Hasbro has reached a point where they are comfortable with adding variations of the word terror into faction names of the upcoming movie. This is one of the benefits of winning the war on terror. Cartoon baddies can have scary names again.

But do you think the Terrorcons will shout out "TERRORIZE!" before transforming as the Predacons did in the Beast Wars show? Would that be too edgy or is the movie franchise too mature to resort to cartoon conventions?

Do you think we're more likely to hear "MAXIMIZE!" from the goodies or is "BEAST MODE!" going to be what the Maximals shout? WIll anybody do any call outs before transforming at all?

I'm wondering what ingredients I expect from a live action Beast Wars.

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 8:00:42 PM UTC-7, evil.king.m...@gmail.com wrote:
> Do you think we're more likely to hear "MAXIMIZE!" from the goodies or is "BEAST MODE!" going to be what the Maximals shout? WIll anybody do any call outs before transforming at all?
I don't expect they'll do any of that, to be honest. I mean, the Michael Bay movies barely used the classic transforming sound effect, and that's far more iconic and memorable.

> I'm wondering what ingredients I expect from a live action Beast Wars.

Nobody will have the right voices. They're animals, so they'll get to make scatological jokes. They might throw in some popular lines from the show, so there's an off-chance we'll get an awkwardly-placed and badly-timed "ultra gear" or "shut up, Rattrap" but mostly I'm predicting an utter travesty..

Zob (predicts there will be at least one Optimus Primal joke having to do with flinging poo)

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 5:52:09 PM UTC-5, Zobovor wrote:
> On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 8:00:42 PM UTC-7, evil.king.m...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Do you think we're more likely to hear "MAXIMIZE!" from the goodies or is "BEAST MODE!" going to be what the Maximals shout? WIll anybody do any call outs before transforming at all?
> I don't expect they'll do any of that, to be honest. I mean, the Michael Bay movies barely used the classic transforming sound effect, and that's far more iconic and memorable.

Marvel has proven that fidelity to the franchise is a money maker. DC went so far as to resurrect the Snyder cut to appease the fans and as a money-spinning move. But Transformers *still* gets no respect, six movies and billions of dollars and merchandise later.

> > I'm wondering what ingredients I expect from a live action Beast Wars.
> Nobody will have the right voices. They're animals, so they'll get to make scatological jokes. They might throw in some popular lines from the show, so there's an off-chance we'll get an awkwardly-placed and badly-timed "ultra gear" or "shut up, Rattrap" but mostly I'm predicting an utter travesty..

At least Bay brought back Cullen. We don't have a single original VA back in his/her iconic role. The hopes, they are not high.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:12:05 PM UTC-8, Codigo Postal wrote:
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 5:52:09 PM UTC-5, Zobovor wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 8:00:42 PM UTC-7, evil.king.m...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Do you think we're more likely to hear "MAXIMIZE!" from the goodies or is "BEAST MODE!" going to be what the Maximals shout? WIll anybody do any call outs before transforming at all?
> > I don't expect they'll do any of that, to be honest. I mean, the Michael Bay movies barely used the classic transforming sound effect, and that's far more iconic and memorable.

> Marvel has proven that fidelity to the franchise is a money maker. DC went so far as to resurrect the Snyder cut to appease the fans and as a money-spinning move. But Transformers *still* gets no respect, six movies and billions of dollars and merchandise later.

You do realize that those seven movies and billions of dollars and merchandise are bigger than the source material, don't you? If they were going to respect any version of Transformers, it would be that, sad as that might be.

(This is why TF:Prime has Bumblebee speak in beeps, for instance, and why the Allspark Cube appears in nearly everything now, when it was never a thing before... and the similarly named Allspark was a mystical thing in Beast Wars, not an object).

Marvel and DC are bad examples because they've had 50-75 years of interpretations of the characters to the point where "fidelity to the franchise" is almost meaningless. Marvel experimented with a few movies before it found its house style, and has shoved everything into that style, DC tried to make Superman into Batman and stumbled as a result (Snyder's movies made money, but never as much money or as much impact as the Nolan Batman movies).

