Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

Sabrblade wrote:One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

true, but it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy said a good guy was dead when they werent.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

true, but it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy said a good guy was dead when they werent.

Also, true. Though, out of curiosity, what do you make of this?



Given how fragile the bots and cons were in the Marvel Comics, dead or not dead Magnus?

Sabrblade wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

true, but it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy said a good guy was dead when they werent.

Also, true. Though, out of curiosity, what do you make of this?



Given how fragile the bots and cons were in the Marvel Comics, dead or not dead Magnus?

I never saw them as "fragile" in the comics.

And considering how easy it was to bring them back in the comics I would say "not dead".

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

true, but it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy said a good guy was dead when they werent.

Surely Galvatron wouldn't have known of Magnus's resurrection? At the point Galvatron fought Rodimus inside Unicron, Galvatron was still under the impression that Magnus was dead, hence the quote.

MightyMagnus78 wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

true, but it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy said a good guy was dead when they werent.

Surely Galvatron wouldn't have known of Magnus's resurrection? At the point Galvatron fought Rodimus inside Unicron, Galvatron was still under the impression that Magnus was dead, hence the quote.

You dont seem to understand my point.

What I'm saying is that it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy made such a bold, grandiose, statement and was wrong.

Starscream in "the search for Alpha Trion"
"Prime has disintegrated"
"the destruction of Optimus Prime is a long awaited victory for the decepticons"

Galvatron and scourge in the movie
Scourge: "The autobots have been terminated"
Galvatron: "and the matrix with them"

Galvatron and Cyclonus in "5 faces of darkness"
Cyclones: "Might Galvatron, where are thr autobots heads?"
Galvatron: What does it matter, their destruction is assured.

I could site many more, but I think my point has been made.

Galvatrons statemt isint evidence of anyones death, only that he thinks they are dead.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

MightyMagnus78 wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:One more thing about Ultra Magnus' temporary "death" in the movie. Galvatron refers to it as a death:

"First Prime, then Ultra Magnus, and now, you! It's a pity you Autobots die so easily, or I might have a sense of satisfaction."

true, but it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy said a good guy was dead when they werent.

Surely Galvatron wouldn't have known of Magnus's resurrection? At the point Galvatron fought Rodimus inside Unicron, Galvatron was still under the impression that Magnus was dead, hence the quote.

You dont seem to understand my point.

What I'm saying is that it wouldnt be the first time a bad guy made such a bold, grandiose, statement and was wrong.

Starscream in "the search for Alpha Trion"
"Prime has disintegrated"
"the destruction of Optimus Prime is a long awaited victory for the decepticons"

Galvatron and scourge in the movie
Scourge: "The autobots have been terminated"
Galvatron: "and the matrix with them"

Galvatron and Cyclonus in "5 faces of darkness"
Cyclones: "Might Galvatron, where are thr autobots heads?"
Galvatron: What does it matter, their destruction is assured.

I could site many more, but I think my point has been made.

Galvatrons statemt isint evidence of anyones death, only that he thinks they are dead.

Sorry, my bad, I totally misinterpreted your post.

MightyMagnus78 wrote:Sorry, my bad, I totally misinterpreted your post.

no prob, I've made the same mistake plenty of times

Sabrblade wrote:Decepti-Scott, you're not understanding what Sto means when he says, "There's no solid evidence from the film's narrative to confirm that they died." By this, he is NOT saying that they DIDN'T die, but rather, just that the film does not openly declare their deaths. It IMPLIES that they died, but does not verbal SAY so.

Sto's claim of a lack of evidence to the confirmation of their deaths in just the film alone is a general statement. You are misinterpreting this as though he were instead saying "They did not die," which he is not saying at all.

Sto's claim of "There's no solid evidence from the film's narrative to confirm that they died," only means that we can't say yes or no either way without consulting external material--meaning info from stuff outside of the movie.

The statement that you think he's saying (but isn't) of, "They did not die," gives a definite answer to their fates. Sto, however, is merely saying that there is NO definite answer to the fates. He's not saying that they did or didn't die, but that we cannot say for certain what their fates were from just watching the film alone. We can IMPLY that they died, but we cannot say that they DID die and take it as a fact from the movie alone.

