I was wondering, are the hatchlings the Decepticons grow mindless, subservient soldiers to their army, or actual Transformers with a choice of sides? It's a neat concept but very vague. Your thoughts?
I don't really know but I have an idea for Hot rod! Okay so In the past Optimus and co land on the nemesis while no one is around and MAYBE Hot rod is a stolen hatchling brought up by Optimus prime but lost and now has found earth?
My guess is the hatchlings have independent minds but if they are raised as Decepticons, they will become Decepticons altho they can still switch sides later on once they are adults.
hmm kinda hard to say. If they are anything like human babies they personalities are developed thru experience. But I would not put it past Megs to have mindless and obedient soldiers.
One would like to think this is just a Bayformers movieverse take on budding/protoform hatcheries/clone tech (like Wingspan & Pounce, for example). But what we saw? The way it played out? The look of it all? The multiple Cons looking the same? The (given the two movies total now) apparent Bonecrushers, the multiples of each Constructicon, Blackout & Grindor? I'm simply amazed no other repaints of Starscream came into play, or Barricade's twin Roadblock chasing someone around & the like. I gotta say the Cons have finally been fully made exactly what I (and I recall others) was/were afraid of. Drone monsters, copied & pasted foot soldiers, the individuality of them all reduced to your atypical Star Wars clone soldier. I understand everyone runs to the issue of time & money, but this is a special case, I'm sorry. This isn't Ninja Turtles fighting hundreds of the same model of The Foot, or Star Wars Jedi battling clone after clone, this is Transformers with Decepticons, all of whom are individuals. Do you think anyone outside of a TF forum saw the forest fighting scene and thought "Oh look! It's Grindor! The new Decepticon that looks just like Blackout from the last movie!"? No, much like my wife, hell much like me, we assumed Megs got resurrected, and shit so did Blackout. Color seemed kind of off, but for all we know sitting at the bottom of the ocean for two years might do that to a metal fella. And there's the whole slipup of how many Cons are down in the ocean from one point to the next. Yet that's the angle they're pushing now. Blackout & Grindor, Decepticon Protoform clones by the dozen grown & hatched like alien eggs, multiple Constructicon clones. It's just a damn shame. Ugh, I just don't care for it in the slightest.
Considering the number of clones and redecos in G1 alone, how do we supposedly know that it's not the movieverse version of the same thing? Either I'm missing your logic somewhere, or it's just missing altogether. Enlighten me, please.
As opposed to Jetfire who was raised by mum and daddy wheel. Given that Jetfire didn't want to live in so much hate thus switching sides I assume Decepticon hatchlings are indoctrinated with so much hate. LOL Does that mean it is why Bonecrusher hates everything? The younger generation like Wheelie the concept of sideswitching was so alien that is likely something very rare.
Given the way you're asking the question, I'm almost tempted to say take the question and the attitude with it, and cram it. But, what the heck, why not. Clones in G1? Cloudraker & Fastlane, Pounce & Wingspan. Who else? Redecos, plenty. Likenesses, though not matches, in design can be found from the Seekers to Ironhide & Ratchet's similarities. But there wasn't legions of foot soldiers at play, armies of identical clones. Unless I'm somehow wrong on that, in which case bring on an example. Wait, why am I trying to find different words to say the same thing....I'll just quote it since I said it right the first time.. So yeah, I guess you did miss the logic. And, as a friendly suggestion, you might want to work on the 'tude when merely inquiring to a fellow fan on something, especially when its possible you just didn't grasp the intent...somehow. Additionally, you say.. Movie version of what thing, exactly? Of the old G1 days where there was no growing of machine men/robots but assembly? Where similar design could be made sense in that in manufacturing replacement pieces for robot people in times of civil war with resources dwindling, that similar chasis & the like might be a norm here & there? Or maybe you meant G2 where lost ancient knowledge showed a painfully morphometric budding process where one Transformer can split off from another preexisting one? Perhaps you were on about the Protoforms as known in shows like Beast Wars & Animated where we're never told exactly where they come from, only that they exist in a form of liquidated state and solidify when brought online or given a Spark? Because what we saw in the film was eggsacks of little baby Decepticons floating in glop. So while, as said prior, one might like to think this is just a Bayformers movieverse take on budding/protoform hatcheries/clone tech (like Wingspan & Pounce, for example), the fact its now been taken to Cons hatched from eggs in order to allow the filmakers battle fodder you'd normally find in TMNT fights or Star Wars conflicts, and its possible (and in some cases probable) that might not sit entirely well with some people, those people being prior existing fans and newly formed ones. I know I don't like it, and it does beg a non-TF-fan to wonder, "How do you grow a robot?". I know, with TF level of tech you can go on about nano-this, replicate-that. But still, that's for folks who know. To those that don't it just looks like egg pod aliens instead of evil robots. And to me, it just doesn't look good. Heck, you take growing Cons in goo filled egg sacks, robot leg humping, giant metal balls and parachute farting on a whole, and it does seem to lend some comical credence to the running gag that maybe Michael Bay doesn't know what a robot is. Or maybe I missed your 'logic', and you would be so kind as to enlighten.
It is also possible that all those poor hatchlings will indeed turn out evil if they are not breast fed with energon milk. Breast energon milk is best for babies.
