The Energon Pub

u are using flawed logic, consider things like spiderman and x-men, people remember those movies even though they are changed from the original universe, same will happen with the tf movie i promise u that

Great Atlas wrote:u are using flawed logic, consider things like spiderman and x-men, people remember those movies even though they are changed from the original universe, same will happen with the tf movie i promise u that

Uh, there's a difference between using the same universe and making certain characters completely unrecognisable. Even if the GG's costume was a bit naff, he still looked like the GG.

Transformers today is the same for the kids as the original was for us. My little cousin loves the stuff the way I loved my original. He thinks the 86 movie was cool, but he doesn't know/care who half the characters are. Prime and Megatron he recognizes b/c of how the act, not necessarily how they looked.

And as for sheer awesome factor, I there's a reason my 6y/o cousin started applauding when the Decepticons started rolling out in the new movie, b/c he knew it would be big and that it would be awesome. They both thought the movie was great, and that the Transformers were cool. And they most certainly NOT upset that the TFs didn't look like the ones they knew. They didn't care b/c the movie was awesome, and as others have stated a kick-ass restart of our beloved Transformers.

FuriousRodimus wrote:Transformers today is the same for the kids as the original was for us. My little cousin loves the stuff the way I loved my original. He thinks the 86 movie was cool, but he doesn't know/care who half the characters are. Prime and Megatron he recognizes b/c of how the act, not necessarily how they looked.

And as for sheer awesome factor, I there's a reason my 6y/o cousin started applauding when the Decepticons started rolling out in the new movie, b/c he knew it would be big and that it would be awesome. They both thought the movie was great, and that the Transformers were cool. And they most certainly NOT upset that the TFs didn't look like the ones they knew. They didn't care b/c the movie was awesome, and as others have stated a kick-ass restart of our beloved Transformers.

Everybody i know that saw the movie, thought that even though the looks changed, the movie was AWESOME!

FuriousRodimus wrote:Transformers today is the same for the kids as the original was for us. My little cousin loves the stuff the way I loved my original. He thinks the 86 movie was cool, but he doesn't know/care who half the characters are. Prime and Megatron he recognizes b/c of how the act, not necessarily how they looked.

That doesn't really counter anything I said. It still stands; if TFs today were memorable they wouldn't need to change them every year. And even then, Armada Optimus should still be iconic. And he's not. Because modern TFs are not the same for kids now as G1 TFs were for us. You're still operating under presumption, even if it's a seemingly educated one.

What it boils down to is; I would not have watched this **** as a kid. As a very young kid, maybe, but I would have gotten sick of it. G1 TFs sticks with me to this day.

And it's not down to "What I grew up with" either. We're not all idiots, some of us can look at things from an objective point of view.

Great Atlas wrote:

FuriousRodimus wrote:Transformers today is the same for the kids as the original was for us. My little cousin loves the stuff the way I loved my original. He thinks the 86 movie was cool, but he doesn't know/care who half the characters are. Prime and Megatron he recognizes b/c of how the act, not necessarily how they looked.

And as for sheer awesome factor, I there's a reason my 6y/o cousin started applauding when the Decepticons started rolling out in the new movie, b/c he knew it would be big and that it would be awesome. They both thought the movie was great, and that the Transformers were cool. And they most certainly NOT upset that the TFs didn't look like the ones they knew. They didn't care b/c the movie was awesome, and as others have stated a kick-ass restart of our beloved Transformers.

Everybody i know that saw the movie, thought that even though the looks changed, the movie was AWESOME!

It's true, some of my friends who know/little nothing about TF thought it was amazing. And my little cousins adored it. The younger one was like "You could make your car look like Bumblebee" (I drive a 1977 Firebird). I was like "I could, but I think I'd rather have it Transform in to a robot that was a little different."

Spark Light wrote:

FuriousRodimus wrote:Transformers today is the same for the kids as the original was for us. My little cousin loves the stuff the way I loved my original. He thinks the 86 movie was cool, but he doesn't know/care who half the characters are. Prime and Megatron he recognizes b/c of how the act, not necessarily how they looked.

