DeSanto and Murphy off of Transformers 2?

[Figs]

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

I never got into the comics, so you may be right if the comics expanded on it more. As far as I knew the movie is based solely off of the show though, correct me if im wrong.

 

[bowspearer]

I never got into the comics, so you may be right if the comics expanded on it more. As far as I knew the movie is based solely off of the show though, correct me if im wrong.

Actually Michael Bay based this movie on the standard alien invasion action movie formula with a hint of "boy and his car" which Spielberg had his heart so set on.

 

[Figs]

Actually Michael Bay based this movie on the standard alien invasion action movie formula with a hint of "boy and his car" which Spielberg had his heart so set on.

Did he say that in an interview? As far as I stand thats your opinion as well as alot of Negatrons. I know that Spielberg wanted the boy and his car thing but never heard of anyone including Bay that he wanted to make a cliche alien invasion flick.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

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.

Right DeSanto and Murphy said that...even though Hasbro specifically told them not to. Shame.

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

Not really. He had a scene where he refused to get on a stretcher. But overall the character didn't develop any. Frankly if you ask me they regressed Ironhide quiet a bit over the show until they had him acting as goofy sidekick chasing B.O.T around. He wasn't that complex a character, his use was just inconsistent enough to warrant you thinking he was complex. Most characters were like that in Transformers. They'd use them erratically and under different writers for different purposes. One scene does not a character make. It's not like Robotech where Rick Hunter starts out a young upstart and ends up a competent, brooding fighter pilot who is tired of war but cannot get flying out of his blood. Ironhide was often portrayed as simply the cliche' tough old war horse.

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.

Beast Machines featured morphing techno-organics. Masterforce featured transectors...or power ranger style piloted robots. Beast Wars features microbot sized Maximals and Predacons taking techno organic forms. These things were pretty far beyond the normal style changes. Hell, look at the purposed Transtech. All of those things were all over the place. So, no I don't see this as violating any Transformer asethetic. In fact most strongly resemble vehicons.

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.

Then your understanding is only partial. Hasbro wanted the designs to be significantly different from all their current lines in production...including G1 rereleases.

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.

The Secret of Omega Supreme is certainly considered among the "better" episodes. As is most of season 3, but that stuff still is far from modern day characterization in comics and even children's television. As I say, the show was very inconsistently written with almost no far reaching plot arcs. And it was written by committee, meaning one writer could and often did undo groundwork laid by another. I mean Money is Everything is a great stand alone episode, but when viewed in relation to the rest of the series it falls apart.

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.

Transformers (Marvel) had an interesting handle on it's characters to be certain. But it is not good fodder for a film, unless you want Optimus acting as a secondary character to Prowl, and stories like "Are All Dead" to be forefront. Also keep in mind the comics used Buster, not Sam or Spike, and as I said were a lot more obtuse, especially to non fans of the Transformers franchise. Marvel was great for me because it ultilized all those fringe characters I like so much. But unless you want Megatron to only be present for 19 issues (episodes) it's not good for a show or movie. Those major re-used characters need to be front and center and not so much Bludgeon and Thunderwing.

 

[TheCardPlayer]

Don't bother ShadowBoxing. Bowspearer was a ******ed troll on DM.net

 

[CFlash]

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.

Deep doesn't mean hard-to-find. But, yeah, I can't count the number of times I've said it wasn't Capt Planet and hit you over the head.

BTW, I was 9 when TF came out. Big difference between 4yr and 9 (I have an 8yr daughter... trust me, I know). I was old enough to remember "The Day After" TV movie to this day, the NYC black out (polar opposite of the black out a few years ago), old enough to be reading books and form opinions about what Transformers said to me. By the time I was teen I had obviously moved on to other stuff. So, yeah, you're partly right. But it was an inspiration that led me to other things, thankfully.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

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.

Scorponok was an awesome character. Another one of those fringe guys Simon Furman used to love to make into something. But Shakespeare...naw, I wouldn't take it that far. It was good though. But that kind of a scene and that kind of space opera fanwank doesn't really translate to film...certainly not an introductory piece.

