TRON: Legacy

TRON.  Wow.  TRON!

I remember being thirteen when I saw TRON for the first time.  I loved it.  It was an 80s cheesefest, sure, but it was captivating in the way that it blended the colorful whimsy of Disney fantasy, the technical detail of computing, the fun of arcade gaming, and the style of 80s filmmaking.  In many ways, TRON taps into something highly personal within those of a certain generation.
TRON has been somewhat relegated to the hardcore geek crowd for the last decade or two, and no one ever really believed that a sequel would ever be made.  Now, 28 years later, seemingly out of nowhere, comes TRON: Legacy.

Essentially, the gist of the original TRON was that Kevin Flynn (played by Jeff Bridges), computer programming genius, accidentally became "digitized" into a computer. There, he discovered a neon-colored world much like our own, where "programs" are individuals in the form of people. Kevin meets a security program named TRON, and helps him defeat the evil Master Control Program. In TRON: Legacy, Kevin Flynn has mysteriously disappeared, leaving his only son, Sam, to grow up alone. Now, after being without his father (or the answers behind his disappearance) for twenty years, Sam stumbles upon the world inside the computer and discovers that his father has been trapped inside the system by a malevolent program called CLU, who is created in Kevin's exact image. Sam, Kevin, and a female program named Quorra must fight CLU and escape from the digital world.

So that's about it. Lots of electroluminescent sci-fi action adventure.

Here's an interesting thing about Legacy: in contrast to the first movie, which was very bright, colorful, and fun, Legacy is rather dark and subdued. The tone is (for the most part) very serious. It works out alright, but I can't help feeling that the film would have been better-served by a faster pace and more "fun" vibe. As it is, it's okay, but it borders on being actually boring at times, which is something you never want to see in a movie about neon-colored people throwing laser-edged frisbees and riding digital motorcycles.

An unusual trait of the TRON films is that the visual effects, while not entirely flawless, feel somehow perfect. Because these events take place inside a computer world, it only makes sense that they should look computerized. After all, they are computer-generated.

The look of the TRON world in general is very different from the original film. While the original film had bright colors and characters that glowed as though made of light itself (and showed the programs to be actual beings of energy), Legacy alters this considerably. Legacy's world is dark—fitting, for this darker story—and its characters are shown to look like regular humans who merely wear clothing with a few glowing stripes. While I like the sleeker nature of the suits—especially the lack of the dorky helmets—the character designs in Legacy are almost boring by comparison to the first film. It's a fundamental change to the TRON universe, and I'm not sure I like it.

Old:

New:

The action scenes, while perhaps sparse, are generally well-done, and highly unique. They challenge the audience to wrap their heads around ideas of physics and energy that contradict real-world norms, much like The Matrix did in 1999.

The music of TRON: Legacy, composed primarily by Daft Punk, the world-renowned electronic music duo—is merely adequate at some times, but astonishing at others. Whether with electronic beats or orchestral swells, the soundtrack of Legacy is, overall, an amazing work of art. Some have said that the entire focus of Legacy is the sound, and I'm not inclined to disagree.

The characters of Legacy—Sam, Kevin, Quorra, and CLU—are all very well-acted. None of them really grip the audience the way that Kevin did in the first film, mostly due to the movie's subdued tone. One rather unique aspect of Legacy is the way that a younger version of Jeff Bridges is recreated through the use of extensive facial motion-capture and digital animation. The "young Jeff Bridges" looks astoundingly realistic in still photos, but in motion looks very obviously fake. At the same time, however, Jeff Bridges' acting manages to shine through in his motion-captured performance, giving the CG character a kind of emotional depth that counteracts the fakeness of the digital model.

One interesting note: the character of TRON from the first film does not factor into this film's story in any major way. In fact, the small ways that TRON is referenced in Legacy feel almost confusing to fans of the first film, since he's put in a position to have a much bigger role in the film than he does. It's almost definitely certain that he will return in a sequel (if such a sequel is made), but until then, this is just confusing.