Long story short, Sto is not saying one way or the other about whether or not they died, but instead that the movie is simply AMBIGUOUS on this matter, giving NO answer one way or the other at all.

There is no right or wrong answer. There's just NO answer period.

Every time someone posts something about the death of the bots in question that guy has to come chime in with his "ya know theres no solid proof that bla bla bla. Trying to pass his opinion off as fact and so on.
This is exactly what he did with my statement. If it truly is a case of him only trying to say theres no proof one way or the other, or in other words noone actually SAID those bots are dead then all one should need to do is use common sense.
Weather "it has been said that you "cant apply it" or not, its a good rule of thumb to apply comon sense to situations no?
If you apply common sense it isnt a far stretch at all to go ahead and say yeah those bots died, the arc crashed, jimmy hoffa is dead, natalee hollaway is dead, the linberg baby is dead despit the fact that noone came forward and said they are dead.
If you ask me he is simply trying to be an individual by arguing this.
I could go on a megs and all decepticons are pot heads thats why their eyes are red campaign. There is no proof from within the narrative that that isnt true one way or the other either is there? I could make the SAME arguement as he with my statement and it would be just as annoying and just as sound. I promise you someone would come forward and tell me its stupid to assume that and to use common sense and they would be right. I would then say that common sense cannot be applied to this because its been "said" that you cannot and Id still be no more wrong than stovokor with his arguement.
See my point?

Your making way to big a deal about this, man. Does it really matter whether or not they perished? Does it really have be to stated one way or the other? I mean, who really cares if they died or not? They don't play any big roles in the story anymore. It's not like the G1 cartoon was this perfect piece of work that gave solid info on every little detail. Things were overlooked in that show all the time. Ambiguity was abundant in that show (and its movie).

Look, Sto is one of more knowledgeable guys on this site. He don't make stuff up and sticks primarily to facts and canon. And the fact of this matter is that the fates of the bots in question are not explicitly stated in the movie. That is not to say that they didn't die, but only to say that we can't say for sure. Like I said before, we can IMPLY that they died given how several others did die, but at the end of it all, it's still only us guessing since there was no true closure on the matter in just the film by itself.


Also, are you referring to the ship that Ironhide and co. were flying in the movie as the Ark? The real Ark was still embedded in the side of the volcano on Earth. That ship, however, was just a shuttle.

decepta-scott wrote: Every time someone posts something about the death of the bots in question that guy has to come chime in with his "ya know theres no solid proof that bla bla bla. Trying to pass his opinion off as fact and so on.
This is exactly what he did with my statement. If it truly is a case of him only trying to say theres no proof one way or the other, or in other words noone actually SAID those bots are dead then all one should need to do is use common sense.
Weather "it has been said that you "cant apply it" or not, its a good rule of thumb to apply comon sense to situations no?
If you apply common sense it isnt a far stretch at all to go ahead and say yeah those bots died, the arc crashed, jimmy hoffa is dead, natalee hollaway is dead, the linberg baby is dead despit the fact that noone came forward and said they are dead.
If you ask me he is simply trying to be an individual by arguing this.
I could go on a megs and all decepticons are pot heads thats why their eyes are red campaign. There is no proof from within the narrative that that isnt true one way or the other either is there? I could make the SAME arguement as he with my statement and it would be just as annoying and just as sound. I promise you someone would come forward and tell me its stupid to assume that and to use common sense and they would be right. I would then say that common sense cannot be applied to this because its been "said" that you cannot and Id still be no more wrong than stovokor with his arguement.
See my point?

If I was wrong you'd think you would have been able to prove it by now.

And the problem with your "examples" and your "common sense" rant is that your imposing human mortality limits on these characters.

Sure, I can accept most of those people have died, given time and and their ages when they went missing.

But you cant apply that kind of "common sense" thinking to these characters, they have survived similar injuries in the past, some of them are over 9 million years old.

You say to use "common sense" in regards to the shuttle crashing and that it would have killed them if they were still aslibe, but Brawn and the others survived the Ark crashing from much higher.

"Common sence" as you would use it just doesnt apply because your limiting it to what you assume is a norm, when there is no norm.