 

[Figs]

Deep doesn't mean hard-to-find. But, yeah, I can't count the number of times I've said it wasn't Capt Planet and hit you over the head.

BTW, I was 9 when TF came out. Big difference between 4yr and 9 (I have an 8yr daughter... trust me, I know). I was old enough to remember "The Day After" TV movie to this day, the NYC black out (polar opposite of the black out a few years ago), old enough to be reading books and form opinions about what Transformers said to me. By the time I was teen I had obviously moved on to other stuff. So, yeah, you're partly right. But it was an inspiration that led me to other things, thankfully.

I think you have said the Capt Planet thing 2-3 times and as far as using that excuse is pretty lame. I wasn't bringing the show down to that level of tree hugging cheese, just that it wasn't as deep as some think. It was still leaps ahead of Capt Planet.

 

[bowspearer]

Don't bother ShadowBoxing. Bowspearer was a ******ed troll on DM.net

Ironic post. Reported.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

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".

I have the UK on computer file, but thanks for asking. All these things you bring up are great stories, but much like Inferno (X-Factor/X-Men) and Target: 2006, they aren't exactly fodder for movies. The characterization was great at times. And I think Simon Furman is a great writer, but he doesn't do Transformers introductory films, he does stories that appeal to long time fans with a deep knowledge of the toyline and it's characters. I honestly don't see myself watching "Bludgeon and Grimlock the Movie". That characterization you describe also is for the really hardcore Sci-Fi/fantasy/Transformer junky. Not for the average moviegoer. I don't think people could stand the deep introspective robots and appretiate them on the level I do, certainly not when you are setting up a war that's suppose to last three films.

 

[Marvin]

i love how everyone's got this history..and backstory in forums...
"oh i met u way back when...u were so notorious..."

I want to be a legend













lol

 

[CFlash]

I think you have said the Capt Planet thing 2-3 times and as far as using that excuse is pretty lame. I wasn't bringing the show down to that level of tree hugging cheese, just that it wasn't as deep as some think. It was still leaps ahead of Capt Planet.

In context, for me, it was leaps ahead of Donkey Kong, Smurfs, Gobots, and oh god the laughable G.I. Joe. Other kids cartoons would copy its maturity... but almost always going the safe ethereal trippy route (Thundercats, Masters, etc).

It's tough to argue a point when you're forced to take an extreme side-- responding to "it aint deep like Shakespeare you dolt!" Well, duh! I never said it was! But understanding what Transformers was about is not BS'ing, that's just called having a mind. And as you said, the statements where there out in the open.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

In context, for me, it was leaps ahead of Donkey Kong, Smurfs, Gobots, and oh god the laughable G.I. Joe.

Transformers was G.I.Joe. It was made by the same people, and written by largely the same writers, voiced by the same cast and the Autobots/Decepticon war was simply lifted off of G.I.Joe and placed onto Transformers (as stated by Jim Shooter himself).

 

[Figs]

In context, for me, it was leaps ahead of Donkey Kong, Smurfs, Gobots, and oh god the laughable G.I. Joe. Other kids cartoons would copy its maturity... but almost always going the safe ethereal trippy route (Thundercats, Masters, etc).

It's tough to argue a point when you're forced to take an extreme side-- responding to "it aint deep like Shakespeare you dolt!" Well, duh! I never said it was! But understanding what Transformers was about is not BS'ing, that's just called having a mind. And as you said, the statements where there out in the open.

I know you never said it was like Shakespeare but how much you and B_F seem to complain about the fact that those messages might not be in the movie version make it seem like it was that important. When did I ever call you a dolt, not to mention I never said you were bull****ting.

 

[Marvin]

I also love how, with as many ppl are involved in production..

someone can come here and assume such and such's plot direction was this higher up..

and this other plot direction was the directors..

i wonder..
maybe it was the berg's himselfs idea to have shia wearing that strokes shirt...

..
this goes beyond weather fans should be happy with the two dudes or not based on wild assumptions of have fan aware they were or weren't
it's about if what bays says is true...

then should they be claiming the credit they are claiming...