All in all, TRON: Legacy is a rather mixed bag, yet is still quite remarkable. There's a sizable amount of depth in the film and its story, concluding with a curveball surprise at the end. While there's a part of me that loves TRON and wants to love TRON: Legacy, in the end I can only say that I like it.

7/10

The Last Airbender

...Look, I... I just don't want to write this. It's not worth my time.

I love the animated series upon which this movie is based. But I loathe this movie. It takes all the magic, heart, drama, humor, excitement, energy, and fun out of the show, and replaces it with slow, stupid nonsense that does nothing but frustrate.

I could rant about how bad this movie is for a lot longer. I could mention how details, big and small, are changed from the series for apparently no reason, angering fans. I could talk about the bland acting, or the fact that there are literally NO scenes in the movie that serve as anything other than exposition. I could mention the stupidly-choreographed action scenes, which stand in contrast to the series' jaw-dropping fight scenes.

But no. I've already wasted more energy typing this review than this movie deserves.

0/10

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

This is not a good film.
It is, however, a decent-ish movie.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen lacks solid character development, good scriptwriting, and a coherent plot. And yet, for all it's flaws, there are still select moments where it's highly entertaining.

Revenge starts off with a brief prologue, followed by a great action scene that sets up the plot very well. In this story, Optimus Prime and his team of Autobots are working alongside NEST, a small U.S. military force led by Major Lennox, to eradicate the Decepticons from the face of the planet. When an ancient evil enemy, The Fallen, moves to destroy the Earth, Optimus Prime and the Autobots find themselves nearly powerless against this new Decepticon threat.

Unlike the first film, in which the the film's budget greatly restricted the amount of screentime that the transformers could be given, here we see the robots in their full glory throughout the film, even when we probably don't need to. The extreme close-up camera problems from the first film are almost entirely gone, as the action is much better-framed in Revenge of the Fallen.

The film feels very much like the original animated series, as we get the same globe-spanning (and oft-ridiculous) sci-fi war adventures of the Transformers. It's a lot of fun, even if it comes off as convoluted and silly.

A highlight of this film is the much-improved character of Sam Witwicky. In the last film, he was an annoying boy whose entire motivation was to get a cool car and a hot girlfriend. His entire existence in the last film seemed contrived and silly, as was the film's assertion that he somehow represented the best of humankind. In this film, he is shown to be much more responsible, working right from the start towards getting his college education, and, later, saving the world. He is also given a completely plausible reason to exist in the film, which makes his scenes actually contribute to the overall plot rather than distract from it as in the first film. For the first time, I actually care about Sam. He earns his place in the film.

Mikaela (Megan Fox) has nothing to do in the movie. All of her important scenes only serve to advance the plot in a very small way, and it's obvious that the scriptwriters were just looking for something to do with her. Nearly all of the other secondary characters are similarly useless or annoying, with the notable exception of Major Lennox, who continues his role as the .

Throughout the film we see Optimus Prime not as the slow, clunky old robot that he was in the last film, but as a powerful and skilled warrior. After seeing Optimus do little in the first film but give inspirational speeches and get kicked around by Megatron, it's great to see him as the great warrior that he should be. One of his fight scenes is, without a doubt, the best action scene I've seen in a long time. As a Transformers fan, that scene alone was worth the $9.50 I paid for the ticket.

Bumblebee is the only other Autobot that's given much spotlight, which is probably for the best. Honestly, there's no reason for the audience to care about anyone else, so this is a welcome change. He's every bit as cool as he was in the first film, though his speech problems are becoming annoying. In the last movie, we never really got to see him in action, as he was either off-screen or crippled for all of his fight scenes, but here we can see that he's an extremely good fighter; fast and powerful. His Camaro form also gets an upgrade from the 2007 film, which is nice for the people like me who appreciate that.