Sabrblade wrote:Your making way to big a deal about this, man. Does it really matter whether or not they perished? Does it really have be to stated one way or the other? I mean, who really cares if they died or not? They don't play any big roles in the story anymore. It's not like the G1 cartoon was this perfect piece of work that gave solid info on every little detail. Things were overlooked in that show all the time. Ambiguity was abundant in that show (and its movie).

Look, Sto is one of more knowledgeable guys on this site. He don't make stuff up and sticks primarily to facts and canon. And the fact of this matter is that the fates of the bots in question are not explicitly stated in the movie. That is not to say that they didn't die, but only to say that we can't say for sure. Like I said before, we can IMPLY that they died given how several others did die, but at the end of it all, it's still only us guessing since there was no true closure on the matter in just the film by itself.


Also, are you referring to the ship that Ironhide and co. were flying in the movie as the Ark? The real Ark was still embedded in the side of the volcano on Earth. That ship, however, was just a shuttle.

thank you

Sabrblade wrote:Your making way to big a deal about this, man. Does it really matter whether or not they perished? Does it really have be to stated one way or the other? I mean, who really cares if they died or not? They don't play any big roles in the story anymore. It's not like the G1 cartoon was this perfect piece of work that gave solid info on every little detail. Things were overlooked in that show all the time. Ambiguity was abundant in that show (and its movie).

Look, Sto is one of more knowledgeable guys on this site. He don't make stuff up and sticks primarily to facts and canon. And the fact of this matter is that the fates of the bots in question are not explicitly stated in the movie. That is not to say that they didn't die, but only to say that we can't say for sure. Like I said before, we can IMPLY that they died given how several others did die, but at the end of it all, it's still only us guessing since there was no true closure on the matter in just the film by itself.


Also, are you referring to the ship that Ironhide and co. were flying in the movie as the Ark? The real Ark was still embedded in the side of the volcano on Earth. That ship, however, was just a shuttle.

I know it has never been called the ark and I dont even have a problem with saying it isnt called an arc. But you must see how you cant defend stos argument that you cannot concider something fact if you cannot PROVE it with facts from within the narrative and in the same post tell me that I am wrong to call that shuttle an arc when it was never proven from within the narrative that it WASNT called the arc.

I also agree that it isnt realy a big deal. You cannot dirrect that statement at me and spare sto. Especially when he is the instigator here. He started this whole thing and has been right there with me this whole time.

My comment was that wheeljack and wind charger had died. Sto says no proof of that because they didnt turn grey. I say they were blown to bits, were supposed to be viewed as dead why else even show them. I also say that prime was the only bot to turn grey and that was for dramatics. He rebuts with starscream , prowl and ratchet turn grey
and if they turn grey then that must mean when bots die they turn grey. Concluding that wheeljack and charger could be alive because they were not grey.

I respond that starscream turned to ash and since ash is grey he cannot be counted and then point out that the bots on the shuttle all had color after they fell out dead. Sto drags two frames of prowl being some other color than his normal one and says it was grey. He then points out a black hand on ratchet and says that that was him turnung grey with death.

Finally I say that ratchet had a white arm and that white is a COLOR so he cannot be concidered grey. It must be a mess up. Also that prowl did not turn "grey" and since all bots are shown after that scene with all their color, prowl included, that one should conclude that they all retained their color after death proving that a dead bot dosent have to be a grey bot. You also have magnus being blown to pieces and killed, but retaining his color. Not to mention the fact that the bots in question were never seen again.

Now, Could one say that I cannot say they are dead for sure because the narrative did not include someone SAYING that they had died? I guess so. The narrative never SAID that starscream died either but we see him crumble to dust so we assume he is dead. Thats where the common sense comes in.

While noone actually SAID that wheeljack, brawn and windcharger had died, there is certainly an overwhelming ammount of circumstantial evidence that they are all dead. Circumstantial evidence is used along with common sence to figure things out all the time.

Let me put it like this. Were this case to go to a court of law and all the evidence was weighed, I have no doubt that the decepticons would be convicted of the murder of brawn, ,wheeljack and wind charger. Unless they were tried in fla then they would be acquited and allowed to go home and party with casey anthony.

Hope no part of this offended you sarblade because it certainly was not ment to (even though you high jacked my other thread)
Enjoy your evening.
scott.

decepta-scott wrote:I also say that prime was the only bot to turn grey and that was for dramatics. He rebuts with starscream , prowl and ratchet turn grey
and if they turn grey then that must mean when bots die they turn grey. Concluding that wheeljack and charger could be alive because they were not grey.