(I would also argue that the Snyder Superman isn't very faithful to the core of the character -- the greatest strength of Superman is that he inspires people, and in "Man of Steel" Perry White actually inspires more people than Superman. You can bend Superman in a lot of ways, tell dark stories or light, but the core of every successful Superman story is inspiring others to do better.)

> > > I'm wondering what ingredients I expect from a live action Beast Wars..
> > Nobody will have the right voices. They're animals, so they'll get to make scatological jokes. They might throw in some popular lines from the show, so there's an off-chance we'll get an awkwardly-placed and badly-timed "ultra gear" or "shut up, Rattrap" but mostly I'm predicting an utter travesty.
> At least Bay brought back Cullen. We don't have a single original VA back in his/her iconic role. The hopes, they are not high.

Movie Optimus is such a different character from any other version that a different voice honestly would have made more sense. "Your face is the right of all sentient beings!"

> > Marvel has proven that fidelity to the franchise is a money maker. DC went so far as to resurrect the Snyder cut to appease the fans and as a money-spinning move. But Transformers *still* gets no respect, six movies and billions of dollars and merchandise later.
> You do realize that those seven movies and billions of dollars and merchandise are bigger than the source material, don't you? If they were going to respect any version of Transformers, it would be that, sad as that might be.

I wonder. After the death of G1, I thought Beast Wars would be the new iconic version of the brand for many fans, but G1 persists. After the wilderness of the BM/RID years, Armada relaunched the brand into the stratosphere, and I thought that might be the new iconic version of the franchise, but G1 persists. The Bay movies have had a tremendous financial impact, and have left their imprint on the lore, but will it be enduring? Or will G1 continue to define the Transformers-verse forever? My money would be on the latter.

>
> (This is why TF:Prime has Bumblebee speak in beeps, for instance, and why the Allspark Cube appears in nearly everything now, when it was never a thing before... and the similarly named Allspark was a mystical thing in Beast Wars, not an object).

No denying the Bayverse's influence. But we also get periodic callbacks to Sky-Byte, and there's no dispute that the once successful RID2001 is now of very little relevance to the franchise. I see almost no discussion about the storylines, characterizations, or motivations of the Bayverse. Arcee is still a pink car, not a devil's threesome of motorcycles. Other than a few tributes like Beep and Boop Bumblebee, or the Allspark MacGuffin, Bayverse has had as much lasting cultural impact as the Macarena.

> Marvel and DC are bad examples because they've had 50-75 years of interpretations of the characters to the point where "fidelity to the franchise" is almost meaningless. Marvel experimented with a few movies before it found its house style, and has shoved everything into that style, DC tried to make Superman into Batman and stumbled as a result (Snyder's movies made money, but never as much money or as much impact as the Nolan Batman movies).

Fidelity to the core tenets, then. In the films, Superman is still Clark Kent, heterosexual Caucasian-presenting cisgender male in love with Lois Lane.. Batman is still Bruce Wayne, and criminals are still a cowardly and superstitious lot. The essentials are in place, and true to the fundamentals of the characters. Plus ca change.

They're not making Marvel movies for the "homies in the projects."

> Movie Optimus is such a different character from any other version that a different voice honestly would have made more sense. "Your face is the right of all sentient beings!"

Probably, but then it would have felt even less like our Transformers. When you're building a franchise around a beloved property, it makes sense to acknowledge the love and the parasocial attachments people have to that property. Otherwise, just call it Transmorphers and be done with it.

Look at Ghostbusters: Afterlife, or Spider Man: No Way Home. The creators told new stories that acknowledged and respected what came before, and were richly rewarded at the box office. Yet the people behind the TF movies feel justified in ignoring or rewriting the very things that people loved about the franchise to begin with (like turning Cool Dad Prime into Homicide Prime).

