Michael Bay's money was in place, and the picture exploded and worked hard, but it felt like he was playing with the investors, and he didn't take the film seriously at all.
In addition to the editing and plot arrangement of this movie, the plot is also very embarrassing.
The "International Humanitarian Organization" arrests the president of a small Middle Eastern country and fosters a president that he is satisfied with. Is it realistic to contact the nearest HK? I don't know if the screenwriter can do it for satire, and the plot is full of loopholes.
The president bombed his own refugees with chemical weapons to deter enemy countries?
WTF, what the hell logic. One minute after the mutiny, the president got angry and bombed the hospital and school directly. The way to fight the mutiny is to become a terrorist?
The motives of this clumsy character seem to reflect the vain reason that the United States treats the Middle East issue. (I don't want to make up the reason, it's over if you do it)
It is a free, the whole people directly enter anarchy, what is the new president doing? Be a mascot.
Or the famous American saying: Although their homes were bombed, they were freed.
Decades have passed, it is indeed very free, there is no industrialization, and the flattened houses are not built again.
Several houses in the family have been demolished, but there is no demolition fund, and no house has been built yet, only democracy and freedom are left.
View more about 6 Underground reviews
