DeSanto and Murphy off of Transformers 2?

[ShadowBoxing]

I can point to the passage in Hamlet that's about sanity and disillusionment (there's only one) that forms the whole tone of the play. OR is Hamlet just about "Revenge" to you. It's not, you know.

Halmet is a single play with a cohesive plot which builds upon and interweaves itself through it's many elements. Transformers, and even you just decried this as being a problem you had, doesn not have a cohesive plot. It's just inconsistent because it created a vague enough premise that could be written and churned out on a week by week basis. I.e. "Decepticons want power (energon), and Autobots must stop them". This comparing Transformers to great works of literature is beyond absurd

And as I've said repeatedly it wasn't just about "OIL" (although they did seem to have a predilection for it seeing as how they went after it MULTIPLE times unlike those Burmese crystals). It was about the resources and minerals found on Earth.

NO IT WAS ABOUT ENERGON which OCCASIONALLY was made from these things. OCCASIONALLY. Got it.

Energon was a ficticious substance. It wasn't real. And it didn't matter what they made it from or how they got it because it came from a variety of sources. It was simply a plot device over which they fought...many of the ingredients not exclusive to this planet, MOST of them ficticious themselves.

 

[bowspearer]

Ok i see....as for the second part,well i am unlikely to do that search but ive never heard any word that a Starscream design that was deemed fakes was actually real,in fact i don't think i have seen the design you are talking about

It initially surfaced on the macrossworld forums as a lineart concept sketch that someone coloured black and red. Since Don Murphy looks like he's re-arranged all the threads on his board and it's now impossible to find, I dug up the image which I had in an email:

 

[Cth]

No, in the script:

Spoiler

-Mikaela (or Maggie? I forget) takes out Devatator/Brawl.... using Bumblebee's arm. SHE did it.
As for the rest you're accurate.
-But Bonecrusher does die at the hands of the Army. It happens real quick AFTER his fight with Optimus. He's surrounded by Jazz, Ratchet, etc. And Lennox (a human) lodges a bomb into him.
-Also you forgot Frenzy. He gets killed twice-- by the two chics. Partly because of his own stupidity.

Since Barricade's fate is cloudy: the number of Decepticons killed by Autobots stood at ZERO in the script. Hopefully the movie changed all that. Although I suspect not much. Plus, BB has no business taking anybody out IMO! LOL.

Ahh, you're right.. she does help him aim. Still, the original point remains, the military doesn't take everyone out. Oddly enough, it gives her character something to do, other than be eye candy/sex object. I still give the credit to Bumblebee, since it wouldn't be possible without him.

Spoilers hidden:

Spoiler

As far as Bonecrusher, that's what I'm saying, in the script, he was taken out by military, which was changed for the film.

Frenzy dies of his own accord, not military, nor through direct action by the blonde hacker.

Besides, some fans would go nuts if Autobots killed ("Optimus doesn't kill, that's not heroic!") Either way, they can't win. I'm glad they did go that route personally.

Everyone was cheering for BB in our theater since he literally went through the ringer.. his journey came full circle, and he was able to be a hero through and through, showing courage no matter what which I felt was pretty in character.

Even when he was outmatched, BB would still be right there on the front line trying to help out and stop Decepticons in the comic and cartoon.

I hope you do post a review CFlash, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on it.

I think everyone can agree there's missed opportunities, but I feel it's a pretty decent entry in its own right to the TF mythos.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Well it's possible that they were given those down the track. I was referring to initially. I know the Marvel comics weren't there because I tried confirming what I'd heard with Roberto Orci, by asking him if the Marvel Comics were given to them as source materials. I got a vague and spin doctored answer- the kind you hear politicians giving when they want to answer a question in a way where they don't really address it.

They lifted the plot from Infiltration and Armada. Not that this surprises me. As Cth points out, movies prefer going with a more up to date version of the source material. Mostly because in effort to work with the owners of the property they want an easy transition for fans coming off of the movie into the franchise.

 

[CFlash]

And as I've said repeatedly it wasn't just about "OIL" (although they did seem to have a predilection for it seeing as how they went after it MULTIPLE times unlike those Burmese crystals). It was about the resources and minerals found on Earth.