That doesn't really counter anything I said. It still stands; if TFs today were memorable they wouldn't need to change them every year. And even then, Armada Optimus should still be iconic. And he's not. Because modern TFs are not the same for kids now as G1 TFs were for us. You're still operating under presumption, even if it's a seemingly educated one.

What it boils down to is; I would not have watched this **** as a kid. As a very young kid, maybe, but I would have gotten sick of it. G1 TFs sticks with me to this day.

And it's not down to "What I grew up with" either. We're not all idiots, some of us can look at things from an objective point of view.

Did you ever consider that the character models were changing to keep with an advancing chronology? And it's too early to tell if Armada/Energon/Cybertron will stick b/c the kids are like 6-8y/o right now. Geez, give 'em a chance to grow up before you start spouting off about the characters being memorable. And you didn't really counter my argument with an example of kids you know. It may be a presumption, but there's at least some evidence backing instead your constant stream of blustering that has become repetitive and annoying.

Or could it be that the character models change b/c...Hasbro is a corporation, that caters to it's shareholders and needs to make profits, and so instead of giving us a deluge of characters that no one knows or cares about (i.e Ruckus, Crankcase, Roadgrabber, Monstructor, et al.)they have decided to stay with a few main characters that act the same in every incarnation and are still recognizable to their target audience in the cartoons dues to voice actor continuity and character continuity.

Maybe you should go hang out with Tramp and you can regale each other with the glories of G1 and bemoan the changing of what was 'pure' and 'perfect' and simply leave the new movie and stories to those of us who like the movie and understand the most basic premise of Transformers: That things change.

Spark Light wrote:

FuriousRodimus wrote:Transformers today is the same for the kids as the original was for us. My little cousin loves the stuff the way I loved my original. He thinks the 86 movie was cool, but he doesn't know/care who half the characters are. Prime and Megatron he recognizes b/c of how the act, not necessarily how they looked.

That doesn't really counter anything I said. It still stands; if TFs today were memorable they wouldn't need to change them every year. And even then, Armada Optimus should still be iconic. And he's not. Because modern TFs are not the same for kids now as G1 TFs were for us. You're still operating under presumption, even if it's a seemingly educated one.

What it boils down to is; I would not have watched this **** as a kid. As a very young kid, maybe, but I would have gotten sick of it. G1 TFs sticks with me to this day.

And it's not down to "What I grew up with" either. We're not all idiots, some of us can look at things from an objective point of view.

Actually, what it boils down to is this: Transformers, first and foremost, is a TOYLINE, and when it comes right down to it, Hasbro has the final say in their appearance, character, and existence, regardless of the popularity of any cartoon series, animated film, or live-action film.

Had Transformers started out as a cartoon series that spawned a toyline, it'd be a much different story, and I think we'd see more cohesive continuity.

But Transformers, ultimately, started as a simple toy, which is why we've seen so many iterations of these characters--even from those in the movie.

And if that's not the case, then please explain to me why half the characters, including Optimus Prime, were killed off within the first twenty minutes of the '86 movie?

You know when trashy action movies become a smash hit success, much to critics and many tasteful film fans' disarray, and you wonder how the hell so many people watched that and thought it was anything more than a slightly above average film with a rubbish plot?

This is what it's like from the inside.

Spark Light wrote:You know when trashy action movies become a smash hit success, much to critics and many tasteful film fans' disarray, and you wonder how the hell so many people watched that and thought it was anything more than a slightly above average film with a rubbish plot?

This is what it's like from the inside.

Hey, guess what, if you care what a critic thinks, and base your thoughts on a movie off of that, you are a sheep.

Real people decide for themselves. I decided that I can accept the flaws in a movie, and, hence, I enjoyed myself.

Spark Light wrote:You know when trashy action movies become a smash hit success, much to critics and many tasteful film fans' disarray, and you wonder how the hell so many people watched that and thought it was anything more than a slightly above average film with a rubbish plot?

This is what it's like from the inside.

I do know what's it's like. The Fast & The Furious was horrible.

Did you ever consider that the character models were changing to keep with an advancing chronology?

