So what if it made less money than DOTM? It’s actually funny to see how you’re reaching so bad, it only made like 10,000 more. Barely made 100 million? It also made 1 billion in the end and was the highest grossing movie of 2014, Chinese pandering or not. Reaching once again. Quite a bit of fans that isn’t it? And maybe all of those points about BB I was making that you seemingly ignored and then proceeded to go on a random rant about TLK?

 

Evidently, since me merely mentioning how radically different the boards are these days after the TLK fallout somehow triggered a back-and-forth on how TLK supposedly isnt representative of public reception of the bayverse franchise as a whole.

Maybe it's time this thread got closed since there really isnt so much discussion as there is flippant bashing of how "dumb" the G1 design looks which has nothing to do with either movie BB design.

 

YOU’RE responsible for the thread shifting to TLK.

 

This thread has received countless warnings to stay on topic. We don't like to just lock things up unless it was total spam to begin with. Please play nice, and stay on track, because there is a conversation to have here.

 

I just want to talk about how much I love my baby boy.



This design is so perfect. Round but no chubby, heroic but not threatening, cute but not helpless. It's everything Bumblebee should be. I WANNA HUG HIM.

 

On top of that, he pays respect to the original design in various small ways, like the horns on his head, where the rear of the vehicle ends up (around the hips), and while the chest is blatantly movie based, its compressed to try and resemble the original roof chest as much as possible with the hood. The face is still a touch too alien but beyond that, it really is a good hybridization of the movie BB core design and recognizable traits of the G1 design. The lack of door wings extended is also very good, since so many autobots have such features, Bumblebee lacking them makes him stand out even more.

 

Indeed, but I quite like how the BB movie handled faces. It feels like a much more typical example of "inhumanity" common to Transformers. It's basic and robotic but still infinitely expressive and exudes character. It's the perfect form of movie Bumblebee's face, for lack of a better explanation. Same with Shatter, Dropkick and Blitzwing, the latter two having moving "mouth plates" and Shatter having a less monstrous but still suitably inhuman mouth.

Plus I love how his head design evokes his alt mode without directly lifting details from it. The shapes, silver trim and old 50's grills on the sides of his head immediately call to mind an old compact car from decades ago. You feel the VW in his design even if you can't see it.

 

He looks like a sweet boy, just as he should.

 

How about a G1 toy head if the G1 toon head and Bayverse head are both no good?









Wait a minute......this whole time????

Yeah they actually got Bee pretty spot on when you look at it like that. The BB18 design just enhances the toy likeness that was there since 07

 

No he doesn't. Bumblebee has two horns of the same size on the sides of his head. A rhino has two horns of different sizes growing out of their nose in the center of their face.

You pitch this like a ha ha got ya moment in that first sentence. But you followed it with two contradictory statements.

I keep criticizing that BB but you don't see any of the audiences complaining... You do realize I'm part of the audience right? So you in fact have seen people complaining. And the Bayformers designs are almost constantly being complained about by other people as well so your last sentence there is just a straight up lie as clearly you have seen audiences complaining or you wouldn't have been able to write this reply to one such complaint in the first place.

Two things I want to address here.

1. I don't doubt that people have praised the design. However you are aware that different people can have different opinions right? Just because some random group of people for some unknown reason like that design does not mean I have to agree with them. Your post comes across like you're arguing against a fact claim that could be proven wrong but we're discussing matters of opinion.

2. Regarding your claim that it was praised specifically for NOT using his UGLY G1 counterpart I'd like to see a source for this. I don't believe anyone has ever worded it in that way.

And before you mention that I used myself as an example before. I was only speaking from my own perspective to begin with. I never claimed to represent the opinions of anyone by myself. You on the other hand do appear to speaking of the opinions of other people here not just your own so you can't make the same claim that I've seen you say it there for it must be true because you were speaking for others in this instance where I was only speaking for myself.

To answer the question, yes I have but that's irrelevant because I'm NOT a G1 fanatic.

A G1 fanatic would want movie Bumblebee to look EXACTLY like he did back in the 80's. This would mean keeping the same proportions, the same vehicle, basically using that exact design. This is clearly not what I'm asking for.

I specifically said in my first post that I didn't care what Bumblebee transformed into. The image I showed earlier of a G1 style movie head also is not an exact recreation of that G1 design. It would still be a different iteration of the character.

All I'm asking for is that the character actually resemble his original name sake not for him to literally be a direct copy of. There's a HUGE difference between these two things.

