#Review

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014): A Crappier Version of Spider-Man 3 *SPOILERS*

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmzmzotc2mzg2ov5bml5banbnxkftztgwotc2mdk5mde-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“The Amazing Spider-Man 2” is directed by Marc Webb, who also directed the first “Amazing Spider-Man” film, and stars Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx, and Dane DaHaan in the fifth live-action “Spider-Man” film brought to the big screen. This film continues the story of Peter Parker in what is being called, according to all the movie’s marketing, “his greatest battle.” …Honestly it’s not. His greatest battle happened in 2004 in Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man 2.” He has to stop the evil Electro, while at the same time, he regroups with an old friend, Harry Osborn, the son of Norman, whose name was mentioned in the last movie, but has a much bigger importance in this movie. Meanwhile, he has to balance all of that with his relationship with Gwen Stacy.

The year before this movie came out, that’s when I first aspired to make my own movies in Hollywood, that’s also when I started to look at all sorts of film news regarding films that come out long from the day its announced. This was one of those films I was really looking forward to. “The Amazing Spider-Man” wasn’t the best Spidey flick I’ve seen, but it didn’t mean I lacked faith in its then upcoming sequel. When I first saw the first trailer for it, my excitement grew, and before it came out, it was my most anticipated film of 2014 right below the final “Hobbit” film. I liked the film when I first saw it, but as time passed, the film went from being good, to just being OK. Before watching this film again, I wondered if this opinion would change. So how was the experience of rewatching this movie? It was worse than I thought it would be. There were some cool moments, but this experience of rewatching this movie, was surprisingly boring and surprisingly almost anger-inducing. So much crap is happening in this movie that it isn’t even funny! You think a lot of crap happens in “Batman v. Superman?” A lot of the crap you see that movie, at least in my book, PAYS OFF! This movie almost seems to never know what it ultimately wants to be! It’s just a bunch of tones combining together in one product! It’s like putting peanut butter on pizza. Peanut butter is an unthinkable pizza topping and even if your friends call you boring for doing so, you’re probably better off ordering cheese pizza. Which reminds me, hilariously enough, this movie is full of cheese.

Andrew Garfield returns in this movie as Peter Parker, and when I compare Andrew Garfield with Tobey Maguire from Raimi’s trilogy, I do think there are some things I like better one way as opposed to the other. One pro Garfield has compared to Maguire is his age. He was a bit younger than Tobey when playing Peter in each of their first “Spider-Man” movies and he was also younger than Tobey was when they were doing their own second installments. Another pro Garfield has is his line delivery. OK, well, this isn’t entirely directed towards Garfield as an actor, nor is it directed towards Maguire, it’s more towards the writing. Garfield’s interpretation of “Spider-Man” is slightly more faithful to its source material. What do I mean? Garfield’s Spidey gives more quips as opposed to Maguire’s. Sure, Maguire did that too, but not as much. Although as Peter Parker, I think the better interpretation goes to Maguire. It was believable, it showed how much of a nerd he was, and it wasn’t as awkward. OK, you have every right to bring up some segments in “Spider-Man 3” which I consider understandable. Speaking of faithfulness to the source material, Spidey has web shooters. I personally prefer Spidey shooting webs out of his wrists simply because believe it or not, it sounds more practical. You have this high schooler, you have no verification that he or his family is rich, and now he’s making all of this technology that could be costing a lot of money. The creator of “Spider-Man,” Stan Lee, actually has a criticism for all of this. He likes the web shooters because at any point Spidey could run out of fluid and he’s forced to rely on his wits. By the way, Stan, Stanny, Stan by me, Superstan, if you’re reading this, which you probably aren’t, because you’re probably at a convention right now or something, I need you to rewatch Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man 2.” Spider-Man doesn’t exactly run out of fluid, but he has trouble producing it, which eventually leads to him losing his powers, I honestly think that’s better, but you do you. Also, from my memory, between the two films in Marc Webb’s Spidey series, Spidey never runs out of fluid. One of his web shooters becomes disabled, but he never runs out of fluid. If you ask me, after watching every “Spider-Man” film brought to the big screen that exists today, I’ve come to the conclusion that Tobey Maguire is my preferred “Spider-Man.” He may not be as funny, but he’s extremely relatable, I’m able to care about him, and his interpretation may be arguably the most realistic interpretation of a superhero I’ve ever seen.

Emma Stone also returns in this movie, and she once again plays Gwen Stacy. One key difference between her character compared to the love interest in Raimi’s trilogy, Mary Jane, is that Gwen is never a damsel in distress. Now, some of you might be getting tired of that sort of thing, and believe me, I don’t mind Gwen as a character being someone who’s able to stand up for herself, but at the same time, it makes her a dumbass, we’ll get to that in a second, but let’s talk about her in the beginning of the movie. We first see her in this movie graduating high school. She’s the valedictorian and she gives this speech that is supposed to have a huge meaning in the movie as a whole, Peter comes in after trying to complete the mission he’s taking on at the movie’s opening, he kisses Gwen on the lips. Kind of cringeworthy if you ask me. Although we do get a pretty good Stan Lee cameo. The relationship between Peter and Gwen is kind of off and on. They start off as boyfriend and girlfriend, they have an awkward conversation, awkward mainly for me, the viewer, which then leads to the two breaking up. Peter then stalks Gwen Stacy, which he later admits, so yeah, basically this attempt at making a “Spider-Man” movie turned into the superhero version of “Twilight” for a few seconds… Weird. The two eventually become friends, then it’s almost like they become friends with benefits. No, they don’t have sex, they kiss once in a closet, so you can probably call them friends with minor benefits. Then the two reunite as boyfriend and girlfriend just before Gwen is supposed to leave on a plane to the United Kingdom because she just got accepted to Oxford and they have summer classes. It’s a very rocky relationship, kind of like this movie. Oh, and you know how I mentioned when it comes to the character of Spidey in this series compared to the previous one that they are slightly more faithful to the comics? Well, in terms of faithfulness, this movie’s final act is faithful to Gwen Stacy too. Right before the big bloated electric battle begins during the end of the movie, you can see Gwen and if you know anything about the comics, and you watch this movie, just look at her outfit. It may look familiar to you. Some of you might be asking why I’m bringing this up. Well, in this movie, spoiler alert, I said there were spoilers in the title of the post, so if you are at this point without having seen the movie and you care so much, only blame yourself, Gwen dies. When she dies, she’s actually wearing the same exact outfit she wore when she died in the comics. Another thing I actually just found out, is that when she dies, it’s in a clock tower, and when that happens, it says 1:21. And if you read the comics, Gwen dies in issue 121. On the topic of Gwen, let’s talk about some other things.