No, they were changing to sell more toys.

And it's too early to tell if Armada/Energon/Cybertron will stick b/c the kids are like 6-8y/o right now.

It isn't. It'd still be remembered now if it was to be remembered in 10 years time.

AEC was barely even shown here in the UK.

AEC just was not as big as G1 is. Not by quite a bit. Please stop pretending otherwise.

Geez, give 'em a chance to grow up before you start spouting off about the characters being memorable. And you didn't really counter my argument with an example of kids you know.

It may be a presumption, but there's at least some evidence backing instead your constant stream of blustering that has become repetitive and annoying.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence(unless you're seeking to prove a rare case).

Or could it be that the character models change b/c...Hasbro is a corporation, that caters to it's shareholders and needs to make profits, and so instead of giving us a deluge of characters that no one knows or cares about (i.e Ruckus, Crankcase, Roadgrabber, Monstructor, et al.)they have decided to stay with a few main characters that act the same in every incarnation and are still recognizable to their target audience in the cartoons dues to voice actor continuity and character continuity.

If TFs were as big as they were in the 80s(or even the 90s, I believe Primal's Ultra lasted for well over a year), first off, you'd still see Armada Prime plasted everywhere even during Cybertron, and they'd be able to keep selling the original Armada Prime toy for 2 years, not one. The original G1 Optimus Prime was iconic - Armada Prime is not.

Even Hasbro's decisions harken back to G1 constantly - how many figures in Titaniums, for example, were based off series that weren't part of the G1 continuity block? Not many. Alternators? None. Classics? None, not even Beast Wars which might have qualified.

Maybe you should go hang out with Tramp and you can regale each other with the glories of G1 and bemoan the changing of what was 'pure' and 'perfect' and simply leave the new movie and stories to those of us who like the movie and understand the most basic premise of Transformers: That things change.

And then change back again. They're Transformers, not transsexuals. Honestly, how **** stupid can you get to splurt out that overused trite at someone and not realise how much it fails at the most basic level? This is an example of what I'm talking about. That rubbish has been used time and time again in these arguments, and not one of you have later stopped to realise what's inherently wrong about that statement. It's not the same kind of change. Nowhere near it. It's like saying that the Hulk is all about change since Bruce Banner changes into the Hulk, therefore we should change the Hulk heavily. It makes no logical sense whatsoever. This is because you are not thinking critically, you are only repeated catchy arguments you inhereted from someone else equally bad at arguing.

NO successful franchise is all about change. Franchises do have to change; but it cannot be a valid premise. If TFs kept changing the Aesthetic wildly every year, it would end up harming them immensely. TFs would not remain popular if Hasbro didn't keep taking elements from the original every time they start again. Animated is heavily based on G1, much more so than anything we've gotten recently. And I bet you that it will be the only series that lasts more than a year, if it's any good.

If something I am a fan of changes, I do not have to remain a fan of it anymore, since my reasons for being a fan may no longer be there. It is not more "open minded" to be mindlessly acceptant of change. This is not social progression here, which I wouldn't be surprised if you were quite conservative regarding, it's not something that NEEDS to change. It's iconic in it's own right. It's not to do with the state of the world, and there was nothing heavily wrong with it to begin with. It doesn't NEED to change in the way you think it does.

Apart from that, you're an insufferable twat for casting me as a G1 purist. I absolutely can't **** stand people that throw in comments like that at the end of arguments. It just shows how little confidence you must have in the blabbering that comes before it. Not everyone who disagrees with your rubbish has to be some charicature of a fanboy. Go shove your shortpacked-isms up your ass.

Not to mention the kids that grew up in the 80s are also the prime audience for action flicks. They'll be swallowed in the hype for this one, but for the second movie, they're actually going to have to work at making a good Transformers movie. That means it'll actually have to be centered around the main characters this time. What a thought.

FuriousRodimus wrote:

Spark Light wrote:You know when trashy action movies become a smash hit success, much to critics and many tasteful film fans' disarray, and you wonder how the hell so many people watched that and thought it was anything more than a slightly above average film with a rubbish plot?

