What? If Mando was wearing pink pajamas and fought with a wet noodle, that would just be stupid full stop. That has nothing to do with legacy. It's about making smart storytelling decisions that lead to good content. The Clone Wars characters and Luke only came in S2 after S1 established a rock solid foundation with plenty of new, memorable characters who never existed in Star Wars before.

What?! He is going to look like G1 Optimus, he is going to sound like G1 Optimus, he is going to turn into a flat nosed truck, and he is going to be the main character of the movie. The director used the exact term "G1 Optimus Prime" during the unveiling of the movie a few weeks ago. What more could you possibly want? This is silly.

It's a shame that you seem to consider every non-G1 iteration of Transformers is "TransRobotGuys", but it seems like it can't be helped.

I enjoyed Bumblebee very much (although you seem to count that as a Bay movie, so who knows), and I very much hope to enjoy Rise of the Beasts. I may even rewatch the Bay movies and (gasp) enjoy them too! Bye.

 

One thing that's been gradually bothering me more and more is that we know a grand total of three Autobots in the film so far, two of whom being BB and Prime. But the third is Mirage NotJazz and what is literally the only thing we know about his character personality from a script leak?

Anti-authority.

When the hell did every Autobot ever suddenly become teenage edgelords in the middle of puberty? Not all Autobot have to be a team player, sure, but it feels like the only personality anybody seems to think of is anti-authority given we're literally getting an entire faction of them with the Terrorcons if they're too anarchistic even for the Decepticons.

I don't know, maybe another G1 character that isn't Optimus Prime? I mean, shit, we have Barricade as a legacy franchise character, but to date we still don't have a Prowl or Streetwise in the movies? A car chase comprised of nothing but Police cars attacking each other with spike strips, laser weapons, and maybe handcuff nunchucks or whatever sounds fantastic.

 

I also find it interesting how the impossible to please Geewunner bad people don't seem to have an issue with Arcee being a red + pink motorbike which she definitely wasn't in G1, it's almost like they're totally okay with change within reason or something if it meshes well with the character.

If you have no attachment to the characters from the 80's its pretty easy to just brush it all aside in favor of new (often inferior) stuff. Funny how that works.

Also     that latter comment.

 

I would disagree entirely. I have seen media made that ran deep and ran respectful to the franchise's lore that was still boring and still bad. Good characters aren't made out of wikipedia article trivia, they're made out of actions and motivations that amuse and connect with people. The Mandalorian would still be a good show if you grabbed it's wide story stroke elements and set it in any other fictional universe and tweaked it's facsimiles. I would say it was "despite it" thru and thru.

Mind you that I do think that having a universe to base the product on that is already ingrained in pop culture and thus easier to market for a wide group of people helps advertising and likely helps production itself since you won't be needing to sit down and hammer down setting materials but my mind goes back to all the countless times where I had to explain plot points and continuity notes to friends who were engaging with Marvel movies and what not that make me feel like the technobabble and the mythology is not really that important to the wider audience as much as actors with charisma and good humor and good action are. You can, and you should, make your voice heard online talking about how pleased you are when things are done that way if you enjoy it done that way since making one's voice heard is how you potential influence the makers of that media, I just disagree at the notion that the nostalgiawank has that much relevance to how a product connects with people outside of the fanbase niche.

 

Oh, yeah, I completely forgot Arcee was confirmed. As did I think anybody else who believes that 'geewunners' will only be satisfied with 100% adherence to the source material.

 

It's that inability to pick up on nuance in discussion that I keep yammering on about, either you're open to change and open-minded or you're a stinky poopy GeEwUnNeR who will never be happy with anything that isn't a shot-for-shot remake of the '86 film. Nothing in-between, either one extreme or the other.

Peoples issue with 'Mirage' isn't even that difficult to understand yet people continue to misunderstand and mischaracterize it. It's not an unreasonable observation whatsoever and yet time and time again it's being exaggerated in order to make 'the other side' look bad.

"Hello, yes. I have no attachment to this or any of the characters from this specific series so I don't mind seeing them potentially radically altered. I care more about Transformers as a concept rather than a fleshed out universe with recognizable characters that stand the test of time and so on."

"I see, but some people like Transformers and the characters as they already are and would enjoy seeing these characters brought to life in a theatrical format."

"I'm sorry to inform you but these movies aren't actually intended for you."

"So wait, these movies aren't intended for Transformers fans? That sure explains a lot."

 

There was one time I defended the crap out of the 2007 movie. I gave allowances to all the character decisions because, hey, a live action movie is better than no movie.

I don't think any G1 fan is wanting a word-for-word remake of G1. But they are asking that, if you have a character named Mirage in the script, you don't assign him to Jazz's alt mode. Find another car that doesn't already evoke another Autobot. There were lots of awesome street-legal sports cars in the early 90's to choose from...but they pick Jazz's alt mode? SMH. Just more of Lorenzo's "I don't care, give me a paycheck" mentality.

