New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream

Transformers News: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream

Tuesday, August 20th, 2013 6:47PM CDT

Categories: Site News, Toy News, Site Articles
Posted by: LOST Cybertronian   Views: 29,451

Topic Options: View Discussion · Sign in or Join to reply

Seibertron.com is proud to present the all inclusive gallery with 127 images for the second Transformers Collectors' Club subscription figure Slipstream. If you missed it you can check out the gallery for the first figure Scourge as well. One of the few and far between female Transformers and the subject of many customs, this is the first official Slipstream toy. She is a redeco of Transformers Prime First Edition Starscream with a new head. Click on through to enjoy the gallery.

Convention & Club Exclusives Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream

New Club Subscription Gallery: Deluxe Slipstream
Search Got Transformers News? Let us know here!

Most Popular Transformers News

Most Recent Transformers News

Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513032)
Posted by SKYWARPED_128 on August 20th, 2013 @ 7:42pm CDT
That's weird. As Starscream, the mold looks feminine, and as Slipstream, it's too masculine.

To be fair, the head sculpt isn't really helping. Maybe getting a Shapeways head from TecromDesigns might improve it.

Just my two cents' worth. >:oP
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513035)
Posted by SW's SilverHammer on August 20th, 2013 @ 8:21pm CDT
So Seibertron, in your opinion, do you think this figure works better as a representation of a timelines/allighned Slipstream or Prime Starscream? Also femininity, do you think this mold in general works for a woman?
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513037)
Posted by RiddlerJ on August 20th, 2013 @ 8:33pm CDT
SKYWARPED_128 wrote:That's weird. As Starscream, the mold looks feminine, and as Slipstream, it's too masculine.

To be fair, the head sculpt isn't really helping. Maybe getting a Shapeways head from TecromDesigns might improve it.

Just my two cents' worth. >:oP


I think the problem is that the chest is too large in relation to the hips. The upper half looks masculine while the lower half looks feminine.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513051)
Posted by SKYWARPED_128 on August 20th, 2013 @ 10:38pm CDT
RiddlerJ wrote:
SKYWARPED_128 wrote:That's weird. As Starscream, the mold looks feminine, and as Slipstream, it's too masculine.

To be fair, the head sculpt isn't really helping. Maybe getting a Shapeways head from TecromDesigns might improve it.

Just my two cents' worth. >:oP


I think the problem is that the chest is too large in relation to the hips. The upper half looks masculine while the lower half looks feminine.


You're right! The shoulders should also be a little narrower.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513052)
Posted by Nemesis Destron on August 20th, 2013 @ 10:39pm CDT
Hey Seibertron, I think you should have included a shot of voyager Starscream holding Slipstream rather than the deluxe. But great work there none the less! :VEHI:
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513053)
Posted by Sabrblade on August 20th, 2013 @ 10:39pm CDT
SKYWARPED_128 wrote:To be fair, the head sculpt isn't really helping. Maybe getting a Shapeways head from TecromDesigns might improve it.

Just my two cents' worth. >:oP
The head looks much MUCH better in hand in person. That close up pic above doesn't quite capture her good side (no offense, Ryan ;;) ). ;)

SW's SilverHammer wrote:So Seibertron, in your opinion, do you think this figure works better as a representation of a timelines/allighned Slipstream or Prime Starscream?
"Aligned Slipstream" is the same thing as "Prime Slipstream".

RiddlerJ wrote:I think the problem is that the chest is too large in relation to the hips. The upper half looks masculine while the lower half looks feminine.
There is a way to (mis)transform her so that her chest is straightened and not hunched forward, but it's a bit of an extra tight fit and it might not be wise to do this for too prolonged a period of time.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513056)
Posted by SW's SilverHammer on August 20th, 2013 @ 11:18pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:

SW's SilverHammer wrote:So Seibertron, in your opinion, do you think this figure works better as a representation of a timelines/allighned Slipstream or Prime Starscream?
"Aligned Slipstream" is the same thing as "Prime Slipstream".



Sorry i screwed up, i was kinda out out of it, anyhow what i meant to say is: does mold work better as the Timelines/aligned Slipstream or transformers Prime/aligned Starscream
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513057)
Posted by Sabrblade on August 20th, 2013 @ 11:20pm CDT
SW's SilverHammer wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:

SW's SilverHammer wrote:So Seibertron, in your opinion, do you think this figure works better as a representation of a timelines/allighned Slipstream or Prime Starscream?
"Aligned Slipstream" is the same thing as "Prime Slipstream".



Sorry i screwed up, i was kinda out out of it, anyhow what i meant to say is: does mold work better as the Timelines/aligned Slipstream or transformers Prime/aligned Starscream
Ah, that makes sense.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513098)
Posted by GuyIncognito on August 21st, 2013 @ 8:22am CDT
Seeing as how "female" Transformers don't have to deliver babies vaginally, I don't see why they should have wider hips, like human females.