This is as bad as the random trademark-maintaining nameslaps Hasbro used to do. RID01 Prowl repaint that looks like Red Alert? Let's call him Inferno. Orange flying Autobot camcorder? Laserbeak. Green Constructicon-looking Autobot back hoe? I got the perfect name: Grimlock.

Codigo Postal <codigopostal959@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Marvel has proven that fidelity to the franchise is a money maker. DC
>>> went so far as to resurrect the Snyder cut to appease the fans and as a
>>> money-spinning move. But Transformers *still* gets no respect, six
>>> movies and billions of dollars and merchandise later.
>> You do realize that those seven movies and billions of dollars and
>> merchandise are bigger than the source material, don't you? If they were
>> going to respect any version of Transformers, it would be that, sad as that might be.
>
> I wonder. After the death of G1, I thought Beast Wars would be the new
> iconic version of the brand for many fans, but G1 persists. After the
> wilderness of the BM/RID years, Armada relaunched the brand into the
> stratosphere, and I thought that might be the new iconic version of the
> franchise, but G1 persists. The Bay movies have had a tremendous
> financial impact, and have left their imprint on the lore, but will it be
> enduring? Or will G1 continue to define the Transformers-verse forever?
> My money would be on the latter.
>
>>
>> (This is why TF:Prime has Bumblebee speak in beeps, for instance, and
>> why the Allspark Cube appears in nearly everything now, when it was
>> never a thing before... and the similarly named Allspark was a mystical
>> thing in Beast Wars, not an object).
>
> No denying the Bayverse's influence. But we also get periodic callbacks
> to Sky-Byte, and there's no dispute that the once successful RID2001 is
> now of very little relevance to the franchise. I see almost no discussion
> about the storylines, characterizations, or motivations of the Bayverse.
> Arcee is still a pink car, not a devil's threesome of motorcycles. Other
> than a few tributes like Beep and Boop Bumblebee, or the Allspark
> MacGuffin, Bayverse has had as much lasting cultural impact as the Macarena.
>
>
>> Marvel and DC are bad examples because they've had 50-75 years of
>> interpretations of the characters to the point where "fidelity to the
>> franchise" is almost meaningless. Marvel experimented with a few movies
>> before it found its house style, and has shoved everything into that
>> style, DC tried to make Superman into Batman and stumbled as a result
>> (Snyder's movies made money, but never as much money or as much impact
>> as the Nolan Batman movies).
>
> Fidelity to the core tenets, then. In the films, Superman is still Clark
> Kent, heterosexual Caucasian-presenting cisgender male in love with Lois
> Lane. Batman is still Bruce Wayne, and criminals are still a cowardly and
> superstitious lot. The essentials are in place, and true to the
> fundamentals of the characters. Plus ca change.

That’s the names. Not the characters. Optimus Prime leads the Autobots
against the Decepticons.

Plenty of people are as bothered by the Snyder Superman as anything Michael
Bay did to Transformers. From Pa Kent telling Clark to let kids die, to the
bitter joyless man that Clark Kent is… it’s less faithful to the original
character than Optimus Prime killing (he tried to kill Megatron in the 86
movie, and was generally prevented from major violence in the show by after
school cartoon standards rather than anything in the continuity of the show
itself)

(But, Snyder did give us the Martha Moment, so that was something we will
never forget.)

> They're not making Marvel movies for the "homies in the projects."

Black Panther?

The Falcon and the Winter Soldier tv show?

Luke Cage tv show? (Homie central there…)

Ms. Marvel tv show? (Female Pakistani homies, but…)

I’d toss She-Hulk, Shaing Chi, and a few others in there on general
principle.

It might not be your favorite stuff Marvel has done — I think “Black
Panther” is more interesting than anything else they have done, but tastes
vary — but they are definitely doing it. (I do wish “Black Panther”
developed the Afro-Futurism more, as a lot of authors have done more with
that than Kirby did when creating Wakanda… but the secret superpower is
already stretching the MCU)

On a somewhat related note, I have found “Star Trek: Discovery” having a
single token straight white male very funny. Pity about the show itself.
Star Trek works better in a more episodic form, as “Strange New Worlds”
demonstrates, with “Picard” offering a counter example.