Old

New

The two new "comic relief" characters, Skids and Mudflap, are extremely annoying. They're portrayed with a large number of racial stereotypes (which makes absolutely no sense), and serve to do nothing other than sit there and act like morons. They could have been completely taken out of the story and the film would have been better for it. It's not exaggerating to say that they're the worst part of the movie.

Jetfire, perhaps the most important of the new Autobots, is portrayed in an odd fashion. Whereas he was a powerful (and relatively young) Autobot in all of his previous appearances in Transformers lore, here he is shown to be an ancient transformer that can barely move. As a fan, I'm somewhat disappointed with this portrayal, as Jetfire is one of my favorite TF characters. Here he serves the purposes of exposition and little more. His entire introduction scene is actually one of the major subplots that did not need to be in the film.

The rest of the Autobot cast is relatively ignored. Ironhide and Ratchet are given only a few lines in this film, and serve as background characters along with Arcee, Jolt, and Sideswipe. While this might seem sad, it ultimately works, as they really are mere soldiers in a war, and aren't extremely important characters anyway.

The villains this time are actually shown in their full glory outside of battle, rather than only glimpsed as in the 2007 film. It's nice, even if they're a bit silly and not very deep. They really only serve as the threat, not actual characters. However, as that threat, they serve their purpose well.

The aforementioned forest battle comes in the middle of the story, and honestly is the high point of the entire film. The story's climax isn't anywhere near as interesting, but the endless number of explosions and mini-battles keep the intensity high. Perhaps too high, actually.

It's been said by some that a film is filled with depth, while a movie is superficial entertainment. By those definitions, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is a terrible film, but a so-so movie. Normally the battles and "fun" elements of the story would be enough to elevate the movie overall, but the bad stuff here is just so bad that it's hard to enjoy the whole.

4/10

Star Trek

This is not the Star Trek you know. At all.

Star Trek is an insanely fast and fun re-imagining of the Star Trek franchise, and it generally works. Those who pine for a methodical, thought-provoking film may be disappointed, as this film makes momentum its primary concern. If the 1978 Star Trek: The Motion Picture was focused on slow plot development with minimal action, then this new Star Trek is its polar opposite. While there is plenty of character definition and development, this film does it in a very quickly-cut style, giving us hundreds of great character "snippets" rather than a few dozen longer sequences. Sadly, the film is perhaps too focused on the momentum, often interweaving too many subplots into the narrative in order to keep the pace going strong. It's a trade-off, and while I'm not sure it was for the best, it certainly keeps the film interesting, which is, at the very least, fun.

"Fun" may be the key word in this new film, which seemingly ditches the science fiction "thinker" feel of the old Star Trek for a much more exciting narrative. Humor similar to that seen in Star Trek IV (the one with the whales) abounds in this film, which may annoy some and thrill others.

The new Trek crew is much more evenly-balanced than the old. While the Original Series shoved characters like Uhura, Chekov, Sulu, and Scotty to the background, this film gives each crewmember their own spotlight, usually seamlessly.

Chris Pine's portrayal of James T. Kirk is remarkable in that the viewer is not constantly reminded of William Shatner, as there aren't too many comparisons to be drawn. While Shatner's Kirk was a slightly foolish risk-taker, Pine's Kirk is a younger, brasher, and much more thrill-seeking character. He doesn't show the maturity of Shatner's Kirk in this film, but the ending certainly seems to suggest that we will see that in the sequels.

Zachary Quinto's Spock is one of the most significantly different portrayals, as he does not have the complete emotional control that Leonard Nimoy's version of the character possessed. This Spock is shown to be a somewhat conflicted character, constantly confused by his half-Human-half-Vulcan heritage. It's enjoyable to watch, though I do wonder how future storylines will deal with the fact that Spock is now a much more emotional character. Will he still retain his reliance on logic? It seems essential to the character, so I hope so. In any case, Quinto plays the character extremely well, to the point where one actually forgets Nimoy's famously powerful voice, even despite Nimoy's appearance as Spock in the film.

