Transformers: El lado oscuro de la luna

In order to coincide with a fourth Transformers coming out in the next few months, I'll be reviewing this third entry of the successful film series. I liked the first Transformers despite it's cheesy dialog in some parts and while there were some awkward moments and very bad dialog, I still liked Revenge of the Fallen. Then, when I saw the whole thing in theaters back at 2011, I thought, this wasn't so bad after all. It later turned out to be a good ride, but while I do think it's a bit of an improvement over the previous film, it's nowhere near as good as the first.

First, there are some good things that saved the film for me. The music score from Steve Jablonsky has improved and has an epic tone to it. The story is a lot more decent than the previous film with a much better second and third halves; the action sequences are solid especially the collapsing building scene which took my very breath away. The scenery is great and the special effects are as top-notch as ever. The acting is good, too. While John Turturo, Franches McDormand, and John Malkovich aren't given much to do, they did fine with the material. Patrick Dempsey did OK as the villain, but he's a bit underwhelming. Rosie Hunter Whiteley is a bit bland, but not exactly terrible as the new girlfriend for Sam Witwicky. While Shia LeBeouf isn't as charismatic as he was in the first film, he does have the same charm he brought to the film series so far. The Autobots and Decepticons are great to see again and the voice actors are solid especially Leonard Nimoy as Sentinal Prime, who is a very good villain for the movie much Megatron.

Then, there are the bad things that I would point out. First, the script. While the second and third halves are a lot better, the first half is pretty boring. It seems to be lacking in it's action and it wasn't exciting. Second, the ending is way too similar to the first Transformers (what? with the auto-bots and decepticons fight against each other while bringing destruction to the city and such?) The pacing is also very sluggish it would almost put you to sleep. Third and mostly the final problem is the dialog. There are some humorous bits that might get the audience a chuckle, but there are other parts that are just so inane it would give you a headache.

Overall, Transformers: DOTM isn't nearly as good as the first, but despite the flaws that I just stated, I think this is a great sequel in an overall solid franchise. I may not be a fan of Michael Bay and such, but while I do not like the Bad Boys films, Pearl Harbor, and others, I think that this and the other films are a lot better and it deserves a recommendation to those who haven't seen it.

Not as fun as the first one, but definitely a step up from Revenge of the Fallen and a fine way to end a trilogy of Shia Lebouf.

After the critical back-lashing Revenge of the Fallen, Michael bay stated that the third and possibly final Transformers would take away everything that failed in the last movie and give the audience what it wanted. But has he learned his lessons? Yes and no. Gone are the racially insensitive robots, the incredibly messy and clumsy plotting and much of the dizzying, incomprehensible camera-work. What remains is the poor geeky humour and questionable performances from the leads. Shia Labeouf was very enjoyable in the first movie but here has gone into overdrive, and his character Sam Witwicky has become much less relatable and interesting. His home life in particular (of which the first half of the movie focuses) is getting irritating. His girlfriend problems and embarrassing parents boring and we really couldn't care that much about how he feels unappreciated for saving the world twice. Then there's Megan Fox's replacement: Rosie Huntington-Whitely. She can't act. At all. It wasn't expected that the former model would be that great but she really is poor.

The first hour of the film is much like Rosie. Nice to look at (especially in 3D) but lacking any substance at all. We are left with Ken Jeong doing his Hangover thing in a 12A film, and not being funny, just very annoying. And John Malkovich doing his thing but really just embarrassing himself. There are reams of exposition, while the plot is better than the last two films it is still handed out poorly. Bay won't let the action tell the story, it has to be action, break, story, break, action. The rest of the first hour is just CGI and Shia going mental while Rosie watches blankly.

But all of a sudden the supporting comic actors are dropped and Michael Bay does what he does best: Explosions and fighting. An impressive freeway chase leading into a fight a plot twist (yes a plot twist in a Transformers movie) and a death of a significant character. The whole film gets better from here. The plotting gets tighter, John Tuturro and Frances McDormand are given more screen-time (there were so many Coen favourites in this movie I was expecting John Goodman to be voicing an Autobot) and the action is dished out in spades. Whe the decepticons invade Chicago all hell breaks loose. And we are given fights, battles, explosions and collapsing buildings galore. Robots kick, punch and rip each other apart. And this is where the third dimension comes into play. This is definitely the best 3D experience since Avatar. Watch in awe as Optimus Prime tears chunks of metal out of other giant robots and chucks them at the screen while in the depths of the background, aerial battles ensue. It is breathtaking and a triumph for 3D, proving that it can be done properly and amaze the viewer.

If you went an hour late to the movie, and make sure it's a 3D screening, this would be a 5 star experience of pure entertainment. But as it stands it's still a solid closer for the trilogy, an improvement on Revenge of the fallen but not as good as the first.