On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 4:05:03 AM UTC-5, Gustavo Wombat, of the Seattle Wombats wrote:

> >
> >>> Marvel has proven that fidelity to the franchise is a money maker. DC
> >>> went so far as to resurrect the Snyder cut to appease the fans and as a
> >>> money-spinning move. But Transformers *still* gets no respect, six
> >>> movies and billions of dollars and merchandise later.
> >> You do realize that those seven movies and billions of dollars and
> >> merchandise are bigger than the source material, don't you? If they were
> >> going to respect any version of Transformers, it would be that, sad as that might be.
> >
> > I wonder. After the death of G1, I thought Beast Wars would be the new
> > iconic version of the brand for many fans, but G1 persists. After the
> > wilderness of the BM/RID years, Armada relaunched the brand into the
> > stratosphere, and I thought that might be the new iconic version of the
> > franchise, but G1 persists. The Bay movies have had a tremendous
> > financial impact, and have left their imprint on the lore, but will it be
> > enduring? Or will G1 continue to define the Transformers-verse forever?
> > My money would be on the latter.
> >
> >>
> >> (This is why TF:Prime has Bumblebee speak in beeps, for instance, and
> >> why the Allspark Cube appears in nearly everything now, when it was
> >> never a thing before... and the similarly named Allspark was a mystical
> >> thing in Beast Wars, not an object).
> >
> > No denying the Bayverse's influence. But we also get periodic callbacks
> > to Sky-Byte, and there's no dispute that the once successful RID2001 is
> > now of very little relevance to the franchise. I see almost no discussion
> > about the storylines, characterizations, or motivations of the Bayverse..
> > Arcee is still a pink car, not a devil's threesome of motorcycles. Other
> > than a few tributes like Beep and Boop Bumblebee, or the Allspark
> > MacGuffin, Bayverse has had as much lasting cultural impact as the Macarena.
> >
> >
> >> Marvel and DC are bad examples because they've had 50-75 years of
> >> interpretations of the characters to the point where "fidelity to the
> >> franchise" is almost meaningless. Marvel experimented with a few movies
> >> before it found its house style, and has shoved everything into that
> >> style, DC tried to make Superman into Batman and stumbled as a result
> >> (Snyder's movies made money, but never as much money or as much impact
> >> as the Nolan Batman movies).
> >
> > Fidelity to the core tenets, then. In the films, Superman is still Clark
> > Kent, heterosexual Caucasian-presenting cisgender male in love with Lois
> > Lane. Batman is still Bruce Wayne, and criminals are still a cowardly and
> > superstitious lot. The essentials are in place, and true to the
> > fundamentals of the characters. Plus ca change.
> That’s the names. Not the characters. Optimus Prime leads the Autobots
> against the Decepticons.
>
> Plenty of people are as bothered by the Snyder Superman as anything Michael
> Bay did to Transformers. From Pa Kent telling Clark to let kids die, to the
> bitter joyless man that Clark Kent is… it’s less faithful to the original
> character than Optimus Prime killing (he tried to kill Megatron in the 86
> movie, and was generally prevented from major violence in the show by after
> school cartoon standards rather than anything in the continuity of the show
> itself)
>
> (But, Snyder did give us the Martha Moment, so that was something we will
> never forget.)
> > They're not making Marvel movies for the "homies in the projects."
> Black Panther?
>
> The Falcon and the Winter Soldier tv show?
>
> Luke Cage tv show? (Homie central there…)
>
> Ms. Marvel tv show? (Female Pakistani homies, but…)
>
> I’d toss She-Hulk, Shaing Chi, and a few others in there on general
> principle.
>
> It might not be your favorite stuff Marvel has done — I think “Black
> Panther” is more interesting than anything else they have done, but tastes
> vary — but they are definitely doing it. (I do wish “Black Panther”
> developed the Afro-Futurism more, as a lot of authors have done more with
> that than Kirby did when creating Wakanda… but the secret superpower is
> already stretching the MCU)
>
> On a somewhat related note, I have found “Star Trek: Discovery” having a
> single token straight white male very funny. Pity about the show itself.
> Star Trek works better in a more episodic form, as “Strange New Worlds”
> demonstrates, with “Picard” offering a counter example.

