Uh, Roger?

Posted by · 8:05 am · June 29th, 2009

Peter Cullen (voice) in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

The day will come when “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” will be studied in film classes and shown at cult film festivals. It will be seen, in retrospect, as marking the end of an era. Of course there will be many more CGI-based action epics, but never again one this bloated, excessive, incomprehensible, long (149 minutes) or expensive (more than $200 million). Like the dinosaurs, the species has grown too big to survive, and will be wiped out in a cataclysmic event, replaced by more compact, durable forms.

From Roger Ebert’s recent write-up on “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.” Even though he mentions an expectation for boffo business in the next graph, I have to ask: Do you really think a $203 million opening isn’t going to yield more and more unrelenting, big budget, massive event films developed from successful franchises with built-in fanbases? It’s only a matter of time before “Voltron” makes it to the screen. And if they had figured out a live action “Thundercats” by now, I’m it would have hit the multiplexes already, too.

And the bit about “many of those who do see it will find they simply cannot endure it.”  I wonder when was the last time Mr. Ebert saw a film with an audience.  Against all odds, the public is head-over-heels for this thing.

Anyway, extinction is wishful thinking, my friend.




→ 6 Comments Tags: | Filed in: Daily

6 responses so far

  • 1 6-29-2009 at 8:40 am

    Jonathan Spuij said...

    Again, it all depends on the second weekend. I mean it’s already a success but if there’s a not inconceivable 65% drop Ebert will be on the right side. While I doubt film classes will show it, I do believe that if Avatar fails for whatever reason that one will be shown, simply because of the technical revolution.

  • 2 6-29-2009 at 8:48 am

    adelutza said...

    I know I’m late to this conversation but I can’t believe that roughly 20 milion people actually went to see that movie. It’s ridiculous.

  • 3 6-29-2009 at 9:06 am

    entertainmenttoday.. said...

    Money aside all I want is a film with a story and characters that are fairly involving. Im a supporter of the first Transformers film. I thought it was a really well done summer film that was involving and alot of fun. This sequel was a shell of the original as it was just plain flat.
    I can’t believe Spielberg came out a month or so ago and said this was Bay’s best film. Really better than “The Rock” or the first Transformers movie. I know Spielberg is an ex-producer but he has to know this film is a stiff and dead on arrival.

    Chuck

  • 4 6-29-2009 at 1:18 pm

    Kyle said...

    I think audience reception will be better gauged when we see how it does next weekend.

  • 5 6-29-2009 at 1:45 pm

    Davidraider88 said...

    At least Ebert didn’t like it, for a second I thought he might give it 3 stars or more just like he’s given to every film lately

  • 6 6-29-2009 at 2:47 pm

    the world said...

    I’m not sure what defy’s reality more, transforming robots or a hottie like megan fox falling for a dweeb like Shia??