The Energon Pub

You know I would have loved to see the reaction to this 2 years ago. Now many people accept and even like the new movie designs. Yet 2 years ago or so when the designs were first leaked everyone hated them. I wonder how this design would have gone over back then?

Oh I know the majority would have hated the lanky look. But I bet if they had gone in this direction many people would have been more accepting of the designs early on.

See!
See!
They tried to make your dam G1 movie and look at it!
Go ahead and look!
Aren't you ashamed of yourself?
Huh!
Would you pay to see that?
No, I didn't think so!
Now get in your cage and think about what you almost did...
(under breath) That's f'ing terrible.






(Me yelling at the dog for bitchin about movie designs)

roy_flagg00 wrote:a supercombat reverse joint monkey.

Those 'reverse joints' you speak of are in fact not reverse knees, but the ankles. Cats and birds have elongated feet and walk on their toes. So the leg bends at the knee (which sticks out forward) then at the ankle (sticks out to the back) and then at the toe.

okay, so is starscream a cat or bird?

roy_flagg00 wrote:okay, so is starscream a cat or bird?

Dang. You keep making me laugh.

D-340 wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:It is not the best, but it is better than a gorillabot. Also, I like to think of starscream as a scrawny, weasley bastich, not a supercombat reverse joint monkey.
Also I like a recognizable face, not two eyes and a bunghole for a mouth.

This I agree with. While the little bit of character we got with movie Starscream told it was in fact Starscream, the design would have been better for someone else. I always said the movie 'Screamer reminds me of Crumplezone.

see, this is why i prefer the prototype to the design we got. i really like the design itself (hell, i own the toy and love it), but it's terrible as starscream. aside from bearing absolutely no resemblance to the character it's supposed to be (an issue i have with several of the movie designs), the body of the final version is the exact opposite of the sleek, aerodynamic form that every previous starscream has had, which i felt was an important part of what defined his character.

bottom line: this prototype is quite far from perfect, but it would have been a good jumping off point. if you showed me this next to the final design and asked me which looked cooler, the final design blows this away. but the question is which is a better starscream design, and this prototype wins that one hands down.

roy_flagg00 wrote:okay, so is starscream a cat or bird?

Neither. The legs are designed like that of a Velociraptor. Possibly because Raptors are fast runners, or because Starscream is an F-22 Raptor.

Ew, that thing is disgusting.

I love Starscream's final design. Very evil-looking and badass, even if it is very "un-Starscream-like" and wide. Plus his transformation is very unique from every other jet Transformer.

Shadowman wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:okay, so is starscream a cat or bird?

Neither. The legs are designed like that of a Velociraptor. Possibly because Raptors are fast runners, or because Starscream is an F-22 Raptor.

Thanks for clearing that up.
So what your saying is that starscream in the movie is a velociraptor?

roy_flagg00 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:okay, so is starscream a cat or bird?

Neither. The legs are designed like that of a Velociraptor. Possibly because Raptors are fast runners, or because Starscream is an F-22 Raptor.

Thanks for clearing that up.
So what your saying is that starscream in the movie is a velociraptor?

Yup. His upper body is so big, because to causes a lot of forward momentum. (Same reason you swing your arms back and forth when you run.)

Wow that prototype makes Starscream look very um... feminine... maybe they could make it Pimp-daddy Starscreams Ho in the next movie?

Shadowman wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

roy_flagg00 wrote:okay, so is starscream a cat or bird?

Neither. The legs are designed like that of a Velociraptor. Possibly because Raptors are fast runners, or because Starscream is an F-22 Raptor.

Thanks for clearing that up.
So what your saying is that starscream in the movie is a velociraptor?

Yup. His upper body is so big, because to causes a lot of forward momentum. (Same reason you swing your arms back and forth when you run.)

:BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD::BANG_HEAD:
I officially have no hope for the next movie.

Awesome. Does that mean you'll stop posting in the movie forum?

TheMuffin wrote:Awesome. Does that mean you'll stop posting in the movie forum?

Don't get your knickers in a bunch.
BTW, I will continue posting because this is public opinion forum and many people share my opinion that the movie, wile it had it's bright spots, was a colossal failure to live up to the incredible potential that it had.
Bison liked the movie too.

Ok. You put Raul in a post. I now love you in a non erotic manner.