NO IT WAS ABOUT ENERGON which OCCASIONALLY was made from these things. OCCASIONALLY. Got it.

Energon was a ficticious substance. It wasn't real. And it didn't matter what they made it from or how they got it because it came from a variety of sources. It was simply a plot device over which they fought...many of the ingredients not exclusive to this planet, MOST of them ficticious themselves.

Wouldn't it have been simpler if the writers simply had them go after a magical castle? Or better yet... a box!?

 

[skorponok]

 

[bowspearer]

Halmet is a single play with a cohesive plot which builds upon and interweaves itself through it's many elements. Transformers, and even you just decried this as being a problem you had, doesn not have a cohesive plot. It's just inconsistent because it created a vague enough premise that could be written and churned out on a week by week basis. I.e. "Decepticons want power (energon), and Autobots must stop them". This comparing Transformers to great works of literature is beyond absurd
NO IT WAS ABOUT ENERGON which OCCASIONALLY was made from these things. OCCASIONALLY. Got it.

Energon was a ficticious substance. It wasn't real. And it didn't matter what they made it from or how they got it because it came from a variety of sources. It was simply a plot device over which they fought...many of the ingredients not exclusive to this planet, MOST of them ficticious themselves.

For someone who's held up on here as some kind of oracle of TF lore, you sure do seem to have little to no exposure to the Marvel comics.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Wouldn't it have been simpler if the writers simply had them go after a magical castle? Or better yet... a box!?

They did in three episodes. But the box, the Allspark makes more sense because it has a purpose to their race. It gives them life. In effect controlling their evolution and future as a race. That's fairly significant whereas "magical glowing fuel source = Megatron's domination" isn't so concrete.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

For someone who's held up on here as some kind of oracle of TF lore, you sure do seem to have little to no exposure to the Marvel comics.

I have all 80, plus all the miniseries. And we aren't talking about the comics....as they have no connection to the cartoon outside of sharing a relatively similar first "episode" and characters. (and of course "The Big Broadcast of 2006" being adapted)

If you doubt me go here
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=262790

 

[Figs]

Wouldn't it have been simpler if the writers simply had them go after a magical castle? Or better yet... a box!?

Honestly, Energon was the magic castle/magic box. They basically changed up what they made it out of, Oil, electrical energy and so on.

 

[bowspearer]

They lifted the plot from Infiltration and Armada. Not that this surprises me. As Cth points out, movies prefer going with a more up to date version of the source material. Mostly because in effort to work with the owners of the property they want an easy transition for fans coming off of the movie into the franchise.

Which is arguably a huge mistake in this case. I'm not saying that storywise it wasn't the better way to go, but the characterisation levels in this movie were piss poor from the first draft and not much has changed since it went to shooting. Sure if you gently scrape the surface it all seems ok, but scratch any deeper and you find yourself majorly reaching to find any real substance in terms of characterisations.

I'm not advocating for huge monologues- just the same depth of characterisation that the comics gave people. I have a huge bug bear with Bumblebee on that score- it's like the writers and Bay think that Hot Rod/Shot and Bumblebee are the same type of character- they're not, yet essentially what you have is Bumblebee with the personality and body of Hot Shot.

Then there's Ironhide- they've gone for the tough aspect without factoring in the whole frailness duality that made the character so appealing to begin with. Don't even get me started on the Decepticons here. Or the way they managed to throw the baby out with the bathwater in terms of character designs and come up with a style that better suits a "Machine Men" (aka Challenge of the Gobots) movie.

The fact is that this movie lowers the bar dramatically in terms of the quality of G1 based media to the point where Carnage in C minor is almost average. Now that's saying something.

 

[Cth]

They lifted the plot from Infiltration and Armada. Not that this surprises me. As Cth points out, movies prefer going with a more up to date version of the source material. Mostly because in effort to work with the owners of the property they want an easy transition for fans coming off of the movie into the franchise.

It also helps with the rights.

Imagine if they based it loosely on a Marvel comic plot.. Marvel would have a potential stake in the movie and could sue and/or tie up production on sequels.

It also gives them a better idea of the fanbase than older properties.

