
Most critics respond negatively to Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, with even the more forgiving reviews stopping short of a firm recommendation. Praise clusters around the visual effects: the machines convince, and several reviews find invention and occasional fun in Michael Bay’s action sequences. There is scattered appreciation for the comedy, but little support for the story or characterisation, which most critics find too thin to sustain the prolonged fighting.
The main disagreement is over how much the spectacle compensates for those weaknesses: Time Out finds enough inventive action to make surrender possible, while Den of Geek finds the action flat despite the impressive effects. The spread runs from qualified enjoyment to outright hostility, with excessive length, confused plotting and numbing noise recurring across the reviews. Several critics also object to racial caricatures, sexism or militaristic posturing, treating these as substantial failings rather than incidental lapses of taste.
Bay delivers a sprawling, frenetic, blasting, bloated tentpole surgically assembled for core demographics with a certain sense of fun, though the 149-minute runtime drags and the plot is both perfunctory and convoluted.
Read the full review →T
Time Out
16 June 2009 · ★★★ · Tom Huddleston
60
It boils the blockbuster down to PG violence, safe sex and special effects with largely absent narrative logic, yet offers inventive action sequences and becomes irresistibly lunatic in its climactic desert battle, leaving viewers to surrender or suffer.
Read the full review →V
Variety
15 June 2009 · festival review · Jordan Mintzer
60*
The film is longer and louder than the original, with impressively lifelike machines and superior effects that serve as the centerpieces, though the narrative makes little effort to set up the fights.
Read the full review →The sequel is a bigger, more excessive version of the first film with wild bad-taste jokes and impressive effects sequences, but it accentuates the original's flaws with baffling plotting, forgettable robots and a numbing experience overall. The spectacle saves it just about, though more brains would have helped.
Read the full review →L
Little White Lies
17 June 2009 · 2/2/2 · Matt Bochenski
40
The critic views the film as a frenetic, over-the-top spectacle pushing Michael Bay’s style to its extreme, with some arresting action scenes and sensational effects, but faults its lack of logic, poor storytelling, and conservative politics.
Read the full review →A
The AV Club
23 June 2009 · Tasha Robinson
40*
The review portrays the film as the Platonic ideal of a bigger, louder sequel that recycles the first film's beats but ultimately delivers a massive, eye-popping combat sequence in the final half-hour. Excessive chase scenes, vulgar comedy, slapstick, and ethnic caricatures are criticized, though the action payoff is acknowledged as what audiences likely wanted.
Read the full review →H
The Hollywood Reporter
15 June 2009 · Ray Bennett
30*
The critic describes the sequel as a nonstop whirl of battling machinery that will please devoted fans but finds it loud, tedious, and far too long for others. The massive battles and box-office potential are noted positively, while the simplistic plot, lack of characters or comedy, and overwhelming noise are singled out for complaint.
Read the full review →N
The New York Times
24 June 2009 · Manohla Dargis
20*
The critic finds the film cretinous and tedious, with inane visual ideas and noxious stereotypes, though it wears viewers down with its outlandish spectacles and dumb fun.
Read the full review →S
Slant Magazine
23 June 2009 · Nick Schager
10*
The critic calls the film banal, belligerent, and brain-dead, succeeding only at falling far short of bare-minimum cinematic standards through incoherent, fetishistic action and racial stereotyping. The plot's lack of inspiration, unintelligible mayhem, and extended runtime are highlighted as major flaws.
Read the full review →G
The Guardian
19 June 2009 · Peter Bradshaw
10*
The critic finds the film loud and boring, comparing it to watching paint dry while being hit over the head with a frying pan. He singles out the excessive length, uninteresting and directionless plot, and Megan Fox's wooden performance for particular complaint.
Read the full review →I
The Independent
21 June 2009
10*
The critic calls the film a pretentious, nonsensical, sexist, jingoistic and militaristic muddle that exemplifies everything repulsive about Hollywood blockbusters. The long runtime is filled with incoherent plotting, identical CGI robots, leering camerawork and offensive stereotypes rather than characterisation or thrills.
Read the full review →D
Digital Spy
16 June 2009 · Simon Reynolds
40*
The critic notes it fulfills expectations as a stupid, silly blockbuster with impressive spectacle but criticizes the lack of emotional core, character, and story, making it soul-destroying and tedious at times. Praises some comedic moments like John Turturro's performance.
Read the full review →P
The Playlist
23 June 2009 · Rodrigo Perez
40*
The film is not a complete disaster but is too long, overwrought, and cartoonish, with racist elements and self-important grandeur that doesn't land. It resembles Bay's Pearl Harbor in its histrionics and is far from fantastic even by his standards.
Read the full review →C
Collider
23 June 2009 · C minus · Matt Goldberg
30*
The critic is disappointed by the sequel to the first film, criticizing its weak humor including racist caricatures, meaningless spectacle, and lack of story or characters that make the action unengaging.
Read the full review →D
Den of Geek
15 June 2009 · 2 out of 5 · Luke Savage
30*
The critic finds it a terribly disappointing sequel by the numbers with a weak, confusing story and flat action scenes despite impressive effects. They single out the comedy moments and some technical wizardry for praise.
Read the full review →/
/Film
24 June 2009 · 3/10 · Russ Fischer
30
The film is dull, ponderous, and overlong, with incoherent storytelling, tedious military elements, and a sense of being made by a teenager for teenagers. A few IMAX sequences provide the only real entertainment value amid the chaos.
Read the full review →Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate