Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by Nathanoraptor, Apr 18, 2020.
No, he turned into a Bugatti Veyron (German) and then a Mercedes AMG (German)
I thought he was talking about the bot mode I have no idea about cars other than "it looks cool".
I wouldn't expect anyone to alienate their ancestry, although I could clearly understand how their vision may be influential or different from western films.
What you're talking about is mass-shifting though. It was a thing in Bayformers as well.
I'm still impressed by the Bayverse designs in the original trilogy as each piece of each robot was articulating and animating while they were on screen.
Personally, I've never seen the Bayverse aesthetic as a particularly realistic take on the Transformers. I mean, it probably wouldn't be a good idea for a battle robot to have all those exposed gears and whatnot. How do they regenerate physical ammo? The movie robots shoot bullets, which in itself presents more logical problems than the G1 cartoon. Not to mention that a mostly hollow car couldn't transform into a 15/20 foot robot. A lot of them gain tons of mass in robot mode. I'm honestly a bit surprised that people criticize Bumblebee for this, and call it a "logical flaw". I've been noticing this since 2007. The Bayverse made an attempt to make the designs look realistic to the average viewer on a single viewing, but if you stop to analyze them they don't really hold up on a logical level. I still see the Bayverse designs as very stylized, just in a different way than something like G1. You still have to brush the cheats off as "transformium" or "space magic".
On a personal level, I agree with you about Devastator. I also prefer the movie interpretation. Not necessarily because of the attempt at realism, but because I feel like Devastator always had a bit of gorilla in his blood. The G1 carton went as far as to directly compare him to King Kong in an episode. The moves took the implication that was already present and used it as a way to make him more imposing.
Yeah, I loved those designs. They were like full organisms, just not organic.
You are correct in that an F-22 is 62 feet in length, and Starscream's height is cut in half by using multi segmented legs that collapse and are inverted, so he appears as if he is crouching, when in actuality he is not. They did this to prevent mass shifting, as that was the only set in stone rule that Michael Bay gave ILM from day one. Some would argue that this rule wasn't followed, and to an extent I would agree. I've seen various scale charts created by fans, who claim that Megatron was 31' tall, and Optimus was 28'. Perhaps that was their stated intent, however if you measure them using in frame comparisons with known heights, you will find a different story. For example, in TLK desert scene Lennox who is 6'4" is standing beside Megatron in the same frame. If you use Lennox as a reference, Megatron is 48' tall, which means Optimus would have to be closer to 35' or 37'. The only other explanation is that he somehow would have altered his size when he changed his exoskeleton, or else it's a trick of the camera angle.
By the way I just remembered, mass shifting do exist in Bayverse. The Twins literally changed from one half each of Ice Cream Truck into two whole cars by themselves.
That's what it is he's not standing next to Megatron
Isn't this like the fifth time someone's started this same thread?
This is weirdly circular logic, here. You are saying that the design changes done in order to make the jet robot not tower over the truck robot don't work... because he's slightly shorter than the truck robot.
Firstly, according to the scale charts, Starscream is slightly taller than Optimus Prime (31 feet to Optimus' 28 feet). However, the point is that there's no significant difference in height between the two when they're in a shot together; Starscream would have towered over Optimus if these design changes hadn't happened. Starscream's height is cut in half in robot mode by a greater bulk and shorter, digitigrade legs.
Yeah, Devastator looks cool, but he doesn't do much in the film. However, there's another simple answer - keep the combiner's size relative to its components. For example, make Menasor 40 feet tall (based on the size of his leg and torso components) and tweak the design for teams where there are guys out of scale (say, make Blast Off a jet on Bruticus… which the Generations Bruticus toy did) and if it doesn't lead to a roughly humanoid Transformer, so be it. Combiners are supposed to be monstrous, anyway.
Classics and Generations was more about upgrading old toys to meet new engineering standards, or match their designs to their original cartoon designs. They weren't attempting to fix logical issues with the original design or simply put a new twist on old characters. Having said that, though, Bayverse aside, people didn't like the redesign for Animated Waspinator - I personally loved the more Frankenstein's monster look, as well as the new depth Wyatt and Isenberg did with the character.
And, my point was more how people reacted to the changes, rather than the changes themselves. Transformers as a fandom is fairly unique in this regard - there's nobody complaining that, say, MCU Scarlet Witch doesn't have her headpiece or that MonsterVerse Mothra has a stinger. Marvel, DC and Godzilla fans are fine with, sometimes quite radical, reinterpretations of the original design. For example, GMK, which is cited as a great Godzilla film by G-fans, has the most radical reinterpretation of King Ghidorah in the character's history.
Whilst I agree using the generic protoform design for every Decepticon in DOTM was lazy, some of the Bayverse aesthetic, like using claws and wheel-feet, was actually pretty unique and cool; making these things recognisably alien and strange. For example, Bayverse Ravage and Laserbeak, whilst still being recognisably feline and avian respectively, still looked alien and spiky and weird, rather than just a "robot cat/bird".
