REALLY THAT GOOD is an independent MovieBob Production. If you enjoy it and want to see more like it, please consider supporting The MovieBob Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/moviebob1 Welcome to a NEW kind of film-criticism series, built around the radical premise that just because "everyone knows" a movie is a classic doesn't mean it stops being worth a deeper look.
TRANSFORMERS: THE MOVIE debuted in 1986 to scathing reviews and a less-than-transformative box office performance - after all, it was essentially a 90 minute toy commercial whose target audience was already getting its fix on TV for free. But home-video and regular TV play, combined with the enduring popularity of the TRANSFORMERS brand and the shocking (however marketing-driven) decision to kill off many of the most popular original characters made it a pop-culture staple for a whole generation of fans; many of whom today regard it as a cult classic... but is it?
Where some merely see a cynical feature-length commercial highlighted by oddball voice-casting, inconsistent animation and some of the cheesiest 80s heavy metal ever recorded; many devout fans insist it all (somehow) adds up to something more - and its enduring popularity suggests they might have a point: There's a thousand things "wrong" with TRANSFORMERS: THE MOVIE; but if a whole generation still claims to be sincerely captivated by its strangely-hypnotic bizarre visual aesthetic, caught up in its surreally-serious sci-fi melodramatics and moved to tears by the death of Optimus Prime... are they wrong?
Where does authorial intent (in this case: to make a toy commercial) give way to audience-perception in determining which creative works get to "matter?" Is TRANSFORMERS: THE MOVIE... Really That Good?
14 Comments
Phreezdryd*length=48:47
Edit: Not sure why I bothered to nitpick this, and now notice the video initially shows 48:48, but almost instantly changes after starting to 48:47. Some kind of split second discrepancy?
siftbotThe duration of this video has been updated from 48:48 to 48:47 - length declared by Phreezdryd.
ChaosEngineI have to say that I loved the intro to this.
Also, I saw this movie when I was 9, and I loved it.
Watched it again a few years ago, and while as an adult I can recognise the cynical marketing, the phoned-in celebrity voices and the at times batshit insane script, I don't think I will ever be able to watch Prime kicking arse to "The Touch" without a deep, visceral "fuck yeah" reaction. Yeah, it's cheesy as fuck, but goddamn, it is just freakin' *quality.
siftbotBoosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by ChaosEngine.
siftbotMoving this video to Phreezdryd's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.
PhreezdrydHmmm, never tried *beg before.
siftbotSending this video to Beggar's Canyon to plea for a little attention - beg requested by original submitter Phreezdryd.
PhreezdrydWhat the hell, *promote
siftbotSelf promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by original submitter Phreezdryd.
notarobotThis is actually a pretty good deconstruction. Good intro and conclusion.
siftbotMoving this video to Phreezdryd's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.
antYeah, I had seen this for years.
*length=48:47
Edit: Not sure why I bothered to nitpick this, and now notice the video initially shows 48:48, but almost instantly changes after starting to 48:47. Some kind of split second discrepancy?
ant*scifi
siftbotAdding video to channels (Scifi) - requested by ant.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.