The evidence proves Prime wasnt the only one to fade color.

It must be a mess up.

Problem is you cant prove its a mess up.

Thats the prooblem with your argument.You speak in absolutes "they are ARE dead", "it MUST be a mess up"," Prime was the ONLY one to fade" but you cant back any of those claims up.

I on the other hand said Prime wasnt the only one to fade color, I said theres evidence showing Prowl fade, I said theres evidence showing partsof Ratchet faded in color.

Even if it was a mess up, which theres nothing to suggest it was, I'm still right.

You also have magnus being blown to pieces and killed,

Being blown to pieces does not equal death for a transformer.

Not to mention the fact that the bots in question were never seen again.

A]that proves nothing
B] at least 1 was seen again

The narrative never SAID that starscream died either but we see him crumble to dust so we assume he is dead.

Actully the "continued" narritive did indeed say Starscream was dead...in season 3

So your wrong again.

there is certainly an overwhelming ammount of circumstantial evidence that they are all dead.

the same Circumstantial evidence can be used to argue they lived.

YEAH YEAH YEAH BLA BLA BLA.
You havnt proved anything you claim to have proven. I have given ample evidence to refute all you have claimed to prove. The circumstantial evidence I provided above cannot be used to prove they lived. Like I said. Take this arguement into a court room and I win.
I dont care about that though.
Where were you today between the hrs of 12 p.m. and 2:20 p.m.?


EDIT
Ive just found the most wonderful function! I add stovokor to my "foe" list and like magic, I no longer have to read his posts or look at his picture under the things he says to me that I dont care about. COOL!!!

decepta-scott wrote:YEAH YEAH YEAH BLA BLA BLA.
You havnt proved anything you claim to have proven.

I did indeed prove what I claimed.

Even others have told you.

Ratchets hand faded color, that is prpoven 100%
Prowls horns and face faded, that is proven 100%

I have given ample evidence to refute all you have claimed to prove.

Sorry but your excuse of a shadow is not "ample evidence", and your excuse that Ratchets color may have been a mistake is possible, but since you cant prove its a mistake it doesnt refute my claim.

The circumstantial evidence I provided above cannot be used to prove they lived.

It certinly can.

Heres a small list of your circumstantial evidence.

1]the were damaged on the floor
but we have seen that plenty of times

2]the ship crashed saw Brawn must have died
but he survived a much bigger crash 4 millionl years earlier.

3] they were never seen agasin
p[leant y of charracters werent seen again

4]they "looked" dead
So did the Conehead seekers.

Ramjet, Thrust and Dirge all look to have been killed asnd eaten by Unicron and explode in his mouth.But all 3 are alive in season 3.

If your really asking I dont mind talking.

I was at 2 doctors, my dialysis doctor and a surgeon, they are planning at taking my right leg
Where were you today between the hrs of 12 p.m. and 2:20 p.m.?

Instead of starting a new thread Ill just ask here. It is an animated movie thread.
Was autobot city on earth, the one that was attacked and destroyed, supposed to be metroplex before he got a transformation cog? I remember the epp right after the movie which I belive was titled the five faces of death has blur and wheelie delivering a transformation cog to metroplex which was "broken in the great war" according to perceptor. Was It metroplex?

CRAP!!!!! Sorry all. This was an accidental repost of the post above it. This cpu is really quirky.

decepta-scott wrote:Instead of starting a new thread Ill just ask here. It is an animated movie thread.
Was autobot city on earth, the one that was attacked and destroyed, supposed to be metroplex before he got a transformation cog? I remember the epp right after the movie which I belive was titled the five faces of death has blur and wheelie delivering a transformation cog to metroplex which was "broken in the great war" according to perceptor. Was It metroplex?

Partially, yes. Metroplex forms a small section of Autobot City, and during the film you can see Slammer's turret rotate at one point (Slammer is Metroplex's little tank buddy who forms a tower in Metroplex's City Mode, so Slammer's turret was all of Metroplex that we could see in the movie).