One thing I want to bring up is the character of Captain Stacy, who is also Gwen’s father, which if you saw the movie which came out before this one, he dies in that. Before he dies, he says the words displayed in the image above. Peter actually sees Gwen Stacy’s dad throughout the film, not literally, because he’s dead, but it’s almost as if Captain Stacy is in front of him. Peter disobeying Captain Stacy’s dying words and seeing Captain Stacy at the end of the movie should have been a sign for him that Gwen could get in trouble. After seeing that, I wonder how obvious in terms of foreshadowing this would be to people. During my first few watches, I don’t remember seeing it all that much until recently. Although I probably did notice it and it just slipped from my memory because it’s been a while since I saw this movie. Also, I want to know, if you saw the movie, did you notice this? And what are your thoughts on it? I want to know in the comments.

When Gwen Stacy shows up as Spider-Man is fighting around the power grid, she says she must be here because she knows how this grid operates and that sort of thing, but she has to make it clear that being here is “her choice.” Listen, I get if you want a progressive female character that girls can look up to in a movie, but the problem here is, Gwen doing this, is just idiotic by the standards of common sense. “Highly Illogical,” as Spock puts it. Gwen has no superpowers, so it would be like me, a guy who hasn’t played a game of ice hockey in his life, suddenly joining the NHL. In fact, when Gwen dies, I blame her more than Peter. I mean, sure, when she died it was sad, but if you remember the quote from Captain Stacy which was recently brought up, Spidey tried to leave Gwen out of it, but she forced herself in. Sure, Spidey failed at getting rid of Gwen at that moment, but still. How could he? Maybe some blame can go towards the web slinger for failing, but Gwen nevertheless brought herself in.

the-amazing-spider-man-2-poster-banner-full

On a different subject, let’s talk about some bad guys. One of the biggest problems people have with this film are the villains. If you remember “Spider-Man 3” from 2007, you may recall that people disliked it partially due to the movie having three villains (New Goblin, Sandman, and Venom). In this movie, the main villain according to the film’s marketing was Electro (right). However, Spider-Man interacts with certain people in this movie who potentially become villains, including the Green Goblin (middle), and the Rhino (left). So in a way, the “Spider-Man 3” problem exists in this movie. This problem is overall done differently, but nevertheless, it exists. Speaking of which, let’s talk about those villains.

Starting off with Electro, his character is played by Jamie Foxx and overall I thought the buildup for his character, going from average person to villain was very compelling and in a way, I was able to understand how he felt at certain points of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, Spider-Man is going around the city trying to complete an objective, and there’s this guy named Max. He’s going around the city and all of these blueprints he’s carrying fall out of his hands. Spidey lends a helping hand to him regarding the blueprints and he says that Max is Spidey’s “eyes and ears.” Max throughout the first act is treated rather horribly by those he works with, especially considering it is his birthday. As far as other positives go, I really liked the first fight sequence between Spidey and Max in Times Square. At times it is full of CGI, much like another portion of the movie that I bet you might predict I’m thinking of, but still, I enjoyed it. Speaking of CGI, there was this one sequence when Electro was blasting this amazingly massive sparkle wave throughout Times Square, that certainly did a lot of damage. Despite all of what I said so far, I do have some criticisms. Electro feels like a superhuman whose powers give you the will to do anything. At times, it’s almost as if the screenwriter needed a scene to make sense so he’d put in a power we have yet to witness from Electro and it just feels absurd. In fact, there’s one point where we see him, and he’s wearing nothing but boxer shorts. I mean, kids watch these movies so you can’t show any penises, but really?! Just do some closeups on Electro and cut his legs off! Might look weird in terms of presentation but it might make Electro slightly more convincing. Either that or crop the image or something!

Speaking of awful, let’s go onto Dane Dahaan. In this movie, he’s portraying the character of Harry Osborn, and if you know anything about “Spider-Man,” he’s the son of Norman Osborn. You may remember from the last movie, there was a subplot involving Norman and how he was gonna die soon. You barely saw his character during the movie, but still, that plot was a thing. Turns out in this movie, he actually has more screentime. How much screentime in total? Probably less than a few minutes. Norman actually ends up dying moments after talking to Harry and it turns out that the disease that was the killer for Norman happened to be genetic. Interestingly enough, Harry is getting this disease at a much quicker rate than Norman. This leads into a subplot that just got duller by the second. This subplot involves Harry getting a cure for himself. Eventually, he says that he needs Spider-Man’s blood. Part of this is based on research done by Peter’s father and the fact that Spider-Man himself was bitten by a Spider. Now let’s drift away from that and talk about Dane DaHaan himself. I haven’t watched much of Dane DaHaan’s work, but I hear he’s gonna be in “Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets,” a movie I’m really looking forward to. Although it comes out the same day as “Dunkirk” so I’m gonna put “Valerian” behind that on my must see list. I don’t know how well or poor he does in other movies, but in this movie, Dane DaHaan may have given what I consider to be part of my top 10 worst performances of all time. Dane starts out in this movie as if he were a slow talker. Like, imagine if “Seinfeld” were soft rebooted today and the original cast came back to do more episodes, and if they did one involving an over-dramatic slow talker, this would be a character if the episode had a really dark vibe. Later on, it becomes better, but it’s really weird. Plus the way Harry looks as the Green Goblin is creepy, but I almost don’t buy it for some reason. Anyone else feel that way?

This paragraph is gonna focus on Aleksei Sytsevich, otherwise known as Rhino. This character is played by Paul Giamatti, a fairly respected actor from films like “Saving Private Ryan,” “Cinderella Man,” and “Saving Mr. Banks.” Much like Dane DaHaan in this film, this guy’s performance is weak. I personally like Giamatti’s performance as opposed to DaHaan’s, but that doesn’t say much because watching his performance was almost like watching a cartoon. The first few seconds of him on screen, he’s just obnoxiously yelling random mumbo jumbo that I guess can also be referred to as words, this is all being done while he’s driving a truck and the camera is just focusing on him as he’s shouting. You can argue that Spider-Man acts like a cartoon in this movie with those endless quips he’s got, but I can buy into it. If this was a voiceover role in an animation I might be a little bit more forgiving, but it doesn’t work in a live-action film like this.