Leonard "Bones" McCoy may be my favorite re-imagining of any of the characters. Karl Urban, known for his Rohirrim-mustering in The Lord of the Rings, plays the slightly manic and constantly paranoid McCoy in such a sensical-yet-constantly-humorous way that the viewer cannot help but be entranced at his every appearance. He can switch from being hilarious to completely serious and dramatic at a split-second's notice, and with absolutely no sign of inconsistency. This McCoy is simultaneously accurate to the original character and completely different, all while being wholly entertaining.

The characters of Scotty and Chekov are played mostly for laughs, and while 80% of the time it works, every fifth gag comes off as childish and stupid. Hopefully that'll change by the time the second film rolls around,

The villain of the film, Nero, is a little bit underdeveloped. Star Trek: Countdown, a comic book prequel to the film, developed Nero's character in an amazing way. However, his portrayal in this film is hampered by the fact that certain very important scenes for Nero were cut out of the theatrical release, leaving us to wonder exactly how and why this seemingly silly character is in command of the massive Romulan mining ship-turned-warship, the Narada. I would have loved to have seen more of the tragic and powerful backstory of Nero in the film, as it really developed him into a character that was sympathetic, truly vengeful, and enthralling.

One significant point must be addressed: two of the main characters become romantically involved. Every time I hear myself or anyone else bring up that relationship, I have to stop and take a moment to gather my scrambled thoughts up off the ground. While the film certainly explains why their coupling should occur, it is still very off-putting. However, the humorously shocked reactions of the other characters to this relationship both acknowledge and alleviate viewers' concerns.

Some of the plot choices in Star Trek are confusing. Why exactly did the writers feel the need for a Willy Wonka-style "Scotty's stuck in a water pipe" scene? It added NOTHING. Also, the reveal of the film's backstory was badly done, leaving many--including myself--scratching their heads as to why the choice was made to reveal the central driving force of the external conflict in such a schitzophrenic and vague manner.

Another seeming plot hole is the fact that Kirk and most of the main characters are mere cadets, yet are almost instantly promoted to being the senior staff of the Federation's flagship by the end of the film. From what I've heard, there was a bit of dialogue that was cut from the film which explained that, due to the time-altering events of the film's prologue, the timeline is attempting to "mend itself" by pushing the same people from the Original Series into their same roles, despite the altered state of the universe. That line would have gone a long way to explain things, and I'm not exactly pleased that it was cut.

There are several events in this film that are so mind-shatteringly epic that they forever alter the Star Trek universe. This new series of films is not the same Trek we've known for 40 years; this is something entirely different, slightly akin to Joss Whedon's Serenity. Some may not initially welcome the change; it took me about twelve hours to accept it. Now that I've had a good morning's sleep, I've realized that I love this new movie. It's character-based, fast, and fun.


9/10

Star Wars: The Clone Wars

Star Wars: The Clone Wars is not a "movie." Originally, it was intended to be the first several episodes of the upcoming TV series of the same name. However, due to various reasons, these episodes were edited together into a "movie," and released in theaters.
God help us all.

One thing that is immediately obvious is the fact that The Clone Wars is very kid-oriented. Instead of the dramatic Star Wars logo and the opening crawl sequence, the film begins with the Clone Wars logo, and has no crawl. Instead, what would have been the text of the crawl is actually the spoken dialogue of a narrator. It sounds somewhat like the narrator of the old WWII propaganda movies, and works on some level. However, I honestly hate the fact that Lucasfilm feels the need to talk down to me. I could have read the opening crawls just fine when I was four years old, and I don't need it to be read to me now. Just let me read it for myself and let my imagination do the work.