And now, I'm going to try to calmly decipher your previous message to me and get to the bottom of this whole mess from before.

decepta-scott wrote: I know it has never been called the ark and I dont even have a problem with saying it isnt called an arc. But you must see how you cant defend stos argument that you cannot concider something fact if you cannot PROVE it with facts from within the narrative and in the same post tell me that I am wrong to call that shuttle an arc when it was never proven from within the narrative that it WASNT called the arc.

I also agree that it isnt realy a big deal. You cannot dirrect that statement at me and spare sto. Especially when he is the instigator here. He started this whole thing and has been right there with me this whole time.

Okay. With this shuttle not being the Ark, it is true that the movie by itself gives no name to this shuttle. Though, the reason we know it isn't the Ark comes from outside material. In which case, it was the Beast Wars cartoon that referred to the larger Autobot vessel that crashed into the volcano on Earth in the G1 cartoon as the Ark. Other material related to the G1 cartoon gives no indication that there were any other Arks aside from the main one, and so, to assume such just feels... out of place.

However, because material outside of the movie is involved in this particular claim, it becomes a different case from what Sto was trying to say because he was referring to just the movie alone without any outside info, whereas I was using outside info for my claim.

Though, since this bit is a little insignificant compared to what lies ahead, I'll just stop here and move on.

decepta-scott wrote: My comment was that wheeljack and wind charger had died. Sto says no proof of that because they didnt turn grey. I say they were blown to bits, were supposed to be viewed as dead why else even show them. I also say that prime was the only bot to turn grey and that was for dramatics. He rebuts with starscream , prowl and ratchet turn grey and if they turn grey then that must mean when bots die they turn grey. Concluding that wheeljack and charger could be alive because they were not grey.

Well, what's wrong with them just being unconscious? They could have been just badly injured yet still alive? I'm not syaing I believe that, but why rule out that possibility?

decepta-scott wrote: I respond that starscream turned to ash and since ash is grey he cannot be counted and then point out that the bots on the shuttle all had color after they fell out dead. Sto drags two frames of prowl being some other color than his normal one and says it was grey. He then points out a black hand on ratchet and says that that was him turnung grey with death.

And what's wrong with that?

Though, I pointed out how Prowl looked kinda bluish to me, so his colors did fade to where he was no longer in his normal colors.

decepta-scott wrote: Finally I say that ratchet had a white arm and that white is a COLOR so he cannot be concidered grey. It must be a mess up. Also that prowl did not turn "grey" and since all bots are shown after that scene with all their color, prowl included, that one should conclude that they all retained their color after death proving that a dead bot dosent have to be a grey bot.

Well, why are Prowl's red parts darkening and Ratchet's red hand being darkened not enough to say that they faded too? After all, white and black are close enough colors to gray.

decepta-scott wrote: You also have magnus being blown to pieces and killed, but retaining his color.

Yeah, but the bots have survived getting blown up before.

decepta-scott wrote:Not to mention the fact that the bots in question were never seen again.

As do many others who we know to have lived.

decepta-scott wrote: Now, Could one say that I cannot say they are dead for sure because the narrative did not include someone SAYING that they had died? I guess so. The narrative never SAID that starscream died either but we see him crumble to dust so we assume he is dead. Thats where the common sense comes in.

Starscream's a different case. We can say that he did die because his fate was fully shown (and in great detail too). The fates of Wheeljack, Windcharger, and Brawn, however, weren't.

For them, we'd need to be told of what happen to them. For Starscream, nothing need be said because we saw it in all its horrifyingly awesome glory.

decepta-scott wrote: While noone actually SAID that wheeljack, brawn and windcharger had died, there is certainly an overwhelming ammount of circumstantial evidence that they are all dead. Circumstantial evidence is used along with common sence to figure things out all the time.

Well, yes, there is some evidence based on the deaths of their comrades. But it's only enough for us to assume that they died, since none of it actually reveals their fates to us in any manner.

decepta-scott wrote: Hope no part of this offended you sarblade because it certainly was not ment to (even though you high jacked my other thread)
Enjoy your evening.
scott.

Oh, I haven't been offended at all (though my name could be spelled better ). I'm just trying to help make ends meet in this.

As for that "high jacked" remark, I've already responded in the other topic.