Look at other examples I've used. Optimus Prime, Soundwave, Shockwave, and everyone in those Cybertron scenes in the Bumblebee movie all resemble their G1 name sakes. Not a single one of them is a direct copy of their G1 design but they just resemble them enough to actually be easily recognized as those characters. That's all I'm asking for.

Again knowing it's Bumblebee because you're told it's Bumblebee does not equal the design being instantly recognizable as Bumblebee.

Let me show you another example with probably one of the most easily recognizable characters in existence...



Who would you say this is? If you guessed Darth Malak you would be correct however what would you say if I told you this was actually Darth Vader. You would probably say something along the lines of...

1. Nope it's clearly Darth Malak.

2. It looks nothing like Darth Vader.

My response to that is...

1. This actually was Darth Vader before Malak was even thought of. You only recognize him as Malak because you were told this was Darth Malak.

2. Of course he looks nothing like the Vader we've all come to know. But that doesn't change the fact that this was a Darth Vader design.

What I mean by that is that if you look at concept art for Darth Vader from the very first Star Wars movie which would later be called A New Hope, one of those concept designs that ended up not getting used looks very similar to the design Darth Malak ended up with. But because you don't associate that design with the Vader you know you're probably having a very hard time accepting the idea that Malak is Vader. This is the same thing that occurs when I look at Movie Bumblebee. The fact that it is Bumblebee, that we're told that's who he is, that we know that's who he's suppose to be does not change the fact that he does not in any way resemble the Bumblebee we would actually recognize.

Baby face? He doesn't even have a face!

Well I was a kid during G1 and Bumblebee was my favorite character so YES! Though as an adult I can not for the life of me figure out what the appeal was...

Also I'm saying me here but the body was only about 4 years old at the time and I didn't split off till the body was about 11 years old so that might also have something to do with why I can't figure out what the appeal was. I don't even have any real memories from this time, I only know what my dad has told me.

Yes... He actually has a mouth and he's almost always smiling. The movie version has some very expressive big eyes to make up for the fact that he has no other facial features.

There you go making fact claims again. Do you seriously think that everyone in the world shares the same opinion? Cause you seem pretty sure of yourself that EVERYONE would agree with you and not a single kid in the whole world would want to see a movie with a more G1 style Bumblebee in it.

How does it look like an animal and why would that even be a bad thing if it did?

Also are you not aware that kids technically have ALREADY watched a movie with that design in it. In fact there's a character with a more G1 looking design in the same movie.



Just paint that yellow and you would suddenly have a much better looking Movie Bumblebee. Granted he's only in one scene and dies but Cliffjumper was in the Bumblebee movie with the G1 style head you find to be so ugly that kids would never watch it.

Two things...

1. Again we're discussing opinions. Of course not everyone is going to agree with my personal opinion.

2. Again the idea that the movie design has never been criticized by anyone as you're implying here is obviously bull shit. If that were true we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now. The fact that a certain group of people liked the design for whatever reason means nothing. Other opinions still exist. Criticism still exits. There has never been a case of any movie or character design being universally loved by every single person and never being criticized. That has NEVER happened. You're living in a fantasy world if you think the world works that way where everyone miraculously agrees to the same opinions all at the same time.

Well the G1 fan boys aren't the only people complaining because I'm not one of them. Again I'm not asking for G1, I'm just asking for the character to some what resemble the character he's named for.

IDW does a great job of this. He has a movie inspired vehicle mode but a G1 inspired head design. I can actually look at that and clearly see that's Bumblebee without being told who that is.

Armada Sparkplug looks more like Bumblebee than movie Bumblebee does. I can clearly tell he was inspired by G1 Bumblebee even without being told that because of how similar the characters look to each other.

BW Buzzsaw looks more like Bumblebee than movie Bumblebee does. His head isn't even the right color... though it would be for Goldbug but still I could much more easily accept these two characters who aren't even named Bumblebee as the character than whatever that thing is in the movies.

Get over what exactly? There's nothing to get over. I don't like the design, that's all there is to it. You seem more butt hurt that someone dare have a different opinion than you do. Maybe you should follow your own advice here and get over it.

You're going to eventually learn that other people have their own opinions that are not always going to agree with yours. No one is required to agree with you. It also doesn't matter if an opinion is popular. Just because the majority of people like the Matrix movies doesn't mean I'm wrong for disagreeing with that opinion.

Different people have different opinions. Get over it.

That's also not a good enough reason for me to change my opinion and join the band wagon. That's not even a argument. It doesn't matter how many times they use that design in movie, it doesn't matter how popular that design gets, none of this means I have to change my opinion. I'm still going to think it's an ugly design.

