merely evade explosions (in similarly chaotic action scenes) and the humor relies on scenes like the one in which a little robot humps Megan’s boot like a dog (!). The robots’ potential is wasted here, especially in terms of their individuality, and some are even annoying (the “couples” accompanying the main characters). And when you finally see a truly impressive robot, it’s immediately made ridiculous by his “funny” huge steel testicles from underneath which John Turturro radio-calls the Marine Corps (!!). This is simply not a direction I wanted Transformers to take. And that’s not even to mention the weak script, barely holding together the continuous action orgies, which just don’t satisfy after two hours. Michael, you obviously have no idea why the first film was such a nice surprise. (19.06.2009)

100% concentrate of one artist. From another director, I would love it, but this Bay… and I can only take him dissolved. Everything bangs, everyone is gorgeous, everyone is American… and then the humour, the humour!!! Horny dogs, a stoned mum, moron robot twins… Two stars for the special effects, otherwise it’s rubbish. (15.08.2011)

Michael Bay has transformed himself into his own genre, where he has made his own rules that physics, logic, and even Spielberg himself cannot affect. On the other hand, no one else has such perfectly stitched visuals with slow-motion shots of the characters' hellishly serious faces, military formations, and the setting sun with heroic music blaring. It’s off the rails, without a drop of judgment and a sense of calm. And with the overblown runtime, it hits the viewer with the vigor of a little cheeky brat whose rich parents bought him a lot of toys from Hasbro and he doesn't know what to do with them out of mischief. So there are explosions everywhere and in between all this we have Shia and Megan, who just happen to look good again. I admit that I have probably never felt so awkward after leaving the movie theater for having actually liked this. But I don't want to see it a second time, not without the assistance of the big screen. PS: Even after a second viewing, it's still surprisingly entertaining. In a perversely demented way, but it's fun. :) (23.06.2009)

Bay likes to escalate. This means that the second film is bigger, more explosive, more infantile, stupider, more lobotomized... maybe a little funnier. Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman used most of their intelligent ideas in the Star Trek prequel script, so in this Hasbro mishmash they have no choice but to dilute the really demented plot with decent gags and self-parodying one-liners. Which is nice - otherwise Revenge of the Tinsmiths would seem really unbearable to me. Even so, watching two and a half hours of destruction, confusing action and rushing concrete mixers is a solid impact on the nervous system. Especially because, compared to the first film, it's no longer ballbusting - it's hackneyed. The moment of surprise is there, so we get Emmerich's recipe "if you don't know what to do, blow up as much of the world's ropes as possible". At the end, the divine Michael Bay prepared his much-loved pathos in a raw state for me, for which I thank him and send him a tin kiss. I know that Michael Bay lovers will be drooling with happiness, but for a viewer, who, in addition to a ton of steel armor, also likes a little bit of thought put into things, this year's blockbuster is Star Trek. And that won’t change no matter what Michael Bay does. (19.06.2009)

Naked robot genitals across the screen. Robot Jar Jar Binks in duplicate. Optimus "Conan" Prime. Devastators remake of the scene with Legolas on the Oliphaunt. “Mythology". A fire farting and leg rogering little robot. A huge, rusk robot with a walking stick who (for a change) farts out a parachute. A camp pug. A cowardly Megatron. Silicon heaven not included. Bay simply let rip. What else do you expect. Unlike the second Bad Boys, he let rip in the wrong direction. Seriously infantile. Michael, I want those politically incorrect brothers back, not prattling midgets... um, midgibots! (24.06.2009)

I would deserve a slap for expressing everywhere that the other Transformers cannot be great. Because they, in fact, once again gave me a sense of absolute happiness that cinema has given us blockbusters. The revenge of the defeated may not rewrite history and will never be anything other than a thrilling ride, which surpasses the story with its visuals (even though it is irresistibly fairy-tale-like). Those who were so captivated by the adventure of the boy and his protector are suddenly disappointed when Bay's vision brings something even more magnificent. Not me, I bow before the story of the same boy, who, however, has much more to do this time. Enthusiasm, wide-eyed and touched by how intoxicating a film can be. I go to the cinema because of this, and I'm sorry that the series never reached this peak again. (27.06.2009)

Hm. I saw a lot of action, but sometimes I just didn't know who was with who, where is what. The beginning was decent, I enjoyed it, but then it went downhill, although the action and noble gestures increased. Too bad, I just wasn't enjoying it. Anyway, if I were a guy I'd add a star for Megan Fox's cleavage, those running scenes, they really could have used some slow motion, eh? X-) But then again, I didn't expect more from it, so no disappointment. Definitely worse than the first one. The message "love and peace and memories" was sent again, so I'm expecting another installment. (22.07.2009)