This "movie" does not have spectacular animation by film standards. In fact, visually, it's rather sub-par compared to virtually any other CG animated movie in theaters. However, for a TV series, it will be easily one of the most visually stunning shows on TV, if not the most. To quote IGN.com, the characters are rendered with a style reminiscent of "hand-painted maquettes". It's a very interesting style, though in motion much of it seems strange. George Lucas apparently told the animators to make the motions of the characters stiffer and more exaggerated, rather than smooth and lifelike. This is an interesting move, though it doesn't always pay off. Many of the character movements just look awkward or illogical, rather than stylistically interesting. The battle scenes are spectacular to be sure, but they lack a certain style. They don't have the sharp style and pacing of the previous animated Clone Wars series, and aren't realistic enough to be anywhere near as good as what was seen in the live-action films. What's left is something in-between that isn't as good as either, and falls short of nearly every mark.

The two main flaws of the film are the dialogue and the pacing. Throughout the film, there is no pause. The entire movie is one quick sequence after another, filled with poorly-written and acted dialogue. This may not be the fault of the voice actors, however, as the animation for the film was done at least a year ago, and the voice actors may have had to lip-sync to the animation, causing the lines to sound odd or ill-timed. Additionally, the "squeezing" of the already-made episodes into a film under two hours may have left the editors with nothing left to do but make every shot in the film as short as possible. I honestly cannot describe how fast the film moves. It's like watching a schizophrenic on caffeine (my apologies to any schizophrenics whom I just mentally compared to this film. You're much better than that).
There is no room for drama or a quiet moment. The film just keeps on running, never taking a break. This makes the action scenes seem no more exciting than the [very few] non-action scenes, and the dialogue less and less important. Rather than allowing for the dialogue to have any timing or depth, the film abruptly jams lines together, making it seem as though the movie's editors were having Mountain Dew pumped into their veins.

Please understand; I love Star Wars. I own at least three dozen Star Wars novels, not counting my many guidebooks, my favorite of which is titled Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to The Force. I own at least fifteen Star Wars video games, and there are very few who dare to challenge me at Star Wars Trivial Pursuit. Heck, I even own a Master Replicas Force FX Luke Skywalker Episode IV Electronic Lightsaber.

She's my baby. ^-^

I literally do not understand how anyone could not like Star Wars; it's a completely alien concept to my mind. I love everything that makes up the universe of The Clone Wars. Despite this, I can't simply accept Clone Wars as a film. The upcoming TV series will probably succeed where the movie failed, but that's not good enough. Clone Wars is one of the most poorly-executed films that I have seen in recent memory. It's worse than Tomb Raider 2, The Mummy 3, and Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie. I feel as if George Lucas himself has tortured me for two painful hours of my life.

They didn't even ask me any questions...

Do yourself a MASSIVE favor and DO NOT SEE THIS FILM. It's not worth your time or your childrens'. Instead of paying for a movie ticket, go buy an action figure from the movie; you'll have more fun with that.

Prince Caspian

In December of 2005, The Chronicles of Narnia: the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was released in theaters. While not necessarily very deep, it was very charming. Every bit of every scene was filled with magic and wonder, and was constantly interesting despite a lack of action. Prince Caspian, on the other hand, is quite the opposite.

The first Narnia film ended with a sense of wonder and curiosity; the second begins with a close-up of a screaming, pain-ridden pregnant woman. This scene is in no way comical. In fact, it is somewhat disturbing considering Narnia's reputation for child-like innocence. However, this scene quickly sets up the conflict which is the central focus of the entire film. From the start, it is clear that every shot in the film was carefully done, and each scene is nearly poetic in its symmetry and beauty.

However, for a long while, the cinematography is the only interesting part of the film. While it's always great to see the characters we know from the first film, they don't even know what they're doing for the first half of the story. They spend the first hour of the film traversing a Narnia that has been ridden of magic, with storytelling that is similarly ridden of its magical charm.

The story itself doesn't entirely make sense, and, due to the fact that it generally follows the book's plot (though with many additions and a few character modifications), unfortunately lacks a strong conclusion.

Fortunately, the battle scenes nearly make up for everything. While I always imagined that Narnia had the potential for great action sequences, LWW (the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe) was a far more peaceful film, and didn't take Narnia's battle potential to the fullest degree.