The focus ought to be uniting people, not dividing them.

In classic media from the 80s and 90s, the message was about eliding differences and focusing on our common humanity.

Today, *not* emphasizing our differences is a cardinal sin, and indeed, there’s a very strong sense of antagonism in the presentation of diversity in modern media.

Here are two episodes of G.I. Joe that did it right, and did it best. Two stories featuring minorities that don’t reduce them to tokens or tropes, don’t wallow in grievances, and don’t condescend. Instead, two great stories that showcase those Joes as fully realized people and fully integrated members of the team, without ever once calling attention to their race or ethnicity. More of this, less of the divisiveness, is what this country needs.

Red Rocket’s Glare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj-bcS4WC2s
Lasers in the Night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udc2C9KKs-Y

Codigo Postal <codigopostal959@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 4:05:03 AM UTC-5, Gustavo Wombat, of
> the Seattle Wombats wrote:
>
>>>
>>>>> Marvel has proven that fidelity to the franchise is a money maker. DC
>>>>> went so far as to resurrect the Snyder cut to appease the fans and as a
>>>>> money-spinning move. But Transformers *still* gets no respect, six
>>>>> movies and billions of dollars and merchandise later.
>>>> You do realize that those seven movies and billions of dollars and
>>>> merchandise are bigger than the source material, don't you? If they were
>>>> going to respect any version of Transformers, it would be that, sad as that might be.
>>>
>>> I wonder. After the death of G1, I thought Beast Wars would be the new
>>> iconic version of the brand for many fans, but G1 persists. After the
>>> wilderness of the BM/RID years, Armada relaunched the brand into the
>>> stratosphere, and I thought that might be the new iconic version of the
>>> franchise, but G1 persists. The Bay movies have had a tremendous
>>> financial impact, and have left their imprint on the lore, but will it be
>>> enduring? Or will G1 continue to define the Transformers-verse forever?
>>> My money would be on the latter.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> (This is why TF:Prime has Bumblebee speak in beeps, for instance, and
>>>> why the Allspark Cube appears in nearly everything now, when it was
>>>> never a thing before... and the similarly named Allspark was a mystical
>>>> thing in Beast Wars, not an object).
>>>
>>> No denying the Bayverse's influence. But we also get periodic callbacks
>>> to Sky-Byte, and there's no dispute that the once successful RID2001 is
>>> now of very little relevance to the franchise. I see almost no discussion
>>> about the storylines, characterizations, or motivations of the Bayverse.
>>> Arcee is still a pink car, not a devil's threesome of motorcycles. Other
>>> than a few tributes like Beep and Boop Bumblebee, or the Allspark
>>> MacGuffin, Bayverse has had as much lasting cultural impact as the Macarena.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Marvel and DC are bad examples because they've had 50-75 years of
>>>> interpretations of the characters to the point where "fidelity to the
>>>> franchise" is almost meaningless. Marvel experimented with a few movies
>>>> before it found its house style, and has shoved everything into that
>>>> style, DC tried to make Superman into Batman and stumbled as a result
>>>> (Snyder's movies made money, but never as much money or as much impact
>>>> as the Nolan Batman movies).
>>>
>>> Fidelity to the core tenets, then. In the films, Superman is still Clark
>>> Kent, heterosexual Caucasian-presenting cisgender male in love with Lois
>>> Lane. Batman is still Bruce Wayne, and criminals are still a cowardly and
>>> superstitious lot. The essentials are in place, and true to the
>>> fundamentals of the characters. Plus ca change.
>> That’s the names. Not the characters. Optimus Prime leads the Autobots
>> against the Decepticons.
>>
>> Plenty of people are as bothered by the Snyder Superman as anything Michael
>> Bay did to Transformers. From Pa Kent telling Clark to let kids die, to the
>> bitter joyless man that Clark Kent is… it’s less faithful to the original
>> character than Optimus Prime killing (he tried to kill Megatron in the 86
>> movie, and was generally prevented from major violence in the show by after
>> school cartoon standards rather than anything in the continuity of the show
>> itself)
>>
>> (But, Snyder did give us the Martha Moment, so that was something we will
>> never forget.)
>>> They're not making Marvel movies for the "homies in the projects."
>> Black Panther?
>>
>> The Falcon and the Winter Soldier tv show?
>>
>> Luke Cage tv show? (Homie central there…)
>>
>> Ms. Marvel tv show? (Female Pakistani homies, but…)
>>
>> I’d toss She-Hulk, Shaing Chi, and a few others in there on general
>> principle.
>>
>> It might not be your favorite stuff Marvel has done — I think “Black
>> Panther” is more interesting than anything else they have done, but tastes
>> vary — but they are definitely doing it. (I do wish “Black Panther”
>> developed the Afro-Futurism more, as a lot of authors have done more with
>> that than Kirby did when creating Wakanda… but the secret superpower is
>> already stretching the MCU)
>>
>> On a somewhat related note, I have found “Star Trek: Discovery” having a
>> single token straight white male very funny. Pity about the show itself.
>> Star Trek works better in a more episodic form, as “Strange New Worlds”
>> demonstrates, with “Picard” offering a counter example.
>
>
> The focus ought to be uniting people, not dividing them.
>
> In classic media from the 80s and 90s, the message was about eliding
> differences and focusing on our common humanity.
>
> Today, *not* emphasizing our differences is a cardinal sin, and indeed,
> there’s a very strong sense of antagonism in the presentation of
> diversity in modern media.
>
> Here are two episodes of G.I. Joe that did it right, and did it best. Two
> stories featuring minorities that don’t reduce them to tokens or tropes,
> don’t wallow in grievances, and don’t condescend. Instead, two great
> stories that showcase those Joes as fully realized people and fully
> integrated members of the team, without ever once calling attention to
> their race or ethnicity. More of this, less of the divisiveness, is what
> this country needs.
>
> Red Rocket’s Glare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj-bcS4WC2s
> Lasers in the Night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udc2C9KKs-Y
>