(i also love how when the movie succeeds it's ILM, it's the berg, it's the material...it's megan fox..
when it fails...DAMN U MICHAEL BAY)

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I know you never said it was like Shakespeare but how much you and B_F seem to complain about the fact that those messages might not be in the movie version make it seem like it was that important. When did I ever call you a dolt, not to mention I never said you were bull****ting.

I said he was BSing. I didn't call him a dolt, but one of his posts was the stupidiest thing I ever read in regards to the show. I think Cflash does throw way to much onto this show. The movie largely keeps it intact. The show was about Autobots and Decepticons fighting in a power struggle. It didn't really matter in the show where that power came from, because as you and I both note, it came from a variety of inconsistent sources. Energon was magical. In the real world or a show that was more grounded, Energon would have had a formula or something. But it didn't.

 

[CFlash]

I know you never said it was like Shakespeare but how much you and B_F seem to complain about the fact that those messages might not be in the movie version make it seem like it was that important. When did I ever call you a dolt, not to mention I never said you were bull****ting.

Possibly because almost every episode revolved one way or another around that premise.

P.S. I didn't meant to say you called anyone a dolt. That was just an expression.

 

[CFlash]

I said he was BSing. I didn't call him a dolt, but one of his posts was the stupidiest thing I ever read in regards to the show. I think Cflash does throw way to much onto this show. The movie largely keeps it intact. The show was about Autobots and Decepticons fighting in a power struggle. It didn't really matter in the show where that power came from, because as you and I both note, it came from a variety of inconsistent sources. Energon was magical. In the real world or a show that was more grounded, Energon would have had a formula or something. But it didn't.

And if they weren't machines and if they never went for Earth resources but rather always went for a magical castle and if Optimus had never said "this planet is rich in..." from Day-1, I'd have to agree with you.

 

[Figs]

Possibly because almost every episode revolved one way or another around that premise.

P.S. I didn't meant to say you called anyone a dolt. That was just an expression.

Ah, sorry for misreading into the dolt part.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

And if they weren't machines and if they never went for Earth resources but rather always went for a magical castle and if Optimus had never said "this planet is rich in..." from Day-1, I'd have to agree with you.

As both me and FigmanJ said, Energon is a magical castle that was made from a variety of sources. He said "rich in resources", that's pretty vague. So vague in fact their resources largely were unreal or mystical objects, even once Megatron tried to extract energy from something he got off his own ship (wrap your head around that one). Transformers had 98 episodes....count them "1,2,3...98". And 3 of those episodes EVER, EVER used oil as a means to get Energon. Energon was "magic", and Macguffin, because it didn't matter where it came from or what made it, it simply was some round about way for Megatron to get power and for the Autobots to have a motivation to fight him. Resources is a vague term...anyone who fights you and takes things is after your resources. And in the cartoon resources would even amount to "human slaves" (Ultimate Doom). Not exactly "war for oil".

Remember Cobra Commander stole resources and tech too...are you going to start arguing for that show as well.

 

[bowspearer]

Right DeSanto and Murphy said that...even though Hasbro specifically told them not to. Shame.

Not really. I think Hasbro wanted mass marketability whereas Desanto and Murphy wanted a movie featuring the G1 characters. Sadly it seems they lost out.

Not really. He had a scene where he refused to get on a stretcher. But overall the character didn't develop any. Frankly if you ask me they regressed Ironhide quiet a bit over the show until they had him acting as goofy sidekick chasing B.O.T around. He wasn't that complex a character, his use was just inconsistent enough to warrant you thinking he was complex. Most characters were like that in Transformers. They'd use them erratically and under different writers for different purposes. One scene does not a character make. It's not like Robotech where Rick Hunter starts out a young upstart and ends up a competent, brooding fighter pilot who is tired of war but cannot get flying out of his blood. Ironhide was often portrayed as simply the cliche' tough old war horse.

