Transformers: Dark of the Moon: Review By ZanyZap

Jul 1st, 2011 by ZanyZap
Dark of the Moon lives up to hype; it's loud, obnoxious and mediocre.
  • OVERALL
    2.5
    WORTHY
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
Director: Michael Bay

Writer(s): Ehren Kruger

Stars: Shia LaBeouf, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley and Tyrese Gibson

The threequel to director Michael Bay's robot-on-robot action slammer is like a 154 minute music video for Dubstep: It's loud and obnoxious and it feels like we're riding on the Universal Studios upcoming "Transformers" rollercoaster.

But despite the jars and the jerks (and there are a lot of them), "Dark of the Moon" is still a fun ride, if you remember to pop a few ibuprofens during the previews.

"That's one small step for man," says astronaut Neil Armstrong after exiting Apollo 11, "and one giant leap for mankind."

The Apollo TV cam catches our favorite space ranger and the moon's large acne scars... size 10 footprints... the American flag on Viagra and... a crashed Cybertronian spacecraft piloted by leader of the Autobots Sentinel Prime (voiced by Spock aka Leonard Nimoy!)--

Hold up. Say what?!

Screenwriter Ehren Kruger, who penned "Revenge of the Fallen", takes over an hour to explain what the trailer showed us in two minutes. The Autobots led by Optimus Prime must recover something from the Ark--the ship Armstrong scoped out in 1969--before the Decepticons.

If they fail, you guessed it: Bay will blow up the world. Excuse me, Megatron and friends will blow up the world, leaving the fate of mankind in the hands of Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf), or depending on how you view it, at the mercy of Kruger's drawn-out script.

The Cybertronian space race is intercut with robots brawling; LaBeouf screaming; a few fun gimmicks; more robot brawls; a line-up of bad jokes and undeveloped characters; even more robot brawls; and to Bay's credit, a lot of cool visuals. A shot where soldiers act as flying squirrels, weaving in and out of skyscrapers, comes to mind.

Around 70 percent of the jokes fall flat, but there's comfort in knowing that you'll laugh at least 30 percent of the time. A highlight of the humor is Witwicky's "mechanical pets," a robotic Bert and Ernie, who--thank the Lord--replace the racist-bots from "Fallen" as comedic relief.

During the more exasperating scenes (the ones without "robot sex"), pretend you're playing "Where is Waldo? Consumer Edition" and attempt to spot the product placement. It'll pass the time.

Every shot shines, from an explosive orgy of bolt and screw in downtown Chicago all the way down to the entry of Bay's newest sex puppet--or should I say up, as we have a peeping-tom angle that makes even James Stewart of "Rear Window" jealous. Bay should either win Best Cinematography or be listed as Hollywood's biggest pervert.

Although Bay lives in a virtual world of photoshopped women, it's a crying shame that the acting abilities of his pretty centerpieces cannot be edited too.

After watching Victoria Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley's performance as Witwicky's love interest, members of the Academy Awards should consider their first ever retraction. Marion Cotillard (Best Actress, "La Vie en Rose"), hand over your Oscar for Best Actress to Megan Fox for 2007's "Transformers"!

An exchange between Huntington-Whiteley and Megatron is almost as cringe-worthy as the animal crackers scene in another Bay masterpiece, "Armagedon."

Even LaBeouf, who gives it his all, cannot recompense Huntington-Whiteley's poor chops or a slew of forced, awkward supporting characters, like those played by greats John Malkovich and Frances McDormand. LaBeouf, if someone asks you in 50 years if you had the guts to get in the car a fourth time, your answer better be a resounding "NO!"

Michael Bay has transformed into the Adam Sandler of directors. Most critics will never appreciate his movies and he will never be nominated for a substantial award past the MTV Movie Awards. But Bay will never cease to entertain his audience, especially when he makes things go boom.

"Transformers: Dark of the Moon" lives up to the hype and meets all expectations: It is a solid, entertaining and mediocre summer escape.

Do you like this review?

Comments (37)

  1. moviegeek

    @diaigma We'd never agree on a show together :P People would get annoyed hah.