Having said that though, I do like Bumblebee Blitzwing, firstly because of the combination of Bayverse and G1 aesthetic and secondly because of the "flight suit" look of the design (his colouration and especially his "mask"). Why they got rid of the "gas mask" on Starscream, I'll never know.
You are now saying that Starscream should be bigger than Megatron based on images I've provided from the film itself, if you're saying Starscream's height is 50% of what it should be if the mass wasn't displaced horizontally in his signature dorito gorilla mode.
Is that why a cement mixer is now the entire head? You know, the thing full of sawblades that's actually bigger than the cement mixer mode in of itself?
"Logical issues with the original design"
You are acting like a product range mainly composed of two repurposed toylines from the 70s had to actually adhere to that crap. And no, I didn't misdate them - look up the filing date of the patent for the original Sunstreaker toy, that's from the late 1970s.
Wow. It's almost like you didn't even read that part of my post given you are just regurgitating the exact same argument about how a human character not having a hat is somehow the same thing as a complete redesign of an alien robot where the composition of car parts is very much an important aspect.
The Twins does have mass shifting, so it's not like they uhhh... operate on that logic anyway.
Posting this again since the previous post seems to be skipped between long post
Umm... why? Aside from THE BEAST and movie Devy, I can't really remember where there are Monstrous combiner.
And by Monstrous, I mean things like Movie Devy, or at the very least uhhh... umm... not...look... human?
Even THE BEAST still looks like hunched human.
I don't know why but that mode make me laughed way harder than it should.
And back to my first point, I guess?
The change in Mothra was more like Bumblebee's OP compared to G1 BB, it's a faithful but updated. You can put her pic side by side, and people will still recognize it's Mothra. You can't do the same with let's say, Scream or Megs (Toys only G1 deco aside, obviously).
This isn't really a good defense of these designs.
Maybe possibly fixing some minor 'logical' issues when it comes to the fictional transforming alien robots doesn't justify them being terrible representations of the characters they're meant to be, when they aren't just slapping a name on a bot that's nothing like them and that's not even taking into account how many times the existing movie designs cheated / mass shifted.
Often in the films the Decepticons would all just blend into each other because they all had the same dulled / dark color schemes and the same shallow personality, the Bots didn't fare much better either. The Cons are all mostly interchangeable. At least in the Bee movie you could recognize who was meant to be who, their designs were distinct while still being faithful. The Decepticons in the bay films were often super generic, it doesn't really matter how creative or interesting their designs are when they have no personality.
In one movie, in one scene that lasts a few seconds, their Starscream completely and utterly demolishes the dorito gorilla.
This reminds me of a piece Ken Christiansen worked on while doing work for the ROTF video game.
He wasn't even working on the movie and yet he designed a Movie Starscream that looked heaps better than the grey ape triangle. An amusing fact is that the final head design slapped onto Bay Starscream was a concept created for Megatron, so they just recycled it and plopped it onto the Jet Decepticons body.
They should have done this for each movie HOLY shit
Greater pains were taken to avoid mass-shifting than previous incarnations - for example, Soundwave doesn't shrink into a tape deck. And most of the scale cheats are more due to camerawork than actual errors in animation (e.g. what they did with the T-rex in Jurassic Park).
Keeping all the characters in a realistic scale (i.e. combiners with sizes relative to their components) can lead to more creative and interesting designs - for example, a 40-foot tall Menasor is scarier than a Godzilla-sized Menasor.
And in another scene, their Ravage fails to live up to the Xeno-panther ROTF design.
Now, I do like some of the Bumblebee designs - the Seekers, Shatter and Dropkick to name a few.
However, some I don't - for example, the G1 design for Arcee sucks (it's pretty much Robot Princess Leia) and pink is too "girly" a colour. The TF: Prime design for Arcee is much better, combining danger with femininity - in fact, I would go as far to say the TF: Prime design for Arcee is the best design the character has ever had and the one they should have looked at.
I do like their Starscream design - I'm just a little sad they removed the "gas mask" Blitzwing had. In fact, they should given that to all the Seekers, because I love the "flight suit" design aesthetic they did for Blitzwing.
The Twins were once a combined ice cream car before going into their own alt mode cars, each at least as big as Bumblebee.
Yeah... note why I said "greater pains".
With the Twins' ice cream van mode... I don't know what they were trying to do. Cheap comedy? I don't know.
Having said that though, that was the film that introduced the awesome Xeno-panther design of ROTF Ravage.
"Greater Pains" doesn't count when it's literally the 2nd movie of the series...
Every of that logic of "Trying to keep it's scale logical" flew out of the window because they're not even trying with The Twins.
Separate names with a comma.