Theatrical Review of Transformers

---

Tools:
Send to a friend »

---

In this summer of $200 million comedies ("Evan Almighty") and $300 million action spectacles ("Spider-Man 3"), one film has flown under the radar, relatively speaking. "Transformers," the second big screen adaptation of the Hasbro toy line about two sets of vehicle morphing robots, delivers in all the places spiders, pirates and surfers couldn´t: a crowd pleasing rock ´em, sock ´em explosion laden 144-minutes with no pretense of being anything more than it is.

Two groups of Transformers have come to Earth looking for a cube of immense power called the Allspark. Entire worlds can be destroyed and revitalized using this technology. A select group of humans, led by Mr. Average Teenager Sam Witwicky (Shia LeBeouf), allies themselves with the good robots, called Autobots, to find the Allspark and make sure Megatron and the Decepticons don´t use it to eliminate the planet.

In all honesty, this "Star Trek" Borg cube-inspired Allspark is the maguffin in this story, conveniently dropped into the plot as an excuse to watch cars turned into robots, those robots fire rockets and missiles and energy weapons at each other while puny humans carry on like it´s the end of the world. Knowing this, how deep of a story can an audience reasonably expect? Not very, about on par with director Michael Bay´s previous outings like "Armageddon" and "The Rock." But we don´t go to any film based on a 1980s cartoon-let alone a Bay film-to be wowed by superior acting or a revolutionary script. We go to see shit blowed up real good. And, on that count, "Transformers" delivers the goods better than any pure action movie of the last five years.

Every aspect of the film in a wonder to behold, not just the buildings in the way of concentrated weapon blasts which have chunks eaten out of their sides or the massive robots wrestling with each other in Ultimate Fighting cage match-type encounters. Either Industrial Light and Magic has progressed leaps and bounds beyond the effects houses who handled "Spider-Man 3" and "Pirates of the Caribbean" or those other outfits are grossly incompetent. From a rational standpoint, there is no way for what is on screen to come from miniatures or stop motion; but from a movie making standpoint, how can Spider-Man swinging through the streets of New York look so obviously fake and cartoon-ish, yet the Autobots and Decepticons so convincingly real?

They blend in with their surroundings so completely and flawlessly interact with the human actors that it´s not outside the realm of possibility the production team assembled full size robots for every sequence in the picture. There are no jerky movements, not so much as a detail out of place. Scorch marks, dents, dings…even the way each individual gear moves when one of the Transformers walks…the effects are bar none the best we´ve seen this year, outside of "300."

Even the actors, themselves taking an obvious backseat to the titular characters, fulfill their end of the bargain. They´re not asked to do a whole lot-except LaBeouf-besides run, jump, slide, yell and pull triggers. With Josh Duhamel (TV´s "Las Vegas"), Tyrese Gibson, Anthony Anderson, Jon Voight, John Turturro and Bernie Mac, a cast which reminds us more of "Armageddon" than "The Rock" takes shape. Without fail, everyone in the film does what they were contracted to do: Duhamel provides the good looking poster boy, Mac a welcome breath of humor early on, Voight his patented bewildered government official (here the Secretary of Defense) and Turturro as the man we all love to hate. But the majority of the acting duties fall on LaBeouf, who reportedly scored a role in next summer´s "Indians Jones IV" based on his work here.

The reasoning is pretty obvious. He can go from regular teenager worried about getting a car and the girl to near action hero in three seconds flat, pulling off both roles with equal authority. And he makes us believe every quick-thinking quip really comes to him in the spur of the moment as opposed to being the brainchild of scriptwriters. LaBeouf can headline a summer action movie like this and he can anchor one of the spring´s better dramas, "Disturbia." With the right mix of films in the future, he should have a long career in Hollywood.

So I guess we have to talk about the actual plot at some point, right? This story is a reinvention of the classic "Transformers" story, in which the Autobots and Decepticons fled their home of Cybertron in order to find more energon cubes. Which is fine, since the entire Earth needs to be put in mortal jeopardy immediately and energon just isn´t going to cut it. As with other Bay films, the plot unfurls rather quickly, yet takes all time it can get away with before actually kicking into gear. There are attempts at humanizing Sam and the rest of the humans interspersed with the search for the Allspark to get the audience to sympathize with them. Mostly, they´re successful. A brief sequence early on shows Lennox (Duhamel) talking to his wife and new daughter, whom he has never seen since he is on active duty. It reminds me of a scene in the non-Bay production "Deep Impact" between Ron Eldard´s character and his family right before the climax of that film. It shamelessly tugs on the heartstrings, hoping to evoke the correct emotional response from the audience. And even if it doesn´t, this thread doesn´t pop up again until the end of the picture.

Apparently, the Allspark has been kept in a US landmark for decades. Its power signature has been masked from everyone by reinforced concrete. I´m sorry, but concrete? Are you serious? This thing had the power to destroy entire worlds and concrete keeps all manner of scans from seeing its location? And the final decision to move the cube is just as bewildering. Why, outside of the "blowing stuff up good" rationale, would anybody agree to this plan?

Hell, we can bat around all manner of plot holes or head scratchers, but that wouldn´t be fun. (For the sake of argument: why are people continuing to run from the scene of the final battle twenty minutes after its started? Is the government so desperate as to be recruiting analysts out of high school? And why, for the love of everything rational, does the military consistently discount the one person with any credible information on the Transformers or the Allspark?) Not that it really matters: this is an action movie with no agenda.

If there is one aspect of the film that doesn´t quite live up to what it should be, it´s the introduction of Optimus Prime and the final battle with Megatron. When Optimus finally comes on the scene, there should be a bombastic score, something to herald the coming of the hero the fans want to see. There isn´t a sense that everything will be okay since he´s on the scene. Think of how Darth Vader is introduced in "Return of the JedI´ with the Imperial March. Prime is a hero worthy of that level of reverence.

And that final battle is the one flat action sequence in the film. The others are kinetic, with dizzying camera shots and a clear idea of who´s doing what to whom, a directing style many action directors can learn from. There´s no sense of drama or excitement over it; this is the titanic match up between Luke and Vader or Picard and the Borg Queen. It comes off as feeling run of the mill.

"Transformers" isn´t supposed to be anything except loud action pulp to fill a summer slot and rake in the money. Oh yeah, and to sell toys. For only the second time this year, I walked out of the theater with one singular thought in my head: I can not wait to see this movie on high def DVD. Like "300," "Transformers" should be, done right, one of those reference discs. Combine the auditory and visual experiences of this film with the detail and clarity brought with the next generation of home theater software and this may just be the most anticipated new release in the second half of the year.

I´d be remiss if I didn´t mention a major disappointment: the classic "Transformers" theme song is nowhere to be found in the film. It had been remixed for the 1986 animated movie, but it´s absent here. The whole thing didn´t need to be included; part of it over the end credits would have been welcome.

"Transformers" is a family-friendly film, with no real objectionable content. The actors don't take their clothes off nor are there many curses. (Only one of the many jokes in the film might pose a problem: Sam´s mother demands the Autobots get out of her bush…they´re standing in her garden.) There is a large amount of fighting and peril, though, which might cause a smaller child to have problems. A young boy of 6 or 7 years old sat in front of us during the screening and he didn´t say a word during the entire movie. In fact, he didn´t move from the edge of his seat until the end credits rolled. I didn´t even have that experience in "Ratatouille."

The movie rates a very strong 7 out of 10 because it delivers on its premise and doesn´t get bogged down in trivialities of its plot. And summer action has never looked so good.

---

---