The Energon Pub

Cliff Jumper wrote:

Autobobby1 wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote:I don't get why it can't work if the Alternators can.

Hmm...maybe because they're toys designed as toys that only are supposed to have realistic alternate modes.

I DARE you guys to find a clip using G1-ish designs that looks realistic. I have yet to see one that doesn't look cartoony, goofy, or spead up so that you don't notice the designs.

Okay, but the robot modes look like funtional humanoid robots and still retain the look of a real car. How would that not transfer to real life if it is real life?

Well, the motion would be unrealistic and the designs are pretty bulky.

In the end, who cares about designs? Transformers have gotten facelifts so many times, who can honestly say what Transformers look like?

[/quote]In the end, who cares about designs? Transformers have gotten facelifts so many times, who can honestly say what Transformers look like?[/quote]

notice though that all iterations of the Transformers retain a blocky look along with the identifable car/object/animal parts. That is until the new movie.

wingdarkness wrote:@nugget
But I thought B-Bee's transformation (especially after he beat barricade) was a joke...He just crumbled in a car and during the final fight almost every transformer except Starscream and Optimus just Eddie-Gordo'd there way in and out of transformations,

Hmm, I politely disagree about BB and SS, during the scene with Simmons and S7 (when they call for backup) you can see BB transform pretty slowly and where the head, arms and legs all fit. As for Starscreams, the transformations abit fast but during the final battle where he takes out Ironhide and Ratchet, you can notice the legs folding into place last of all. I'll agree that the Optimus transformation was abit hokey though.

I can't read through all 14 pages but for those who take issue with the faces in particular. Watch the movie again and during the scenes where Optimus is talking to Sam as well as the Barricade interrogation scene, try to visualize them talking through faceplates or G1 faces, it (the scene) will not the same impact.

PS: Did anyone think Ratchet and Ironhides faces looked abit like Primal from BM? Not the head shape just the faces.

Cliff Jumper wrote:
notice though that all iterations of the Transformers retain a blocky look along with the identifable car/object/animal parts. That is until the new movie.

'Oragomi'?? "clever" pun or are you just a spaz?? Regardless it's a great word and I may adopt it.

I see what you're saying in your examples, but it'd be more compelling if you hadn't used a screencap that although is from the 2000's, is using the 1984 character models. And given that we've had 20 odd years of transformers looking various ways, with alot of those being the 'humanoid, squared-off + vehicle parts' that just means you have plenty of designs you can enjoy, but it does no harm to have some new designs and a new look for a new transformers continuity.

It's not like making the Transformers into kung-fu somersaulting endoskeletons rolled in car-parts makes the ones from the last 20 years any less good or enjoyable.

Nope not a spaz Flashback. I was referring to the Oragomi styled mecha in some Anime. Now I'll admit that tf have adopted some of the oragomi mecha in they're shows. Divebomb for instance resembles that style of Anime mecha.

I would like to make this comment:

As far as the movie goes it was good otherwise I would not have seen it twice or gotten the toys. I just think that since it was sold to the fans a G1 faithful movie, to me anyways, it should have been more faithful to the source material.

Cliff Jumper wrote:Nope not a spaz Flashback. I was referring to the Oragomi styled mecha in some Anime. Now I'll admit that tf have adopted some of the oragomi mecha in they're shows. Divebomb for instance resembles that style of Anime mecha.

so do you mean 'Origami' or is oragomi the name of a designer/style?

Origami, sorry typo.

wingdarkness wrote:I'm kinda new here so I don't know how much it's been discussed and if it has please forgive me, but does anyone think the transformations of the cars in the GMC commercials are more pleasing to the eye than the Morphing that takes place in this movie?? In the GMC commercials you actually see it turning into a car and it looks practical...I was hell-bent on not seeing this movie but the GMC commercial kinda gave me some optimism atleast on how some of them would transform (I mean I had seen optimus and others thru previews too)...Imagine my shock though to see many of the transformers designs render them into balled up peices of foil that morphed in and out of car mode...Or so many moving parts that the enjoyment of the transformations were just to over-the-top...

