TRANSFORMERS

transformers1.jpgOverall Impression — Odd, inconsistent tone that veers between cartoon comedy and serious violence.  Cool effects, though.

THE FOUR QUESTIONS

Who’s the main character? — Sam Witwicky.

What’s he trying to accomplish? —  Save the world by enabling the good robots to defeat the bad robots.

Who’s trying to stop him? — Megatron, as well as certain governmental factions (though they come around to his side towards the end.)

What happens if he fails? — The world falls to the evil Decepticons.

THE FOUR ARCHETYPES

Orphan — Sam is a geek loser at school.  Uncool, doesn’t have a car, doesn’t have a girl.

Wanderer — Tries to figure out what’s going on with his new car and all these other vehicles which suddenly are able to transform into giant robots.  He eventually realizes that the glasses he’s gotten from his famous explorer grandfather are a key to this puzzle.

Warrior —  He goes head to head with the authorities while the good Autobots get more engaged with the bad Decepticons.

Martyr —  Sam is willing to risk himself to save Optimus Prime from Megatron.

 AND, IN THE END…

I SO wanted to love this movie and ended up only liking it.  The sad thing is that I didn’t feel particularly good about myself when that happened.  It appealed to that part of me that likes loud noises, big film scores, cool effects…all the surface gloss and glitter.  But there’s that other part of me that wants a more involving story with real emotions, and this film didn’t have it.

Compare this to either of Michael Bay’s ARMAGEDDON or THE ROCK.  Both superior action movies because we cared about the people in them as well as their relationships.

Tags: , , ,

No Responses to “TRANSFORMERS”

  1. Anonymous November 23, 2007 at 11:47 pm #

    Congratulations on the new blog, Jeffrey.
    Regarding Transformers, I agree about the lack of emotional involvement. I saw it with my 15-year-old son and, after the initial awe at the brilliant CGI effects, we were both totally bored about an hour in. It was just one fight scene after another.
    It just goes to prove you can’t have a good movie without a good story.
    Cheers,
    Dan McG. (Australia)

  2. Dave Niezabitowski November 24, 2007 at 5:39 pm #

    OMG! Finally someone that agrees with me. The glitter was so overpowering that I think that people just loved the film for that. I don’t think they realized that it was truly an empty story.

    I loved the glitter but, I left the show feeling unfulfilled. The story was extremely weak and left me without involvement. They could have all been killed and I would have cared less.

  3. David Goulet November 29, 2007 at 12:05 am #

    My main problem with this flick, apart from the cookie-cutter script, was that the CGI Transformers were too detailed. Way too many metallic angles, shadows, glints, parts sticking out of everywhere — making it difficult to tell many of the robots apart. When you can’t follow an action sequence, it loses all the zing.

    And at the risk of revealing my true inner fanboy, compare the movie with the Beast Wars (Beasties) tv series, which was the first Transformers project using CG animation. Amazing visuals that still hold up today, mature complex characters, a cool mythos (the Spark) and a novel location (a deserted planet). The sparse locale may have been budget driven, but it also kept the storyline clean. I was hoping the movie would be more like Beast Wars, sadly it was far, far from it.

Leave a Reply