Only with the battle mask on... and that's another reason why I actually like the mask.

Though I associate him wearing a mask more with Goldbug than Bumblebee due to the cartoon but still the Battle mask design is actually pretty good. And since pretty much everyone has removable battle masks now days it does kinda work in that regard. I just wish he actually had a face under it.

 

This actually made my day. Screw him being best Movie Bumblebee design, he IS the best Bumblebee design. I'd still like to see him gain a mouth at some point. They may or may not have to redesign most of the head though.

Wow. I bet you're fun at parties.

Obvious changes to Bumblebee were made in the Bumblebee design including:
A new vehicle mode
Rounder proportions
Simplified features
Much more obvious car parts in robots mode
Hidden wings
More expressive eyes
Being a brighter yellow
New accessories
AND MORE!

We also saw how he transformed several times, so saying he looks like he's been made out of broken parts that can never turn back into a car again, when he did just that is stupid. (but an opinion nonetheless so...)

The G1 Bumblebee toy didn't have a face either, and that's where this new Bumblebee got his head design from.

 

Seeing how something transforms and looking like it can transform are two different things. We also saw the Camero transform several times that doesn't mean it looked like it was realistically possible.

Saying he looks like he's been made out of broken parts is actually factually correct considering we can literally see that the car parts have been bent and broken on the robot. The Front of the car that was originally one solid part for example is broken into three separate parts on the robot's chest. The license plate can be seen bent in half just above his crotch.

With the VW design the hood... if it's still proper to call that the hood when the engine is in the back and that's actually the door to the trunk... it's more rounded in vehicle mode and seems to have flattened out in robot mode so again that's another part that completely changes shape between modes. There's not physical way those parts could return back to their original condition to form the vehicle mode again.

1. I know... I've already responded to this point. He had a face plate.

2. The other person who brought this up made the comparison to Bumblebee's battle mask which is more of a fair comparison. You're making the comparison to Bumblebee without the battle mask which looks nothing like the toy.

3. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not complaining about the battle mask. I've actually said several times that I like his battle mask in the movies. So this really doesn't even matter as you're totally missing the point.

The purpose of a battle mask presumably is protect the face during combat... why they need such protection when their face is also metal is a little odd... I can only guess that at least with the movie designs... all the gaps in the face that allows them to have more realistically expressive faces also means their internal wires and stuff might be a bit vulnerable and the battle masks provide a more solid piece of plating to protect that area.

The thing is Bumblebee doesn't even have a face. His battle mask just covers the ugly internal mess he has going on instead of a face.

With G1 characters it was either face or battle mask at all times not retractable masks like it is now. And I don't mind the change to retractable masks. I always wandered what characters like Optimus looked like under there masks anyway. But it's not a fair comparison to use a masked G1 design like you did when we're not discussing the design of the movie battle mask. We're discussing the design of the THING under the mask. Which should be his actual face but there isn't a face there.

 

First off, you could argue that any transformer looks like a bunch of broken up parts, since they ALL ARE. Second of all... Actually I just realized something. Why does it even matter? It's a movie trying to get kids to buy more toys they probably don't need. Does it really matter if the car parts change form? No. It doesn't. If the movie is good and looks good that's all that matters. They fricking space aliens they can do whatever they hell they feel like. You and I are both looking way to deep into a movie about a space robot that can turn into a car. It's silly.

Infact, Shockwave Cannon you too buddy. This whole argument is fucking stupid and It will literally mean nothing. Opinions matter if they can be put to something, but one or two people who think differently than the majority will ultimately have little impact on anything. So arguing with him about how his opinion is dumb, is dumb. Like really dumb.

Yeah, I know you like the battle mask, but his face to you is "ugly" and "scary" or whatever. If I ever said "face" I'm sorry, because everything out side of Bee's face is clearly inspired by the original toy. I don't know what point I'm missing, and honestly I could care less.

Either way it really doesn't matter. We were all having fun, and then you show up all like "Well actually" Like it doesn't matter. You're set in your ways of looking critically at everything and I don't care as long as the robot and the car look cool.

 

Nope. Only Bayformers are. Any other Transformers the parts actually stay intact during transformation. They just shift from one place in vehicle mode to another place in robot mode but they don't break into smaller pieces and bend out of their original shapes like the Bayformers do.

Because it's a live action movie trying to be as realistic as possible. They got rid of mass shifting because it was too unrealistic for transformers to change size during transformation only to replace it with something just as unrealistic.

