Hasbro US Conference talks about a Cinematic Universe

[griffin]

At the annual JP Morgan Conference in America, the CEO of Hasbro was there to tell the audience about the future of the company, and a little bit about its major brands... including Transformers.

The full list of the details can be seen here (http://news.tfw2005.com/2016/05/24/tfw2005-coverage-44th-annual-j-p-morgan-conference-315942), but these are the highlights that relate to Transformers...

- The Transformers Brand is currently going through a transition period, but didn't note what that meant. (we've already seen them taking back the Convention & Club licenses, so they are obviously a part of their new marketing strategy)

- Transformers 5 will continue the story of the previous movies.

- The Fan Community (noted as customers over 16), are acknowledged as being a significant part of their revenue, and they will be looking at more fan-focussed items in the future. (A figure of 20% of their revenue is noted, but that was added in later, so I'm not sure if that was in the speech, and if it was, how would Hasbro know that for sure anyway, so it could just be a very rough estimate.)

- As I had heard someone mention earlier in the year, Nerf has now replaced Transformers as Hasbro's number one earning Brand.

- They mention Activision in the past tense, so maybe their future games will be by someone else (or in-house, as they have been developing their own interactive departments recently, like Allspark Pictures and Allspark Industries).

- There is a mention of "Frustration Free Packaging" specifically for Online Retailers, which could mean more toys that are not for regular retail release, just being packaged in a bag inside a brown box, like the Amazon exclusive Rescue Bots toys last year... as online retailers don't need fancy packaging, and prefer a more condensed packaging for storage.

- The confirmation of a "Hasbro Cinematic Universe" (if it wasn't already officially revealed), which will see the first movies come out in 2018/2019, with the HCU featuring Micronauts, GIJoe, ROM, MASK and Visionaries (and probably Transformers some time down the road, when it is time for a reboot, or one series needs the support of the other).
(it seems everyone is trying to to copy the success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe now)

[UltraMarginal]

It'll certainly be interesting to see where games go from here. perhaps they were disappointed at Activision for letting High moon bite the dust when everyone was looking forward to a follow up game to Fall of Cybertron.

[DrLockdown]

Ugh...why does EVERYTHING have to be a cinematic universe now? Can't we just have standalone blockbusters that don't need sequels?

[GoktimusPrime]

Ugh...why does EVERYTHING have to be a cinematic universe now? Can't we just have standalone blockbusters that don't need sequels?
I'm all for it, because it might improve the story-telling quality for TF films.
It couldn't possibly be worse. :o

[UltraMarginal]

I don't mind the cinematic universe thing, it's like non-episodic television, which is what the world seems to love. just with bigger budget and more time between episodes.

It's an interesting space, actors signing up for a decade or more worth of film, potentially only ever being well known for one character, writers spending the majority of the prime of their career on only a couple properties.

I expect there will be a swing back the other way at some point, where people just want a stand alone story. but if something is really good, you always want to see more of it, so even though it may have started out a single film, there will be another if the studios think there is an audience, look at Independence Day, it took 20 years but the sequel is coming out this year.

[griffin]

Another US conference (http://news.tfw2005.com/2016/06/01/tfw2005-coverage-32nd-bernstein-annual-strategic-decisions-conference-316353), that has a few minor bits of info about the future of Transformers, but is mostly about other Hasbro brands.

[Tetsuwan Convoy]

Another US conference (http://news.tfw2005.com/2016/06/01/tfw2005-coverage-32nd-bernstein-annual-strategic-decisions-conference-316353), that has a few minor bits of info about the future of Transformers, but is mostly about other Hasbro brands.

I found that article hard to understand. Not too sure whether it was due to the company lingo, or the reporter on the board not proof-reading their work before posting.

I was pleased to see they are looking at using MASK again, but I noticed all they are doing is reviving old lines. No new ideas?

[Zommael]

I found that article hard to understand. Not too sure whether it was due to the company lingo, or the reporter on the board not proof-reading their work before posting.

I was pleased to see they are looking at using MASK again, but I noticed all they are doing is reviving old lines. No new ideas?