 

That's basically the argument I've had to make for the past several pages in this thread. LOL!

 

It isn't Jazz's alt-mode.
Sure it's the same manufacture, but it isn't the same car. Like how both Jazz and Cliffjumper are Porsche's.

Or even more so, like how these two are the exact same car with some differences.


Could every well just be like that with Jazz and Mirage now.

 

I think that's a perfectly reasonable thing to say and I tend to agree. It definitely doesn't help with the already existing perception of the ones making these films.

Yes it's not the same exact model but it's still very visually similar to the guy in question.

Again, if we got no info on the name's of which car was who, most people would've probably been comfortable assuming the Porsche was Jazz. It doesn't have to be 1x1 for it to be a similar looking car. Frankly it just looks like they took a Porsche, gave it 2007 Jazz's silver and put a blue stripe on him.

 

I just think we're all going to differ on what we derive our primary enjoyment (or lack thereof) of these movies from. For some the amount of G1 influence present is going to be the driver. That's fine. Others may be looking at other things. All I'm asking is that we wait for the actual movie (or at least a trailer or two) before rendering final judgment.

At the end of the day, if you see this movie and you walk out and your single biggest complaint was that Mirage was a Porsche that was better suited for Jazz, then I'd have to image we'd have a pretty solid movie on our hands (purely hypothetical, of course). Let's wait and see.

 

This pretty much encapsulates my thoughts on the issue. Obviously the two aren't mutually exclusive, but the focus really needs to be on crafting a strong story and characters.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A couple years back I tried rewatching the G1 cartoon, and it frankly didn't hold up extremely well. I'll always have love in my heart for that cartoon, but that show was definitely better in my memories than it was in actuality. Most of the characters are basic archetypes, and the stories were pretty generic and mostly structed around spotlighting the toy of the week.

I'm sure this will be controversial with a lot of longtime Transformers fans, but I honestly don't think G1 Transformers has the artistic integrity of something like Spider-Man or Batman. For instance, Spider-Man is all about showing us the everyday hardships a superhero would face, and about exploring responsibility. You have to get Peter Parker right, or it's not Spider-Man anymore. Even supporting characters like Uncle Ben need to be done right in order for the core themes and ideas to work. Sure Spider-Man is pulpy kids entertainment, but it was pulpy kids entertainment that was trying to say something unique. Spider-Man hasn't stayed consistent for half-a-century because of nostalgia, it's stayed consistent because those things are the brand.

Most of the messages and themes in Transformers just amount to "good will triumph over evil" or "freedom is good"...very generic stuff that basically every kid's brand tries to get across. You don't need to get every character right in order for the core themes and ideas to stay intact. You don't need Mirage to turn into a certain car or Bumblebee to speak. You really don't even need any specific characters or factions. You just need the ideologies of the heroes and villains to be correct (which is where the Bayverse gets iffy). And robots that turn into stuff. Hence why the brand tends to take more liberties with new incarnations than stuff like Spider-Man and Batman. There are less things that need to remain intact for the brand to still be Transformers.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinions and feelings. Nobody is denying that, and neither am I, as this is a website where these types of discussions take place. That said, I’m not sure if it’s funny or just plain galling that G1 fans, who literally have an entire brand catering to them and their nostalgia, complain that they feel “underserved” because they haven’t gotten a live action movie. That’s like getting to eat a huge ass cake, but complaining that someone got the last piece. If anyone is underserved in this fanbase, it’s the fans of shows like the Unicron Trilogy and Animated. The former has gotten scraps thrown in their direction a roughly a handful of times in the last decade, while the latter hasn’t gotten Jack shit since the show was unceremoniously cancelled back in 2008.

Miss me with that “Wah, Hasbro refuses to cater to my nostalgia in live action form” nonsense.

 

Yeah, some people are just too full of themselves to see beyond themselves  

 

Why does that even matter? Mirage was never canonically a Porsche whereas Jazz was. You had a great moment to homage both G1 and 2007 with a silver Porsche Jazz. Everyone is happy. But no, "this car is anti-authority...whhiiiich makes him (psst, who was anti-authority in early G1? Mirage? Okay!) MIRAGE!."

It's all bull shit.

 

I just realized something: this is Blitzwing from the Bumblebee movie all over again. People thought he was Starscream when they saw the first trailer.

 

And to them, I say "get in line". Maybe ten years from now, they'll get their live action Minicon hunt. Or not, because for some people, it's more important to have a great TransRobotGuys movie than a great Transformers: Armada movie.

And yet you're saying there needs to be more AEC material? Go have a beer with Lorenzo. He may buy you one. But probably won't.

 

Like you?

Still waiting on that evidence of you getting Cullen into that casting booth.

 

Again Jr I never said I Did, the Staff used our influence with Hasbro, and Aaron Archer ultimately was the one that spearheaded it.