so, tell me how the constructicons can be in two places at once?

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by Bottom Out, Jun 24, 2009.

  1. Bottom Out

    Bottom Out Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Posts:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    was the movie cut wrong?


    they formed devestator and fought simmons and the twins but at the same time, in a diff area, they were in seperate alt modes chasing/searching for sam and mikayla?
     
  2. GogDog

    GogDog Logic's wayward son Veteran

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Posts:
    12,203
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    246
    Likes:
    +6
    There are many different Constructicons, and they can combine in differing amounts of numbers. This was confirmed at BotCon.
     
  3. Jetstorm

    Jetstorm Wielder of the Keyblade

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Posts:
    1,923
    Trophy Points:
    182
    Likes:
    +6
    Someone posted something like this in the "I've seen the movie" thread, and it made sense to me... this is my take on it

    The "Constructicons" that made up Devastator were just like construction vehicles (maybe with All-Spark energy? Or something) that they used just for the purpose of being Devastator, while the Constructions attacking Sam and Co. were the "real" Constructicons.

    And that works for me (now I won't feel so "ripped off" when/if I buy the big Devastator lol)
     
  4. Chaos Prime

    Chaos Prime Combaticon

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Posts:
    5,622
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +22
    Movie magic! =D
     
  5. Bottom Out

    Bottom Out Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Posts:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0

    wow, thats a cop out and a half
     
  6. Lateralus

    Lateralus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +0
    So Devastator is just one entity throughout multiple vehicles?
     
  7. DinoTarant

    DinoTarant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Posts:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0

    With two huge balls.
     
  8. Lateralus

    Lateralus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +0
    I was kinda hoping he would get more screen time, but he was still pretty hardcore to look at.
     
  9. DinoTarant

    DinoTarant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Posts:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    That wasn't Devastator, that was some joke put on by Michael Bay.
     
  10. Wheeljack_Prime

    Wheeljack_Prime Don't eat me

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Posts:
    11,359
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +41
    and repaints in the G1 show, shoot, any previous TF fiction aren't?
     
  11. DinoTarant

    DinoTarant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Posts:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    That's no excuse, and those repaints are iconic to Transformers.
     
  12. Starscream NZ

    Starscream NZ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,602
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Likes:
    +4
    On-screen. The vehicles that we see forming Devastator NEVER show robot-modes. Strictly go appear as vehicles, to limbs.

    Rampage (red), Long Haul, Mixmaster etc are all seen battling against the Autobots, never as being combined.

    Therefore it seems to indicate that they're two completely different identities, perhaps so that Devastator was just the sum of vehicle-mode only Transformers. Or he himself was just 6/7 seperate vehicles that combined into one large robot (somewhat like how Arcee was originally intended to be)
     
  13. Lateralus

    Lateralus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +0
    Or maybe they didn't put too much thought into it.

    I think I'm right.
     
  14. Valkysas

    Valkysas Attack Buffalo

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2003
    Posts:
    20,799
    News Credits:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +21
    so G1 can do anything it wants, because it's G1?
     
  15. Wheeljack_Prime

    Wheeljack_Prime Don't eat me

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Posts:
    11,359
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +41
    For some reason, that one sentence seems self-contradictory to me.
     
  16. DinoTarant

    DinoTarant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Posts:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    Wow, you're comparing a low budget toy commercial cartoon to a Hollywood blockbuster. Genius.
     
  17. Wheeljack_Prime

    Wheeljack_Prime Don't eat me

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Posts:
    11,359
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +41
    The existence of Bluestreak, Prowl, and Smokescreen as distinct characters is not wholly an animation error/act of laziness, if that's what you're implying.
     
  18. Ktulu

    Ktulu Whoosh TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Posts:
    14,865
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    291
    Likes:
    +3
    G1 having clones, repaints, etc is indeed NO EXCUSE. G1 was a low budget cartoon made as quickly as possible. Even so, as hinted at, the "repaints" and such more often than not did have clear identities. But ignoring that - the major thing to consider? The movie is a huge budget mainstream movie. G1 and the movie - two completely different ball parks. In a movie with tons of cash behind it, to be seen by millions of people, you want to make damn sure everything makes sense to the audience. There has to be a coherent flow to everything.

    What people don't consider in these cases are the general audience. Do you think the "well, G1 had a bunch of characters that all looked like Starscream, so this is ok too" kind of arguments work for anyone that isn't a big fan of the established ficiton? Hell no.

    Random cannon fodder that looks like other characters can be confusing. Confusing = iffy film making. If it wasn't an issue, if it was all loud and clear, this topic wouldn't even exist, now would it? You have to step out of your privileged view point as someone keen on Transformers lore at large. Most seeing this won't fit that profile, and if the movie can't stand on it's own and make sense to someone if it was their first experience with the material, it's taken some bad steps along the way.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2009
  19. McBradders

    McBradders James Franco Club! Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Posts:
    34,131
    Trophy Points:
    286
    Likes:
    +0
    :lol  :lol  :lol 

    Wow.
     
  20. DinoTarant

    DinoTarant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Posts:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    Yeah, they were much more actually. Different personalities, and actually did things on the show.
     

Share This Page