Let me ask you something, have you ever seen a movie that you thought was so bad it was good? Common examples among people for this include: “Batman & Robin,” “The Room,” “Troll 2,” “Birdemic,” “Sharknado,” or “Nicolas Cage: The Movie,” yes, that’s not a real movie but if you know who Nicolas Cage is and follow his work you’d most certainly get my point. If “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” qualifies to be that sort of film, it does by a hair, at least that’s how I feel for now, but I do think there are more moments in this movie that can make this film hysterically bad compared to “Spider-Man 3.” I can actually ENJOY “Spider-Man 3” compared to this piece of crap! Aside from the future meme of Paul Giamatti’s performance in this movie, one of my personal favorite examples of this movie’s plethora of hilariously awful moments include this one scene where Spider-Man is going up against Electro. So the two are fighting in this CGI-infested battle, I mean, it’s a cliche in superhero movie climaxes so whaddaya expect? All of sudden, Electro flies from one structure of the grid to another, and from each structure to the next, is one syllable from “Itsy Bitsy Spider.” Hearing it is funny enough, but it’s also funny to hear Spidey talking about it saying “I hate this song!” By the way, that’s not the only time “Itsy Bitsy Spider” was used in a “Spider-Man” movie. It was used in the finale of Sam Raimi’s first “Spider-Man” movie from 2002. Yeah, the Green Goblin was on his glider and he began singing, “The Itsy Bitsy Spider went up the water spout. Down came the goblin and took the spider out.” If these guys wanted to bring any more hilarity to the table, they should have put in “Boris the Spider” by The Who somewhere! I feel like I should talk about more of these, so you know what? I’m gonna talk about more of these.

There’s this one moment where Peter and Gwen are talking, they’re thinking of just being friends. At one point, Peter thinks of developing some ground rules now that they are friends. One of them is that Gwen needs to laugh differently than she usually would. So at one point she gives off this really corny laugh and it’s almost like listening to a female version of the Joker or the Green Goblin. In fact, Harry shouldn’t be the Green Goblin in this movie, Gwen should (laughs normally, not at all like Gwen).

This next moment isn’t exactly hilariously awful, it’s just… awful. Part of the movie is devoted to Peter finding the truth behind what happened to his birthparents. Some of it feels awkward, some of it feels like it wasn’t worth hearing, and this moment, just feels… insane. There is this bag that is shown at the beginning of the film, it’s ignored until somewhere beyond the halfway point. It had all of Peter’s father’s stuff inside. I don’t even know if I’m gonna end up getting the entirety of this information right, but this movie doesn’t feel right, so this movie and I may as well call it even. One of Peter’s father’s items was a calculator. Peter ends up breaking this calculator and inside it happens to have some subway tokens. Peter all of sudden starts doing some research and heads to the area which this subway is located. So he’s in this underground station, there’s a gateway where you put in your token, Peter puts one in and he goes through the gate, there’s no train on the tracks. Turns out there’s a train is underground! Peter actually pushes a wall in order to bring it up! What the s*it?! What idiot wrote this?! Who thought of this?! Inside there is actually a computer that contains a video Richard Parker, Peter’s father, made. Just… why?! This is f*cking New York f*cking City, not Smurf Village!

I want to talk about the score in this movie. Thus far, I’ve mentioned that I enjoyed every single score in a “Spider-Man” film I reviewed. This film, is inferior to the others in terms of that. I’ve likely heard less impressive scores throughout my life, but this film is the worst of the “Spider-Man” movies when it comes to the score. The music in this film was done by Hans Zimmer, one of my all time favorite movie composers. He’s also had experience with making scores for superhero movies prior to this one. If you watched Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight” trilogy, he did each one of those movies. He even did my favorite movie score, which is in “Interstellar,” a movie that came out six months after this movie. If you watch this movie and that movie, you can tell the same guy did both scores because they sound very similar at certain points. The biggest problem I have with this score, is this dubstep theme he did for Electro. I’ve listened to the theme on it’s own and I don’t exactly mind the music, as music, it’s fun to listen to. But when you place it in this movie, it just doesn’t work. My suggestion is probably putting this theme in the credits, which by the way, we’re gonna get to. There were some likable moments in the score, but in the end, it cannot even come close to rivaling Danny Elfman’s scores in Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man” trilogy.

Oh yeah, let’s talk about the ending of this movie, it sucks! It all starts out with a sinister six teaser, then it continues to a point which the public wonders where Spider-Man is, then Spidey is in the city, he’s about to take down Rhino, a villain you may know from the comics. He was shown in the trailer and there’s this one shot that looked pretty cool in it, the shot was shown in the movie, and as soon as they start fighting, the movie’s over! This ending might be disappointing to a lot of people, but a small shred of disappointment might be added if you were watching the trailer and were looking forward to that.

Now let’s dive into the movie’s end credits, because there is an end credits scene worth talking about. And just a reminder to you all, I wouldn’t be saying this to you if I were reviewing the movie back in 2014. I might point out that there is an end credit scene, but that’s pretty much all I’d say. But I want to bring a little more depth to the table. I still recall the first time I saw this movie, it was a sold out IMAX showing, or should I say lie-MAX because it was shown in IMAX digital (I’ve ranted about it more than once). There were about 500 people in the theater. Once the movie was over, a good number of them, including me, actually stayed for the credits. So we’re watching, throughout there is this song by Alicia Keys playing called “It’s On Again.” That song comes to an end, and we see this flashing, then we are cut to a door with an X on it, that signifies that we are getting a scene related to “X-Men,” which does make sense because “X-Men: Days of Future Past” has yet to come out and it was going to be in theaters soon. Once that’s over, we go back to credits, and throughout there are no other scenes. Now just a reminder to you all, I own the Blu-Ray for this film. It also comes with a DVD and digital download copy code so you can watch the movie digitally. I watched the Blu-Ray version in preparation for this review, and that was not the only time I watched the movie in that specific format. On the Blu-Ray, and this can also give a little suggestion to other home video formats as well, the end credit scene isn’t there! Now, “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” is a Sony film, and FOX owns the rights to the “X-Men” movies, so putting that scene in this movie is a little bit out of the ordinary. If that clip existed solely for the sake of promoting “X-Men: Days of Future Past,” a movie which came out three weeks after this one, I get it, but removing it entirely from the film later on is just wrong in my book! There are some people who enjoyed that in the theater and may have been looking forward to watch it again at home, but they don’t get to see it! I wonder if one day there will be another edition of “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” released on home video and it will be subtitled “The Theatrical Cut,” and that cut will feature the “X-Men” end credit scene. For those of you who think I’m creating fake news and you plan to call out on me like Donald Trump, I have video proof, and I’ll mention once again, I WAS AT THE THEATER, so I saw something that maybe you didn’t. There is another video of this I found on YouTube that may have better quality, but I’m posting this video you’re seeing up above because in case you can’t tell, that was taken by someone in a movie theater, which was the only way you could really watch this scene. Also, if it looks kinda weird, that’s because the presentation was in 3D, quite possibly IMAX 3D.

