It will probably come as no surprise that I've seen Dark of the Moon twice now, with a different friend each time, but both at the local 'mini-IMAX' screen, in 3D.
On the technical side, despite most of it being filmed in native 3D, there were huge long sequences where I barely perceived the effect, and very few scenes where it was truly beneficial to the movie. I can see why the movie studios are keen to push 3D (increased revenue, harder to pirate) but, frankly, it's a gimmick that has already run its course and become passé. It works well in computer animated movies but, for live action, it is almost entirely without merit.
But what of the movie?
I've read a lot of negative comments about Dark of the Moon, which I find almost unfathomable because, to me, it's everything the first movie should have been. It has a stronger plot (ripped off from the 80s cartoons, to be sure, but well-developed for a Summer Blockbuster), the two sides of the story - human and robot - are better balanced and intersect in a more believable fashion. The story takes quite a dark turn and, for the most part, the stakes feel much higher in this one than in either of the first two (Decepticons planning to use Earth's technology against it, and The Fallen planning to destroy our sun and convert the released energy into Energon to save Cybertron, respectively, so they should have felt high stakes, but really didn't!). In fact, it almost makes the original, and possibly even Revenge of the Fallen, seem retrospectively better simply because this is the concluding chapter in the trilogy.
I'd even say the acting was better, with Shia LaBeouf showing a greater range than in any of his previous films, even beyond the TF franchise.
But it's a Summer Blockbuster based on a toyline, not an adaptation of a great work of literature, so there are plotholes, inconsistencies and unnecessarily lingering shots of various parts of Rosie Huntingdon-Whiteley (who, whatever you may hear or read to the contrary, is a far better actor than Megan Fox). That said, having read a few reviews now, I do feel that some folks in the audience were simply put off because the plot and characters weren't spoon fed to them. There were points where you just had to infer background events while the action followed something else - most notably when a group of Autobots somehow got captured while the humans were running amok and trying to save the day all by themselves. The action didn't always follow the most plot-important events (it has been observed that, given a choice between character advancement and spectacle, Michael Bay will always opt for spectacle), but anyone who expected otherwise must have missed the 'Summer Blockbuster' part.
It lacked the toe-curling 'humor' of the first two, and even those scenes involving Sam's embarrassing parents were better played and more relevant to the story, if only by straying into schmaltzy romantic clichés. Patrick Dempsey also put in a notable performance, cast against type, as one of the bad guys, and I particularly liked the way he briefly became panicked with the Decepticons' true intentions became apparent, only to slip back into believing his safety was assured as long as he kept working for them. Classic 'lackey' behaviour. John Malkovich must have had some fun with his 'Middle Manager' role but, even now, I can't see why he was even pursued for such a daft part.
My personal complaints would be that, yet again, Megatron was barely in it. He was reintroduced fairly early on, then disappeared till very near the end. Meanwhile Shockwave, so prominent in the trailers, spoke only one word in English (or not, since the only understandable word he spoke was "Optimus") and, like Brawl in the first movie, is despatched all too quickly by a focused attack by human soldiers. The vast majority of the Decepticons are never named - only in toy form, it seems - and, when the invasion begins, they cease to be individual characters for the most part. They are merely 'the invading force'. Also, I felt the Wreckers were all but wasted, appearing only briefly in robot mode, although they did get more dialogue that some of the otherwise more prominent Autobots.
Also, yet again, it all relied on some strange, high-tech McGuffin which, according to Sentinel Prime, "defies your laws of physics" (suggesting that there must surely be some non-verbal, data-transfer communication between the 'bots, or at least that they have superfast internet access, because he says that not long after being revived! Having been in hibernation, as a visitor to our solar system, how would he know about 'our' laws of physics?). It was a nice nod to the cartoons, but I'd rather no explanation than something like that.
Furthermore, it has been noted that, with another 'doomsday device' at the centre of the story, it seems like the Decepticons had an awful lot of backup plans which, somehow, coincidentally, all end up focussed on Earth. Unlikely as it may seem, it is still perfectly plausible, assuming there's a sensible timeline for The Allspark, The Fallen and Sentinel Prime's flight from Cybertron.
I liked that some throwaway lines of dialogue were actually subtly referencing plot points, or nods to the cartoon, but others were clearly in there just to sell toys (Prime complaining that Driller had taken his trailer, adds "I need that flight tech!" - I'm half expecting the next series to be based around Armada, so Prime can say something like "We must liberate all the Mini-Cons!"). In so many ways, this movie served as a better introduction to the TransFormers, their world and their politics, than the first movie... and, were it not for a few lines of dialogue peppered throughout the first half of the movie, one could almost pretend that Revenge of the Fallen hadn't happened. The way the story of the TransFormers was interwoven with the Space Race of the 1960s, and even the Chernobyl disaster, was quite well played, though perhaps a little underexplored.
One thing that really surprised me was how graphic some of the deaths were. The first movie had Jazz ripped in half by Megatron, and it was barely acknowledged. The second seems to have killed off the 'wheelsnakes' without any comment. This one... takes one of the main characters from the first two films and has him rusting away in front of your eyes. Many humans are reduced to ash by one blast from the invading forces. One Autobot is graphically executed, and another almost suffers the same fate. It's still not discussed in any way, meaningful or otherwise, but it's also far more graphic because the camera lingers on these scenes. More than that, though, one of Laserbeak's assassinations is quite unnerving, because of the way he sneaks into the house. I was left feeling certain that he didn't just kill his target, but the whole family as well, even though that's the one occasion that no bodies are shown.
All in all, I wish the writer of this movie had been involved from the start... Orci and Kurtzman have written some good scripts, but TransFormers was not one of them, and everyone now acknowledges that Revenge of the Fallen was an unfinished script because of the Writers' Guild strike. Dark of the Moon is far superior to both of them in every significant way, and I almost wish Bay would reconsider his wish to leave the franchise. If one considers TransFormers, Revenge of the Fallen and Dark of the Moon to be a trilogy, rather than the first three chapters in an ongoing franchise, they must surely represent the first time since Star Wars that each film stands on its own, rather than simply acting as a bridge to the next movie.
I, personally, find that quite refreshing.
No comments:
Post a Comment