"The imminent destruction of everything we know and love has begun."
With the release of ‘The Last Knight’, all in all Michael
Bay has stolen 761 minutes of my life over the course of the last ten years.
Granted there’s the often used excuse of “the first ‘Transformers’ wasn’t that
bad’ and indeed it was not but at the same time it is not good enough to warrant
the truly abysmal nature of its subsequent sequels. A shred of me hoped that ‘The
Last Knight’ might actually embrace the inherent ridiculous of the franchise
given that there were talks of Arthurian legends and Nazis in this one. But
alas, no, it’s the exact same goddamn movie again!
Humans are at war with the Transformers, and Optimus Prime
is gone. The key to saving the future lies buried in the secrets of the past
and the hidden history of Transformers on Earth. Now, it's up to the unlikely
alliance of Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg), Bumblebee, an English lord (Anthony
Hopkins) and an Oxford professor (Laura Haddock) to save the world.
Right, screw a casual intro because there’s too much to talk
about. ‘Transformers: The Last Knight’ is without question one of the most
painful cinematic experiences I’ve sat through in some time. It may not
objectively be the worst film I have seen this year or even the worst of this
franchise but it’s still a hateful, diabolical abomination that stands as a
testament to everything that is wrong with modern filmmaking. I know I just
gave a plot summary in the paragraph above but in all honesty this movie has a
plot which is beat by beat identical to its four predecessors. Autobots are
looking for an ancient artefact that can turn the tide of the war, Deceptacons
want to stop them, most humans are sceptical of the Transformers but one unlikely
outcast human helps them, there’s a fuck-ton of product placement, racial stereotypes,
sexist undertones veteran actors being humiliated, and a rare mix of being
ridiculously convoluted as well as idiotically simplistic.
The characters are about as flat and unengaging as they
come. Bay employs the cheapest tactics of trying to establish the characters
and some of them almost don’t fail. But then later in the movie each character
will do something unbelievably moronic or irrational. None have any discernible
motivation, distinction or depth of any kind and before you say “no one goes to
a Transformers movie to see the humans”, the description I just gave applies to
the machines as well as the people. In regards to the Transformers specifically
though, they have such little presence in the movie that even those simply
wishing to see a movie about giant fighting robots will be disappointed. There
are so many long stretches of the movie that just feature one expositional
monologue after another that it becomes boring. Every now and then the movie
attempts to deliver a moment that it has convinced itself is humorous, but
these moments fall flat every single time.
It goes without saying of course that the story is completely
nonsensical both due to the script and Bay’s unique visual language of never
being able to convey a single discernible plot point to the audience. He places
such an extreme emphasis on every single shot that it becomes impossible for the
viewer to latch onto what is and isn’t important to the overall story, what
will and won’t be recalled later as well as simply what is going on at that
exact moment. The story amounts to a rough order of half-hearted plot points that
are either ignored completely or picked up again randomly and much later into
the movie, glued to a series of rapidly escalating action sequences that I don’t
care about.
But for all its similarities to the previous instalments of
the franchise, ‘The Last Knight’ manages to find new and distinct ways to be
terrible, ways that I could never have even of anticipated and ways that I’m
still struggling to fathom even now. The movie seems to have been shot in three
different aspect ratios. Filmmakers like Chris Nolan and Wes Anderson have done
that to evoke a specific mood from scene to scene or inject a unique cinematic
quality to it, which is not what Bay is doing here. Anderson and Nolan make an
effort to disguise those ratio changes through editing or scene transitions but
Bay clearly doesn’t have time for that nonsense as he just slaps it haphazardly
into the movie to a point where a shot/reverse shot within the same scene can
have a completely different screen format to the image that proceeded it. Even
if you are watching the film in a format that reduces this issue, the framing
and composition of each opposing shot is so wildly off due to the erratic ratio
changes that that it becomes impossible to ignore. I’m almost tempted to list
it as a deliberate creative decision because I can’t comprehend the idea of
someone overlooking that….but then I remembered that this is Michael Bay we are
talking about.
I will say that it’s not quite as terrible as ‘Age of
Extinction’ for having a shorter runtime which eases it’s pacing and makes it
feel like less of a torturous endeavour (it’s still an hour and a half too long
though). It’s also better than ‘Revenge of the Fallen’ because unlike that film
it isn’t shot entirely in close-up, though it is still just as mind numbingly
bombastic. But these improvements are not deliberate, it just so happens that
this disaster of filmmaking is slightly more bearable than those other
disasters of filmmaking. Nothing within these films is done with a deliberate
bearing on quality, it’s all just a marketing tool designed to rip cash from
your pockets with as little effort as humanly possible. It’s the epitome of cynical
and lazy filmmaking.
Loud noises, followed by more loud noises, concluding with
other loud noises, forever; the sequel.
Result: 2/10
No comments:
Post a Comment