I just watched the film for a second time tonight, and I see both sides of the arguement. On how we perceive things, visual moving parts do look more complex, and I think that's how the new designs were made; they wanted to show a sophistication that humans could never have thought possible and is clearly alien. MORE than just snapping any old vehicle into five anatomical sections.
This concept, the face anyway, reminds me of that god-awful Michael Jackson "Moonwalker" robot. Not sure why, maybe it's the colours. I don't get the human face thing really. If you are part of an alien robot army led by a megomaniac from another planet bent on total destruction, why would you look or want to look human? Surely, like Barricade showed in the film, you want to scare the crap out of people.
True, this concept makes it clear "he turns into a jet" than the movie counterpart, but he looks cumbersome just like the original G1 characters. Not to mention the wings on his back looks like they can be snapped off.
Basically, I'm all for complexity. I remember a "Top 100 cartoons" programme on TV once summing the Transformers cartoon up very unfairly (and VERY briefly) as "a cartoon about cars that transform into robots that look like cars".
I would never want to see "sophisticated" aliens on the cinema screen and think.. "uh.. they kinda look like a toys".

he would look better if he could use atleast a little muscle and thickness... he's too thin...

Hey look Go-bots movie concept art!
oh wait...my mistake.

roy_flagg00

My problem in a nustshell is that this prototype showed that designers initially did have the idea to show a certain level of respect to g1 designs, and Bay and that douchebag production lead came in and sunk that idea. not surprising from a guy who has made pretty clear his disdane of G1.

At least the prototype, while not perfect, resembled the IDEA of transformers.
The problem is not that the movie designs did not look like G1, but that they did not resemble the transformers CONCEPT to a sufficient degree in my taste.

You're being awfully nice about it. Not even an "off their rocker" comment to fit in there?

Riotflea, I hate you because you are a genius.

Bah. That's a sad commentary on society then lol.
This guy seems to have his head in the right place though:

Creature SH wrote:

Autobot032 wrote:The movie designs actually move, emote, etc...can't accomplish that with G1-esque designs.

An entirely humanoid design can't emote as well as an insectoid pile of blades can ? How the hell does this kind of reasoning work ?

Creature SH

If you can buy magical shapeshifting nanotech hide altmodes, you could certainly stomach a flexible coating for the face. It's not such a far cry from materials we actually have in earth technology right now.

For real. Once we start talking nano-tech... holy crap.
Nanite technology is LITERALLY inseparable from what is called in fantasy as "magic".

So why the designs looked as they do (which in my opinion is sheets of metal with MOST exposed innards), how the robots had nano tech but still no protective "skin" (like Beast Wars!) is beyond me.
No, it's like, insulting.

beastwars designs were not perfect, but they were way better than these crappods.
(See, it doesn't have to be G1).

Exactly. They had hyper-technology, but didn't translate it into well into their bodies?
(Robots in movie AND the designers).
Downright conflicting stuff...

Riotflea wrote:Bah. That's a sad commentary on society then lol.
This guy seems to have his head in the right place though (...)

Above shoulders, centered. Is that right ?

Seriously, though, it really doesn't take much other than willingness to see where the movie went wrong.

I also find the "alien robots = alien faces" reasoning rather bogus. This is - at the core - a science fiction property, and science fiction has always gotten away with humanoid aliens without raising any eyebrows. In fact, the most successful scifi franchises had them as the norm, rather than the exception. I don't see anybody complaining about Luke Skywalker's lack of extra mandibles or Spock's unforked tongue.

Creature SH wrote:
Seriously, though, it really doesn't take much other than willingness to see where the movie went wrong.

I also find the "alien robots = alien faces" reasoning rather bogus. This is - at the core - a science fiction property, and science fiction has always gotten away with humanoid aliens without raising any eyebrows.

Even better, they observed us through the internet, spoke our language, transformed into our vehicles... but had ditched using holograms or nanite skin to not FREAK out their human contacts in regards to faces?
We, who are so obsessed with image and body (face) language?

Missed potential.

Still, they can just barely get away with it now... though it'd be retarded to still look as they do in any sequels.

::looks at 'Action HQ' ad on side of posting box::
::gets ill looking at 3 movie faces that are akin to wadded tinfoil crammed into helmets::

I love the new Star Scream. Why keep recycling old designs and feeding us the same old stuff forever. The movie star scream definately looked liked an evil, technically advanced alien being.

I always thought the heads of Starscream, Skywarp, and Thundercracker had a very Princess Leia bun thing going on. The movie head is an improvement. I'm not sure I like the rest of the movie Starscream (walks like a chicken and has legs to match), but it's better than the rough draft (which is always the goal).

I never liked Starscream's character, myself, but you don't see enough of him in the movie to to know if that's any better.

Looks like a cheap ass gobot.

I like movie Screamer, as weird as it may sound he has become my favorite design of the movie, and this one just looks plain, a silly. I just can't see Screamer doing some of the crazy stuff he did in the movie in this form. (F-22 battle scene anyone?)