They didn't all appear at once, but yes, there is a definite "army" of seekers in the G1 cartoon. Look here for a list. The only difference we have between most of them is which garish color scheme they happen to wear. The Decepticon duplicates that had any considerable screen time in RoTF also had color variations. I don't think the background Deceps in RoTF should be given any more thought or consideration by the viewer than the random seekers and other "extras" in G1 or any other TF universe. For the logic of your criticism to hold up as a distinction between RoTF and what's come before, there has to not be an army of Decepticon clones in G1. There is an army of Decepticon clones in G1. In that case, while your complaint is valid on its own if applied to both RoTF and G1, it has no relevance in pointing out differences between the two and nothing to do with the concept of "hatchlings".
I liked that they imported a sense of the organic with hatchlings - it thus made sense for the Transformers to have emotions, make connections and feel pain, etc.
I found this little tibit on Transformers Wiki: Explains the existence of the hatchlings on The Nemesis to a tee and why they need energon in ROTF.
In my TF3 script I have a unique idea on what they are but I will not share it...in a few years I will unveil my ideas.
I think all transformers on Cybertron are actually built. The Hatchlings are created by Decepticons to build army while Allspark is lost. They will always be Decepticons.
So G1, where, and I requote myself, "there was no growing of machine men/robots but assembly? Where similar design could be made sense in that in manufacturing replacement pieces for robot people in times of civil war with resources dwindling, that similar chassis & the like might be a norm here & there?" You mean back when its plausible the machines were built, not grown? Retroactive application is a personal choice, not a fact. And, I say it again, "Likenesses, though not matches, in design can be found from the Seekers to Ironhide & Ratchet's similarities. But there wasn't legions of foot soldiers at play, armies of identical clones." In G1 there were varied Seekers or Seeker-like TFs on occasion, and there were other non-Seeker-y 'generic' Transformers as well. At no point that I recall did we see shoulder to shoulder droves of them. So an assumption is being made on numbers, the Protoform process (well, one of its many definitions) applied retroactively by individual choice/taste, then presented as what exactly? 'Proof' that I can't dislike the way they did a Con Clone army in RotF? Buh? Er, what color variations? The only variations on color that could be claimed are "All the Long Hauls were Construction vehicle brand green" or "All the Bonecrushers were Military Desert Tan". All the of generic Clone Cons were of one color that I recall. Again, no there is not. In G1 there were only Pounce & Wingspan, Fastlane & Cloudburst, and sure I'll throw ya Reflector, when it comes to actual confirmed Clones. Well, now that I say 'confirmed' I really shouldn't throw in Reflector, but the bone's been thrown so screw it. And even though these 'Clones' had their individual differences, well, I guess my dislike of an aspect used in RotF doesn't hold up, now does it. I say, "Ugh, I just don't care for it in the slightest", you say my complaint has no logic or relevance. Great. My complaint as a personal preference is valid no matter the case, fy to tha i. And the fact is you're weaving through series & guidebook explanations, jumping forward, backward, and around in order to deny what the clones in RotF are and tell me I'm wrong for not liking the way Bay implemented them. There are no armies of exactly duplicated, entirely identical Decepticon Clones in G1, period. Nor are there hatchlings. If there's an episode displaying otherwise, do name it please. Similar but not exact body structures that vary from an individual colored this way to an individual colored that way in the time of a cartoon, comic and toyline that pegged these fictional characters for the robots & machines they are, in a continuity where growing a Transformer in an egg sack never made it to a page, to so much as a single still frame of animation or out of the mouth of so much as a single character in reference holds no relevance in defending anything about a protoform clone Con army in RotF, just to state it plainly to you. So, you're saying I have to feel the same way and that I'm wrong for having my own preference on the matter? What makes your opinions & preferences right and mine wrong? As much as I never cared for Dreamwave on many items, they had their moments. While that's not one of them imo, and they're referencing more the protoforms we've seen in Beast Wars times (being such a concept was never seen, spoken of, or used in a series prior, nor had Animated come along yet), and that's merely the Dreamwave explanation for many available nowadays on Protoforms, and since I have the guide that's from I can say there's more to that entry, yeah that explanation could certainly apply verbatim to what was seen in RotF by description/application alone. But is what I've been saying being purposely ignored? I mean, did I not start out my first post in-topic with "One would like to think this is just a Bayformers movieverse take on budding/protoform hatcheries/clone tech"? Are some of you implying we have seen egg sacks growing fledgling clone Decepticons like they were Transformery babies in Cybertronian wombs before onscreen as though a page out of Aliens or another similar movie? Given the fact Bay & company do reuse TF models when they feel they can are you arguing that from a movie-making mindset these generic Cons, and all the Constructicon clones, are not used for battle fodder in the same manner of Star Wars Clone soldiers, or copy & pasted computer generated generics in a historical battle action movie adaption, or Ninja Turtle foot ninjas? I mean, I'm allowed to not like the way they did something, right? Because I made that clear as well. Or is it being implied I can't not like an aspect in a Transformers media, or perhaps just the way it was utilized? I didn't run face first into someone's over-defense of the film here, did I? Come on, throw me some answers here, and not to just one question, to all of them.
At least it answers the question your kids ask every hour of the day: "Mommy, daddy, where do baby Transformers come from?" "Hatcheries, darling, hatcheries." "Wow! So Transformers practically lay eggs. Does this make them reptiles?"