Actually there were a few scenes like that with Ironhide- but there were many where he always managed to go down after getting shot up way more easily than the other Autobots- which incidentally is completely in line with how Nel Yomtov wrote him when he did his tech spec. As for the other characters, I'd argue that while there were origin inconsistencies certainly, the characters were by and large pretty consistent thanks to the fantastic voice acting they had.

What's more, the comics almost seemed to take the cartoons as a framework and deepen the characters entirely from there (with the expections of the likes of Grimlock and Shockwave).

Beast Machines featured morphing techno-organics. Masterforce featured transectors...or power ranger style piloted robots. Beast Wars features microbot sized Maximals and Predacons taking techno organic forms. These things were pretty far beyond the normal style changes. Hell, look at the purposed Transtech. All of those things were all over the place. So, no I don't see this as violating any Transformer asethetic. In fact most strongly resemble vehicons.

The design aesthetic (as opposed to figure concepts) rarely changed this radically though and where it did, there was still a simple elegance to the look of the characters. Even the Vehicons didn't go this far out there. To be brutally blunt, what the designs most strongly remind me of are the old Super Gobot designs.

Then your understanding is only partial. Hasbro wanted the designs to be significantly different from all their current lines in production...including G1 rereleases.

Yes but bear in mind what happened with BM in terms of Maximal toy sales- figures like deluxe Optimus Primal and Buzz Saw became shelf warmers and the line wound up being a major flop for Hasbro. Heck- Transtech got completely canned before it even made it to a toy line. You would think that even though Hasbro wanted a major point of difference, that they would have learned their lesson in terms of the design aesthetic (the only time when the design aesthetic radically changed previous to this was BM and Transtech).

The Secret of Omega Supreme is certainly considered among the "better" episodes. As is most of season 3, but that stuff still is far from modern day characterization in comics and even children's television. As I say, the show was very inconsistently written with almost no far reaching plot arcs. And it was written by committee, meaning one writer could and often did undo groundwork laid by another. I mean Money is Everything is a great stand alone episode, but when viewed in relation to the rest of the series it falls apart.

I agree that in terms of continuity and plot it's a glorified mess, but the characterisations left a lasting impression on people to the point where there are fans who hate that the cartoon was disregarded to a large degree with this movie.

Transformers (Marvel) had an interesting handle on it's characters to be certain. But it is not good fodder for a film, unless you want Optimus acting as a secondary character to Prowl, and stories like "Are All Dead" to be forefront. Also keep in mind the comics used Buster, not Sam or Spike, and as I said were a lot more obtuse, especially to non fans of the Transformers franchise. Marvel was great for me because it ultilized all those fringe characters I like so much. But unless you want Megatron to only be present for 19 issues (episodes) it's not good for a show or movie. Those major re-used characters need to be front and center and not so much Bludgeon and Thunderwing.

Yes but it's like the difference between a stage production with drawn out monologues and film where you get the same depth in other ways. In each case, when the characterisation becomes a highly artistic business, every single word dictating their actions and utterances is deliberately planned out and the story even alters slightly to fit in with their personalities- as opposed to b-grade popcorn fodder which shoehorns its characters to fit in with the story like some steaming turn covered in a thick layer of swiss chocolate.

I'm not saying to clone the comic, but rather to look at what made the characters tick and who they were, make that the unchanging constant and then adapt the story to fit that. Here's some twoing and froing on the TF movie board with what I mean:

To be fair, didn't Mystique have, like, 1 or 2 lines in X-Men 1? She didn't really get developed till number 2. And SHE'S the one everybody remembers from the first film.

To be equally fair though- those 1 or 2 lines set the character up perfectly while giving the audience a taste of what her past was like, her mindset, and with the way they were delivered, plenty of depth to the character. It's a prime example of giving a character minimal exposition while still giving the character all the depth they need. It's soemthing I've always felt this movie screwed up with big time, as all the writers ever seemed to do was scratch the surface lightly in terms of the character depth they saw- at least that's how the script drafts made it appear.

But she had the same past as every other mutant did...that's the point they were trying to get across...that it's no picnic having powers.

