We're both complete strangers to the franchaise. I only saw the first movie because someone told me it had orson Welles in it and that was several years ago and unlikely to be repeated.
All throughout my childhood I played with robots that could turn into dragons, rocks, dinosaurs, cars, trucks, whatever. All that time I imagined what it would be like if they were real. I tried to envision massive robots destroying cities and turning each other into scrap.
Not only did I get to see that, but I got to see it with a horribly awkward teenager, directed by a man who understood that there was no way on this Earth that you could make a movie about giant, transforming robots and NOT have it be absolutely ridiculous.
It reminded me of a Bert I. Gordon film too. Lots of padding and a paucity of gigantic things wreaking havoc. Plus the science was right up there with the "because the human heart is not a collection of cells but in effect a single cell..." line from "The Amazing Colossal Man"
To avoid flames from those who don't know me the above means that I enjoyed it.
Comments 8
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Not only did I get to see that, but I got to see it with a horribly awkward teenager, directed by a man who understood that there was no way on this Earth that you could make a movie about giant, transforming robots and NOT have it be absolutely ridiculous.
It was so over the top that I thought it worked.
Unlike Spider-Man 3.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Or really harsh on balls.
Reply
It reminded me of a Bert I. Gordon film too. Lots of padding and a paucity of gigantic things wreaking havoc. Plus the science was right up there with the "because the human heart is not a collection of cells but in effect a single cell..." line from "The Amazing Colossal Man"
To avoid flames from those who don't know me the above means that I enjoyed it.
Reply
Leave a comment