Meaning, the TF comic at Marvel may have sold 100k copies back in the heyday of the speculator craze, but these days, IDW sells about 11-15k.

That's a better size of the "fanatic" fanbase, that seek out the original property in all forms (not just the toys, but the tie-ins like the comics, etc that a summer film like this hinges on)

I took the guy's evasion as not knowing who currently owns the property and not wanting to step on any of their partner's toes or risk potential lawsuits that could tie up sequels. Being responsible for something like that would be devastating for someone in Hollywood I'd imagine.

 

[bowspearer]

I have all 80, plus all the miniseries. And we aren't talking about the comics....as they have no connection to the cartoon outside of sharing a relatively similar first "episode" and characters. (and of course "The Big Broadcast of 2006" being adapted)

If you doubt me go here
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=262790

I notice you say you have all 80 as opposed to all 332 (meaning there's a huge slice of stuff you've missed). Interesting. Incidentally, I never said they were directly connected. However the fact is that when G1 was discussed in terms of its merits, all I heard was you trash talking the cartoon. I mean let's face it, this movie is no Flight of the Bumblebee, you'll find no Scrounge here, this is no Perchance to Dream, and I think that Bay would have a brain hemorage before we saw a characterisation in a Decepticon as deep or conflicted as Scorponok's. These are just some examples of where this movie does not compare favorably to what came before this. No matter how much people try and spin it; the problems with this movie go way beyond "leather vs spandex".

 

[bowspearer]

I took the guy's evasion as not knowing who currently owns the property and not wanting to step on any of their partner's toes or risk potential lawsuits that could tie up sequels. Being responsible for something like that would be devastating for someone in Hollywood I'd imagine.

Except that I asked him flat out if he was given the Marvel Comic as a source material by Hasbro (incidentally Andy Wildman's and Simon Furman's company Titan Books had the rights to them last I checked- although IDW seems to be slowly buying up the old Marvel stuff). That's hardly something that you can cause grief by answering.

 

[CFlash]

Honestly, Energon was the magic castle/magic box. They basically changed up what they made it out of, Oil, electrical energy and so on.

When it's sentient machines doing it in a real-world time when you have an energy crisis (late 70's, early 80's) and in a time where nations are essentially out-and-out fighting for Oil (today) it ceases to be a "magic castle" Macguffin and instantly becomes relevant and topical--

...and, yes (gasp!), thought-provoking. Are we the Decepticons? What are we fighting over? Why should I buy gas-guzzling hummer? Why do people hate us? Just what are we doing wrong? Bla bla bla. The cartoon did it... for lots of folks (maybe not ShadowBoxing or you), the movie should too (and BTW, I'm still open to the notion that it indeed does).

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Which is arguably a huge mistake in this case. I'm not saying that storywise it wasn't the better way to go, but the characterisation levels in this movie were piss poor from the first draft and not much has changed since it went to shooting. Sure if you gently scrape the surface it all seems ok, but scratch any deeper and you find yourself majorly reaching to find any real substance in terms of characterisations.

I'm not advocating for huge monologues- just the same depth of characterisation that the comics gave people. I have a huge bug bear with Bumblebee on that score- it's like the writers and Bay think that Hot Rod/Shot and Bumblebee are the same type of character- they're not, yet essentially what you have is Bumblebee with the personality and body of Hot Shot.

The character was originally called Hot Shot. Buts it's not the first time in Transformers we've seen a character's name re-assigned.

Then there's Ironhide- they've gone for the tough aspect without factoring in the whole frailness duality that made the character so appealing to begin with.

I mean for someone who brought up the Marvel Comics, Ironhide was a total no show in that series. He barely was used at all contrary to his character in the UK and cartoon series.

Don't even get me started on the Decepticons here. Or the way they managed to throw the baby out with the bathwater in terms of character designs and come up with a style that better suits a "Machine Men" (aka Challenge of the Gobots) movie.

That was Hasbro's deal though. Hasbro didn't want these characters looking like previous incarnations because they wanted the movie to be it's own thing so they could market it. If you aren't used to that in Transformers then you haven't been with the franchise very long.

The fact is that this movie lowers the bar dramatically in terms of the quality of G1 based media to the point where Carnage in C minor is almost average. Now that's saying something.