My favorite character in Narnia has always been Peter. When I saw his fighting style in the Battle of Beruna (the end of LWW), I knew that I'd found a pretty accurate visual representation of how I'd fight if someone gave me my choice of weapons and armor. I seriously would love a suit of armor like Peter's. I'd wear it all the time. ^-^

Unfortunately, in LWW he was young and inexperienced, and couldn't really hold his own against the White Witch (though he gave her a really great fight for someone at his age and skill level).
In Prince Caspian, however, he has lived for years in Narnia, and has had time to nearly perfect his swordfighting skills. He was incredible.

SPOILERS ENSUE:
There was one scene where I thought "it'd be awesome if he took down that guy by parrying to the right, spinning to the left, then slashing horizontally across his back" (because that's exactly what I would have done; it's one of my signature moves). Half a second later, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT PETER DOES. I got totally excited, not just because I saw a reflection of my own fighting style, but because of the level of skill that it shows. It's basically a move that simultaneously shrugs off an enemy's attack and casually kills him (or at least slashes his spine. ^-^). That move shows that you're on a level far above your opponent, and stand among the elite.
I have yet to successfully pull that move off. But that's beside the point...

Towards the last half hour of the film, I thought to myself "all I really wanted was for a nice, long, one-on-one duel between Peter and some high-ranking badguy, but it's probably too late now." Five minutes later, IT HAPPENED. O_O
I was ecstatic.
Peter's beheading of the Telmarine was my favorite part of the film. I clapped and cheered (which, if you know me, is quite a rare thing).



I've decided that I've had it with purists. Yes, Peter's attitude isn't perfect like it was in the book. Yes, there is a minor subplot with Susan and Caspian. Yes, they added an action scene. I DON'T CARE. Honestly, the original books don't go into enough detail or realism anyway. The characters are rather two-dimensional, serving only to follow along with the plot points rather than actually develop as realistic characters. The fact that Peter was accustomed to being High King and had trouble being a humble boy again is only natural, and makes sense. Furthermore, it makes for great development as he re-learns to be humble and effectively submit to Aslan's will.

In the end, Prince Caspian was mixed. I think that LWW was better overall, but Caspian's action scenes were far superior, and the entire film had greater depth.

EDIT: Check out my updated (and much more thorough) thoughts on the film here:
Eight Months Later

Transformers

If you didn't immediately think "AWESOME!" when you heard there was a Transformers live-action film coming out, you are either a girl, a fool, or a pessimist. In the case of the latter one, you have no business watching cartoons anyway, so shut up and leave. Now.

On a faraway planet named Cybertron, life exists not as anything biological or organic, but as something mechanical; what we might call "robotic", but much more complex. These robotic life-forms have the ability to "transform" between two forms: a humanoid robot mode and an alternate vehicle mode (anything from a car to a jet fighter). Two factions of "transformers" exist: the Autobots, who favor peace, and the evil Decepticons, who favor destruction. The Decepticons (inevitably) turn against the Autobots, and a civil war breaks out. This war lasts many eons, but finally reaches the point where the entire planet, both in resources and population, is nearly exhausted. The battle between the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons eventually reaches Earth, where the two factions discover Earth's massive natural resources, which would enable one side or the other to win the war.
And so begins "the Great War"; a long struggle between the forces of the Autobots and the Decepticons, with humanity caught in-between.

One particularly interesting and unique part of the Transformers saga is the fact that the transformers really have no reason to protect humanity. Humans are like ants to the towering, powerful, and technologically advanced Cybertronians. If they so choose, the transformers can easily squash the forces of mankind and take the planet's resources for themselves (and therefore win their ages-old conflict). However, the Autobots' leader—the wise, moral, and powerful Optimus Prime—states that "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings," thus the Autobots therefore side with humanity, even if it means potentially losing their war. The Decepticons, meanwhile, have no care for humanity, and will gladly kill or manipulate mankind for their own purposes. The Decepticons already outnumber and outgun the Autobots, so the decision of the Autobots to protect humanity is somewhere between a brave, moral move and a death sentence. This kind of heroism (and the conflict against the Decepticons' evil) is what makes the characters in Transformers great despite their lack of real depth.