Just to point something out - I don't believe the shuttle at the beginning of Transformers the Movie is called the Ark, its just a generic Autobot shuttle, like the one Optimus and Sunstreaker pilot to Earth with the Dinobots, and the two seen later on during the evacuation of Autobot City.

Not only that, at the beginning of the movie Optimus Prime says:

"Ready the Shuttle for Launch"

Had it been called the Ark, i'm sure he would have refererred to it so.

G1 continuity has established that the ship that crashed into the volcano is called the Ark.

Thats my two cents

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

decepta-scott wrote:YEAH YEAH YEAH BLA BLA BLA.
You havnt proved anything you claim to have proven.

I did indeed prove what I claimed.

Even others have told you.

Ratchets hand faded color, that is prpoven 100%
Prowls horns and face faded, that is proven 100%

I have given ample evidence to refute all you have claimed to prove.

Sorry but your excuse of a shadow is not "ample evidence", and your excuse that Ratchets color may have been a mistake is possible, but since you cant prove its a mistake it doesnt refute my claim.

The circumstantial evidence I provided above cannot be used to prove they lived.

It certinly can.

Heres a small list of your circumstantial evidence.

1]the were damaged on the floor
but we have seen that plenty of times

2]the ship crashed saw Brawn must have died
but he survived a much bigger crash 4 millionl years earlier.

3] they were never seen agasin
p[leant y of charracters werent seen again

4]they "looked" dead
So did the Conehead seekers.

Ramjet, Thrust and Dirge all look to have been killed asnd eaten by Unicron and explode in his mouth.But all 3 are alive in season 3.

If your really asking I dont mind talking.

I was at 2 doctors, my dialysis doctor and a surgeon, they are planning at taking my right leg
Where were you today between the hrs of 12 p.m. and 2:20 p.m.?

I lack the know how to respond after each post of yours with my rebuttal so I will simply answer a different way.

first Its sad to hear they want to amputate your leg. I am an r.n. so I have seen this a few times in my life. I was especially close to a patient who had to loose a limb and so this has tugged at my heart strings. I want to ask a few questions but Im not going to pry. I will only say that there are many other options and procedures that they will exhaust before they will take your leg. Im hoping they have discussed that with you. If they havnt, get another doctor A.S.A.P!!!
Heaven forbid they actually do have to amputate,and I know this is of little consolation,but they have made TRUELY remarkable advancements in prosthetics. I cant even begin to tell you what kind of neat things Ive seen youd have needed to have seen them yourself to understand. I cant immagine how much better they will be another ten yrs from now.
Im guessing that if you need to attend bi or tri weekly dialysis proceedures you have ss and ins.(If you dont you can surley get it if only for the ins) That ofcourse means that you will not be limited to the older, obsolete models due to lack of funds. There are even special programs you can get into some of which offer free usage of "experamental" equipment that is better than anything that can be bought.
Again I know it is of little consolation. I am just trying to give you a bit of hope and a silver lining. Thanx for the kind words reguarding the kidnapping of my starscream. I apologize for insulting you, but maintain that you got snippity with me first. Watter under the bridge.
Lets try to keep this civil from now on k?

My starscream analogy was flawed due to the fact that it was indeed STATED he had died. I get that your point is that it wasnt confirmed the bots in question had died and ssince screamer had been confirmed it was a bad analogy but my point still stands. You knew he had died reguardless of the fact that noone said he was dead. That was my point.
A better analogy would have been that you know unicron has eyes even though noone says "unicron has eyes" Im saying only that you dont have to be TOLD something to be able to draw a conclusion if you have ample evidence.
I still cant buy that ratchet faded. He didnt fade infact he only had a black hand and the same bright white arm. I maintain that was a color error and there is no proof that it is not. Since you insist it could be their way of showing he turned color however we are still at odds here. Its only fair that since neither of us can proove our point in this case, it should be dropped from the debate entirely.
Since prowl turns color for a few seconds. but is seen later in color along with ratchet again none of us can proove anything one way or the other, It should be droped as well. I know you well enough by now to guarentee you will disagree with me though.
With reguards to the idea that brawn wind charger and ratchet couldnt have been concidered dead for sure because they didnt turn grey have you ever given any thought as to why unicron head still had color? He was totally dead. How about prime holding his color after his second death in dark awakening? He was dead for sure in the return of optimus prime and he had his color the whole time despite the fact that he turned grey the first time he died. This shown that there can be screw ups with this whole grey death theory and so again a dead autobot dosent have to be a gray autobot.
As far as brawn surviving the crash to earth in the arc, I disagree.
None of the transformers survived infact they layed there on the floor of the arc for 25million yrs (None of them lost their color either). If that robot hadnt brought them back to life they would never have functioned again. Much the same way the quints had to bring prime back and the junkions had to bring magnus back.
I think that covers all I wanted to say. Take care.