G1 media wasn't "quality", come off that high horse. It was a logically inconsistent show, with no cohesive plot, and little character development. And the Marvel comic, while better, was far to obtuse to ever be used in a film world (I mean Megatron was rivals with Ratchet, and Prowl was more front and center than Prime half the time). This movie, as I've seen so far, far exceeds anything within the wildest dreams of G1. It's realistic in it's feel and image, it has high octane action (which usually was absent in the show) and it has a plot with characters who actually might really be involved in such a conflict while trying to preserve some of what made the original popular.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Except that I asked him flat out if he was given the Marvel Comic as a source material by Hasbro (incidentally Andy Wildman's and Simon Furman's company Titan Books had the rights to them last I checked- although IDW seems to be slowly buying up the old Marvel stuff). That's hardly something that you can cause grief by answering.

Cth is right though. Marvel could still sue and claim intellectual property rights over part of the movie. Especially in the case of the writers involved. Reprinting an issue isn't aa big a deal than utilizing it's story in your own personal project.

 

[bowspearer]

The character was originally called Hot Shot. Buts it's not the first time in Transformers we've seen a character's name re-assigned.

Except that one of the questions that fans got asked on dm.net was whether fans wanted Hot Shot or Bumblebee in the movie- right around the time everyone was being told that this movie would be based on G1.

I mean for someone who brought up the Marvel Comics, Ironhide was a total no show in that series. He barely was used at all contrary to his character in the UK and cartoon series.

Yes but he was one example of a character that was quite well done in the Cartoon with that character duality.

That was Hasbro's deal though. Hasbro didn't want these characters looking like previous incarnations because they wanted the movie to be it's own thing so they could market it. If you aren't used to that in Transformers then you haven't been with the franchise very long.

Actually I've never stopped being with the franchise- what's more, you and I both know that this goes way beyond the normal style changes that take place with lines. In fact as I understand it, Hasbro's only concern was that the designs could be engineered into toys. Bay on the other hand wanted millions of moving parts that were noticeable in robot mode as well.

G1 media wasn't "quality", come off that high horse. It was a logically inconsistent show, with no cohesive plot, and little character development.

I'd disagree in terms of characterisation, considering its target audience at the time. The episode featuring Omega Supreme and the Constructicons instantly comes to mind.

And the Marvel comic, while better, was far to obtuse to ever be used in a film world (I mean Megatron was rivals with Ratchet, and Prowl was more front and center than Prime half the time). This movie, as I've seen so far, far exceeds anything within the wildest dreams of G1. It's realistic in it's feel and image, it has high octane action (which usually was absent in the show) and it has a plot with characters who actually might really be involved in such a conflict while trying to preserve some of what made the original popular.

Except that the characters are a mere shell of what they would be. If you were more familiar with the likes of Perchance to Dream and Crisis of Command then you'd have to agree with me.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

When it's sentient machines doing it in a real-world time when you have an energy crisis (late 70's, early 80's) and in a time where nations are essentially out-and-out fighting for Oil (today) it ceases to be a "magic castle" Macguffin and instantly becomes relevant and topical--

Again this would only be the case if Energon were somehow linked to oil. But it wasn't. It was some sort of substance they needed the Transformers to fight over. Even in those first three issues it jumps around in both form and purpose.

...and, yes (gasp!), thought-provoking. Are we the Decepticons?

No, the Decepticons were Decepticons. The show pretty much explicitly stated that.

What are we fighting over?

Not energon, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Why should I buy gas-guzzling hummer?

All cars were gas guzzling back then. You know who weren't. The Autobots. Never once had to refuel.

Why do people hate us?

They loved us back in the 80s.

Just what are we doing wrong? Bla bla bla.

Not buying these really cool action figures. Go.buy.now.t:

The cartoon did it...

No, it didn't. You are doing it by massively overblowing a 22 minute toy commercial. The show did having an agenda, it was selling toys. Not pushing liberal politics. If it wanted to do that the show would've focused on political issues. And vague references to war and blah blah power doesn't count. It wasn't even a realistic war they were engaged in.

for lots of folks (maybe not ShadowBoxing or you), the movie should too (and BTW, I'm still open to the notion that it indeed does).