This is what it's like from the inside.

I do know what's it's like. The Fast & The Furious was horrible.

And that's exactly what the "Haters" think of the Transformers movie. Is it really that hard to relate to that?

Spark Light wrote:

FuriousRodimus wrote:

Spark Light wrote:You know when trashy action movies become a smash hit success, much to critics and many tasteful film fans' disarray, and you wonder how the hell so many people watched that and thought it was anything more than a slightly above average film with a rubbish plot?

This is what it's like from the inside.

I do know what's it's like. The Fast & The Furious was horrible.

And that's exactly what the "Haters" think of the Transformers movie. Is it really that hard to relate to that?

Yes.

Shadowman wrote:

Spark Light wrote:

FuriousRodimus wrote:

Spark Light wrote:You know when trashy action movies become a smash hit success, much to critics and many tasteful film fans' disarray, and you wonder how the hell so many people watched that and thought it was anything more than a slightly above average film with a rubbish plot?

This is what it's like from the inside.

I do know what's it's like. The Fast & The Furious was horrible.

And that's exactly what the "Haters" think of the Transformers movie. Is it really that hard to relate to that?

Yes.

QFT. /thread

Spark Light wrote:If RiD, Energon, et all, where really that memorable, they would have lasted more than a year without having to change.

It was always Hasbro/Takara's intention for the Armada/Energon/Cybertron series to only last for one year each.

It NEVER had anything to do with popularity, that's simply how they chose to market things. The original idea for A/E/C was to be a "trilogy", while Cybertron never fitted in with the trilogy aspect the whole plan did in fact last three years.

G1 Optimus as an icon lasts to even this day. Armada Optimus was already forgotten about. Unicron Trilogy Optimus, in general, has already been forgotten.

Over exposure. The incarnations were simply not given enough time.

Yet suprisingly, a lot of people still fondly remember Armada Starscream.

You have nothing to back up the idea, you're just presuming it. It's a presumption that Transformers today is the same for kids now as it was back in the 80s.

How is life in your little fantasy world where you read one thing and interpret it as something else?

I NEVER said Transformers from the 80's is the same as Transformers for kids today. NEVER.

What I said was is the kids who grew up with Transformers in the 80's are now working in the media fields, that's why TF's pop up on things like Robot Chicken, Family Guy, and all the other various places they've popped up.

Kirk remains to this day an icon even among people that didn't grow up with him. I didn't grow up with him, I grew up with Jean Luc Picard. But I still recognise Kirk as an icon. Why? Because he had that lasting quality. So does Jean Luc. People won't remember Johnathan Archer the same way, or else we'd already know it by now.

People remember Kirk over Picard because Kirk has been around longer. He also featured in more films than Picard. It's that reasoning why Picard will be remembered more than Archer. Longer exposure.

Just like G1 ...

People really underestimate kids - older kids will most certainly know G1 Transformers. Kids love to be experts on things, and many will read up on the history even from an early age. A huge portion of youngsters would be heavily aware of Generation 1 Transformers. It's what their parents grew up with, and it's what will last practically forever.

Funny, I seem to remember saying something similar.

What was it I said? Oh yeah, new fans introduced through the modern series tend to go back and learn about history from the beginning.

That's the only reason G1 is popular. New fans are going back to collect it. Over the years things will expand and there'll probably end up being a demand for A/E/C figures and even movie figures years down the track.

Or there may not be, only time will tell. You bitch me out for presuming things yet you seem to be stuck in the "G1 is the only true Transformers" mentality.

Feel free to join the 21st century some time soon.

Just wanted to give my 2 cents about 300...

I understand it's based on a graphic novel, and not trying to be historically accurate.
Either way, I don't care.

My problem was that there was waaay too many cheesy lines,
a couple of the creatures were LAME and laughable,
especially the hunchback...
Pshhhh.

Now, were some of the action scenes cool?
Absolutely.
But all in all, there were enough bad, stupid things that made it MEH for me.

Spark Light wrote:

Did you ever consider that the character models were changing to keep with an advancing chronology?