Anyone felt this way about the design factors of the differing transformations?

I agree that there's way too many moving parts (especially Prime) making the tranformation process exaggerated and corny. (That's why the movie toys are better than the movie itself.)

I know Bay hates making still shots, not moving shots, and not moving parts.

Someone could have reminded him not to overdo it.

Autobobby1 wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote:I don't get why it can't work if the Alternators can.

Hmm...maybe because they're toys designed as toys that only are supposed to have realistic alternate modes.

I DARE you guys to find a clip using G1-ish designs that looks realistic. I have yet to see one that doesn't look cartoony, goofy, or spead up so that you don't notice the designs.

[/quote]

G1 Jazz transforms very well on cartoon and the toy itself. Very dynamic, especially on "we'll be back after these messages" clip.

Cliff Jumper wrote:I would like to make this comment:

As far as the movie goes it was good otherwise I would not have seen it twice or gotten the toys. I just think that since it was sold to the fans a G1 faithful movie, to me anyways, it should have been more faithful to the source material.

For me, the toys are much better than the robots in the movie. The toys has great designs and quite complicated transformations. The robots in the movie has great designs too, but overly complicated to the point of being unreal, and way too many useless moving parts. It distracts from the real transformation.

I definitely agree with you on that Auto Bot

Auto Bot wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote:I would like to make this comment:

As far as the movie goes it was good otherwise I would not have seen it twice or gotten the toys. I just think that since it was sold to the fans a G1 faithful movie, to me anyways, it should have been more faithful to the source material.

For me, the toys are much better than the robots in the movie. The toys has great designs and quite complicated transformations. The robots in the movie has great designs too, but overly complicated to the point of being unreal, and way too many useless moving parts. It distracts from the real transformation.

Only "Rainman" could transform these Bayformers in toy form....That's the thing that always gets on my nerves when I hear Bay talk about "He wanted the transforms to be real"...If That $hit is real then normal transformer toys are the realest thing in history...I mean it sounds simple when you say it, but Transformers turned into robots then turned into vehicles, etc and you saw why...I mean if they had too many wasted parts or unbelievable parts then you wouldn't be able to transform them...Think about all the moving parts on these Bayformers and ask yourself what in God's name did these guys look like before they were transformers?? That's why Bay wouldn't let you see what they looked like (besides a faint sillouette) before they scanned the cars because he has no concept on the fact the TFs always transform based on their orginal bodies...That's why this movie was all about transmorphing...

I've actually have had no problem TFing any of the movie toys. Didn't need the instructions, either(they're useless anyway). But then again, the onlt TF I've had problems TFing in the past few years was MP Prime, and with him I just glanced at the box.

As far as excessive moving parts, yeah there are some. While some of them were cool to see move like muscle tissue, others were distracting. Like the scene at Sam's house withe close up of Prime's head. It was a little too much.

wingdarkness wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote:I would like to make this comment:

As far as the movie goes it was good otherwise I would not have seen it twice or gotten the toys. I just think that since it was sold to the fans a G1 faithful movie, to me anyways, it should have been more faithful to the source material.

For me, the toys are much better than the robots in the movie. The toys has great designs and quite complicated transformations. The robots in the movie has great designs too, but overly complicated to the point of being unreal, and way too many useless moving parts. It distracts from the real transformation.

Only "Rainman" could transform these Bayformers in toy form....That's the thing that always gets on my nerves when I hear Bay talk about "He wanted the transforms to be real"...If That $hit is real then normal transformer toys are the realest thing in history...I mean it sounds simple when you say it, but Transformers turned into robots then turned into vehicles, etc and you saw why...I mean if they had too many wasted parts or unbelievable parts then you wouldn't be able to transform them...Think about all the moving parts on these Bayformers and ask yourself what in God's name did these guys look like before they were transformers?? That's why Bay wouldn't let you see what they looked like (besides a faint sillouette) before they scanned the cars because he has no concept on the fact the TFs always transform based on their orginal bodies...That's why this movie was all about transmorphing...

Morph is just a fancy word for Transform.

I don't know about you, but my Barricade toy is a b*tch.