The film stays mostly true to the original "feel" of the series. Staples of the animated series, such as the human characters and the Autobot HQ are gone (or at least altered), but the basics are the same. Aside from the (mildly deep) moral conflict, however, the Transformers film is rather devoid of any sort of moral message, focusing on action, incredible special effects, and humor. When I say "incredible special effects", I mean INCREDIBLE. This movie is like watching Jurassic Park with machines.

Steve Jablonsky's musical score is absolutely wonderful, with memorable themes and a kind of sweeping orchestral power that's rarely heard in modern cinema outside of fantasy epics like The Lord of the Rings and Star Wars. On rare occasions, rock music breaks in, giving a much needed break of fun (notably during a very fun chase scene).

This film is really a live-action “upgrading” of a cartoon. It has a somewhat cartoony feel, with giant robots walking around and acting like humans. The amazing visual effects make the transformers' incredible mobility totally believable, but the situations and dialogue are somewhat Saturday morning-esque. If you walk into the film expecting a sci-fi Saving Private Ryan, quickly slap yourself and pretend you’re eight years old again. The film’s plot and dialogue is not realistic in the least; it's just an amazingly cool cartoon. While it's true that real-life combatants don't face each other one-on-one, spouting lines such as “It’s just you and me… One shall stand, one shall fall,” the heroes of Saturday morning cartoons certainly do. While these situations and lines may seem unrealistic, they serve as a kind of animated poetry, translating the overarching moral issues and character motivations into a simple, visual format.

Transformers may not impress those who don't appreciate the “fun” feel of cartoons, and it will certainly not impress cynics or pessimists. To fully enjoy the film, one must suspend their reliance on the rigid ways of the world, and see the film for what it truly is:

Photorealistic giant robots smashing things.

In all honestly, while the humor may hold the interest of those uninterested in the spectacular action or the sheer coolness of transforming robots, any viewer can likely decide whether or not they will enjoy the film just by deciding if the above quote appeals to them.

At the same time, there are plenty of problems in the film. The budget was a bit low for such an undertaking, and the only way to make the Transformers look real was to severely limit their screentime. This means that the plot does not truly begin to revolve around the bots themselves until halfway into the movie, and even then they remain strangely off-camera.

What we get instead is divided between government drama, military action, and silliness involving the character of Sam Witwicky.
The government story isn't terrible, but it's definitely a little pointless and silly. The military action is, in large part, pretty great. Sam's story is loosely connected to the transformers' tale, but most of it revolves around his desperate struggles to find a hot girlfriend. Sam is moderately relatable, but he comes off as extremely shallow for most of the film. He feels rather pointless and shoved in.

The "female love interest" of the movie is Mikaela Banes, played poorly (or perhaps perfectly?) by Megan Fox. It's obvious that Mikaela only exists in the movie to be the hot chick; there's no reason for her character to exist whatsoever. She's seemingly even more shallow than Sam, less likable, and entirely useless.

Finally, there's a certain amount of infantile humor in Transformers that's just inexcusable. Have you ever wanted to see a giant robot urinate oil on a guy? Do you love masturbation jokes? Then you'll love this. Also, get out of my sight. You make me sick.
Some of the humor isn't offensive; it's just bad. One scene involves the Autobots "comically" hiding from Sam's parents in the Witwickys' backyard. It's not funny, and it likely only drew special effects money away from other scenes that could have further developed the Autobot characters.

There are a ton of problems with Transformers. And yet, for all its flaws, the bits we get with the transformers themselves are so glorious and jaw-dropping that they make the entire movie enjoyable by extension.
Transformers might not technically be a great film, but it is, ultimately, a very fun one.

7/10.

(written 5/7/07, rewritten 7/1/11)