The trouble is that revived old lines have an in-built audience, no matter how small. They look at something like Transformers which has been kept alive for 32 years, in no small part due to a fanbase which is now at the stage where they are having children who are encouraged to purchase TFs, and the thinking is that there must be someone out there who has a nostalgia for a property like MASK and if they have a kid that's two sales instead of one.

On the other hand, to come up with something new, they have to persuade that older audience that it's worth looking into rather than just relying on nostalgia, which means walking a tightrope between appealing to the "core" audience of kids which is always diminishing and to the more sophisticated (though often not by much :p) adult audience. It's also harder to get licensees involved for a property they know nothing about.

That's not to say new properties can't make it but it makes more sense for the likes of Hasbro to focus on properties they can revive and turn into a money-spinner if they're super-successful, like MLP.

[griffin]

I was pleased to see they are looking at using MASK again, but I noticed all they are doing is reviving old lines. No new ideas?

Transformers has been all about recycling characters and concepts, because it keeps working for them... and if they didn't recycle ideas, us fans get upset about it (like an old character name being allocated to a new character, especially of the opposing faction).

[Ozgardian]

I would love to see a cg animated Beast Wars movie or even a cg retelling of the original 1986 movie in cg ( as long as it's does justice to the original!). As for toys, I believe the best pretender toys were those of the animals. So if they decide to revise pretenders I would like to see them incorporated into the Beast Wars Line. ...Monstructor anyone?;)

[GoktimusPrime]

I would love to see a cg animated Beast Wars movie or even a cg retelling of the original 1986 movie in cg ( as long as it's does justice to the original!). As for toys, I believe the best pretender toys were those of the animals. So if they decide to revise pretenders I would like to see them incorporated into the Beast Wars Line. ...Monstructor anyone?;)
I'd rather see Beast Wars use their own gestalts like Magnaboss and Tripredacus.

[Lord_Zed]

I'm all for it, because it might improve the story-telling quality for TF films.
It couldn't possibly be worse. :o

I dunno about that, to me the move to a cinematic universe smacks of a poorly thought out copycat move without addressing any of the fundamental issues with the existing movies.

It's just going to be years of the same, but hey now Transformers and Gi Joe, Mask etc are linked so you should watch all of them even though they are still just as crappy.

[Ozgardian]

I'd rather see Beast Wars use their own gestalts like Magnaboss and Tripredacus.

Wasn't implying the Beast Wars gestalts should be replaced, just added like the Transmetals & Fuzors. I'd love to see Magnaboss & Tripredacus on screen. And it's not like BW was rich on the whole gestalt/combiner gimmick. I think the Pretenders line would fit in more comfortably with BW then G1 or any other era of Transformers & would tie in nicely concerning the sheilding from raw energon storyline.

'The Covenant of Primus' would make a great movie. Have it narrated by Alpha-Trion (although I don't know who could voice him considering John Stephenson died last year;- RIP Windcharger:() & bring some awesome writers in like Simon Furman, Bob Forward, Larry DiTillo, etc... You get the idea!

[griffin]

- The confirmation of a "Hasbro Cinematic Universe" (if it wasn't already officially revealed), which will see the first movies come out in 2018/2019, with the HCU featuring Micronauts, GIJoe, ROM, MASK and Visionaries (and probably Transformers some time down the road, when it is time for a reboot, or one series needs the support of the other).
(it seems everyone is trying to to copy the success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe now)

Further confirmation of Hasbro going ahead with its Cinematic Universe (http://news.tfw2005.com/2016/09/21/hasbro-moving-ahead-cinematic-universe-325151), as we've already seen the IDW version start this month, and Jon Barber from IDW looks to be a key factor with the Cinematic version. But it seems that the inclusion of Transformers is still yet to be decided or confirmed.

I guess they don't want to upset the successful formula for Transformers, but as it will eventually lose steam, it could then be rebooted and introduced into the HCU some time later.

[griffin]

We still don't know if Transformers will be joining Hasbro's Cinematic Universe, but two properties have been dropped - MASK and ROM (http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/01/22/hasbro-cinematic-universe-shrinking-transformers-unaffected-357155).

GIJoe and Micronauts are still going ahead for 2020, but it seems odd that MASK was dropped, as it would work in well with GIJoe (and Transformers - humans trying to replicate the alien converting technology).