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  2. Diaigma

    @moviegeek - funny. I always liked Siskel more.

    I'll take it! :P

    11 months agoby @diaigmaFlag

  3. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @moviegeek -- Wow, nice point. I get what you're saying, but I still think a film should be rated upon as an overall movie. Sure, the action may make you jizz, but if the acting, directing, score, etc -- sucks, why would it deserve anything more than a 3/5?, heck even 2.5 would do. That's just my 2 cents, and I really appreciate yours.

    11 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  4. ZanyZap

    @stoned: Great description. Watching it in 3D was like adding cocaine to Kool-Aid mix. :P.

    11 months agoby @zanyzapFlag

  5. TheStonedReviewer

    A tedious, over long, sex obsessed gimic of michael bays imagination, with entertainment on the eyes e.g. the 3D which does live up to expectations which at times is STUNNING, but it has nothing else going for it, great review man!

    11 months agoby @stonedFlag

  6. moviegeek

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx I disagree with you. (your comment directed at @zanyzap). I think when you go into an action movie, you should judge the action foremost. When you go into a comedy, the amount of laughs should rank highest in your critique. No, a film shouldn't be judged solely by that and given a 5/5 if that element is awesome. But a 3/5 is hardly being all that generous. I don't think anyone walks into Transformers for good story or great acting (though that would be great if they were there). One of my critiques was that there was actually TOO MUCH story going on. I'm not getting defensive or anything. But I think people tend to overthink the simplicity of being a movie critic.

    Branching with that, that's why it annoys me when people review ALL films by those four subcategories at the top of a review on MW (Story, Acting, Directing, Visuals). A film can have more or less parts to it to fulfill what it set out to do. An example: The Transporter. Ludicrously-plotted movie with plain acting that featured some spectacular action. I'd give the movie a 3.5. An action movie with amazing action. Sure, it's not perfect; but it accomplished what it set out to do. To judge all movies on that same rubrick is quite silly. (Not that you do that, mind you. I'm just on a tangent right now). Anyhoo. :P

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  7. thedude-abides

    @zanyzap LMAO!!

    11 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  8. ZanyZap

    @thedude-abides: Keep telling yourself that Dude, and I'll keep patting myself on the back for being awesome. It's cool; we're both pretty laid back. Now get me a White Russian and be quick about it. :P

    11 months agoby @zanyzapFlag

  9. thedude-abides

    @zanyzap I was kneeling before your insight; not you :P

    11 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  10. ZanyZap

    @dan1: I was a virgin to the Pepper Jack variety until last night. They were godly; but if they are the Hercules of the Cheez-Its, tobacco is the Zeus. @narrator should be happy that I've returned to character. :P

    @thedude-abides: Thank you, but please get off your knees. I am awesome, but I am not a god... as far as I know. :P I like McDormand a lot, but I have to admit her best movies were under the Coen bros directon.

    @slysnide: I hear ya. That's happened to me before. I'm sure it was a nice, long response. You, (the late) Vamp, and Narrator always post "novel" responses--but don't stop; I'm always picking up good books. :P

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx: Thanks. Go in with an open mind. You may like those aspects. Some apparently have. I obviously didn't.

    Thanks all.

    11 months agoby @zanyzapFlag

  11. slysnide

    This sounds about right. (my goddam comment was deleted and I can't for the life of me remember what I wrote, but I know it was better)

    11 months agoby @slysnideFlag

  12. thedude-abides

    I kneel before your insight on this movie, my friend. You summed every aspect of this one up to perfection. Much like Green Lantern, I feel vindicated in my skepticism leading up to this film. Why, might you ask? Here's why:

    Whitely isn't an actress, Dempsey is a decent tv actor at best, McDormand hasn't had a decent role in her entire career that her husband hasn't given her, and it's not Malkovich's scene. And most importantly, it's MICHAEL FREAKIN' BAY!! Has everyone forgotten that fact? Way to go, @zanyzap. A very dead on, sarcastic review, lol. Love the James Stewart analogy, by the way.