It's 2013, people. A figure, ESPECIALLY A ROBOT, doesn't need to have Barbie Doll proportions to represent a female character.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513121)
Posted by Bumblevivisector on August 21st, 2013 @ 10:23am CDT
GuyIncognito wrote:It's 2013, people. A figure, ESPECIALLY A ROBOT, doesn't need to have Barbie Doll proportions to represent a female character.
Right, of course not.

Today, Monster High doll proportions would be way cooler.

In fact, I think that's why Slipstream's bulbous, ridged cranium works once you actually have her in hand. I look forward to someone taking a crack at a replacement head, but only because I still really want a proper Animated Slipstream. Even if that never happens, this figure turned out fine.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513133)
Posted by Seibertron on August 21st, 2013 @ 11:16am CDT
The new head isn't horrible, it's just not a very feminine figure to me (though I agree that's an odd statement to make since TFP Starscream's body seems effeminate to me). If the head looked more like her bio card head, then I'd be much happier. It's not. I knew going into it that this was one of the Subscription figures I was looking forward to the least, so on to the next one. Breakdown and Ultra Mammoth are the ones to which I'm looking most forward.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513225)
Posted by SKYWARPED_128 on August 21st, 2013 @ 8:14pm CDT
GuyIncognito wrote:Seeing as how "female" Transformers don't have to deliver babies vaginally, I don't see why they should have wider hips, like human females.

It's 2013, people. A figure, ESPECIALLY A ROBOT, doesn't need to have Barbie Doll proportions to represent a female character.


With all due respect to you Guy, if one has to start down that road, then there's really no point in having gender in robots in the first place. Transformers isn't exactly the most well thought-out piece of fiction, and sometimes you just have to go with the obvious. If Slipstream is supposed to be a humanoid female robot, then she'll need to have humanoid female proportions.

She doesn't need Barbie proportions per se, but a recognizable female physique would serve it better, like FE Arcee. By human standards, FE Arcee would have a rather athletic physique, but is still recognizably female to the human eye. Even if you photoshopped away her chest area and made it flat as a board, she'd still look female.

The truth is, unlike Arcee, Slipstream is a retool of a toy that was designed in the image of a gaunt, somewhat bird-like male TF. Had she been designed from the ground up as a female TF, I'm pretty sure she would have different proportions--again, NOT necessarily Barbie-like, but recognizably feminine. That certainly seems to be the case with TFA and PRID Arcee.

I'm not bashing the figure in any way. All I'm saying is that had she been designed as her own toy, she'd have had more suitable proportions for her gender.

Sabrblade wrote:
SKYWARPED_128 wrote:To be fair, the head sculpt isn't really helping. Maybe getting a Shapeways head from TecromDesigns might improve it.

Just my two cents' worth. >:oP
The head looks much MUCH better in hand in person. That close up pic above doesn't quite capture her good side (no offense, Ryan ;;) ). ;)


I couldn't find any other pics of the toy in Google, but I guess you're right--it does look somewhat better in the pic below the closeup.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513228)
Posted by Sabrblade on August 21st, 2013 @ 8:35pm CDT
SKYWARPED_128 wrote:With all due respect to you Guy, if one has to start down that road, then there's really no point in having gender in robots in the first place.
To be fair, Transformers did actually start off that way, with the robots having no gender. Bob Budiansky wrote the original character bios and the Marvel Comics with that very mindset, but the cartoon kinda went with its own thing and introduced genders with the female Autobots in "The Search for Alpha Trion" and Arcee in the movie. Since the cartoon became more widespread than the comics did, it wound up setting the mold of TF genders more than the comics did. ;)
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513231)
Posted by SKYWARPED_128 on August 21st, 2013 @ 8:55pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:
SKYWARPED_128 wrote:With all due respect to you Guy, if one has to start down that road, then there's really no point in having gender in robots in the first place.
To be fair, Transformers did actually start off that way, with the robots having no gender. Bob Budiansky wrote the original character bios and the Marvel Comics with that very mindset, but the cartoon kinda went with its own thing and introduced genders with the female Autobots in "The Search for Alpha Trion" and Arcee in the movie. Since the cartoon became more widespread than the comics did, it wound up setting the mold of TF genders more than the comics did. ;)


My point exactly...sort of. :D

Anyways, thanks for the info. Interesting--I never knew it was the cartoon that started the whole female bot thing.

All hail the human incarnation of tfwiki itself. :BOWDOWN:
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513233)
Posted by SW's SilverHammer on August 21st, 2013 @ 9:18pm CDT
So real quick sabrblade, are Bob's notes about ratchet here for the cartoon or comic?

Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513236)
Posted by Sabrblade on August 21st, 2013 @ 9:35pm CDT
Huh, interesting. Best guess is that he must have wrote that before deciding upon the no gender rule.