And I agree with the decision to get rid of mass shifting by the way. But if the goal is making something that looks realistically plausible for live action and doesn't work on cartoon logic then they've utterly failed because those transformations would be impossible. They only work because it's been animated to do so. It defeats the purpose of live action when the characters still work on cartoon physics.

Actually the answer would be yes. Read back what you just said. It's a movie trying to get kids to buy toys. That's exactly why it DOES matter. The movie designs aren't physically possible in the real world which has resulted in toys that have to cheat every step of their transformations in order to resemble what they were on screen.

Now there are other Transformers that have had to cheat as well but not this much and given the nature of live action and realism the movie designs shouldn't need to cheat at all in order to work as toys. If the movie designs were actually good Hasbro could make 100% screen accurate toys right down to how they transform.

The toys also have an insane amount of panel lines in vehicle mode. Again you could argue that other Transformers do too except those are panel lines that would actually be on the car anyway not from how they have to transform. The lines around a door for example don't count because of course a door is going to have lines around it otherwise it couldn't open it and you'd have no way in or out of the car. I'm only counting the lines that are there only as the result of transforming into a robot. And guess what. G1 Transformers do not have any panel lines. They transform into completely solid vehicles that look like they're suppose to. Only the movie Transformers transform into these broken jig saw puzzle of a vehicle with panel lines all over the place that wouldn't be on the actual vehicle. Those lines exist because it's impossible to fill in those gaps and make the car look solid again like they do in the movie.

I bought a model of Sideswipe's vehicle mode from the movie that doesn't even transform because I really like that car and I wanted to have one that actually looked decent. Though to be fair that's particular car is so sleek it would be very hard to have it transform into a robot without creating some panel lines. Pretty much only the doors have visible lines. I'm not even sure how you get to the engine on that car cause it doesn't have an obvious hood panel like other cars.

Um... you literally just made the argument that didn't matter and here you're saying it does matter. Which is it?

1. They're fricking space aliens does not explain how they can defy the laws of physics like that.

2. Just because something is a work of fiction does not excuse it from critical analysis. Especially when it's suppose to have some elements of realism. The suspension of disbelief only reaches so far. You can not just explain EVERYTHING away with... BUT IT'S FICTION! Unless you started with the premise that literally anything could happen to begin with.

Example being the Mask. His whole thing is the ability to use cartoon physics in the real world so he can get away with that because that's part of the initial premise. However if other characters not effected by the Mask were to suddenly defy the laws of physics this would be a valid complaint.

3. You know you're on an internet forum where grown adults discuss fiction based entirely on a children's toy line right... everything about this is silly. Why does that matter? Are we not allowed to talk about subjects unless it's completely series? This isn't a place for serious conversations, this is a place for silly conversations, that's kind of the whole point. If you got a problem with that I think you're in the wrong place. lol

What? Was that even a sentence?

Again, you know you're on a forum where adults discuss a franchise made for children right. You're taking this way too seriously at this point.

It doesn't matter if an opinion can be put to something or not, you're still allowed to voice your opinion. You're still entitled to an opinion. How much impact that opinion has on anything is irrelevant.

Um... I never said his opinion was dumb. He said that to me. This comment seems to be directed at the wrong person.

I've been talking about his face this whole time so that doesn't matter. Also that's not even true.

The only thing he has in common with the original toy is the colors. The battle mask wasn't even inspired by the original toy. It was inspired by the actual insect bumblebee. He has antenna like a bee not horns like the original design had.

The point is that he doesn't have a face and looks nothing like the character he was named after.

How does my showing up and voicing my own opinion ruin your fun? How dare anyone disagree with you! I'm so sorry I didn't realize this was a one sided conversation. I thought we were on a free forum where everyone was allowed to voice their own opinions.

What was even the point of this thread? The title said which Bumblebee design do you prefer. I don't like either of them. That's my opinion. I contributed to question asked and then I get attacked for answering it because apparently you didn't like my response.

Again the topic asked for opinions, it's an open forum. I gave my opinion. You don't agree with it, too bad no one is obligated to agree with you! Having a conversation means listening to other people's opinions not just the people who agree with you.

Again I don't see what the point of this topic is since you seem dead set on attacking anyone that doesn't agree with you.

 

I love staring at Bay's bumblebee parts. So intricate. But Knight's is something you could have a connection just by looking at it. Many people says he is so simple. Still far from it. He is as detailed as Jazz and very well made too.