d.p.

decepta-scott wrote:

ScoutSi wrote:Just to point something out - I don't believe the shuttle at the beginning of Transformers the Movie is called the Ark, its just a generic Autobot shuttle, like the one Optimus and Sunstreaker pilot to Earth with the Dinobots, and the two seen later on during the evacuation of Autobot City.

Not only that, at the beginning of the movie Optimus Prime says:

"Ready the Shuttle for Launch"

Had it been called the Ark, i'm sure he would have refererred to it so.

G1 continuity has established that the ship that crashed into the volcano is called the Ark.

Thats my two cents

Sorry but you cant be "sure" prime would have called it the arc. Was it called an arc? I dont know but if I were to refer to it as such, you couldnt rightly tell me I am incorrect as there is no proof one way, or the other.
That is infact the point that stovokor has been trying to make to me. You cant agree with stovokor above and then disagree with me here. Thats hypocritical.
Having said that, I wouldnt think it to be called an arc because it dosent really make any sense Which is the point Ive been trying to make. It makes no sense I.M.O.to show all those bots mangled and destroyed, get close ups of them, confirm that all the other bots to have been seen mangled and destroyed are infact dead, but have two of the MOST beaten looking ones survive. I just dont see them doing that.
A different mans two cents.
Take care pal.

decepta-scott wrote: I lack the know how to respond after each post of yours with my rebuttal so I will simply answer a different way.

first Its sad to hear they want to amputate your leg. I am an r.n. so I have seen this a few times in my life. I could ask a few questions but Im not going to pry.

I dont mind, ask anything you like.

I will only say that there are many other options and procedures that they will exhaust before they will take your leg. Im hoping they have discussed that with you. If they havnt, get another doctor A.S.A.P!!!

saw an other today, they are working on a few options after the evaluate all the info they need to gather from the other doc's

Heaven forbid they actually do have to amputate,and I know this is of little consolation,but they have made TRUELY remarkable advancements in prosthetics. I cant even begin to tell you what kind of neat things Ive seen youd have needed to have seen them yourself to understand. I cant immagine how much better they will be another ten yrs from now.

yeah, ZI've been looking into it.

Im guessing that if you need to attend bi or tri weekly dialysis proceedures you have ss and ins.(If you dont you can surley get it if only for the ins) That ofcourse means that you will not be limited to the older, obsolete models due to lack of funds. There are even special programs you can get into some of which offer free usage of "experamental" equipment that is better than anything that can be bought.

I'm actually doing home dialysis treatments, its 12 hours every night, but I dont have to be tied tyo a clinic 3 or 4 days out of a week.

Again I know it is of little consolation. I am just trying to give you a bit of hope and a silver lining. Thanx for the kind words reguarding the kidnapping of my starscream. I apologize for insulting you, but maintain that you got snippity with me first. Watter under the bridge.
Lets try to keep this civil from now on k?

no prob bud, its all forgotton.

My starscream analogy was flawed due to the fact that it was indeed STATED he had died. I get that your point is that it wasnt confirmed the bots in question had died

correct

and ssince screamer had been confirmed it was a bad analogy but my point still stands. You knew he had died reguardless of the fact that noone said he was dead. That was my point.

True, but bits partly because vof the dramatic effect of the fade in color.

think about it this way.

The fade in color was indeed done for dramatic effect, its not something the characters noticed.It was done for the benefit of the audience, so that they would know that there was a difference between what happened in the past when they were injured and what happened to them now.

Its the reason why Prowl faded slowly in a close up, its the reason they showed Ratchet with a faded hand and Ironhide with color, to show us who was still alive and who was deefintively dead wst that moment.