In the end, my thoughts on “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” has changed quite a bit from what they were last time I thought about it. Last time I thought about it, I thought it was just OK, but now it’s sadly worse than that. The “X-Men” thing won’t affect my score, but everything else will. This movie is nothing but a bunch of scenes that are randomly placed together. Peter Parker was awkward, Gwen Stacy was stupid towards the end of the movie, there were too many subplots, Aunt May was rather annoying, there’s one moment from the start of the film that comes to mind when I say this, the script almost felt like it was written by Akiva Goldsman, the writer of “Batman & Robin,” Paul Giamatti is basically the Heavy from “Team Fortress 2,” and Dane DaHaan, just, why? Why Dane DaHaan? Why did this happen? If you watch this movie, you might have some fun watching it, but ultimately, if what you’re looking for is a good “Spider-Man” movie, watch “Spider-Man” from 2002 or “Spider-Man 2” from 2004. A couple last things before I give my rating, this movie has a good chunk of deleted scenes. Including a moment when Peter meets his father in person and the introduction of Mary Jane Watson played by Shailene Woodley (Divergent, The Secret Life of the American Teenager). This movie as a final product is the longest “Spider-Man” film ever made. If these scenes were included, the final product would have only been longer. I’m gonna give “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” a 3/10. For the record, I actually gave “The Amazing Spider-Man” a higher verdict, but in the end, I’d probably much rather watch this movie. Why? It may not be as well crafted as a film, but I can still enjoy some of the goofiness it has to offer. Not to mention, “The Amazing Spider-Man” is essentially something the world has seen before in “Spider-Man” from 2002, which was a better flick, this however is a different movie. Thanks for reading this review and I can now declare that my series of reviews dedicated to past “Spider-Man” movies is over. I want to know, if there is a series of film reviews you want me to do, what would it be? Right now I think I have one in mind. In a few weeks, the movie “Dunkirk” comes out, and that is a film directed by Christopher Nolan. Maybe before that, I should do some of his films from the past. Maybe I could do “Inception,” “Interstellar,” “Memento,” “Insomnia,” or his “Dark Knight” trilogy. This isn’t official, but I’m just saying I might keep it in mind. We’ll see what happens. Also, what is your favorite “Spider-Man” film? Mine’s “Spider-Man 2” by the way. And no, “Captain America: Civil War” doesn’t qualify. If you want to read any of my other “Spider-Man” reviews, I’ll have links to those posted down below. Hope you enjoy those and I hope to see “Spider-Man: Homecoming” in theaters as soon as possible. Stay tuned for more reviews! Scene Before is your click to the flicks, and now, I’m gonna leave you with a horribly delivered quote from Harry Osborn in this movie that I find hilarious.

“On my 16th birthday, you sent me Scotch.” -Harry Osborn

“SPIDER-MAN” (2002) REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/spider-man-your-friendly-neighborhood-2002-movie/

“SPIDER-MAN 2” (2004) REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/04/14/spider-man-2-best-superhero-movie-to-date-spoilers-for-this-movie-spider-man-1/

“SPIDER-MAN 3” (2007) REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/spider-man-3-2007-is-it-really-as-bad-as-everyone-says/

“THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN” (2012) REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-amazing-spider-man-2012-is-it-really-so-amazing-spoilers/

 

Baby Driver (2017): A Mix of La La Land, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Fast & Furious

Posted on by Jack Drees

 

mv5bmjm3mjq1mzkxnl5bml5banbnxkftztgwodk1odgymji-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Baby Driver” is directed by Edgar Wright, who also directed films such as “Shaun of the Dead” and “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.” This film stars Ansel Elgort (The Fault in Our Stars, Divergent), Kevin Spacey (Se7en, House of Cards), Lily James, (Cinderella (2015), Pride and Prejudice and Zombies), Eiza Gonzalez (Jem and the Holograms), and it even features Jon Hamm (The Town, Mad Men) along with Jamie Foxx (Ray, Django Unchained). This film is about a getaway driver named Baby, he’s forced into working for this crime boss and he goes on a mission that could possibly put him in jail.

Now before we talk about the movie itself, let’s talk about the lead actor in this movie, Ansel Elgort. Going into this movie, one of my biggest concerns happened to be how Ansel Elgort would perform in it given his role. Why? Because when I think of Ansel Elgort, action star is not the first thing that comes to mind. Granted I have seen him in “Divergent,” a movie with action in it, but he is neither the main character nor is he the most memorable character in my eyes. When it comes to Ansel Elgort, the first thing that would usually come to mind is “The Fault in Our Stars,” a romance movie which came out a few years back and has gained a following among many in the teenage girl demographic. I have not seen the movie, I’ve heard mostly positive things, but I’m not rushing to see it. How is he in this movie? Well, I’d say he was a lot better than I expected. I’m not saying Elgort was once a bad actor, I’m just saying he wasn’t necessarily an actor I expected to see in an action film like this. To me, Ansel Elgort now somewhat reminds me of Tom Cruise. You may have some of these folks’s early work which contain more of a romantic vibe, yeah, I’m sticking with romantic, in various segments such as “Risky Business” (Cruise) and “The Fault in Our Stars” (Elgort). But now Cruise, much like Elgort who is in this film, has become this action star that I want to see more of in future movies. Also, another thing that kinda makes the two resemble each other, is this…

Just, look at that! When I saw those sunglasses, I could tell these two weren’t the same person, but it might as well show the similarities between the two folks as actors. By the way, Ansel Elgort is on the left and Tom Cruise is on the right.

Speaking of actors and characters in this film, Kevin Spacey is also in this movie. Now, Kevin Spacey is one of the most revered actors of all time, so it probably wouldn’t be a surprise on how well he does in this movie in terms of his performance. I also got to give kudos to the well-written screenplay as well. Some of his lines are pretty sick and when you combine that with Kevin Spacey’s excellent acting ability, you’ve got a pretty cool character. Now that I’m thinking more about it, this somewhat reminds me of Colin Firth’s character in “Kingsman.” Also, yes, this very likely will make you forget about Kevin Spacey in “Nine Lives.” I haven’t seen that movie, but it’s a movie that came out last year and it is about a businessman that has little to no time for his family. He decides to get a cat for his daughter, because her birthday is coming up, and every year she wants a cat. So he goes to a pet store, and when Christopher Walken’s character shows up with a cat Spacey intends to give to his daughter, a strange turn of events causes Spacey’s character to be trapped inside the body of the cat. So not only does that sound stupid, but it almost sounds like a ripoff of “The Shaggy Dog.” OK, I’ll stop there.