It's 'Bayhem' time again - and this time around demolition king Michael Bay presents his trademark 'Six-C's' in glorious 3D! In case you don't know, the six 'Cs' are: chases, clashes, crashes, combustions, carnage and cleavage. Spread over a bottom-numbing two-and-a-half hours, "Transformers: Dark Of The Moon" can also induce mental and metal fatigue, especially with the clanging robots smashing one another - and the whole exercise making little sense.

Technologically, however, "Dark Of The Moon" is Bay's best work so far - and action fans looking to be awed by scenes of massive mayhem and destruction in 3D should be satisfied. Story-wise, this one is better than "Revenge Of The Fallen", but not as fun and emotionally-connecting as the first.

The film opens with a flashback to the Sixties Apollo landing mission where history is rewritten (by Ehren Kruger) to incorporate the cover-up of an alien spaceship crashing on the moon. That spaceship, of course, is one of the remains of the epic battles between the Autobots and the Decepticons, and its 'discovery' sparks off another war that threatens to destroy planet Earth. Or at least the face of Chicago as we know it.

On the human level, we find that Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) has traded in his girlfriend Mikaela (Megan Fox) for a newer model (a Victoria Secret one, to be exact) in the shape of Rosie Huntington-Whiteley as Carly). Sam is being offered a job by Bruce Brazos (John Malkovich) but we soon learn that Carly's boss Dylan (Patrick Dempsey) may be up to no good. Then, when the conflict between the Autobots and Decepticons hots up, Captain Lennox (Josh Duhamel) and Sergeant Epps (Tyrese Gibson) of the elite Government squad NEST are summarily called into action.

We get lulled into believing that there may somehow be an intelligent plot coming from the conspiracy of the NASA lunar-landing cover-up which also involves the Russian space program and Chernobyl. These turn out to be just an exercise in 'historical name-dropping' to spur our interest before we get to the demolition derby created by the Transformers. Indeed, some of the robots seem to emote better that the live cast. Cybertron leader Sentinel Prime, for example, is even designed to look like Leonard Nimoy (who provides its voice), complete with stuff that looks like beard. Again, the problems of the previous installments recur - like the confusion between the good and bad robots in the clashes.

Unlike the first two movies, there are no more gags about the shock of humans interacting with the mechanical 'bots. Bay, however, insists on some comic sequences and he has hired Ken Jeong to do his in-your-face shtick as Jerry Wang. John Turturro reprises his role as former FBI agent Simmons but this time around, Turturro finds it fit to clown around with his role. The most striking inclusion to the cast is Rosie Huntington-Whiteley as Sam's love interest. However, with limited acting talent, she provides only eye-candy and beside her, Megan Fox would look like an Oscar-caliber actress.

Like the first "Transformers", this one is also a live-action cartoon on a grand scale. Scenes of Chicago buildings being toppled and destroyed can be as spectacular and brain-numbing as those of September 11; and the wing-suit flying sequences are breath-taking. Indeed, these are what most of Michael Bay's fans pay for and they will not be disappointed. The only problem for me is that Bay prolongs and repeats the robotic clash sequences to the point of being self-indulgent. Technically brilliant and visually arresting, "Dark Of The Moon" lacks heart and soul. (limchangmoh.blogspot.com)

I have to say I enjoyed watching Transformers 3. If you take it for what it is, a Michael Bay movie with awesome, epic visuals, an over-the- top weak plot, not very deep characters, and classic 'Bay' humor, then it's great. Not as good as the first, but easily better than the 2nd one.

First off, the visual effects are amazing. One of the best, if not the best, that I've seen, both in details on the transformers, in action/fighting sequences, and in more general landscape shots - the views of Chicago when it was being attacked by decepticons were great. I watched it in 3D in the theater, and it was arguably the best 3D effects I've seen, and best use of 3D cameras, and that is including Avatar which i also saw in 3D. This is what Michael Bay is really good at, and this movie shows he is arguably the expert in visual effects and composition.

visual effects and presentation - 10/10

The plot isn't great. When it starts out, it seems like it might develop nicely into a moderately complex story rooted in some historical events that happened very differently than how we thought (kind of like the hoover dam part in the first transformers), but in the end not much is made of that and the plot is relatively direct and over-the-top. However, it does have a few good moments that offer a bit more complexity or emotion, and anyways I didn't watch the movie hoping for a subtle, complex, and nuanced plot.

Plot - 6/10

The characters and acting aren't Oscar-worthy either, to say the least. Rosie Huntington-Whitely is not a great actress, in fact she isn't really an actress, and it shows, but, to be honest, I have seen worse performances. Shia Labeouf is decent in his role as usual. and again there are some new characters, including some for Michael Bay- esque comic relief (which in my opinion is actually funnier than much of the humor in revenge of the fallen, which felt a little too forced to me).

Characters/acting - 6/10

Fun - 8/10

If you're expecting a layered, nuanced movie with deep characterization and a complex and well-written plot, well, then, don't watch this. If, though, you want a fun blockbuster with truly amazing visual effects, a decent (but forgettable) storyline and characterization, and an easy to follow dynamic, well you'll probably like Transformers 3.