A Twist On Devastator for TF2

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by JOHNDILLINGA, Apr 20, 2008.

  1. JOHNDILLINGA

    JOHNDILLINGA This Space For Rent!

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Posts:
    1,042
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Likes:
    +1
    Well we all know That it might be possible/impossible to have 6 (or 5) Constructicons in TF2, Now what if Devastor didn't need to be his G-1 counterpart.

    How about A "Devastator" as one robot... A Very Large Robot (Bigger then Megs)

    Something like This:

    [​IMG]

    This is the Unproduced G.I. Joe Devastator Jet from 1993, Now I think we could imagine the Devastation this thing could cause, and with
    Bay's Contacts within the Military I'm pretty sure he could get his hands on something like this for filming and with Mike's affiction for war machines I think this would fit the bill more then Construction vehicles.
     
  2. nkelsch

    nkelsch Do you know this Icon? TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Posts:
    2,962
    Trophy Points:
    216
    Likes:
    +0
    If they were going to make the effort to make a huge powerful robot... Considering the confusion with using devastator in the first movie, it would just be easier to call this giant mosnter something else. I am still curious how they are gonna mesh with the name issues with Devastator from movie 1.
     
  3. JOHNDILLINGA

    JOHNDILLINGA This Space For Rent!

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Posts:
    1,042
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Likes:
    +1
    The Name issue was addressed when the dvd came out, that they intended to call him Brawl but during the post production, They used one of the code names in the speach text (That was created to hide the real name during fliming) and instead of going back and editing the movie before the dvd release they just left it.

    But the Tank is Brawl not Devastator.
    Anyone with 5 minutes to waste that was curious to the mix up could find that out online...
     
  4. derob2511

    derob2511 cybertronian architect

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Posts:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    its like saying prime is not a truck but a boat, imo.

    to me devastator is equally iconic as them. And he is the most notable combiner to fans and non fans.
     
  5. JOHNDILLINGA

    JOHNDILLINGA This Space For Rent!

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Posts:
    1,042
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Likes:
    +1
    Well look at Megatron, Instead of an Iconic Gun or Tank we got a Cybertronian Jet. But besides Baricade and Scorpy Most of the Cons were Military Vehicles.

    Which I have a feeling the Cons in TF2 will stay with that theme.

    I just think we need to stop looking at the Movie as being a G-1 movie and let it just be a diffrent Transformers movie.
     
  6. razorchrist

    razorchrist Sniper

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Posts:
    383
    Trophy Points:
    76
    Likes:
    +0
    The problem with that arguement is that you're neglecting to also point out that Bay decided to keep the name "Devastator" for the DVD. Not only did they *not* correct for the film itself (months later on DVD), they used it again in the special features when profiling each character. So as far as anyone who didn't buy the toys is concerned, the Decepticon tank = Devastator. And that means mega confusion if they use the name yet again in the sequel.
     
  7. neospark1

    neospark1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Posts:
    1,592
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +3
    :rolleyes: 
     
  8. ian5555

    ian5555 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,334
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    Call it Devastator and have 6 robots imo. Who cares though if they reuse the same name? It's not like people are going to walk out of the theater or say "Well, it was a good movie but don't go see it they used the same character name in both movies!!!"

    Doesn't really matter though with so many incarnations of Transformers and names, modes ect., nothing is ever constant with G1.
     
  9. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Thank you.

    Fact is Bay has commented on how he thought "Devarstator" was a cooler sounding name.

    Regardless of what the writters and Hasbro wanted his name to be Bay chose to call the tank "Devarstator".And I've said it before and I'll say it again....."I dont believe the naming issue was a mistake".That excuse was an insult to my intelligence.

    And I really dont see the point of naming an other character "Devarstator" if his not going to be a Combiner of some sort.

    Doing as you suggest would only serve to confuse the general movie go'er and piss off the fan boys.
     
  10. Velcrohead

    Velcrohead Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,307
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    It's DEVASTATOR. There is no R in the second syllable.

    QFT, but this will sail completely past the G1 nuts here.
     
  11. Julliant

    Julliant This space for rent.

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Posts:
    1,353
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    I would take the jet over a gun or tank anyday. A tank is powerful but sluggish. Gun? No, just no. Though admittedly the jet design could've been better.

    We should just call the tankbot Onslaught :cool: 

    If they want to use that name again then it might as well be a combiner.
     
  12. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Thanks..........I cant believe I made that mistake about 3 times.
     
  13. SMOG

    SMOG Vocab-champion ArgueTitan

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Posts:
    17,587
    Trophy Points:
    297
    Location:
    Robot Narnia, Quebec
    Likes:
    +88
    There's also the point of view that whatever ends up in the movie is the final word. Whatever the intentions were, it was frozen in proverbial stone the minute that movie hit cinemas (and then DVD) with "Devastator" in the subtitles. So Devastator is the Tank... who is called Brawl in the toy form.

    If they -really- wanted to get around it, they could have someone recover the processor/spark core/brain from the wreckage of Brawlastator from the first movie, and rebuild him into a new form... or use his base hardware to give sentience to a new giant robot. Or something.

    zmog
     
  14. Ziero

    Ziero TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Posts:
    4,790
    Trophy Points:
    181
    Likes:
    +0
    In that case, they already had a giany robot named Devastator in the movie.
     
  15. Smokescreen

    Smokescreen The Ultimate Gambler TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    6,345
    News Credits:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Location:
    The Lost Light
    Likes:
    +39
    :deadhorse: 
     
  16. SMOG

    SMOG Vocab-champion ArgueTitan

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Posts:
    17,587
    Trophy Points:
    297
    Location:
    Robot Narnia, Quebec
    Likes:
    +88
    Thanks for the input.

    Troll threads that you aren't interested in contributing to much?

    zmog
     
  17. Torque

    Torque The WORDSMITH

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Posts:
    11,327
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    221
    Likes:
    +6
    seeing as how Bonecrusher and Devastator are dead, they outta scrap the Constructicons and move on to Combaticons or something-Brawl and Swindle were not names used in the movie, they can still do it without name issues

    or they could have Bonecrusher and Devastator somehow get their sparks to escape.
     
  18. Sideways

    Sideways Banned

    Joined:
    May 17, 2006
    Posts:
    2,432
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Likes:
    +0
    i totally agree.

    "OMFG ITS NOT GEE WUN ! "
     
  19. Torque

    Torque The WORDSMITH

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Posts:
    11,327
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    221
    Likes:
    +6
    actually, a real "twist" would be to name him "Constructicon" (as in Constructicon Maximus) and add another constructicon to the other group
     
  20. Smokescreen

    Smokescreen The Ultimate Gambler TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    6,345
    News Credits:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Location:
    The Lost Light
    Likes:
    +39
    I'm not trolling. I'm not posting anything controversial nor am I baiting anyone into a response. I'm simply pointing out that this argument about the tank's name has been made to death since the film came out last summer. Hence the beating of the dead horse pic. It was meant to be humorous. Nothing to get riled up about.
     

Share This Page