If you notice the title of my review, I said that this film is basically a mix of “La La Land,” “Fast & Furious” and “Guardians of the Galaxy.” Here’s why. This film involves a main character who often listens to music, similar to Peter Quill’s character in “Guardians of the Galaxy,” although in this movie you may notice Baby using an IPod and Peter from “Guardians” using a Sony Walkman, and much like “Guardians of the Galaxy,” I would probably say a good number of people might end up buying this movie’s soundtrack. It probably won’t end up selling as many copies, but still. The film overall is an action film, much like a number of “Fast & Furious” installments, and much like “Fast & Furious” the action consists of multiple car chases and the film contains a heist. Why is it like “La La Land?” Well, there is a romance thrown in the movie as well. I wouldn’t say it was forced, sure, it’s kinda Hollywoodish, but still, I say that with the movie’s writing and characterization, it worked. The romance also felt kinda cheesy at times, but in a way, I’d say it was forgivable, because the chemistry between the characters worked in my book. In fact, this movie at times, felt like a musical. There were no original songs that were done by crowds of people or anything like that, but there were times that the characters were listening to the songs and they were singing, mainly Ansel Elgort, but I believe more than one character got involved in this. Not to mention I kinda moved my hand, head, and foot (I don’t remember if the foot thing happened, but still) to the music.

Since I recently mentioned there’s a love interest in this film, let’s talk about her. Her name is Debora and she’s played by Lily James. When she was introduced in this movie, I thought the connection between her and the lead character of Baby was kinda cute. As mentioned, the romance did feel like a somewhat fantastical Hollywood romance, although in a way, I was able to buy into it, and it didn’t really bother me. In fact, one example is when the two are talking with each other and having a conversation related to music. Yeah, they were talking about songs that have their names in it, so they’re basically referring to these as “Debora songs” and “Baby songs.” Also on a little sidenote, I would like to thank everyone behind this movie for not putting Justin Bieber’s “Baby” into the movie. I probably would have walked out if that were the case. I mean, there’s a reason why the music video for it has so many dislikes on YouTube.

Overall, the action in this movie was fun to watch. It was very well shot, much like some other parts of the movie. There were some cuts here and there, but it wasn’t all jumpcutty or anything like that, it all flowed naturally. In fact, during parts of the movie, it would take a long time for the camera to cut, and I have to say it worked. There are times when movies are like that and it ends up working, and funny enough, “La La Land,” a movie I compared this to, is one of those movies. There are a lot of great action sequences throughout the movie, and if you look above, you’ll see a Suburu car. If you go see this movie, you’ll notice that car in the opening action scene. And once again, here’s another comparison to “La La Land.” The opening sequence in “La La Land” wowed me and set a tone for what’s to come. The same can also be said in “Baby Driver.” When that first action sequence was over, it did end up giving me thrills, but it also gave me the desire to see more action. I also recently mentioned that this movie occasionally has moments that are all showcased in one very long shot. That happens not long after this first action scene, I won’t go into detail, but it did amaze me.

Also, a little fact for you, this movie also contains a little reference from the Pixar animation, “Monsters, Inc..” I’m not gonna dive into what the reference is or anything, but let’s just say, if you go see this movie, pay close attention and keep an eye out for that, because overall it gave me a laugh.

In the end, “Baby Driver” is definitely one of the most entertaining action flicks I’ve seen recently. It’s a very unique experience and had a lot of great characters, including some supporting ones I didn’t mention. However, the film does have flaws. I recently mentioned the cheesy romance, although that complaint I can forgive, and also there was one line that was uttered by Jamie Foxx’s character, Eiza Rodriguez’s character said something that made Foxx’s character say it’s almost like listening to an Oscar speech. It was almost as if Foxx was trying to be funny and the just ended up falling flat. As far as the ending goes, it is really compelling, I understood most of it, but there is one segment that I feel I need to look over. I have a feeling it can be resolved over a second watch, but this complaint still stands. But overall, I had fun watching “Baby Driver,” and I wouldn’t mind watching it again, so I’m gonna give “Baby Driver” a 9/10. This movie is not your average action film. Sure, it’s got your car chases, your gun fights, witty dialogue given on various occasions, while at times it almost reminded me of films like “Interstellar” and “Arrival,” both of which I consider to be great movies. Is this movie as good as those? No, but it doesn’t change the fact that I enjoyed this film as a whole. Thanks for reading this review, pretty soon my series of reviews related to past “Spider-Man” movies are gonna come to an end. The last movie I’m doing for this series is “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” and the reason why I’m doing this is because in a week from now, “Spider-Man: Homecoming” will hit theaters everywhere, and I do plan to see that as soon as possible. Stay tuned for my “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” review, along with my “Spider-Man: Homecoming” review when I get around to it, and even more reviews! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Transformers: The Last Knight (2017): How Much Must I Explain?! *SPOILERS* (Well, Sort of) (Plus Rant on Aspect Ratios)

Posted on by Jack Drees

 

mv5bzgvjody0zwitzmewzs00ymnjltg1mzgtmthkm2zhnty0mte3xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjm3mdm5mdu-_v1_sy1000_cr006401000_al_

“Transformers: The Last Knight” is directed by Michael Bay and it is the fifth installment in Michael Bay’s “Transformers” series. I mean… People probably knew this was gonna happen… The last film didn’t get good reviews… But it made a lot of money… (Sigh). This film stars Mark Wahlberg, Anthony Hopkins, Josh DuHamel, and Isabella Moner in yet another movie called “Transformers” and yet the main focus is directed towards the human characters, so ultimately this movie should be called “Humans: The Last Knight.” All in all the plot to this film (laughs), is that humans and Transformers are fighting each other. Optimus Prime, who is one of the Transformers, is not on Earth. Apparently, the key to preserving the future is in the past, the past of the Transformers on Earth that is.