It still tells us nothing about her. It's better than nothing though.

It does make her seem more real- not to mention being a bad guy that people could identify and sympathise with.

Scorponok was an awesome character. Another one of those fringe guys Simon Furman used to love to make into something. But Shakespeare...naw, I wouldn't take it that far. It was good though. But that kind of a scene and that kind of space opera fanwank doesn't really translate to film...certainly not an introductory piece.

I have to disagree. The problem most people have when Shakespeare comparisons come up is they seem to want to always bring vocabulary into the mix when sometimes it isn't relevant. We're not talking about contributions to the english language here, but rather characterisations and story: as such I'd argue that Scorponok is every bit as much up there as the likes of Shylock and Hamlet.

 

[CFlash]

As both me and FigmanJ said, Energon is a magical castle that was made from a variety of sources. He said "rich in resources", that's pretty vague. So vague in fact their resources largely were unreal or mystical objects, even once Megatron tried to extract energy from something he got off his own ship (wrap your head around that one). Transformers had 98 episodes....count them "1,2,3...98". And 3 of those episodes EVER, EVER used oil as a means to get Energon. Energon was "magic", and Macguffin, because it didn't matter where it came from or what made it, it simply was some round about way for Megatron to get power and for the Autobots to have a motivation to fight him. Resources is a vague term...anyone who fights you and takes things is after your resources. And in the cartoon resources would even amount to "human slaves" (Ultimate Doom). Not exactly "war for oil".

Remember Cobra Commander stole resources and tech too...are you going to start arguing for that show as well.

Damn dude, what part of MACHINES searching for energy don't you understand? Oil featured 3 times? Well that's enough for me considering another time it was natural resources on Dinobot Island, a ruby at the top of the world to harness the entire planet's stored energy, etc. You gotta be pretty stupid or obtuse to not see the themes of this show about MACHINES.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Damn dude, what part of MACHINES searching for energy don't you understand?

But THAT'S NOTHING NEW. Dr. Doom was stealing energy before Microman met Diaclone and gave birth to Transformers.

Remember the Autobots were never "searching" for energy. What back alley treaty did they have? And why didn't the Decepticons just cooroperate. It works for the Autobots?

The Decepticons wanted power, plain and simple. This is not an new or novel concept for villain versus hero conflicts.

Oil featured 3 times? Well that's enough for me considering another time it was natural resources on Dinobot Island

Dinobot Island is a fictional Island trapped on the other side of a time wrap. If you wanted to make a show about the environment or scarce resources why weren't they attacking, oh I don't know, our environment.

a ruby at the top of the world to harness the entire planet's stored energy, etc.

Again fake. If you wanted to make a show about the gas crisis of the 1970s they would've been stealing from gas stations and leaving cities in a veritable panic for resources. But they weren't. They stole things to make energon, and that energon came usually from wildly inane sources. Such as crystals atop the world that made it snow in July when you tapped a small amount of energy from them.

You gotta be pretty stupid or obtuse to not see the themes of this show about MACHINES.

Again the Theme of this show as I, FigmanJ and Hunter Rider have stated were not hidden. It was you're standard good versus evil show about a power struggle. Megatron wanted power, Energon was the way he (somehow) got it. The Autobots always stopped him. That's the theme, if you dig any deeper...then I have some "Choose your own ending books" you ought to write reports on.

The theme of Captain Planet is just as obvious. Remember this was a show for children, young children who wanted new toys. Obtuse and subtextual messages don't exist here. The shows were basic and straightforward. If anything the only message was "don't let the bad men take power".

 

[Marvin]

so the allspark doesn't fit into the "theme" of Megatron wanting power and the autobots racing (pun) to stop him?

speaking thematically of course

 

[ShadowBoxing]

so the allspark doesn't fit into the "theme" of Megatron wanting power and the autobots racing (pun) to stop him?

speaking thematically of course

Of course it does. Megatron wants the Allspark so he can create an army of soldiers to take over the Universe. Pretty much like the old Megatron who just wanted Energon who said "everything I touch is fuel for my power".