[bowspearer]

We still don't know if Transformers will be joining Hasbro's Cinematic Universe, but two properties have been dropped - MASK and ROM (http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/01/22/hasbro-cinematic-universe-shrinking-transformers-unaffected-357155).

GIJoe and Micronauts are still going ahead for 2020, but it seems odd that MASK was dropped, as it would work in well with GIJoe (and Transformers - humans trying to replicate the alien converting technology).

I suspect it was needlessly race-bending Matt Trakker which did it. He's a pretty iconic character and a live action movie with the changes wouldn't have gone down well with the nostalgia crowd the movie would be targeting.

[Ploughmans Lunch]

I suspect it was needlessly race-bending Matt Trakker which did it. He's a pretty iconic character and a live action movie with the changes wouldn't have gone down well with the nostalgia crowd the movie would be targeting.

Yeah, I'm not sure I can really agree with you on this.

-I feel you might be overestimating the impact of M.A.S.Ks nostalgia value and it's audience. Aside from the IDW series and an unlaunched line (which reshaped a lot of the original premise), it's had basically no media exposure for over 30 years. Transformers and GI Joe, on the other hand, have had their peaks and troughs but have always maintained a degree of presence or popularity, and Hasbro are actually making somewhat of an effort to sell a new version of Micronauts without going straight in with a film series, which is a bit smarter.
-The reaction from people on forums is often insignificant when it comes to wider film-going audiences and what they want. There are exceptions but I sincerely doubt M.A.S.K is one of them, given it's relatively small status outside of certain nostalgia markets (which aren't big).
-IDW's MASK would've sold badly even if they kept Trakker as Caucasian because it wasn't a particularly good story, nor was it wanted, nor was there any demand outside of what feels like Hasbro executives wanting to mimic the worst parts of Marvel/DC/what-not shared universe concept.
-I'm guessing that Hasbro pulled M.A.S.K and ROM from their lineup because of the four properties they had (and were intending to throw a ton of money at to make films), they had to consolidate and go with the more reasonable approaches. Maybe their reasoninig goes something like "no one outside of people approaching forty remember or care about M.A.S.K", and you need people outside of that to care.
-Likewise, ROM was cancelled along with M.A.S.L and that didn't have any issues with race-bending, but rather (and this is a guess), "we can't even use the parts of ROM that people, all of which are approaching forty or beyond MIGHT remember from a short-lived comic series, but probably don't, because those parts still belong to Marvel"
-I just feel that MASK, if you were to compare it to what is out there at the moment, could feel like merely a hodgepodge merging (to those without nostalgia) of Transformers and G.I Joe, the former which is critically panned (still made a lot of money, but doesn't need to be replicated) and the latter which can be a hard one to sell but has a much better chance than M.A.S.K on name recognition alone.

Personally, i don't think the race-bending is as big of an issue as some. With M.A.S.K and Trakker, I was neither for nor against it, becuase even if it was a genuine desire for more broader representation or a cynical ploy to exploit that for profit, it just wasn't a series of any importance nor real merit (AFAIK). I mean hell, even the First Strike issue of M.A.S.K was literally just part II of the G.I. Joe issue, and Trakker is now part of G.I. Joe (with a new codename), that's how insignificant the IDW interpretation of M.A.S.K is and, dare I say it, as a broader property? Not to say that MASK is bad or that I'm being critical of anyones taste, I just don't think that IDW having a black Trakker is all that important, also considering what IDW produce has relatively little bearing, content-wise, on films (outside of the concept of a shared universe and what-not).

Sorry I get a bit worked up whenever I see something about race-benidng HI HOW ARE YOU

[UltraMarginal]

I would like to see a mask movie, it's a good blend of ideas, and it could tie in to transformers pretty lightly without much effort.

The Mask Transformations can be a lot simpler, be cheaper to animate allowing for a lower budget more down to earth movie. Not every action sci fi movie has to be about the end of the world/universe

[bowspearer]

Yeah, I'm not sure I can really agree with you on this.

-I feel you might be overestimating the impact of M.A.S.Ks nostalgia value and it's audience. Aside from the IDW series and an unlaunched line (which reshaped a lot of the original premise), it's had basically no media exposure for over 30 years.

