Revenge of the Fallen: Worst-reviewed $400 million hit ever

This article has something for everyone, the haters and the lovers:

`Transformers': Worst-reviewed $400 million hit?

My favorite line:

its like review of the reviews. Most rational article about ROTF so far.

Scary isn't it

yea, looks like whole movie critics gone mad.

That article is far too rational and well-thought-out for the likes of this forum. It burns my eyes!

i.... wait... what... so much sense....
NYAH!

That was... pretty interesting. Will definately be one of the ones to see it again.


jD001

Best Article EVAR!!

'Transformers' sequel could become worst-reviewed $400 million blockbuster ever - Yahoo! Canada News

By David Germain, The Associated Press

ADVERTISEMENT

LOS ANGELES - After just five days, "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" is halfway to $400 million domestically, a box-office milestone only eight other movies have reached. If it climbs that high, the "Transformers" sequel would be by far the worst-reviewed movie ever to make the $400 million club.


Critics and mainstream crowds often disagree, but "Revenge of the Fallen" sets a new standard for the gulf between what reviewers and mass audiences like.


The movie pulled in $201.2 million since opening Wednesday, the second-best result for a movie in its first five days, just behind "The Dark Knight" with $203.8 million. Even after its whopping $60.6 million opening day, "Revenge of the Fallen" was packing theatres, a sign that unlike critics, who mostly hated the movie, audiences felt they were getting their money's worth and were giving the flick good word of mouth.


Critics "forget what the goal of the movie was. The goal of the movie is to entertain and have fun," said Rob Moore, vice chairman of Paramount, which is distributing "Transformers" for DreamWorks. "What the audience tells us is, 'We couldn't be more entertained and having more fun.' They kind of roll their eyes at the critics and say, 'You have no idea what you're talking about."'


According to Paramount's exit polls, 91 per cent of the audience thought the sequel was as good as or better than the first "Transformers," which received far better reviews.


Most of Hollywood's all-time biggest hits are accompanied by either good or at least passable reviews, and some can be among the year's most-acclaimed, such as this year's "Up" and "Star Trek" and last year's "The Dark Knight," WALL-E" and "Iron Man.""


Not so for the new "Transformers." On Rottentomatoes.com, a website that compiles critics' opinions, the sequel had only 38 positive reviews out of 187, a lowly 20 per cent rating usually reserved for box-office duds.


Many critics who liked the movie had reservations, praising the movie's visual effects and relentless action but generally advising audiences to check their brains at the door.


The critical drubbing was a new low for "Transformers" director Michael Bay, never a favourite among professional movie reviewers. But he has long been a favourite among fans, scoring hits with the first "Transformers" and such flicks as "Armageddon," Pearl Harbor," Bad Boys II" and "The Rock."


Like blockbuster maestro Jerry Bruckheimer, who produced many of Bay's movies, the director aims to please audiences, not critics.


"He really had blinders on when it comes to what he believed the picture needs to be, and then he executed it," said Brad Grey, Paramount chairman and chief executive officer. "He's a director who is the definition of blockbuster at this point. His grosses speak for themselves."


Bay's previous worst score on Rottentomatoes was 23 per cent for "Bad Boys II," followed by 25 per cent for "Pearl Harbor." Even his commercial flop "The Island" rated well above the "Transformers" sequel, with 40 per cent positive reviews.


Of the eight movies that have grossed more than $400 million domestically, four scored 90 per cent or higher on Rottentomatoes: "The Dark Knight," Spider-Man," E.T. the Extra-terrestrial" and "Star Wars." Two others, "Shrek 2" and "Titanic," topped 80 per cent.


The other two had mixed reviews but still came in far higher than "Revenge of the Fallen," with "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace" scoring 63 per cent and "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" rating 53 per cent.


This year's biggest hits so far had terrific scores, "Up" with 97 per cent and "Star Trek" with 95 per cent. Both movies have grossed about $250 million, a number the "Transformers" sequel will soar past by next weekend.


On Metacritic.com, a site that assigns ratings of zero to 100 based on movie reviews, "Revenge of the Fallen" received a 36, a lowly score barely above those given to recent box-office duds "Year One" and "Land of the Lost."


Bay has said that if there is a third "Transformers" movie, he would like to come back for it. But his next project could be far quieter than the explosions and action for which he is known.

"I've got to take a little time off from the robot world," Bay said before the movie opened. "I've got to do something totally different. It's enough of this for right now. I keep saying I'm going to do my small movie. I've got one I want to do."

great article! just goes to show that the masses don't really care what critics think.
i won't lie though, i know and know of people who aren't going to see ROTF in theatres because of the reviews, which is like theft if you ask me.

Most large grossing action films are poorly reviewed.