I believe they didnt fadev the others cbecause they wanted to leave the door bopen to future writers to have the possibility to use them again if they wanted.I also believe he has to do with the re-write they were forced to make because the earlier draft was too brutal.

A better analogy would have been that you know unicron has eyes even though noone says "unicron has eyes"

Actully thats not a better analogy.

They secificly said Unicron had eyes in the season 3 episode "Starscreams Ghost"

Im saying only that you dont have to be TOLD something to be able to draw a conclusion if you have ample evidence.

I understand that point in your argument.But what your not getting is that there is not "ample" evidence for either case.

Every point that can be made that is evidence of death can be refuted by the FACT that we have seen others survive similar injuries and situations.

I still cant buy that ratchet faded. He didnt fade infact he only had a black hand and the same bright white arm.

Actually his arm looked a bit dull to me, but that might just be my eyes.

But his had certinly was black/grey when it normally would be red.

And none of those Autobots had black hands.It doesnt make sense that they mixed him with an other character.

As for it being an error, its possible but it doesnt seem likely considering the delibrate asnd slow fading of Prowl's red horns.

Since you insist it could be their way of showing he turned color however we are still at odds here. Its only fair that since neither of us can proove our point in this case, it should be dropped from the debate entirely.

if you want to drop it thats fine.

Since prowl turns color for a few seconds. but is seen later in color along with ratchet again none of us can proove anything one way or the other,

his fade scene was longer and a close up.

And its a standard film masking technique that close ups are more relevant far away shots.

With reguards to the idea that brawn wind charger and ratchet couldnt have been concidered dead for sure because they didnt turn grey have you ever given any thought as to why unicron head still had color? He was totally dead.

How long has it been since you watched season 3?I mean no disrespect or insult but you seem to have forgoton a few key points.

The season 3 openerv shows us that Unicron wass still aslive but inactive.

How about prime holding his color after his second death in dark awakening?

Your forgetting that he had his color when the quints took his body the first time.

Thasts because they werent useing it as "dramatic effect" in that episode.

He was also fully repaired in "the return of optimus prime" when we know he was missing half his face and a arm the last time we saw him.

This shown that there can be screw ups with this whole grey death theory and so again a dead autobot dosent have to be a gray autobot.

As a series as a whole i would agree, but I'm talking about the production of the film itself.

In the film they used the fade in color for dramatic effect.To show the audience the difference between a live robot and a dead one.

To show the audience that this time things were different, that there was a permanence to the damage they received in the film vers what we had seen in the tv series.

The fade in color was a tool they used to relay a definitive part of the story for these characters.And that message was that those that faded were definitively dead.

I believe they didnt fade the others for 1 of 2 possible reasons.

First possible reason was they didnt want bto commit to those deaths in case a future writer wanted to use the characters.

Second possible reason was to conform to the PG rating system.

As far as brawn surviving the crash to earth in the arc, I disagree.
None of the transformers survived infact they layed there on the floor of the arc for 25million yrs (None of them lost their color either).[/qwuote]

2 mistakes there.

1]They asll survived, but were off liune.Which is not the same as death.Because if it was then Prime could have been resurected easily.

2] it was 4 million years not 25 million

Take care.

Same to you

Actully thats not a better analogy.

They secificly said Unicron had eyes in the season 3 episode "Starscreams Ghost"

ROTFLMAO!!!
ALRIGHT STOVOKOR!....Give me a sec.........-thinks back-.....
Unicrons wang! They definetly havnt refered to unicrons wang as being there but we know he has one of tho.....Scratch that too.
Unicrons foot. How bout that?
I will say that you made me aware of prowl turning color. The more I watch that the more I think There may be something to that. Im just having a hard time excepting that they didnt show them all grey in the shot with all of them on the ground. That was the sole purpose of that shot. To show them dead. If they decided to go with the dead bots turn grey thing why would they leave them colored in the ONE scene that was created to show the carnage that had been brought to them? They were all colored in that shot.How could they screw up that bad?
Maybe they intended to have all dead bots grey but droped the ball for some reason. I.D.K. If they did screw up and forget to color them grey Im betting they forgot all of them Id wager they wanted to show that all of em had died. Even wheeljack and wind charger.
My screamer waas kidnapped 24 hrs ago and Im in fragile condition. My mind is numb from all this. Agree to disagree.
Take care.