But people have different experiences, and race colors those differences.
That’s life.

Even skipping race, there are huge differences in the stories of different
white people. Sticking to ancient TV, look at “Seinfeld” vs. “Roseanne” —
they’re telling very different stories about very different people in very
different circumstances. One is wealthy people creating problems out of
thin air, while the other is a lower middle class family barely getting by.
(Swap “Larry David Show”for “Seinfeld” if you want to cut the farce of
Kramer)

Understanding people — which is generally good — means being exposed to a
variety of stories, not just altering a skin tone and leaving the character
underneath white. Seeing and understanding people’s experiences isn’t
divisive — it fosters empathy.

The “I don’t see color” people are making deliberate choices to blind
themselves to reality because they don’t want to be bothered — it’s almost
a thread of “I don’t see color and don’t you try to make me see color.”
“Celebrate the differences” has always been a more realistic approach that
helps build empathy, community and a vibrant restaurant scene with good
tacos.

Evil King Macrocranios <evil.king.macrocranios@gmail.com> Wrote in
message:r
> Do you think we're more likely to hear "MAXIMIZE!" from the goodies or is "BEAST MODE!" going to be what the Maximals shout?

If I remember correctly, Optimus Primal went from beast mode to robot
mode without uttering a word in the most recent teaser trailer. A bit
disappointing if you ask me.

----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html