Critics never ever have a Plan of good movies. If a critic thinks one film being bad, you know it is good. They are somehow like women, telling the opposite of what they mean, in a fashion of telling the opposite of reality.

Either you give a fuck on critics or you take their words for reversal.

Well done.

this was posted already

I found this article that I think best describes the whole Critics vs. Audience thing when it comes to blockbusters..... Anyway here is the link.

`Transformers': Worst-reviewed $400 million hit?

just goes to show you critics don't always know what the masses will like

Sorry..... I see that someone else has posted this already... Lock the thread please.

Mudflap and Skids would probably enjoy this article if they could read.

This may be a trend we don't want to continue. Oh well we shall see.

I like this. This makes sense

I hope on the eventual DVD/BluRay packaging, it reads "Best selling Worst Movie EVER!", "Must See Crapfest!", "The movie for all softheads!", and finally, "Micheal Bay's opus of CGI diarrea!"


Seriously... Street Fighter, Wolverine, Dragonball, Paul Blart, Transformers 2... 2009 is the Year of the Dungbeetle.

Well, I'll say you're right on them being like women. They seem love chick flicks and eat up drama. I'm alive. That means I get enough drama in my everyday life. When I go to the movies I wanna escape all that.

I firmly believe critics bash most movies because they themselves lack any real creativity.

haha webz,
while i agree TF2 is has a butt load of problems, that i am the first to complain about, putting it next to something like Street Fighter makes it look like gold.

So RottenTomatoes.com has Titanic at 80%? That tells me all I need to know about how seriously I should take that website.

yeah you can't even compare them, that's absurd.

I bet its the new Daredevil movie...


just a random guess... heh heh

I hope Bay admits some of the humor in ROTF was totally unecessary!

Critics like movies like The Notebook, what else needs to be said? I thought the movie was far better than the original in terms of story and action. Sure I have minor critiques of it such as too much toilet humor and the lack of certain robots getting screen time, but this all comes with an understanding of what they were trying to accomplish with this movie. I really don't think all the negative reviews are justified. Oh and I actually LIKE the twins.

Does it even matter what critics say? Who gives a crap about them anymore anyways? they just mostly write bad reviews about all movies except the boring ones. How is this even news anyways ?Of course they're gonna write a bad review, that's what critics do nowadays...

I have to say this movie did not excite me. the first one didn't make sense and this one even more so didn't make sense. thought the action was great and the CGI was sweet and I love seeing the bots transform, I really say this movie falls short of a masterpiece type movie. and for the budget it had, it should have been a better movie than the darknight. Mr. bay does great action movies, but he doesn't know how to tell a story in my opnion and with the technology we have no a days, everything is gonna visually look good if you have the money to spend on it. the difference maker is the story and how it captivates an audiance. which either him or his writters clearly can not do IMO

Honestly, it would've been nice if Transformers 2 had been good enough to delight critics too. Dark Knight, Up, Wall-E, Iron Man, Spider-Man 2, X2, and many other huge hits come to mind that were both very successful and very well reviewed.

I find it kind of shocking that so many members here seem to think pissing off critics is a good thing. I dont' think many would argue Dark Knight didn't earn its praise and it still pleased audiences.

You CAN have it both ways. All the receipts show is that the movie was marketed well.

Star Wars Episode One was a hit too.

haha, in your faces suckaaz

As I mentioned above, you can have it both ways and historically the ones that ARE well reviewed make a lot more money.

Rotten Tomatoes takes the average of ALL reviews. they don't skew, just average them out.

I am not suprised that ROFT is making alot of money. I went to watch it expecting to be disappointed. After watching it I thought it was a vast improvement over TF1. I suspect the negative reviews have mainly come from people who expected too much from a film based on a childrens toy of robots who spend their time kicking ass and not emoting. I also suspect, that the drastically increased screen time for the robots over TF1, annoyed many of the critics, who simply could not warm to the robots.

This^ Most of the critic reviews are beyond ridiculous. Obviously the people don't give a crap for them though (box office = win).
What makes me even madder is how all these fans are the same. What, is it monkey see monkey bash? God Primus....just enjoy it for what it is.

This is what happens when you overhype a movie.

Good proof that a bad review will not stop people from watching what they want to see.

I agree with both of you that critics may often overlook the sheer entertainment value of a movie to the average person. Was ROTF rocket-science or deeply meaningful & symbolic? No, but that's OK... it was still a really fun, enjoyable movie, a great way to celebrate Transformers & entertain us for a few hours.

I also think it might serve TF fandom better if we left out comments that sound a little sexist; it reflects poorly on us as a fandom, and may be off-putting to female fans who are also members of the TFW boards. Just my two cents.