If you want to know my personal thoughts on Michael Bay’s “Transformers” series, I think some movies are good and some are forgettable. I also feel that if a certain installment in the series is bad, there are still glimmers of enjoyment which I can grasp out of it. I have not seen 1986’s “Transformers: The Movie,” which has no relation to Michael Bay’s series, so I can’t judge that apart from this. Even though I can enjoy at least some parts of any Bayformers film put in front of me, one of my biggest complaints, in fact a number of people’s biggest complaints, is that they are kinda the same. Sure, a couple things have changed over the years, but formula-wise, it’s similar from movie to movie. There’s always an important entity, it’s probably gonna have some impact on the movie in one place or another. You’ve got your human characters, if there is a girl who is a main character, they need to be f*ckable, those people need to be introduced. You’ve got the military and the government or some big organization, perhaps a company, they need to be introduced. You’ve got Transformers, they need to be introduced, throughout there’s some action, explosions, visuals everywhere. I’ve definitely seen worse layouts and I do enjoy stuff that has similar layouts from one installment another, most notably TV shows. As a kid I watched “Power Rangers,” right now I watch “Family Guy,” and pretty much every single sitcom on TV might have a similar layout. Does this layout work? I guess, but even “Fast and Furious,” a series which just had its eighth installment come out last April, knew when to change things around. There’s some similarities from movie to movie, but they spiced things up from time to time. They still have all the street racing stuff, but they focused on it less in later installments and instead focused on all sorts of action-packed popcorn movie s*it. How was this movie in the very end? Honestly, it was awful. Just simply, awful. I think Michael Caine’s interpretation of Alfred Pennyworth said it best in “The Dark Knight…”

“Some men, just want to watch the world burn.”

I guess after watching this so-called “film” I now realize I’m clearly one of those people. Somebody get me a flamethrower and I’ll begin burning my house down!

Alright, where were we? Oh yeah, we’re still on the same topic. After watching this movie, I honestly think that basically a lot of people behind the project think there is no other idea to take on other than the same one every single time. I can accept a number of TV shows being extremely formulaic, it works there, it can give off a consistent vibe from episode to episode that way you feel like you’re watching one show as opposed to another. These movies although, need to change. In some ways, there was change brought to this one, but the change as a whole just happened to be simple tweaks. The overall story and formula however are considerably similar.

The main character in this movie, Cade Yeager, is played once again by Mark Wahlberg, who was actually introduced in “Transformers: Age of Extinction,” the franchise’s fourth installment. Why was he introduced in that movie? It’s kind of interesting actually. If you are familiar with these movies, mainly the first three in the series, you may know that there was a different lead instead of Mark Wahlberg, that lead being Shia LeBeouf. He left because he thought there was nowhere to really take his character for a fourth installment. He enjoys working with Michael Bay, but he felt he should leave. Anyway, Wahlberg personally was a more fleshed out character in this movie as opposed to the last one, although not entirely because he still does that thing where he constantly brings up the fact that he’s an inventor. Also, he’s kind of a badass in this film, the first scene with him, is fun to watch. Speaking of repetitive behavior, and this is something that is not entirely a fault of Wahlberg, he once again has to shove BLATANTLY OBVIOUS product placement down our throats. Now I bet you’re wondering if the product placement was as excessive here as it was in the previous film? Not really. Sure, it’s there, but it’s not a near 150 minute commercial break.

Remember this? If not, this is the Bud Light product placement featured in the previous film. Overall, it is probably up there with the most obvious product placement in movie history.

One of the characters I’m desperate to talk about is the character of Izabella, played by Isabella Moner. This is the first “Transformers” film featuring this character and when I saw a trailer for the film featuring her, I thought this was quite a turn when it comes to Michael Bay. Why? Because of three girls who go by the name of Megan Fox (played Mikayla in Transformers 1 & 2), Rosie Huntington-Whitely (played Carly in Transformers 3), and Nicola Peltz (played Tessa in Transformers 4). What do these three girls have in common? Well, they’re basically sexualized in the prior “Transformers” films. After watching all of the prior “Transformers” films, these women did turn me on in some way or another, but sexiness is probably the only redeeming quality for these characters, as characters, much like a number of other characters introduced throughout the series, the overall characterization for them was pretty weak. You can argue Megan Fox’s character did s*it, and you’d be right, just watch the finale for the first movie when she was driving a vehicle and Bumblebee was on it, but her doing all of this s*it isn’t really something that many people recall her for. I mean, these characters in my eyes were primarily sexualized, although they were never naked or anything, so I can’t really say kids should stay away from the past films, but this is something I wanted to spit out. Going into this film, I thought this new character was gonna be a much more progressive character that females, specifically those in the younger demographic, can aspire to be. Also, she was a bit younger than some of the girls we got in the past, so I didn’t really expect many ass and cleavage shots on this girl. Now, how was she in this film? As far as acting ability goes, she wasn’t bad, and that says something because there aren’t that many girls, mainly including the recently mentioned sexualized girls, whose acting ability stood out in the previous films. This girl did do some s*it, not really as much as I expected, but still, she did some s*it…

Ah, who am I kidding?!

Yes, it is true. Isabella Moner’s character did some s*it, but the typical Michael Bay sexualization was in this movie too! No, the sexualization is not directed towards Moner’s character, instead, it is directed towards Laura Haddock’s character. This character goes by the name of Vivian Wembley. How was she sexualized? Well, when we first meet her and she’s walking around, she’s in this dress, it almost looks like something you’d wear if you’re going out to a fancy restaurant in a major city and it happens to be a special occasion. We don’t get any shots of her where the camera gawks at her butt or boobs or anything, but I think at one point multiple characters are in a room with her, the girl’s attractiveness is brought up by someone, possibly Wahlberg’s character. Could’ve been more than one person, I don’t know. Perhaps it could’ve been nobody and I’m just imagining things. Although that just goes to show you the quality, or lack thereof, of this film. One thing I also noticed from this character, is that compared to all of the other sex objects featured in the series thus far, is that this one’s considerably smart. So yeah, you can say as far as sexualized characters go, this one is not as stupid as some others. I mean, I’m not saying sexualized characters in general are brainless, they’re just not as smart as this one, at least from what I’ve observed throughout the film.

You can argue that due to her intelligence, she’s not a sex toy, but I ain’t buying your arguement. If Michael Bay had at least one sex object in each of the previous “Transformers” movies, would it really be that shocking for him to insert one in this movie?