No it hasn't had the exposure, yet you seem to be underestimating the cult following it has in toy-related pop culture sections. In fact in countries like Germany, M.A.S.K. was pretty big last I checked. Yes it's not as well known as GIJOE or Transformers, but as a second stringer, it's even more well known than and loved than Visionaries, which is one of the brands Hasbro seem to be wanting to revive.



-The reaction from people on forums is often insignificant when it comes to wider film-going audiences and what they want. There are exceptions but I sincerely doubt M.A.S.K is one of them, given it's relatively small status outside of certain nostalgia markets (which aren't big).

You mean the same market that justified making a Transformers movie and a GIJOE movie to begin with?



-IDW's MASK would've sold badly even if they kept Trakker as Caucasian because it wasn't a particularly good story, nor was it wanted, nor was there any demand outside of what feels like Hasbro executives wanting to mimic the worst parts of Marvel/DC/what-not shared universe concept.

Ok, let's say for a minute that this was all Hasbro. Yes, the problem is that Hasbro don't really seem to understand M.A.S.K. Their approach almost seems to be to try and shoehorn it in under something else - largely GIJOE.

However that doesn't absolve Hasbro's part in all of this. Case in point, would anyone have cared about characters like Bludgeon or Thunderwing if Marvel had simply gone off what Hasbro wanted?

Likewise, would anyone have cared about Transformers much today if the cartoon was at the same level as Gobots?

This is my big bugbear with IDW - it's gotten almost to the point where they've stopped seeing stories to tell for the sake of good storytelling and only care about properties as vehicles for identity politics.

In fact it even harmed the core market that was there; the cynical identity-politics-pandering only turned off fans who are purists, such as myself because they failed to respect the core mythos.


-I'm guessing that Hasbro pulled M.A.S.K and ROM from their lineup because of the four properties they had (and were intending to throw a ton of money at to make films), they had to consolidate and go with the more reasonable approaches. Maybe their reasoninig goes something like "no one outside of people approaching forty remember or care about M.A.S.K", and you need people outside of that to care.

Except that while M.A.S.K. might be a b-grade toy property, it is at the top end of those properties and could easily become an a-list property with the right writing and movie. In fact, before Transformers was a hit, it had the same market demographic that G1 had in terms of a live-action movie aimed at older audiences.


-Likewise, ROM was cancelled along with M.A.S.L and that didn't have any issues with race-bending, but rather (and this is a guess), "we can't even use the parts of ROM that people, all of which are approaching forty or beyond MIGHT remember from a short-lived comic series, but probably don't, because those parts still belong to Marvel"

Actually there would be a strong argument for dumping ROM based on demand. The one thing you left out is that in international market, ROM has far less popularity and recognition than M.A.S.K. did. In fact I'd even put Rom at the same level of obscurity as Spiral Zone in countries like Australia.


-I just feel that MASK, if you were to compare it to what is out there at the moment, could feel like merely a hodgepodge merging (to those without nostalgia) of Transformers and G.I Joe, the former which is critically panned (still made a lot of money, but doesn't need to be replicated) and the latter which can be a hard one to sell but has a much better chance than M.A.S.K on name recognition alone.

Which would only happen if you had bad writing, as from a marketing perspective, that's exactly what M.A.S.K. was developed by Kenner to be. However if the writing and talent behind it were good enough, it could easily stand on its own two feet and find it's own place. Just look at Kamen Rider Drive as compared to Kamen Rider W.


Personally, i don't think the race-bending is as big of an issue as some. With M.A.S.K and Trakker, I was neither for nor against it, becuase even if it was a genuine desire for more broader representation or a cynical ploy to exploit that for profit, it just wasn't a series of any importance nor real merit (AFAIK).

That's just it, to most of us against it, it does read like cynical diversity pandering. As another fan who will remain nameless unless they choose to put their hand up to me said, it would have been one thing if they were doing it as a generation later sequel to the original (eg it was Hondo's son leading the new team), but this was just the old story of IDW putting "diversity" first and things like universe building and respect for properties dead last.


I mean hell, even the First Strike issue of M.A.S.K was literally just part II of the G.I. Joe issue, and Trakker is now part of G.I. Joe (with a new codename), that's how insignificant the IDW interpretation of M.A.S.K is and, dare I say it, as a broader property?

