Really.
They made me do it.
Considering how much I hated the last Transformers movie, surely wild horses couldn't drag me to a cinema showing the third one?
What can I say?
I'm weak.
I'm easily led.
I didn't have actually pay any money.
Please believe me, this was not my idea.
The annoying thing is, Michel Bay actually suckered me into believing this time might be different. The opening ten minutes present some genuinely interesting story possibilities. It's just the other six hours that are utterly unbearable.
Yes, this is an arse-numbingly long movie. It begins in the 60s, at the glorious highpoint of US history: the moon landing. The writers obviously wanted us to contrast this with the fall of the American Empire in the 21st century, and maybe there's some suggestion that the hubris that led man to walk on the moon ultimately brings about the downfall of this seemingly unstoppable world leader. Or something. Any suggestion of intelligent plot is jettisoned like a booster rocket as soon as T3 splashes down in 2011.
From then on in, we get more of exactly what you'd expect. Big fighting robots. Shia LaBeouf running, screaming and mugging for the camera. Some vacuous wooden underwear model who's drafted in to disprove the notion that Megan Fox is the worst actress in Hollywood. More sickening machine-porn and breathless disaster-porn than even Richard Hammond could dream of. And then... we get the Coen Brothers influence.
The last two Transformers movies have been graced by the smoked ham of John Turturro, slumming it for the paycheck - The Jesus would be ashamed. (And he's a pederast, dude.) This time, he's brought friends. Not just John Malkovich with shiny teeth and Bad Comedy controls turned up to 11... but Mrs. Coen herself, Frances McDormand. My god, Frances - what are you doing? My only hope is that your hubby and brother-in-law needed a cash boost for their next project and your appearance here is just a charity appeal. Any other explanation is too depressing to consider.
Still, let's look on the bright side. Transformers 3 isn't quite as bad as 2... in the same way that losing a testicle to a threshing machine isn't quite as bad as losing your whole scrotum.
Posts
13 rants and reactions:
Look on the bright side, at least you could hear it
"More sickening machine-porn and breathless disaster-porn than even Richard Hammond could dream of..." Quip of the week.
'Transformers 3 isn't quite as bad as 2... in the same way that losing a testicle to a threshing machine isn't quite as bad as losing your whole scrotum.'
That's the quote for the DVD cover right there.
Is it wrong that I'm trying to picture how one would get their neither regions close enough to a threshing machine in order to lose a testicle?
...
...Yes, it's wrong. But ta for the warning about the film. I must admit I was starting to get suckered in by the trailer as well.
Obviously that should be 'nether regions'. Highly Freudian slip.
You went to see Transformers 3. Snigger.
You went to see Transformers 3. Snigger.
Thanks for the tip off..any chance you could do the Harry Potter movie too?
;)
Don't think I even liked the first one, had no interest in the second and third ones. Couldn't believe the queues outside the cinema the day this opened.
Dave - it was so loud, you could probably hear it. In Brum.
Steve - and I thought you'd prefer the threshing machine.
Dan - I'm happy for them to use it (for the appropriate fee).
Louis - let's leave your neither regions out of this.
Dad - OK, OK, no need to rub it in - twice!
Millie - I'll have to watch the last 3 first.
Rob - see, I AM more of an idiot than you!
Maybe Tara Reid can reprise her role as Bunny for T4?
Shia misses all the action of nihilist robots cutting off Turturro's johnson while he's at the cash machine.
Yeah didn't like either of the 1st 2 not really interested in this one.
Thanks for the heads up though.
Surely Tara Reid's old enough to be Shia's granny by now?
she looks like his granny, she's actually only 24
Post a Comment