    11 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  13. IlikePie202

    nice review. I saw this last night and I completely agree

    11 months agoby @Ilikepie202Flag

  14. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @zanyzap -- Loved this review. It seems you gave the movie a perfect rating, I'm watching as people give it 3.5-4.5, just because of the action-scenes and special effects,while, they are very aware the script, acting, pacing, etc -- Sucked, quite naturally.(no offense to them, of course).

    Really appreciate you giving this movie the rating it deserves(Although, I have yet to see the film, I have seen the last two, and I will refuse to give a film a 3/5 just because of the special effects and action-scenes).

    Great review, man.

    11 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  15. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @moviegeek -- I'd have to disagree with that one, to be honest, every other review I've read about for this movie, has more about her, if my memory serves me correctly.

    11 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  16. Dan

    @narrator I like the tobasco one as well, but just not quite as much. I have to have a drink if I'm eating those. Weak, I know :P

    11 months agoby @dan1Flag

  17. The Narrator: The Better Man

    Lol, good call @dan1. And my personal favorite is definitely the tobasco one. :D

    @zanyzap, lol. Understandable, friend. Maybe you'll rewatch it with lowered expectations on dvd or blu-ray one day, and enjoy it a bit more. In fact, I bet my bottom dollar that'd be the case. Whatever the case is, you did good in your review, just in case you weren't aware... case. :P

    11 months agoby @narratorFlag

  18. Dan

    @moviegeek I did that cuz of the typo my phone auto corrected to, and I'm too lazy to erase the comment and type it again.

    11 months agoby @dan1Flag

  19. moviegeek

    @dan1 That action you just demonstrated matches well with your avatar lol.

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  20. moviegeek

    @dan1 Hey he wasn't so crazy when he was on the show :P He's lost his marbles since.

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  21. Dan

    Ebert!!!! *throws phone at wall, puts hands in air in exasperation, head explodes*

    11 months agoby @dan1Flag

  22. moviegeek

    @dan1 haha! :D I'll be Ebert. I agreed with him more than Siskel :P Besides, @diaigma is the older man :P

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  23. Dan

    And I'm dubbing @moviegeek and @diaigma the Siskel and Exert of the site. They can decide who is who.

    11 months agoby @dan1Flag

  24. Dan

    @zanyzap I love Cheez-it crackers! Which kind were they? My personal favorite is Pepper Jack. Can never get enough of those little orange bastards

    11 months agoby @dan1Flag

  25. moviegeek

    "The American Flag on Viagra" rofl.

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  26. ZanyZap

    @narrator: Thanks for your thoughts. I expected it to be a lot better than its predecessor, which it was, but Bay's and LaBeouf's comments on how this is the best of the bunch heightened my anticipation. I tried to remain neutral, but you of all people know how that always turns out. The garbled story and the acting bothered me. I focused mainly on RHW, but I was greatly turned off by the roles given to Malkovich, McDormand and even Dempsey. I suppose I should add a bit on that...

    As for the "loud" part, you are correct, I meant loud in nature, although my ears were ringing after. Oh, and I hit ctrl+f to find that part in your review, if you understand why. :P

    11 months agoby @zanyzapFlag

  27. moviegeek

    @narrator ahahaha.

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  28. The Narrator: The Better Man

    @zanyzap, ahaha. Hey! So we disagreed on one film? I'd hardly call us @moviegeek and @diaigma. :P

    I've enjoyed this review, friend, although I don't agree with near half of it, or at least not as strongly. I must say that I do believe you put too much thought into the film. As I judge films based on expectations and practicality, I think you were one of the few who totally forgot what they knew this film would be, and surrendered to the chance to sound... better?

    Whatever the subliminal case, good job, save for the opening quote. Loud? Lol, refer to my review on my thoughts on people calling these films "loud".

    11 months agoby @narratorFlag

  29. moviegeek

    @zanyzap 5 paragraphs are about her ahaha.

    11 months agoby @moviegeekFlag

  30. ZanyZap

    @moviegeek: Hey! I did a little math. She only takes up 10 percent of the review! Get off me! Her ass and legs took up 100 percent of the screen a majority of the time anyway. :P

    11 months agoby @zanyzapFlag