That only goes to demonstrate how little respect for the property they had to begin with; precisely why I panned it from the getgo.


Not to say that MASK is bad or that I'm being critical of anyones taste, I just don't think that IDW having a black Trakker is all that important,

Which it wouldn't be to anyone who isn't much of a fan of the series. To those of us who are more fans of the series, it comes across as a slap in the face to the character (and yes, I'd say the same thing if they made an iconic black character white).


also considering what IDW produce has relatively little bearing, content-wise, on films (outside of the concept of a shared universe and what-not).

And yet IDW comics are the medium which Hasbro seem to be using to reach their older audiences - the ones which PG-13 movies tend to be aimed at.


Sorry I get a bit worked up whenever I see something about race-benidng HI HOW ARE YOU

Race-bending is dodgy as hell and I imagine that Dwayne MacDuffy would be rolling in his grave if he could see the current state of play with it.

I despise it because it: a) it disrespects properties and reduces them to nothing more than blatantly shallow political vehicles, and;
b) unlike strong original characters who simply happen to be <insert minority here>, which empower people the people they're meant to, character bending essentially sends <insert minority here> the message that they can only succeed by riding on the coat tails of others.

[Ploughmans Lunch]

Yep.

Default whiteness is a thing but fair enough.

[Raider]

I don't really remember MASK as a kid. I never watched the show and only played with the toys rarely if a friend had them but I did think it was cool.

Fast forward 30 years and I have been reading the IDW Transformer comics. I enjoyed the Revolution cross-over and that now has me into Rom, MASK, GI Joe and Micronauts. Would have been great to have a cinematic universe that captured all of them.

It is strange though as I really dislike Bayformers as it is just not Transformers as I remember it nor wish it to be. However, I have no feelings about MASK either way as I really only know the current iteration. I guess if I was as big a MASK fan from the 80s I would probably feel the same way as I think my feelings come down to a combination of nostalgia, fondness for the source material and the inherent dislike of change in any way :p

[bowspearer]

Default whiteness is a thing but fair enough.

Before I begin to respond to this, exactly which "whiteness" were you referring to: Celtic, Germanic, Slavic or Anglo?

But I digress. "Default whiteness" is always going to be a thing in cultures which at the time were predominantly white. If you look at franchises like Super Sentai and Kamen Rider, when white people do show up, it tends to be a more token white person (eg KyoryuCyan and especially ShinkenBrown). Should the makers of those shows be ashamed or concerned at their "default Japaneseness" too?

You're far less likely to see it with original properties now than you are say, 20 years ago. Power Rangers is a classic example of that, where casts for it are typically diverse.

However that aside, there are two ways to go about having a more diverse cast. The first is the cheap, tacky and in your face approach which people can see a mile off and which comes across as blatant diversity politics pandering. That is that you take an existing character and change some character trait, so you can say "hey we're not racist/homophobic/sexist/ableist/any other type of bigot - because look, this character is <insert label here> now".

It's cheap, it's tacky, it's condescending and it's downright paternalistically bigoted. People of a certain minority aren't just labels and acting in a manner which treats minorities like they are, is tantamount to an assertion of "they're all the same"/ "they all look alike to me".

That's not empowering people of a minority, it's being condescending to them.

The second approach, the one Dwayne MacDuffy did and there will never be enough accolades for him to give credit where its due, is to create the characters yourself, not in a way where it's like "hey here's a <insert token minority here> character", but where you have a compelling and interesting character, who just happens to be <insert minority here>.

Dwayne did it with his fellow collaborators so successfully that not only have the characters become so mainstream in the DC universe that Black Lightning is allegedly getting a show of his own in the Arrowverse, but back in the 1990s, DC had 3 animated series. The first two were Batman and Superman. The third was Static Shock. A Dakotaverse character was so successful and prominent that he beat out Wonder Woman, the Flash, Aquaman, Green Lantern, Green Arrow and every single other A-lister in the DC universe to get their own series. So don't tell me that Dwayne MacDuffy's approach doesn't work, because history shows that it clearly does. The fact that Black Lightning is set to get his own TV series shows that it's still working to this day.