Good then see it tonight and tell us. I'm confident with your BSing abilities you can turn it into Halmet for us tomorrow.

 

[bowspearer]

Cth is right though. Marvel could still sue and claim intellectual property rights over part of the movie. Especially in the case of the writers involved. Reprinting an issue isn't aa big a deal than utilizing it's story in your own personal project.

Except that the writers involved own all those intellectual property rights these days and no longer have any affiliation with Marvel (every single reprint is done by Titan Books which is owned by Simon Furman), and my understanding of how the Marvel comic worked was that they lost all those rights when they let their license lapse, and let those writers go. It's nowhere near the instant lawsuit you think it is and no lawyer workign for Marvel would be game to even try and claim damages because they'd only be on the receiving end of a countersuit from the writers themselves demanding the lions share (if not all) of the damages awarded to Marvel.

 

[CFlash]

Good then see it tonight and tell us. I'm confident with your BSing abilities you can turn it into Halmet for us tomorrow.

Ah. Now you're just being a prick aren't you?

 

[Figs]

When it's sentient machines doing it in a real-world time when you have an energy crisis (late 70's, early 80's) and in a time where nations are essentially out-and-out fighting for Oil (today) it ceases to be a "magic castle" Macguffin and instantly becomes relevant and topical--

...and, yes (gasp!), thought-provoking. Are we the Decepticons? What are we fighting over? Why should I buy gas-guzzling hummer? Why do people hate us? Just what are we doing wrong? Bla bla bla. The cartoon did it... for lots of folks (maybe not ShadowBoxing or you), the movie should too (and BTW, I'm still open to the notion that it indeed does).

You and Blind_Fury crack me up, you try to make others feel ignorant at times because some people didn't see the "message" behind the show even though most people like me started watching it when we were around 4-5yrs old. As I already said to B_F in another thread, not even you two would have seen the underlining message at that age.

With the adolesent yrs aside, when you get to your younger teen years and then see those messages and points that you call thought-provoking, don't know about anyone else but to me there right out in the open and thus not exactly what I would call thought-provoking.

Thought provoking to me is something that you actually need to study a little to find, something a little deeper. The cartoon had the message out in the open about war and struggle for power and oil in the current world. That is not thought-provoking, it just is(if that makes sense). It just is meaning people would see it in the show and be like "Lol, how cute, there doing a take on whats going on in the world today." There is nothing hardcore or Shakespearean about it. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you and B_F that those messages are there. There just not as hardcore as you guys make them out to be in terms of being deep.

 

[bowspearer]

You and Blind_Fury crack me up, you try to make others feel ignorant at times because some people didn't see the "message" behind the show even though most people like me started watching it when we were around 4-5yrs old. As I already said to B_F in another thread, not even you two would have seen the underlining message at that age.

With the adolesent yrs aside, when you get to your younger teen years and then see those messages and points that you call thought-provoking, don't know about anyone else but to me there right out in the open and thus not exactly what I would call thought-provoking.

Thought provoking to me is something that you actually need to study a little to find, something a little deeper. The cartoon had the message out in the open about war and struggle for power and oil in the current world. That is not thought-provoking, it just is(if that makes sense). It just is meaning people would see it in the show and be like "Lol, how cute, there doing a take on whats going on in the world today." There is nothing hardcore or Shakespearean about it. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you and B_F that those messages are there. There just not as hardcore as you guys make them out to be in terms of being deep.

With the cartoon you have a point- but the same cannot be said for the comics.

 

[Cth]

As we've seen with the Miracleman property (and before that the Spiderman/Carolco deal) it doesn't matter when you're talking potentially huge profits.

Look at Marv Wolfman vs. Marvel.. that's what'd happen and they'd know it.. at the very least, they'd be bankrupted financially going against someone like Marvel who stands to make big from the film, and has deeper pockets than they do.

 

[bowspearer]

Good then see it tonight and tell us. I'm confident with your BSing abilities you can turn it into Halmet for us tomorrow.

Ironic considering that in terms of characterisation, Scorponok's indecision in issue 75 is pretty damn close to (if not on a par with) Shakespeare.