Save your money for something good and enjoyable

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Saw this on Netflix late one night and decided to give it a whirl to see how bad it could be, and I wasn't disappointed. I can forgive movies made on shoestring budgets (Check out Clerks or El Mariachi) but the makers of this movie are not only untalented, they are creative looters: take a popular movie, rip it off, and give it a similar title. The reasons this movie are bad have been given in the other reviews: atrocious dialogue, bad acting, extreme lapses in logic and continuity, etc. Check these out: 1. The satellite man "transmorphs" then is only seen once again. And when you do, he drops from the sky in one of those "Matrixy" poses.2. When the Nissan SUV (with the logo covered with black tape) spits out the dead driver, don't park it next to the crime scene for the next shot-check the license plate number, it's right there.3. The title card describes an "Airforce" base. Sorry, folks, it's Air Force-2 words.4. As the two government people drive the "doctor" in the Suburban, they go through a checkpoint, apparently into the "Airforce" base, then drive past the same checkpoint numerous times during their conversation.5. Our hero fires not only his assault rifle, but his grenade launcher while sitting in the back seat of a pickup truck that has no roll-down back windows. And there is no brass ejected.6. Our hero is known by the government agents as an expert in UAV operation. How they know that is unexplained, but no matter, the subject is never brought up again.7. When the first robot attacks the Airforce base (which has no Air Force personnel), it is shown walking and shooting, and they use the same shot over and over and over and over again.There is a place for low budget movies, such as the ones mentioned above, but at least put some effort into making a coherent script and story. Don't make a shallow ripoff.

Wow where to start. Hmmm CGI, bad but not terrible. I guess it is like a very bad Sci Fi network show for quality. The way, or rather the reason they blow up is hilarious. Production value is pretty rough. They use the same old refinery from virtually all the Asylum movies. Actually they couldn't even scrape together their usual cast of ever returning actors. Seriously every movie has the same people playing small roles. It does give a certain continuity and ruins less careers I guess.They even manage to get some actors not working for scale like Bruce Boxleitner. However he can not save this dog.The camera crew does a decent job with what they have and the sound is OK. We are talking relative terms here. Ed Wood would call this a masterpiece, but it isn't. One production issue I had a problem with and at this point it would be nitpicking given the nature of these films. Keep the main character's wound in the same spot OK. It was almost never in the same spot. For that matter do people run around covered in their own gore for days on end? Which brings us to some other funny issues. The "scientist" gets a pipe put into her leg that they pull out while in the magical van that transmorphs from a 1994 Chrysler mini that the door wont shut on to a 2000 that is missing its wheel covers. So yes there was a transmorphing in the film. All while travelling very slowly(look out the window, trees are barely moving in the background...priceless) At least it was filmed in a vehicle. This character then limps for about half a scene before becoming pretty much fine. About on par with the girl in Cloverfield when pulled off the rebar.There are so many weird things happening with script and plot you have to see it to believe it. But the most epic part is when the Mayor whos' daughter has an operation(as you are told over and over) ask the scientist about the difference between ETs and Aliens. All I can say is she must have been pretty drunk during the shoot and they wanted to wrap. She is wobbling around slurring and is kinda touchy feely. "Thanks for the respect" LOL. The lines that do come out are incoherent at best and require the Mayor to explain what she meant while one of the other characters is caught rolling her eyes. In fact Dr Drool has a plate magically appear in front where she tied her sweater around her hips after the slurring explanation of what friendly/enemy like bad and good creatures from space are. At this point the Mayor mentions how good he is at cooking. She then remembers her cue but not the location of said magical plate. After wobbling a bit and looking around behind her in both directions, she gets that excited look (like a kid getting a bowl of ice cream)when she find it tucked into the front of her pants. I mean it has lots of funny moments but this was really the best for the 5 people who watched it with me. We had to re-watch it 3 times because we were crying so hard from the stupidity of the scene. "I guess thats a take eh!" Replied one of my buddies. The whole scene probably could have hit the cutting room floor. But it wouldn't have been a feature length film if they had tried to fix all the errors in this dog so why bother.To be fair I would have been pretty drunk while filming this too. I hope they had fun filming it, because it is very funny in a "The Room" sort of way. Better than some other Asylum films and I did like it better than Paranormal Activity. I wish one of the MST3K groups would take a crack at the asylum movies. Pure gold as they are a self parody.I gave it 4 for the effort and laughs, but its pretty bad, my official rating is 1 just so more people will see this ...um movie? Come on bottom 100. It really deserves to be there. Some of those movies don't come close to this bad. Gigli is terrible but at least it was produced and had some actors in it.

Movie titles can not be copyrighted . This is why The Asylum , the film company that has a monopoly on " mockbusters " can get away with bringing out film titles that are almost identical to Hollywood blockbusters . What is amazing is that they use ideas and designs that are so obviously based on other movies . It's well known that Harlan Ellison sued Jemes Cameron claiming that THE TERMINATOR ripped off a couple of episodes that Ellison scripted for THE OUTER LIMITS . Cameron and Hemdale Films settled out of court though if you've seen the episodes in question you might be shocked that anyone considered Cameron is supposed to have stolen anyone's idea . Indeed if the film resembles anything it's the 1972 DOCTOR WHO story Day Of The Daleks and Louis Marks didn't feel the need to go running to a lawyer .. Knowing this you will find yourself asking why Cameron amongst others didn't feel the need to contact lawyers to make an undeserved fast buck ? Perhaps they did but thought better of it since they felt that'd be similar to beating up a man in a wheelchair ? It's not so much the TRANSMORPHERS that gives away the plot but :TRANSMORPHERS 2 : FALL OF MAN Has anyone noticed it seems rather similar to :TERMINATOR 3 : RISE OF THE MACHINES And this is what the film essentially is - a blatant reworking of TERMINATOR 3 with TRANSFORMERS , MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE and HALOWEEN 3 SEASON OF THE WITCH thrown in to the predictable , unoriginal mix . We have a scene where a satellite dish turns in to a terminator and you are absolutely left in no doubt what so ever that it's a terminator . Same as later on a car turns in to a transformer and you can't help shouting " Transmorphers other films in disguise Despite the amount of " intellectual property borrowing " going on it's the production values and storytelling that bring the film down . Everything has to be force fed to the audience as in Character A : Wow , we're dealing with a technical complicated thingy Character B : what's a technical complicated thingy ? Character C : It's a thing that's technical and complicated with the lines being spoken in the most uninterested dispassionate way possible . Boxleitner and Rubin are fairly well known and give the least worst performances in a cast who are attractive but laughably wooden . I looked up the ensemble cast genuinely expecting their resumes to have included what is euphemistically known as " adult films " but found very few of the cast have appeared in more than a handful of unknown movies . I doubt if any of the cast will go on to major roles I'll be honest here and state that TRANSMORPHERS 2 is a very mediocre film but no more or less than that , though admittedly the good concepts are culled from other superior movies . The SyFy channel in Britain is showing a week of mockbuster films and it's by no means the worst one I've seen . Sadly something tells me SyFy will be broadcasting films much worse

I could not believe one of the "Transformers" movies had ended up so quickly on TV, not to mention on the no-budget Sci-Fi Channel. Then it began to dawn on me, especially when Shia LaBoeuf failed to appear and Bruce Boxleitner did: I was actually watching a ripoff of the big-budget movie, and an Asylum flick to boot. Horrible! It's men versus killer robots, except it's mostly men (and a woman or two) standing around, talking about killer robots. And the robots that do turn up are just plain silly looking. I wanted to claw my eyes out. But I did the next best thing and turned the damned thing off. I hope you will do the same.,