I hate people. I’d like to help the Decepticons destroy that gang of worms that call themselves human kind. Movie theaters always used to be a place to escape from niggling reality, an oasis of peace and quiet where nobody spoke and let themselves be carried off to fantastic places with the help of a projector and a silver screen. But to conclude, so we can get on to the movie. If I meet that jerk who was spitting in my hair and talking about what was going to happen in the next scene once again, I’ll rip out his eyes and tongue. But, let’s get to the important things. Revenge is a full-blooded action popcorn movie which is slightly brought down by the unnecessarily intricate mythology (which is full of holes anyway). It would have helped if it had been a little briefer. In any case, the action is excellent and mainly it’s less confused that in the first part. The fight in the forest is unbeatable. The finale is nice and completely over the top with loads of robots, where the only downside it that the movie pays too little attention to them. Bay simply wanted to do everything at once, but it wasn’t really worth it (well, in money terms it was actually worth it, but I didn’t mean that). It’s still effective, but it isn’t how it should be. As for the actors, Shia is cool, his character is split between two images of Sam - a poor student with typical problems and a veteran who has some experience behind him - and he pulled it off with flying colors. Moreover, both he and John Turturro were the only ones with really good snappy lines and their scenes together are the best parts of the movie (apart from the FIGHTS). And Megan Fox is foxier than ever. I just hope that in part three they manage to balance the ingredients so that it could rock like it did before. P.S.: Optimus is awesome. (24.07.2009)

I enjoyed the second Transformers mostly as much as the first one. Again, you have to take the film with a grain of salt, but within the action genre, it is a job well done, although it is true, as others have said, that there is so much action in places that it is all a bit cluttered. I liked the fact that this time the action doesn't just take place in the city, but also largely in the desert, which, as a film location, has its own particular charm. In this case, the creators did not limit themselves to pure action and served us a number of funny scenes, which were mainly provided by Sam's parents (especially his mother), the robot twins and robo-kmet. The romantic line was pretty much forced this time, but thankfully there wasn't too much of it. In addition to these storylines, I was also intrigued that they uncovered the Transformers mythology. In the end, it's a weaker but still four stars – if I'd seen the film in the cinema back then, it would have been a clean four, I'm sure. (27.06.2019)

This series has never grown on me since the first installment. However, I have seen all three of them. I watched the first one out of interest, the third one because my brother wanted to go to the movies after years, and they happened to be showing it, which could have looked cool in the cinema. As for the second one, I watched it to fill the gaps between the first and the third film. It's not worth it. Michael Bay just confirmed that he's a freak for technology, and that's the only conclusion the film brings. The robots may look cool, the effects are actually good, but the story disappeared somewhere with the jokes that are inserted into the main character's mouth. Shia LaBeouf should be the catchy cool guy who carries the whole film, but he's just a clumsy person who got his hands on super toys that he loves. "Transformers" are actually like adult "Toy Story", but with the difference that this is pure masturbation over super awesome technology, grand action, and completely dumb story. And Megan Fox? I definitely won't be one of those who daily search the internet for her new photo where she shows at least 20% of her left nipple. If Megan is compared to Angelina, someone has made a big mistake because Angelina, as far as I know, can act excellently when she wants to. Megan just has a pretty face. As soon as she left - in the third film, she had to be replaced by a model who didn't play any role - I immediately gave the film 10% more. And I wasn't the only one. But the second one is simply a travesty. Summer blockbusters like this should be banned. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/06/nebezpecne-znamosti-jak-ztratit-kluka.html (21.02.2013)

There are basically two distinct perspectives that can be applied when evaluating the second Transformers. We can think of this megalomaniacal project by director/businessman Michael Bay as superficial "popcorn" rubbish that serves only to give us visual satisfaction and leave us brainwashed by a dozen different brands of nonsense and screenwriting blunders. The second view is probably the easiest to characterize by conceiving of the whole film as a completely unpretentious diversion, and laughing at the many clichés and "Americana", but still expecting some visual paint and Bayesian camera flourishes, while maintaining some reasonable level of taste for all manner of explosions, carnage, and the general tolerability of said visual pageantry. Personally, I found the second one to be a pretty action-packed but still workable and immensely entertaining spectacle that I'm happy to "switch off" in front of and certainly don't consider to be anything stupid or tasteless. I agree with the opinion that the first one was slicker, less superficial, and had some heartfelt moments. On the other hand, Michael Bay is an animal :) and when you let him out of his cage, he can run amok and what a little kid does with planes, cars, and robots in his room, Bay realizes right on the screen with the help of real planes, ships, and cars. A heady, heavily unintellectual little thing:) (26.06.2011)