Good storytelling and diversifying representations of characters don't have to be mutually exclusive. More crucially, not only does an approach which decides they are for the sake of identity politics become rejected by discerning readers who see it as a cheap and tawdry gimmick, but it becomes an insult to the very minorities it's alleging to empower.


the inherent dislike of change in any way :p

I wouldn't necessarily say "change in any way", rather that any change which is made, should respect the source material and be compatible with the core of it.

By all means more the story into the modern age for example, but respect the identity of the original characters and make how they are - identity and actions - in line with how those same characters would react if in this present day.

Like I it ultimately comes down to two things: respecting the material and respecting the audience.

[Seraphim Prime]

This is my big bugbear with IDW - it's gotten almost to the point where they've stopped seeing stories to tell for the sake of good storytelling and only care about properties as vehicles for identity politics.

In fact it even harmed the core market that was there; the cynical identity-politics-pandering only turned off fans who are purists, such as myself because they failed to respect the core mythos.

I'm sorry but I cannot understand any argument that says changing the race of a character within a story fails to respect the core mythos (unless that character's race is a key part of the story and it's conflict - eg Luke Cage)

I read nothing in the IDW MASK books that tried to turn Matt Trakker into a character that suddenly had to deal with issues of homelessness, gang violence, or historic subjugation because he was suddenly African-American.

As far as core concept -
The original Matt Trakker was a father and leader of a leader of road warriors who piloted transforming vehicles.

The IDW Matt Trakker is a son and leader of a leader of road warriors who piloted transforming vehicles.

The IDW Mask series dealt with the conflict between a global arms dealer/terrorist organisation (VENOM) and those who formed to stop it (MASK), who each pilot amazing vehicles that are capable of transforming for multi-terrain combat. It dealt with people ads leader happened to be African American.

There is nothing in the core concept that is related to race and yet this gets targeted by people who want to trash a book because they lack the empathy to be able to identify with a character that no longer looks like them.

I don't remember seeing these issues raised with the Power Rangers reboot, when they changed the race of Trini, Zack, and Billy (but admittedly I don't really follow that fanbase anymore). So clearly race didn't factor into a story about 5 teenagers being provided mystical powers and piloting mechanical beasts against a space witch.


No it hasn't had the exposure, yet you seem to be underestimating the cult following it has in toy-related pop culture sections. In fact in countries like Germany, M.A.S.K. was pretty big last I checked. Yes it's not as well known as GIJOE or Transformers, but as a second stringer, it's even more well known than and loved than Visionaries, which is one of the brands Hasbro seem to be wanting to revive.

So we're talking about a niche within a niche property. Of which the core concept is vehicles which transform into other vehicles.

I doubt that race is factoring into poor reception any more than a lack of being able to target what MASK should stand for in a modern world, and therefore creating a touchstone for wide recognition beyond that niche market. Similar to how GI Joe ARAH struggles to define how characters largely characterised by old-school warfare are supposed to relate to a modern world.


Ok, let's say for a minute that this was all Hasbro. Yes, the problem is that Hasbro don't really seem to understand M.A.S.K. Their approach almost seems to be to try and shoehorn it in under something else - largely GIJOE.

However that doesn't absolve Hasbro's part in all of this. Case in point, would anyone have cared about characters like Bludgeon or Thunderwing if Marvel had simply gone off what Hasbro wanted?

I can't quite tell what you're trying to say here. On one hand you're condemning IDW for making nuanced changes to character's previously stated bios and backgrounds and then praise Marvel for marking nuanced changes to character's previously stated bios and backgrounds.

[reillyd]

I think there is an element of truth to both your perspectives. Content (comics with large runs, cartoons that get airtime) drive sales. I loved the Visionaries comic in Transformers UK and it made me want the toys. mask cartoon made me want the toys. But nostalgia won't sell toys in big numbers (remember even GI Joe, with two movies, didn't get toys on Australian and international shelves). I don't think a live action movie is going to work with either properties,but a animated series just might.

[MEEEGGGAAATTTRRROOONNN!!!]

I suspect it was needlessly race-bending Matt Trakker which did it.

Easy fix, just change his name from Matt Trakker to Matt Blacker...

[bowspearer]

I'm sorry but I cannot understand any argument that says changing the race of a character within a story fails to respect the core mythos (unless that character's race is a key part of the story and it's conflict - eg Luke Cage)

By that absurd argument, Luke Skywalker growing up on Tatooine had absolutely no impact on the core story of Original Trilogy of Star Wars. Even if we weren't talking about one of the two most core characters of the series, the fact is that a person is a product of several things - that includes their history and their heritage.

