Debates caused by animation errors

Discussion in 'Transformers General Discussion' started by 1984forever, May 17, 2011.

  1. 1984forever

    1984forever Banned

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Posts:
    965
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +1
    One of the biggest debates begun by an animation error is IMO the "who is Cyclonus" debate.

    1) Fans agree that there are at least 3 sweeps + Scourge, totalling 4, although only 3 Scourge/sweep bodies were shown being created

    2) Fans agree that there is really only one Cyclonus, although 2 were pictured as both Skywarp and Bombshell became Cyclonus. The "Cyclonus and his armada" line was supposed to be left out of the movie. So there was really only meant to be one Cyclonus.

    In conclusion, Either Skywarp or Bombshell were meant to a fourth Scourge body. My money's on Skywarp being Cyclonus because I figure Unicron would have sensed that Skywarp was a trusted member of Megatron's inner circle... but that's just my opinion.

    Any other debates caused by animation errors?
     
  2. Nevermore

    Nevermore It's self-perpetuating a parahumanoidarianised!

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Posts:
    13,942
    News Credits:
    239
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    Germany
    Likes:
    +399
    In "Call of the Primitives", "Sweep Six" and "Sweep Seven" were explicitly identified by dialogue.

    Also, please, PLEASE not another "who was Cyclonus created from" debate. We have at lest one of these every month or so. And they never, ever lead anywhere.
     
  3. TrueNomadSkies

    TrueNomadSkies Airachnid's ratservant

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Posts:
    15,867
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    226
    Likes:
    +6
    Plot Twist.


    ... Cyclonus was really just a sweep who managed to skip over to the other side of the board by way of a cleverly disguised temporal space bridge.
     
  4. Silvershot

    Silvershot On The Double Dutch Bus TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Posts:
    1,127
    News Credits:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    177
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Likes:
    +14
    I think that's just an example to set up his actual question of: What other debates started from animation errors? Not the actual debate itself.
     
  5. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    The premise for your topic is already in error.

    The Cyclonus debate issue has been proven not to be an "animation error".

    correct for the film, but as the series continued more sweeps came into being.
    Correct, but not an "animation error" since the scene was animated as written and directed.
    Your "conclusion" is incorrect.

    1 was ment to be Cyclonus.

    The other was ment to be a clone of Cyclonus much like the Sweeps were clones of Scourge.

    Cyclonus was originally intended to have a group nof clones "The Armada".

    Your welcome to your opinion, but the facts say you would loose your money.
     
  6. Nachtsider

    Nachtsider Banned

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Posts:
    12,544
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Likes:
    +3
    Too damn many for the fandom's own good.
     
  7. Rigas

    Rigas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Posts:
    1,018
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +3
    didn't the fiction with the new e-Hobby 3-packs state who was who.

    Can this be considered cannon?
     
  8. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Anything thats is authorized by Hasbro is canon.

    Problems come from when new materials conflict with old materials.

    To begin with, theres really no reason to question what was seen on film.

    The Bot-con comics from a few years ago continued the story and confirmed that Skywarp became "Aramada".

    The IDW movie adaptation once again showed us who became who.

    But still this continues.
     
  9. Chaos Prime

    Chaos Prime Combaticon

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Posts:
    5,618
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +22
    Well according to the Botcon Wreckers comic Skywarp used to be Cyclonus' 'Armada' before being turned into a Vehicon.
     
  10. Nevermore

    Nevermore It's self-perpetuating a parahumanoidarianised!

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Posts:
    13,942
    News Credits:
    239
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    Germany
    Likes:
    +399
    Target 2006 states that Cyclonus was previously some guy named "Life Spark".
     
  11. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Or was it a refrance to a "life spark"?
     
  12. ChrisW

    ChrisW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Posts:
    553
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Likes:
    +0
    The Cyclonus debate is less an issue of new materials conflicting with old materials, but one of the movie conflicting with itself. :) 

    I disagree, since the film was notoriously inconsistent.

    And the Takara United Decepticon 3-pack also confirms that Skywarp became Cyclonus. It's equally valid and 100% contradictory. As such, none of the statements has any real value.

    Admit it, my Klingon friend: you love the debate as much as I do. :wink:  :D  :thumb 

    It was intended to be a reference to a life spark, but was misinterpreted by the author as a reference to a character named Life Spark. Officially, it is thus a reference to an undescribed character named Life Spark.
     
  13. 1984forever

    1984forever Banned

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Posts:
    965
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +1
    Nobody knows who became who. "Armada" is created, the vanishes from the movie a second later. But the sweeps miraculously increase in number.
    There was meant to be an Armada, but someone changed their mind at the last minute. So now we have a decades long debate because of an animation (and editing) error. Any others you guys can think of?
     
  14. D-Unit

    D-Unit #1 Heel

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Posts:
    3,833
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    207
    Likes:
    +7
    Ebay:
    How about the debate over whether something WAS an animation error?
     
  15. Nevermore

    Nevermore It's self-perpetuating a parahumanoidarianised!

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Posts:
    13,942
    News Credits:
    239
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    Germany
    Likes:
    +399
    The exact phrasing makes it sound like a name, considering he doesn't use an article before it.
     
  16. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    23,501
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    347
    Likes:
    +130
    "Was the G1 series a good show?"
     
  17. soundwaverulls

    soundwaverulls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Posts:
    8,842
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +113
    The original script for TF the movie said that fallen decepticons life sparks drifted into space and the writer of that comic misinterpreted that as a characters name.

    TFWIKI.net said
    * The term "Life Spark" originates with an early draft of The Transformers: The Movie, in which it was used to refer to the life force of a Transformer. Upon reading a summary of the feature, which he had not yet seen, author Simon Furman misinterpreted this as the name of an actual Decepticon.
     
  18. 1984forever

    1984forever Banned

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Posts:
    965
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +1
    Let's face it, it was an error that started a debate and some new hire at hasbro tried to explain it away 20 years later. If "Armada" is a real guy, let hasbro give us the Cyclonus repaint of him.
     
  19. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    The movie doesnt really conflict with itself in this case.

    2 Cyclonus type tf's were created.1 was clearly Bombshell, one wasd clearly the other.

    Durring the 2nd attack on Autobot city, 2 Cyclonus type tfs were seen durring the 2 Autobot shuttle lift off scene.

    Theres no conflict.

    Getting 1 answer wrong on a test doesnt make every answer I give wrong.

    Mistakes in other parts of the film does not suggest or prove mistakes in the entire film.

    And theres nothing in the scene in question that suggest a mistake was made in the animation.

    Incorrect.

    Takara continuity differs from Hasbro in many ways.As such, none of the statements has any real value.

    Simplely put, we're talking about 2 differnt universes.Whats valid for 1 is not valid for the other.

    And considering that Takara had NOTHING to do with how the fiction unfolded for the film over 20 years ago, its retcon 20 years after the fact holds very little credibility.

    I wont deny enjoying it at times.

    Thats what I always thought
     
  20. sto_vo_kor_2000

    sto_vo_kor_2000 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    6,794
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Yes we do.

    Its clearly shown on film.

    Not to mention the story boards.

    Incorrect.

    2 Cyclonus type TF's can be seen in the 2nd autobot excape shuttle scene.

    Not to mention all the cyclonus type tfs seen in season 3.

    right,

    you can call it a editing error, or a production error.

    But its not an animation error.

    the animation was rendered as requested and scripted.

    So regardless of what every editing error happened, or how they changed their minds near the end of the production, their intent for who became Cyclonus is clear.

    It really wasnt an error of any kind when you really think about it.

    Right, like they gave us the Sweeps.
     

Share This Page