 

The Bumblebee movie design, it's perfect, though I'm not really a fan of Bumblebee to be honest. Haha.

 

So I want to begin this off by saying that I read most of your response, and this is what I have to say. First of all I should've said that taking the conversation too seriously was stupid, and not the whole conversation. So that was wrong. I've seen a lot of stuff go down on this thread that was downright toxic due to differing opinions, and not making that specification I imagine only added to the toxicity. I don't want to admit it, but I messed up. As for everything else...

I don't know... What VW bug do you know splits up like this?




It's not as crazy as stuff from the live action films, but still, cars don't split up like this at all. They are still made up of broken up parts no matter what way you flip it. You have to break up the vehicle to get the robot.

If the movie was trying to be as realistic as possible, why does Soundwave eject Ravage (a robot that resembles an earth based jaguar)? Why do the Transformers speak English? Why do most of the songs being played in the film come from 1988 and not 1987. Sure it's trying to be realistic but they still go along with some fun cartoony bafoonery.

Also I don't know why Was shifting was brought up, but I've always known why they decided to do away with it and I fully agree with the decision. Bumblebee doesn't even mass shift. They guys who work on these films make sure that each robot mode can fit into the vehicle mode. So...? And sure some of the transformations are ridiculous, but throughout the film Bumblebee shows how he goes from mode to mode sometimes stopping midway through. To me at least it seems fairly plausible. Each car part goes somewhere on him too, and none of them disappear to my knowledge.

Not every movie toy has had to cheat and use faux parts. Now to be fair most Bumblebee movie Bumblebee toys did with the center of the body, but this is still mostly false. Even non movie toys have used fake parts. Combiner Wars Optimus Prime's chest doesn't actually come from the front of the car.



There's also plenty of non movie toys with obvious seems, or other parts that make it clear that the alt mode breaks up. Here are some MP toys that do this:












Most of these seems are not from parts of the car. The sides of a Peterbilt truck definitely don't have large squares in them like that, a gun definitely doesn't split up like that, the back of a VW bug doesn't look like it's own separate part, and old style jets didn't have that many little sections like that. Every transformers toy that transformers, no matter where it comes from will have seems. It's inevitable.

And I'm sure there are G1 transformers with panel lines, but there aren't as many. Infact here is the original Optimus Prime. The lines are still there. The red kinda hides it, but they're present.



These toys come from a simpler time, and as Hasbro evolved and started getting good at making their own toys panel lines started to pop up. It helped them make more complex robots and transformations. Sometimes this was fairly beneficial as it helped Hasbro get the Robot mode they wanted to achieve. Just because the original G1 toys had slightly cleaner alt-modes does not make them better toys than what Hasbro has on the market now. Those toys had extremely limited poseability.

We went from this:


To this:



Also lets not forget that some of the original Transformers toys had you remove robot parts just to get to a decent looking alt mode.

As far as you getting a clean looking vehicle mode of movie Sideswipe good for you.

I'll respond to more when I get the time.

 

He's a older style bug so that would be ALL of them. The 2000 Beetles wouldn't work as well cause those lines aren't there anymore but the old ones from the 80 yeah those actually have those lines on them.

Of course they don't actually split up at all. That's not the point. The point is that they look like they COULD realistically transform and the cartoon actually does a better job of that than the live action films.



Here's a picture of a real 84 Beetle. Notice the line going down the middle of the hood right where it would split to form the feet. There's another line going across right where the feet would separate from the torso. Hence no breaking required. Those lines already exist on the vehicle so G1 Bumblebee would have zero issues returning to vehicle mode and still looking like a totally intact car.

His transformation doesn't create any new panel lines due to the transformation as those lines are already present on the car to begin with. You look at Movie bee though and you get this.



The front of the car is broken up into about 11 different panels here. Show me a real Camaro that has all these lines on it.

The movie actually shows these broken lines resealing themselves as part of the transformation into vehicle mode. This is kind of impossible. Even if you could get the parts back together it wouldn't look exactly the same as it did before the parts were broken up. Anyone who's ever tried welding or gluing a broken coffee mug back together could tell you this. Even if you could fit the damage it wouldn't be exactly the same as it was before. That's what makes the movie designs so unrealistic is because they some how are able to magically reform these pieces back into solid forms with no sign of damage.

No other Transformers have ever needed to do this because their panel lines follow lines that are already present in the vehicle to start with. They don't have to magically make those panel lines disappear because they're suppose to be there. They don't need to magically reseal themselves to hide lines that aren't suppose to exist.