No, they were changing to sell more toys.

And it's too early to tell if Armada/Energon/Cybertron will stick b/c the kids are like 6-8y/o right now.

It isn't. It'd still be remembered now if it was to be remembered in 10 years time.

AEC was barely even shown here in the UK.

AEC just was not as big as G1 is. Not by quite a bit. Please stop pretending otherwise.

Geez, give 'em a chance to grow up before you start spouting off about the characters being memorable. And you didn't really counter my argument with an example of kids you know.

It may be a presumption, but there's at least some evidence backing instead your constant stream of blustering that has become repetitive and annoying.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence(unless you're seeking to prove a rare case).

Or could it be that the character models change b/c...Hasbro is a corporation, that caters to it's shareholders and needs to make profits, and so instead of giving us a deluge of characters that no one knows or cares about (i.e Ruckus, Crankcase, Roadgrabber, Monstructor, et al.)they have decided to stay with a few main characters that act the same in every incarnation and are still recognizable to their target audience in the cartoons dues to voice actor continuity and character continuity.

If TFs were as big as they were in the 80s(or even the 90s, I believe Primal's Ultra lasted for well over a year), first off, you'd still see Armada Prime plasted everywhere even during Cybertron, and they'd be able to keep selling the original Armada Prime toy for 2 years, not one. The original G1 Optimus Prime was iconic - Armada Prime is not.

Even Hasbro's decisions harken back to G1 constantly - how many figures in Titaniums, for example, were based off series that weren't part of the G1 continuity block? Not many. Alternators? None. Classics? None, not even Beast Wars which might have qualified.

Maybe you should go hang out with Tramp and you can regale each other with the glories of G1 and bemoan the changing of what was 'pure' and 'perfect' and simply leave the new movie and stories to those of us who like the movie and understand the most basic premise of Transformers: That things change.

And then change back again. They're Transformers, not transsexuals. Honestly, how **** stupid can you get to splurt out that overused trite at someone and not realise how much it fails at the most basic level? This is an example of what I'm talking about. That rubbish has been used time and time again in these arguments, and not one of you have later stopped to realise what's inherently wrong about that statement. It's not the same kind of change. Nowhere near it. It's like saying that the Hulk is all about change since Bruce Banner changes into the Hulk, therefore we should change the Hulk heavily. It makes no logical sense whatsoever. This is because you are not thinking critically, you are only repeated catchy arguments you inhereted from someone else equally bad at arguing.

NO successful franchise is all about change. Franchises do have to change; but it cannot be a valid premise. If TFs kept changing the Aesthetic wildly every year, it would end up harming them immensely. TFs would not remain popular if Hasbro didn't keep taking elements from the original every time they start again. Animated is heavily based on G1, much more so than anything we've gotten recently. And I bet you that it will be the only series that lasts more than a year, if it's any good.

If something I am a fan of changes, I do not have to remain a fan of it anymore, since my reasons for being a fan may no longer be there. It is not more "open minded" to be mindlessly acceptant of change. This is not social progression here, which I wouldn't be surprised if you were quite conservative regarding, it's not something that NEEDS to change. It's iconic in it's own right. It's not to do with the state of the world, and there was nothing heavily wrong with it to begin with. It doesn't NEED to change in the way you think it does.

Apart from that, you're an insufferable twat for casting me as a G1 purist. I absolutely can't **** stand people that throw in comments like that at the end of arguments. It just shows how little confidence you must have in the blabbering that comes before it. Not everyone who disagrees with your rubbish has to be some charicature of a fanboy. Go shove your shortpacked-isms up your ass.

Not to mention the kids that grew up in the 80s are also the prime audience for action flicks. They'll be swallowed in the hype for this one, but for the second movie, they're actually going to have to work at making a good Transformers movie. That means it'll actually have to be centered around the main characters this time. What a thought.

And yet you sound like a caricature of a fanboy resorting to ad hominem attacks, replete with spelling errors, social commentary, a more-educated-than-thou attitude,and still failing to provide counter-evidence which is at the very heart of academic debate. Nor have you taken into consideration that the market has changed, and that you are no longer the target audience for Hasbro with their newest lines.Agreed they recycle elements, but that's a far cry from recycling entire series, designs, and plot lines.