Its a not well put together Story but Great CGI. Just lots of Eye Candy and no story. People want to see the CGI because its really Great

My thought exactly. Anyone who loves drama and chick flicks, they might as well not to go the theater at all. For everyone else who wants to escape reality and see a world different from ours, a movie is the right place.

The movie is a facepalm of fun.

I watched it because I like the Transformers (I wouldn't be a member on this board if I didn't). I watched it because I had high hopes that it would be as action filled as the previous movie. I liked it because it did live up to that expectation.

At the same time though, I agree with the assessments. I'm not going to overanalyze it though. Will I buy the DVD? Definitely. Will I cringe through the same scenes? Yep. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite, but its hard to support something I like without taking the bad with the good.

What if I'm a fan who went with high hopes and ended up hating it? I'm a critic and a fan! Am I disowned?

Yay. Great. We're gonna be the fanbase that finally gives Hollywood an excuse to throw plot and continuity out the window. "Hey, why are we paying people to manage that stuff? TF2 made $440 mil!"

As I see it, though, if you stop crafting story, characters, etc., you're just making explosion porn. It's really high-end junk food for your brain.

But, making $400 million doesn't change a single line of awful dialogue. I'll say it again: Escapism, popcorn movie, summer blockbuster: NONE of these things excuse a job done sloppily.

Whatever. I'm glad it's pouring money into TFs, cause I'll always be a fan of the toys.

BUT I'm also a fan of movies. I like the craft, I like the medium, I like all the ways you can say a thing on a 40-foot screen. That part of my brain wants Mike Bay to have to watch the My Little Pony Movie until his f&%$ing retinas detach.

If the returns are great, I would love for Bay to put in an easter egg in TF3 that shows an early article of TF2 being reviewed pooryl.

well put. To be very honest, not only do i think the story was bad but so was the character developement of the transformers. There was a bit more than in the first but still it seems like Bay threw in robots just to throw them in. The movie shouldn;t be called transformers, it should be called the witwhicky chronicles.

I don't think the movie is really that good, but I'll still watch it. People think that if a critic rates a movie low that they're saying it's a bad movie. Saying that it's a bad movie never equates that people will not watch it. People watching it doesn't make it a great movie.

I agree with the critics I think this movie leaves a lot lacking. I might watch it again I might not. I don't think I'll run out to see the third movie opening night like I did because the immaturity has finally gotten to me. I've never watched another Bay movie and I will not go out to see other movies he puts out unless it's Transformers. Obviously it's not because I like Bay, it's because I like Transformers.

I've had this experience before it was called The Matrix Reloaded and I have not seen the third part of that Trilogy nor do I plan on it. But this movie is doing well based on the appeal of Transformers and entertainment not because it's any good. Which I wish it were.

I think Bay has a chance to do well at the BO and at the same time make a MATURE movie. I don't ask that he do it for the ratings, for the critics or even the fans. I ask that he do it for the sake of making a really good movie. The fans will love the movies just the same.

To me this article is saying that american audiences are growing more ignorant or something. Anyway, I feel the 1st TF movie was far better because the humour was classier, more autobot time, if there were lots of human scenes it would be human & robot interaction, etc. I didn't feel disappointed with ROTF just because Michael Bay was directing it, but because of the actual film qualities. I think it's the same with Critics, they share a lot of the same views that I see here on these boards. This review link really just sounded like a bunch of BS.

Everyone is acting like critics are all a bunch of snooty people who look down on anything this side of Casablanca, but take a look around. Sites like AICN that's largely geared towards and run by...for lack of a better word, nerds, and they're ripping the movie apart.

They're not watching and reviewing it as "an experience", they're reviewing it as a movie and rating it against movies in the same vein. As a movie, ROTF is NOT good. A "rollercoaster ride of special effects and explosions" only gets you so far, if it doesn't work as a whole it diminishes the greatness of the single scenes.

The people who love this movie I think have a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees. Judging the movie as a whole vs. "OMG, did you see optimus prime kick ASS in the forest???". Yeah, that scene was great, but the movie, beginning to end doesn't stack up against a Dark Knight or Iron Man.

Some critics are excellent.
They've been to film schools, journalism schools, probably made a few indie films themselves. They have a better-than-average knowledge of what it took to get a film made, and generally enjoy movies across all genres. (By the way, Ebert's one of this kind. Except he's also insane.)

Then there's any dumbass with the brain cells to update a website. (Actually, Ebert's like this, too)

Remember, just as not all moviemakers are created equal, neither are all critics.

"Profitable" don't make it "Good."

At what point was the Dark Knight not a "rollercoaster ride of special effects and explosions"??? Oh wait, I forgot, it had Christian Bale talking in that raspy voice...damn, it's right up there with Ben Hur.