As for the designs, I kinda wish Ratchet had some kind of resemblence to the original. You know, the little doohicky on top of his head. Oh well, I still liked the movie Ratchet!

Shadowman wrote:

wingdarkness wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote:I would like to make this comment:

As far as the movie goes it was good otherwise I would not have seen it twice or gotten the toys. I just think that since it was sold to the fans a G1 faithful movie, to me anyways, it should have been more faithful to the source material.

For me, the toys are much better than the robots in the movie. The toys has great designs and quite complicated transformations. The robots in the movie has great designs too, but overly complicated to the point of being unreal, and way too many useless moving parts. It distracts from the real transformation.

Only "Rainman" could transform these Bayformers in toy form....That's the thing that always gets on my nerves when I hear Bay talk about "He wanted the transforms to be real"...If That $hit is real then normal transformer toys are the realest thing in history...I mean it sounds simple when you say it, but Transformers turned into robots then turned into vehicles, etc and you saw why...I mean if they had too many wasted parts or unbelievable parts then you wouldn't be able to transform them...Think about all the moving parts on these Bayformers and ask yourself what in God's name did these guys look like before they were transformers?? That's why Bay wouldn't let you see what they looked like (besides a faint sillouette) before they scanned the cars because he has no concept on the fact the TFs always transform based on their orginal bodies...That's why this movie was all about transmorphing...

Morph is just a fancy word for Transform.

Yeah when you take it by it's extreme literal meaning, and ignore the fact that TRANSFORMERS is a proper noun...So when I say "transform" I mean it in the way you've come to know how TF's generally transform, which is different in this movie because many of them don't "transform" as much as they morph...Complicated and over-eager explanation I know but I had to combat your triteness in pretending not to know what I meant by morphing, a notch below liquid aluminum in many cases as far as this movie is concearned...

Bay is better off directing Mighty Morphin' Transformers.

Moonbase2 wrote:As for the designs, I kinda wish Ratchet had some kind of resemblence to the original. You know, the little doohicky on top of his head. Oh well, I still liked the movie Ratchet!

Actually I would say the toy Ratchet looks better than the movie version. The movie version looks too slim and jagged. When I look at the movie version I cant really tell what he is supposed to turn into, and knowing what he does it doenst come off as being "realistic" looking.

Auto Bot wrote:Bay is better off directing Mighty Morphin' Transformers.

Did you know Predaking was originally designed as a mecha/MegaZord for Super Sentai/Power Rangers?

Shadowman wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:Bay is better off directing Mighty Morphin' Transformers.

Did you know Predaking was originally designed as a mecha/MegaZord for Super Sentai/Power Rangers?

thank you cliff from cheers for your random fact of the day.

decepticonjon wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:Bay is better off directing Mighty Morphin' Transformers.

Did you know Predaking was originally designed as a mecha/MegaZord for Super Sentai/Power Rangers?

thank you cliff from cheers for your random fact of the day.

I live to disappoint!

Shadowman wrote:

decepticonjon wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:Bay is better off directing Mighty Morphin' Transformers.

Did you know Predaking was originally designed as a mecha/MegaZord for Super Sentai/Power Rangers?

thank you cliff from cheers for your random fact of the day.

I live to disappoint!

it's not a dissapointment
cliff was great, random fun facts every episode, however, you might be too young too remember the show

Shadowman wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:Bay is better off directing Mighty Morphin' Transformers.

Did you know Predaking was originally designed as a mecha/MegaZord for Super Sentai/Power Rangers?

I didn't know that. Actually, i didn't know about the Morphin' guys until it was mentioned in forums.

Thanks for the info.

It's interesting that Hasbro tend to pick up a lot of unrelated transforming robots from different cartoons and put them altogether as part of Transformers.

Others i know of is Jetfire from Macross Valkerie, and the newer Insecticons (G1 or G2?) from some Japanese toys.

I came to know about the new Insecticons after having those Japs toys for a long time. I was surprised to see it much later in Transformers catalogues.

Old designs wouldnt have worked in this, or any other live action "Realistic" movie. End of discussion.