And if you can't stand me so much, why do you keep coming back to this thread to force feed your oft stated opinion that everyone at this point has read, and refuted.

It seems to me that you lack confidence in your stance because of your need to repeatedly insult me, while providing no evidence anecdotal or otherwise to refute my statement that Transformers is to kids today as it was to us, simply b/c the character molds keep changing.

Now seriously, let's be done with this. Or at the very least agree to disagree

Spark Light wrote:

And it's too early to tell if Armada/Energon/Cybertron will stick b/c the kids are like 6-8y/o right now.

It isn't. It'd still be remembered now if it was to be remembered in 10 years time.

AEC was barely even shown here in the UK.

AEC just was not as big as G1 is. Not by quite a bit. Please stop pretending otherwise.

Just because the Unicron Trilogy was barely shown in the UK, doesn't mean it wasn't a hit anywhere else. Hate to be the one to tell you, it was huge in the states. We went through the same problems with the toys not being on the shelves as we are with the movie toys now. Aside from the shelf warmers(and there weren't many), the toys were a hit with their intended market, the "Gotta catch 'em all" Pokemon crowd. So as far as the Unicron Trilogy being a hit as big as G1 amongst it's intended audience, IT WAS. So no one is pretending. And it's obviously the same with the movie as of right now.

Is there a Unicron Trilogy? I thought he was killed in the 1986 movie.

Auto Bot wrote:Is there a Unicron Trilogy? I thought he was killed in the 1986 movie.

Armada
Energon
Cybertron

The three most recent series'. All of them involved Unicron in one way or another.

Seems to me that this whole debate--on this forum and elsewhere--proves that the mass majority of people are far more concerned about outward appearances than they are about character.

Oh we got over the lack of characterisation debate within the first few weeks of it's opening.

Shadowman wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:Is there a Unicron Trilogy? I thought he was killed in the 1986 movie.

Armada
Energon
Cybertron

The three most recent series'. All of them involved Unicron in one way or another.

Each unrelated to the other?

This whole debate it the same old story. It's a lot like Optimus Prime: the more things do change, the more they stay the same (see my last point at bottom).

About the toy and story lines and their popularity, we're all missing a big piece of the argument here. Toys today just don't share the same lasting popularity with children that they did when most of use supposedly "grew up". That’s a fact. With technology becoming so dominate in kids lives, they don't play and interact with toys nearly as long as we did. Most kids today are probably never going to look back as fondly as we did about their Transformers because they just did truly grow up with them like we did. That's going to have a huge impact in the "lasting qualities" of the newer generations of stories and toy lines. And that probably has a lot to do with why Hasbro is always changing their toys and marketing strategies (storyline in the cartoons, movies, etc), because the average kid today has a shorter attention span and because the average age kids stop playing with toy in lieu of electronics is declining all of the time. Hasbro is constantly having to try to being new kids into the loop when they lose older ones with the newer fans needing to be younger and younger. Just look at their newest toy and story lines as evidence of that: Animated, Cyber Slammers, and Robot Heros-less real world look, more kid friendly. Sure, there are always going to be exceptions to the rule with kids playing with and collecting toys into their teens and adulthood. But I’d argue that these kids are more collectors at a young age versus just “kids playing with their toys”: most of their peers have already succumb to the allure of iPods, Xbox, and computers long before.

To the posters who’ve said that things don’t have to change, I agree for the most part. I think we can ALL agree that, while some things do get changed and updated, they, for the most part, stay and feel very similar. If we hold up an Optimus Prime from G1, Armada, the Movie, and Animated, an average person’s going to probably recognize them as the same character. That’s the beauty of it all…

And I think we can all agree that there are stong emotions tied to whichever generation or iteration of Transformers you/we prefer and that counter arguments are going to do little to change that. The bottom line is, whether you liked, loved, or hated the movie, love G1, BWs, Armada, etc.. in the toy lines, we are all here because we're passionate about Transformers.