I just realized how much my reviews are like these movies, the Transformers aren’t getting much of a focus. Well, that changes now, because we’re gonna talk about Optimus Prime. I’m gonna invent a new term, and hopefully I’ll have it patented before Cade Yeager from this movie does, and I’m gonna call it the “Reverse Jared Leto Joker.” Why is that? Because you barely see both characters in their individual movies. Not to mention, they were featured as a key role in various forms of advertising. In 2016’s “Suicide Squad,” you see the Joker throughout a good chunk of the movie’s beginning, once the movie advances past the halfway point, you see him less, then you get to the end of the movie where he just pops up. This happens here too, but in reverse. You see Optimus in the beginning, his main contribution to plot begins, we get introduced to a character who goes by the name of Quintessa, he gets put aside for about a half of the film, then he comes in at the end and stays on camera for the rest of the movie. By the way, Quintessa, that character I mentioned earlier, honestly may have one of the WORST voices I’ve ever heard from a character. I mean, if the voice was normal and no special editing was added to it, it would have been fine, but this voice, if it makes any sense, sounded kinda rumbly. I went to see this movie with my father, and when we left the movie and we were in our personal vehicle together, I described her voice as “degrading.” Like, as in, in terms of the character’s sanity, and perhaps to my own sanity. Speaking of sanity, we’ll get to a couple of moments where I nearly lose my sanity a little later on. But before that, let’s talk about one of the movie’s redeeming qualities.

What is the redeeming quality I’m referring to? A better question would start with “who,” but still. I’m talking about Jim Carter’s character of Cogman. This is the first movie in the series featuring this character, and out of every single character made for the purpose of comic relief, this may be the best one of all when it comes to Bayformers. At one point, another character refers to him as a discount C-3PO, which had me laughing, and believe or not, I was probably the only person laughing at that out of everyone in the theater. Another lovable moment from this character is when a bunch of people are talking, I remember it being key to the overall plot. During the scene, you have the score going on in the background, then we go up to Cogman breaking the fourth wall. How so? By playing the organ which goes along with the score. He’s told to cut it out and then he says that he’s trying to make the moment more epic. Then more talking ensues, and he just starts vocalizing. I don’t recall seeing that type of humor anywhere. The closest I can say that has come to this, is during one scene from a “Family Guy” episode called “Baby, You Knock Me Out,” at one point, Survivor’s “Eye of the Tiger” is playing in the background in a way that no character can hear it, much like the recently mentioned score in this movie. Then suddenly, we cut to Peter Griffin who starts singing the lyrics of the song until Quagmire comes in and pushes Peter out.

Admittedly, as I much as I hated the crap out of this movie, the humor is something that is somewhat pleasing at times. Don’t get me wrong, sometimes it fails, but there are moments that had me laughing. This has also been something that has happened in other “Transformers” installments as well, whether it be during action sequences or when people are randomly talking.

Also to make sure I can keep a focus on the topic of the movie’s robots, you may already know one of the series’s recurring characters is Bumblebee, so let’s talk about him. There’s not really much to say about him honestly. He’s just here because, well, he’s a main character. The only thing that Bumblebee adds to the film is one segment having to do with his voice and the fact that he’s in many scenes, including fights.

On the subject of recurring characters, Megatron is also in this film. Honestly, the only stuff I remember vividly from this character is from the beginning. Speaking of that, I actually want to dive into specifics there. One thing I noticed during the start of the film is that a bunch of the Decepticons were getting introduced, and the way they were introduced may have been helpful because if you look at a bunch of Decepticons standing right near each other, they look pretty similar. That’s a plus, but part of me wonders if this was inspiration from last year’s “Suicide Squad.” This isn’t a huge complaint of mine and it’s more of something I am curious about. If you look at a bunch of the Autobots, the robots in the movie who fight for good, as opposed to the Decepticons in the film who fight for evil, the Autobots vary from one another in terms of personalities, quirks, and colors. All of these factors probably make it easier to get attached to them and appreciate them more when they go up against the Decepticons and attempt to take them down.

There’s also this one character I want to bring up. He’s a scientist, I don’t give a crap about his name or an image for him. Because for one thing, I don’t recall his name, and also if this movie has the right to be lazy then why can’t I have the right to laziness? Anyway, the point is, there’s this scientist who appears in multiple parts of the film, he’s trying to convince people the way to solve this whole war on Earth is through his particular scientific viewpoint. A sixth “Transformers” is going to be made without a doubt, and I already know they’re making a “Bumblebee” spinoff, so if the sixth installment actually happens, or if the spinoff takes place somewhere in modern times, here is something I’d like to see. There’s a battle taking place somewhere, maybe a city, which in my eyes would my preferred choice for this. The scientist is running around the city, Hound, an Autobot played by John Goodman, who is also known for playing Coach Harris in 1984’s “Revenge of the Nerds” could get a glimpse at him and shout, “Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd! Nerd!” which if you watch the movie, is almost similar to a constant chant given off at multiple parts of the film. He could also look at the scientist and simply say “Goddamn nerd,” or “What a nerd,” or “I wanna find his frat house from when he went to college so my pals can take it over.” This doesn’t have to be with the scientist, this could be with someone else that’s nerdy, maybe even a group of nerds. Perhaps for the next movie, the casting crew could ask if several cast members from “Revenge of the Nerds” could make appearances as people running away from destruction and Hound happens to be right near them.

Remember the sanity thing I mentioned earlier? Because now we’re gonna get into a complaint I’m not surprised I’m bringing up, because after watching the first trailer for this movie, this annoyed the hell out of me. And this is also a complaint you probably wouldn’t hear from many people. That my friends, has to do with the aspect ratio. When my dad and I were leaving the theater, we start talking about the film and I bring up this particular complaint. He asks what an aspect ratio is. Since he asked that, I might as well explain it in case you are wondering what an aspect ratio is as well. An aspect ratio is essentially how high or wide an image will expand. It doesn’t necessarily depend on the size of your screen, it does however depend on your type of screen.

Let’s say you own a modern day flat screen TV, the aspect ratio for that would be 16:9, which can also be referred to as 1.78:1. This aspect ratio will allow you to watch all of your shows in a widescreen format that covers the screen from both top to bottom and left to right.

Now lets take this CRT TV shown above. This was the big thing before flat screens and HD became a household necessity if you will. These TVs are presented in a format called 4:3, which is also referred to as 1.33:1. This format is also often labeled as “full screen.” If you watch something in widescreen on here, it wouldn’t feel as authentic as opposed to watching it on something with an aspect ratio of 16:9 or wider. Nowadays, they’re still making DVDs, but it is an overall rarity to find one that comes out with an option to watch in full screen. It’s usually just widescreen, because tube TVs aren’t cool anymore. If you find a DVD in the widescreen format and play it on a device hooked up to a tube TV, chances are you will find some black bars on the top and bottom of the screen, which is sometimes called a letterbox. The only way to get rid of those black bars (depending on what you’re watching and TV or device settings) is to change the picture view settings or switch the settings to stretch the top and bottom portions of the image. Varying on the content, the black bars could still be visible even with the settings change, and the image would, based on what you just did, appear stretched out.

