I actually share a lot of your skepticism. Most of what I would say is simply (as a person who was there for the panel in which all this was originally said by Easton) is that Easton's comments reflect his honest beliefs and/or intentions for the show, but that these of course may not ultimately reflect other people's opinions nor the reality of what actually comes to pass.

But as to this comment about what is definitive, I want to mildly push back, having observed that a few things that weren't part of the original G1 cartoon (you didn't say "cartoon," but if you didn't mean that, I'm truly confused as to what you could have meant, becuase so many other things, including the cartoon Easton is talking about, could legitimately be said to be G1) are now considered "definitive" (for good or ill) in how these characters are perceived. Prowl is now, for better or worse, the despicable jerk in the eyes of most fans (one can argue that this started with Furman, but IDW took it to levels Furman never imagined). Likewise, Furman's take on Grimlock has far exceeded the Grimlock of the cartoon.

To look at things that are even more recent, if perhaps untested by future generations, I'd be willing to bet that the recent IDW interpretations of characters such as Swerve, Cyclonus, and Brainstorm will have staying power far beyond the limited versions of those characters back in the 80s cartoon. Prime's version of Ratchet was unlike any G1 version to that point, but IDW's version (at least, the one on the Lost Light) owes much to Jeffrey Combs' character. And how many fans (I'm not really one of them, I confess, but there are quite a few) now insist that Kup should always have a "cy-gar" in his mouth?

If an interpretation is strong enough, folks will latch on to it. That's what Easton is hoping for. Whether or not that actually happens, of course we'll just have to wait and see.

 

On the one hand he worked on the 2011 Thundercats series, on the other he wrote one of the worst one-shots (Deviations) and a pretty awful adaption of MASK. A lot of what he's saying sounds a bit too much like what we heard about the Machinima things before they happened. "Award winning" doesn't have the same impact that it used to, since they seem to just hand out awards to any dumb-ass in the industry.

Darkness in a story setting needs to come naturally, and for something like Transformers it wouldn't be difficult to incorporate dark themes, but if you force it too much then it will get dreary and no longer enjoyable. What I'm saying is that it's fine if you want to tell a dark story, just do it properly. Eugenesis worked and serves as easily the darkest Transformers story ever put to paper, but even then there are moments of levity, even black humor is enough to lighten the mood. My only criticism of it is not so much the story itself, but that more people can't enjoy it because it kind of requires you to read the entire Marvel (Ideally UK+US runs) to be able to fully enjoy all there is to it. But once you do you're left with a story that doesn't hold back, gives us easily the most terrifying iteration of the Quintessons to ever appear in a story except for maybe their role in Tom Scioli's TF Vs. G.I. Joe, and a story that cleverly subverts some of the franchise staples such as Primus, Unicron and The Matrix and gives us an origin for the characters that's 100% science fiction instead of fantastical and mystical.

Animation inspired by Knights of Sidonia sounds nice, but if the writing is wank then it won't matter. A lot of what he's saying sounds too good to be true, so...

 

I'd rather have 6 good, focused episodes than 22 mediocre episodes with unneeded filler.

This really doesn't sound that different than any other writer talking about their own in-progress show. Of course they are going to hype it up because they want us to watch it. What should they say: well, it'll be OK. Watch it or not, whatever. Hell, I know I'm still learning as a writer and have mixed feelings about my art but whenever I post new stuff, I'll sell it hard!

We can't really make any judgement on this until we can see it. But I'm generally optimistic.

 

If you unironically use terms like "dark & serious, for older fans" regarding the next iteration of an animated commercial intended to sell toy cars that are also robots to seven-year-olds, then you are most likely a fucking idiot who does not deserve any kind of creative control.

 

Negative Nancy.

 

There have been so many different iterations of these characters it's kind of insulting they suggest there's only one "correct" interpretation.

I'll give the show a shot, but not really likely this "GEEWUNN!" mentality being at its heart.

This too. Beast Wars managed to be a fun show with real stakes for its characters and didn't lean on the grim/dark or *glares at Machinima* swearing.

