Skip to main content

Bumblebee Departs from the Transformers Franchise to be a Good Movie


I’ve consciously avoided seeing most of the Transformers movies. I was never much a fan of the franchise, and Michael Bay, despite being a more interesting filmmaker than he’s given credit for (as Lindsay Ellis and Patrick Willems have expertly demonstrated), generally doesn’t make very good movies. But Bumblebee, a spin-off prequel to the series, piqued my interest for three reasons.
First, it’s directed by Travis Knight, president of of the stop-motion animation studio Laika and director of its strongest feature, Kubo and the Two Strings. Second, though it boasts a script by the talented Christina Hodson, it underwent significant (though uncredited) rewrites by Kelly Fremon Craig, the writer-director of The Edge of Seventeen, which alongside Kubo was one of the best movies of 2016. And third, that films’ star Hailee Steinfeld is the human lead of the story, and she’s one of the most talented actresses of her generation. All of this boded unusually well for the movie, and luckily I was right to be optimistic.
Set in the San Francisco area in 1987, the alien robot B-127 (Dylan O’Brien) has been sent to Earth by his leader Optimus Prime (Peter Cullen) after the Autobots suffered a major loss in their war with the Decepticons. Through a series of circumstances he loses his ability to speak and most of his memories. Disguised as a yellow Volkswagen Beetle, he’s discovered by a teenage girl Charlie (Steinfeld), unhappy and misunderstood since the loss of her father. Keeping him secret, Charlie names him Bumblebee and the two form a close bond at the same time as other Decipticons have discovered his whereabouts.
One of the movies’ biggest strengths is Hailee Steinfeld. Her characters’ backstory and journey are in no way original (in fact they mirror parts of Sam Witwicky’s from the first Transformers movie), but Steinfeld gives them exceptional weight nonetheless, ensuring the audience is invested in her and single-handedly lifting the film out of some of its tropes. There are seriously some emotional moments that work purely because of this performance. Charlie is quite likeable too, and her detached, awkward behaviour comes from a place of real hurt -certainly more compelling and relatable than any of Bays’ leads. Steinfeld and the filmmakers also understand the importance of giving her a strong relationship with Bumblebee. The movie is essentially E.T. with a robot and it captures a similar touching relationship between its two outcast characters. And their bond is the movies’ heart, making it that much more disappointing in the knowledge of this being a prequel that Bumblebee must go on to spend a lot more time with far lesser characters.
It’s a really small scale movie too, not trying to be epic or mount huge stakes. It’s much more in the vein of an 80s teen movie, which should be no surprise considering the people who made it. The film is at times too on-the-nose with its 80s references, particularly in the music. Charlie’s love of The Smiths is fine, but the movie didn’t need back to back montages to Bon Jovi and Duran Duran. However where music is used well is in Bumblebee’s method of communication, which as in the other movies is through select radio excerpts, but this movie details his learning to do that. Bumblebee has a great design and his transformations are very smooth and logical. This is where Knight’s experience with stop-motion is an asset as he makes sure the audience sees the detail in how Bumblebee becomes the Beetle and vice-versa. The visual effects and action scenes are also fairly clear and devoid of excess. It’s remarkable what these creatures and this world can look like when not shot like a commercial.
The story isn’t very clever or nuanced; there’s an element of Charlie’s backstory that is certain to come back in the climax, and it deals in some typical 80s teen stereotypes, including obnoxious bullies and shenanigans. But in this set-up it’s being made by a very competent team who clearly care a lot about these characters and this universe -something that’s made clear enough in a short prologue on Cybertron which includes no doubt a number of easter eggs for fans.
The movie’s supported by John Cena in a charismatic performance as a government agent and John Ortiz as an idiot scientist. Charlie’s mum and step-dad are played by Pamela Adlon and Stephen Schneider, but the most prominent side character is Jorge Lendeborg Jr’s geeky Memo, a neighbourhood boy who has a crush on Charlie and is accidentally brought into her confidence about Bumblebee. He’s very much an obligatory character though, only there for Charlie to have someone else to talk to. His pointlessness even serves a joke in the climax. The Decepticon villains are voiced by Angela Basset and Justin Theroux, and have some refreshing personalities, living up to their species’ name as well in how they interact with humans.
Bumblebee, though not a great film, is by far the best movie of the Transformers franchise. Its restraint and earnest story are amplified by an excellent performance by Steinfeld and a real endearing relationship between her and Bumblebee. The filmmaking bears no resemblance to what came before, and is all overseen by people who like the source material enough to put genuine effort in that pays off. I hope Bumblebee is a success, so that it encourages more movies like it in this franchise. Because the Transformers series isn’t going to die, and films like Bumblebee are much more preferable to the alternative.

Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more