In this case that especially holds true.

Matt Trakker was a rich white guy in the same way that Tony Stark was a rich white guy. Both were insanely wealthy and insanely powerful, with high level government connections. In fact it was that wealth, the wide reach of the Trakker Foundation and it's connections with the PNA that not only gave M.A.S.K. the perfect cover it did, but allowed the Trakker Foundation itself to serve as a front for M.A.S.K. as a trans-national anti-terrorism task force: specifically concerned with eliminating V.E.N.O.M., which was an offshoot of M.A.S.K., after Miles Mayhem betrayed them.


I read nothing in the IDW MASK books that tried to turn Matt Trakker into a character that suddenly had to deal with issues of homelessness, gang violence, or historic subjugation because he was suddenly African-American.

Which only goes to show how tokenistic race-bending can be. It's a cheap gimmick without substance and everything you have just said here goes to show that.



As far as core concept -
The original Matt Trakker was a father and leader of a leader of road warriors who piloted transforming vehicles.

The IDW Matt Trakker is a son and leader of a leader of road warriors who piloted transforming vehicles.

That's as much an oversimplification as stating that Transformers is about a bunch of warring robots from another planet. It also tells me that you're not as familiar with the lore of the original series as you claim to be. In fact such an approach is so sparse, that it's like saying that Gobots and Transformers are one in the same because they're both stories about a bunch of warring robots from another planet.


The IDW Mask series dealt with the conflict between a global arms dealer/terrorist organisation (VENOM) and those who formed to stop it (MASK), who each pilot amazing vehicles that are capable of transforming for multi-terrain combat.

Right so it's so poorly rebooted that it had M.A.S.K. and V.E.N.O.M. be formed in the completely wrong order. Anyone who actually knows the original mythos knows that M.A.S.K. came first and that it was V.E.N.O.M. which was subsequently created from it when Miles Mayhem doublecrossed Matt Trakker, murdered Andy Trakker and stole half of the plans for the M.A.S.K. vehicles.

So what you're telling me here is that either the IDW writers had no idea what the original lore for M.A.S.K. was or couldn't care less about respecting it


It dealt with people ads leader happened to be African American.

A change which seems to have absolutely no justification to it


There is nothing in the core concept that is related to race and yet this gets targeted by people who want to trash a book because they lack the empathy to be able to identify with a character that no longer looks like them.

Or maybe it's because they respect the characters enough that they don't want them butchered for the sake of pandering - and yes, I would be just as annoyed if they'd made either Hondo MacLean, Nevada Rushmore, Julio Lopez, Bruce Sato, Ali Bombay, or anyone else I've missed, white.

Oh and given that John Henry and Cyborg happen to be two of may favourite DC characters, your argument might need more than a little bit of work here.


I don't remember seeing these issues raised with the Power Rangers reboot, when they changed the race of Trini, Zack, and Billy (but admittedly I don't really follow that fanbase anymore). So clearly race didn't factor into a story about 5 teenagers being provided mystical powers and piloting mechanical beasts against a space witch.

I wasn't talking about the reboot, I was talking about how as various teams have come along, they've been extremely diverse. Dino Charge was a great example of this.


So we're talking about a niche within a niche property. Of which the core concept is vehicles which transform into other vehicles.

Which justifies failing to properly respect the characters and the core mythos how exactly?



I doubt that race is factoring into poor reception any more than a lack of being able to target what MASK should stand for in a modern world, and therefore creating a touchstone for wide recognition beyond that niche market. Similar to how GI Joe ARAH struggles to define how characters largely characterised by old-school warfare are supposed to relate to a modern world.

I didn't say race; I said race-bending; big difference. And if it's had no effect on the book in terms of long time, more hardcore fans, then explain why Marvel's vice president of sales has come out and openly said that minority-bending characters has harmed their sales (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/apr/03/marvel-executive-says-emphasis-on-diversity-may-have-alienated-readers).

Are you telling me that if a publishing company as well entrenched as Marvel took a hit from minority-bending iconic characters, that IDW wouldn't with a title like M.A.S.K., whose core initial market was the nostalgia crowd?