 

I'm getting flashbacks to the build up for the release of Prime on the Hub.

Plus, every time they say a show is dark before it actually releases tends to prove incorrect. It sets expectations that will never be met.

Meanwhile, something like Animated is shockingly dark without needing to use it as a selling point. That serves to improve it through the removal of expectation since nowhere in the prerelease material is stuff like a corrupt autobot government that's barely better than the Decepticons, the tragic story of Wasp, the concept of sentient weapons questioning why their only purpose is to kill, and everybody on the core team having to shoulder personal failures in their history (or Bullhead trying to prove he's more than the big stupid muscle).

Or Rescue Bots casually including characters who have been in isolation for so long they fear integrating with the modern world, indirectly admitting the island was built to survive nuclear fallout, having the balls to do the famous phonebooth scene from The Birds, outright 1984 where the bad guy wins and Cody gets sold out by his own alternate timeline family (unintentionally), and Chief Burns outright telling Doc Greene the truth about the robots purely to let him know his daughter is in safe hands.

They should just say a show will be more mature in tone or something, since at least there it gets the same idea across without sounding so tryhard.

 

It blows my mind how negative some of the fandom can be. So far the toy line has blown the previous trilogy out of the water, so why not the Multimedia related content too? I don't know if it will be so successful that it will be referred to as THE definitive iteration of the franchise, but that doesn't mean it can't be acceptional or even ground breaking. I'm cautiously optimistic, given some of the writing chops, and the fact that it's going te be featured on a mainstream streaming service.

 

Whens this show coming?

 

2020 on Netflix.

 

Because the CW/TR/POTP line had multimedia content that was total trash?

There REALLY isnt much different this time around given once again, it's a planned trilogy with toy and media components.

 

Considering Knights of Sidonia looks like (and is) dog shit, this is a baffling way to market a series.

 

Transformers has been around for 30 years. If you look around the forums there are pockets of the fandom coming into maturity who grew up on Beast Wars, Animated, Cybertron Trilogy, the Bayverse, etc.

For the showrunner to come out and say "Nah, we're gonna stay true to the characters as fans remember them..." is telling all of those fandoms they don't count. That not only do their versions of Prime, Megatron, etc not count...but the new characters those shows brought into the fandom (Blackarachnia, Bulkhead, Lockdown, etc) don't get to have a place in it going forward.

See, that's the other problem. There are people here who loved stuff like CW, TR, and PotP. Like, I don't see the obsession with movie Barricade, but I also didn't grow up during the Bayverse. So maybe I'll joke about it, but that doesn't mean I'll tell fans of those movies those characters don't count.

 

Ultra-Subjective post of the day! Ring, Ring, Ring!!!!

 

Hey, if the creators of WfC want to claim theirs will be the "true" version of the characters then I'm gonna go ahead and claim ownership of deciding what's good and what's trash.

 

Reacting to the article itself (not all the responses above, which I’ll read later), I’m psyched for this. I really think it’ll be great.

I’ll have to check out the other show they reference in the article.

 

You can say “gag.” All right.

You’re the one making us gag! Get that cockroach ass negativity outta here.

 

• The show will keep characters true to themselves and G1 fans will not be disappointed.

Huh. I wasn’t aware that G1 fans were the only people in the fandom, but okay.

 

I wonder how the events of this series will relate to those of the rebooted IDW comic?

 

But how can he hope to have that if his goal is to base his characters on already defined versions from *gestures widely* the rest of the continuity?

Part of what made the characters you mention stick was that they were something new. Or in many cases, previously undefined (or poorly defined) characters being given something that made them stand out from prior iterations.

IDW built a following in part because it was willing to mix in characters who fans had expectations for with a bunch of relatively blank slates plucked from all corners of the toyline and history of the franchise.

But if Easton is just going to look back and say "Let's do G1!" then he's either going to fail spectacularly because those fans are pretty deadset in what they view as "correct" or he's going to end up with something that just sorta exists and is quickly forgotten alongside the Machinima series because it had nothing that made it stand out.