In this interview, he notes that Hasbro had spelled out a "no girl robots" rule that must have led to his treating the characters without gender:[quote]One of the things I liked a lot about the Marvel series, it focused a lot on the fact that these characters were, though living, they were actually ROBOTS and there were reasons for their existence and how they came about. This is the ONE part of the Transformers continuity where they don't have (not without a good explanation) "female" Transformers. What are your thoughts on female Transformers and do you think there's room to explore that dichotomy in the Transformers mythology?

BOB: Well, I remember bringing up that question early on with Hasbro, "are any of these female?" And then I think Hasbro's attitude was, 'this is a boy toy. We don't wanna have, you know, girl robots.' So, I said, "OK, just want to clarify that." Then of course, I think it was in 1986 they came out with the movie, and they had the token female character. Don't ask me to explain it. (laughs) I don't understand it. I think what I came up with was Creation Matrix, however that worked out explaining their existence, their 'livingness' was asexual. There was no female, there was no male, there was no need for them having different sexes. So, I just left it at that and what other people have done beyond that, I don't know. I was just… you know, like I said, I early on brought this question up and I was given a certain direction by the Hasbro executives I was dealing with and I went with it. It's their toy, so if that's what they want, that's fine with me. Now, if somebody wants to change their mind and says, 'oh yeah, there should be a whole other bunch of female Transformers,' then again, it's not my toy, they can do that. [/quote]
There's also this:
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513241)
Posted by SW's SilverHammer on August 21st, 2013 @ 9:50pm CDT
It's kinda odd though that a one paragraph note, of a concept, brings up gender roles and the dichotomy between male and female transformers.
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513242)
Posted by Sabrblade on August 21st, 2013 @ 9:52pm CDT
SW's SilverHammer wrote:It's kinda odd though that a one paragraph note, of a concept, brings up gender roles and the dichotomy between male and female transformers.
In the words of BW Megatron, oh. we simply have a thing for intelligent conversation. :P
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513243)
Posted by SW's SilverHammer on August 21st, 2013 @ 10:23pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:
SW's SilverHammer wrote:It's kinda odd though that a one paragraph note, of a concept, brings up gender roles and the dichotomy between male and female transformers.
In the words of BW Megatron, oh. we simply have a thing for intelligent conversation. :P


I think we have a nice "back an forth", even when we have our disagreements *cough botcon 2013* :P
Re: New Gallery: Club Subscription Service Slipstream (1513246)
Posted by Seibertron on August 21st, 2013 @ 10:49pm CDT
Sabrblade wrote:Huh, interesting. Best guess is that he must have wrote that before deciding upon the no gender rule.

In this interview, he notes that Hasbro had spelled out a "no girl robots" rule that must have led to his treating the characters without gender:[quote]One of the things I liked a lot about the Marvel series, it focused a lot on the fact that these characters were, though living, they were actually ROBOTS and there were reasons for their existence and how they came about. This is the ONE part of the Transformers continuity where they don't have (not without a good explanation) "female" Transformers. What are your thoughts on female Transformers and do you think there's room to explore that dichotomy in the Transformers mythology?

BOB: Well, I remember bringing up that question early on with Hasbro, "are any of these female?" And then I think Hasbro's attitude was, 'this is a boy toy. We don't wanna have, you know, girl robots.' So, I said, "OK, just want to clarify that." Then of course, I think it was in 1986 they came out with the movie, and they had the token female character. Don't ask me to explain it. (laughs) I don't understand it. I think what I came up with was Creation Matrix, however that worked out explaining their existence, their 'livingness' was asexual. There was no female, there was no male, there was no need for them having different sexes. So, I just left it at that and what other people have done beyond that, I don't know. I was just… you know, like I said, I early on brought this question up and I was given a certain direction by the Hasbro executives I was dealing with and I went with it. It's their toy, so if that's what they want, that's fine with me. Now, if somebody wants to change their mind and says, 'oh yeah, there should be a whole other bunch of female Transformers,' then again, it's not my toy, they can do that.

There's also this:
 [/quote]

Except none of this really works when you think about the lead time for developing the 1986 film. Isn't there usually a 1.5 to 2.5 year process of getting an animated movie made? It's mind boggling to think about how early on that the process of the animated movie, including Arcee, had begun which means you ought to toss out all of those rules about no genders just like Autobots are cars and Decepticons are jets/military vehicles nonsense.

"Rules are meant to be broken." They're just guidelines. In the case of a fictional universe like Transformers, just initial thoughts until something better comes along that throws a curveball to everything that came before it (i.e. Aerialbots, Stunticons, Jetfire, Constructicons, female Transformers, etc).

With the exception of Strika, female Transformers ought to have the female look pretty well covered or else it's just a female persona attached to a male body which is a whole other conversation.

Transformers Podcast: Twincast / Podcast #142 - Botcon 2016 Part 3: The Last One
Twincast / Podcast #142:
"Botcon 2016 Part 3: The Last One"
MP3 · iTunes · RSS · View · Discuss · Ask
Posted: Sunday, April 17th, 2016