Wow that was a long rant. Worth it. Sorry if I bored you, but I assure you that rant was ten times as entertaining as “Transformers: The Last Knight.” Sticking with my main point, there are multiple aspect ratios in this film, and there have been films in the past that have done this, including 2 other installments in the series. The second and fourth. As far as the second one goes, I don’t remember where the aspect ratio changed. The aspect ratio changes didn’t bother me much in the fourth one when I watched it, but I wonder if my opinion would change now. In this movie, the aspect ratio changes between almost every single shot on screen! It’s just HORRIBLE to watch at times. I may have tuned it out a couple of times, but when I noticed it at times, it somewhat pissed me off. In fact, when I watch movies that have different aspect ratios, it’s usually only two ratios featured in the whole thing. Let’s take “Interstellar” for example. Much like this film, this was partially shot on IMAX cameras. The types of cameras were specifically different from each other and the footage shot with them was presented not so similarly on screen, the IMAX screen to be specific, but still, that’s how they were shot. In “Interstellar,” there’s a scene where multiple characters are on a distant planet, tensions start to increase at the spur of the moment. That sequence was shot in IMAX. Then we cut to a situation on Earth, tensions increase there as well. Although that is being shot with a different camera, a 35mm camera to be specific. The different situations are cut from one another back and forth and it is all shown using their respective camera in order to build up to where the movie goes next. That film was directed by Christopher Nolan, who has also used the IMAX camera for other purposes in his films, such as certain sequences involving action during “The Dark Knight” and “The Dark Knight Rises.” Here though is a different story, I can just imagine that someone thought it would be fun, either the editor or Michael Bay to just play around with aspect ratios and be inconsistent with them! It’s just so jarring! It makes my head EXPLODE! There were even moments I noticed where the aspect ratio would be one thing, then it changes to something else for literally less than a millisecond, and the next thing I know I’m looking at another one! I’m just glad I didn’t notice absurd quick cutting or I probably would have ran out of the auditorium screaming! The worst part about this is that this is not only something that applies to the IMAX Experience. One movie I went to see multiple times in the theater is “Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens.” It had most of the movie shot with 35mm film and nearly 5 minutes of footage shot in the IMAX format. When seeing this film in a regular theater, the aspect ratio stayed the same the whole time. However, during the escape from Jakku scene, the IMAX Experience changed the aspect ratio. Although I went to see “Transformers: The Last Knight” in a regular theater, so this was utterly displeasing to look at.

Simply put, this aspect ratio bulls*it may be some of the WORST editing I’ve ever seen in a movie. There’s this other movie I reviewed earlier this year called “You Can’t Have It,” if you haven’t seen it, or even heard of it for that matter, I wouldn’t be too surprised. Nevertheless, I mentioned earlier this year when I reviewed that film that the editing was awful there too. Although instead of video, this had to do with audio. The levels from shot to shot in particular scenes was overall pretty infrequent to the point where it got annoying. The video wasn’t spectacular either because I noticed multiple jumpcuts, and I actually recall seeing one in this movie too. So yeah, that’s something these two pieces of garbage have in common. (Sigh)

One thing that usually doesn’t disappoint me in “Transformers” is the action, and while it was fun to watch, it honestly wasn’t enough to save this disaster of a movie. During action sequences, there was some enjoyment to be had, but also a big question to be asked. That question being, “What is happening?” I cannot even believe I got bored watch all of this s*it go down, it made me think that out of all the “Transformers” movies, this is the film in the series that I would probably put on at night when I go to bed and I need something so boring it’ll make me fall asleep. This installment in the series would probably do the trick. Oh yeah, and what was the other thing? Oh right, THE ASPECT RATIOS KEEP CHANGING!

I know I’ve been going on forever, but I need to talk about one more thing before I deliver my verdict to you all. There’s this YouTube channel you may be familiar with called Channel Awesome, one of its most popular series is the “Nostalgia Critic,” which is done by a guy named Doug Walker. One of his most recent uploads is called “Transformers: The Last Knight NON-Review.” In this video, he mentions that he has done a tradition which he reviews each Michael Bay “Transformers” film that comes out, but right now, he wonders what’s left to talk about it that’s new. With that being said, he decided he wouldn’t review the new movie and instead he attempted an “artistic experiment” which features him predicting the overall structure of “Transformers: The Last Knight.” After watching the movie and this video, Doug pretty much nailed the entire structure, there may be some differences here and there, but this prediction was overall pretty much the entire movie. If you’re reading this and you haven’t seen the movie but watched the video, I probably just spoiled the movie for you, same can also be said if you decide to click on the video from here. I just thought I’d share that because this was an interesting experiment and it reveals a lot about how similar these “Transformers” movies really are when you compare them with one another.

In the end, “Transformers: The Last Knight” sucked. I liked numerous segments of the film, but to me, various segments aren’t enough. Not to mention, we are once again being exposed to yet another copy-paste story and structure. I briefly brought up the whole, oh my, it’s the last “Transformers” thing, but let’s face it, it most likely won’t be, which is another thing I absolutely hate about this movie. There’s a scene shown during the credits that might contain some key info that might be covered in the future. I don’t mind seeing another movie, well, sort of, as long as they try on the next one, but I don’t like liars. Maybe Michael Bay won’t direct it and he’ll hand it off to somebody else, perhaps they could do better. As far as blockbuster films go, this one fails on so many levels, and it did not need to be like this. I’m gonna give “Transformers: The Last Knight” a 3/10. This is my score because while I did enjoy some things in the movie, there were a lot of things I didn’t enjoy. I seriously wonder if my score will be lower in the future. Only time will tell. Last year that happened with “Suicide Squad” and “Independence Day: Resurgence,” so we’ll see. Thanks for reading this extremely long review that ultimately has more effort put into it than “Transformers: The Last Knight” itself. Either listen to everyone and stop making these movies, or listen to everyone and either make a good movie, or a movie with a different formula. Even better, a good movie with a different formula. Thanks for reading this review, I’m not sure yet what my next review will be, but I’m thinking maybe “Baby Driver” or something like that, we’ll find out where the road takes me. Stay tuned for more reviews, along with other content that I assure you has greater quality than “Transformers: The Last Knight.” Scene Before is your click to the flicks!