I can't quite tell what you're trying to say here. On one hand you're condemning IDW for making nuanced changes to character's previously stated bios and backgrounds and then praise Marvel for marking nuanced changes to character's previously stated bios and backgrounds.

IDWs changes to Matt Trakker weren't nuanced - they were cheap and tawdry, and according to your own argument, they didn't even respect the origins of the original story.

Conversely, what Marvel did for Bludgeon expanded on the original tech spec without contradicting it. Likewise, there is nothing in Thunderwing's portrayal in the Matrix Quest in G1, which contradicts him being:


A two-faced, lying, cheating, back-stabbing scoundrel. The ultimate Decepticon villain.

This is especially true given that while the Decepticons thought they were destroying the Matrix, he was seeking to gain it for himself as the ultimate source of power and self-advancement.

In short, the argument you do have here, is incredibly weak.

[bowspearer]

Easy fix, just change his name from Matt Trakker to Matt Blacker...

No, if IDW were so concerned with having a black leader, the easy fix would have been to set the IDW comic as a sequel to the original story and have, say Hondo Maclean's son, as the new head of M.A.S.K.

After all, Skywatch had been around for 30 years, so it's entirely feasible that the original team could have existed in the 1980s and have been the first attempt by governments to reverse engineer Cybertronian tech.

Had they done that, next to noone would have an issue with the approach.

[kovert]

- There is a mention of "Frustration Free Packaging" specifically for Online Retailers, which could mean more toys that are not for regular retail release, just being packaged in a bag inside a brown box, like the Amazon exclusive Rescue Bots toys last year... as online retailers don't need fancy packaging, and prefer a more condensed packaging for storage.

The plain packaging idea seems logical. Online customers will buy products without seeing the packaging prior to purchase*. Therefore, the design of packaging becomes irrelevant. However, there will be customers who purchase a premium product and believe the packaging should also have a premium feel.

* Unless they've seen it in a physical store, of course! :)

[Paulbot]

Matt Trakker was a rich white guy in the same way that Tony Stark was a rich white guy. Both were insanely wealthy and insanely powerful, with high level government connections. In fact it was that wealth, the wide reach of the Trakker Foundation and it's connections with the PNA that not only gave M.A.S.K. the perfect cover it did, but allowed the Trakker Foundation itself to serve as a front for M.A.S.K. as a trans-national anti-terrorism task force: specifically concerned with eliminating V.E.N.O.M., which was an offshoot of M.A.S.K., after Miles Mayhem betrayed them.

I remember absolutely zero of any of this back story! I guess it's been 30 years since I've seen the cartoon though.

However I can see that you can remove the word white from that paragraph and have a rich man (regardless of race in a modern reboot) without changing anything else.

But anyway, the main thing I wanted to comment on was how I remember now of this. I misrembered and thought Matt just owned a service station in the American outback!

[Trent]

I suspect it was needlessly race-bending Matt Trakker which did it. He's a pretty iconic character and a live action movie with the changes wouldn't have gone down well with the nostalgia crowd the movie would be targeting.

Haha. Iconic. Yeah. I used to watch MASK as a kid and until IDW resurrected it I couldn't even remember his name. Let alone what he looked like. So the assertion that Hasbro dropped an entire property from a cinematic universe purely because a niche comic made him black, is laughable.

That'd be like saying that taking G1 Optimus Prime and turning him into a face-claiming murderous psychopath won't go down with the nostalgia crowd and won't make the movies any money...

Oh wait!

:rolleyes:

[MEEEGGGAAATTTRRROOONNN!!!]

No, if IDW were so concerned with having a black leader, the easy fix would have been to set the IDW comic as a sequel to the original story and have, say Hondo Maclean's son, as the new head of M.A.S.K.

After all, Skywatch had been around for 30 years, so it's entirely feasible that the original team could have existed in the 1980s and have been the first attempt by governments to reverse engineer Cybertronian tech.

Had they done that, next to noone would have an issue with the approach.

I was just joking.

But I do agree with you, making cosmetic changes without appropriate backstory is just tokenistic.

[Ploughmans Lunch]

If idw’s mask failed because of a black Matt trakker (cynical or not), it says more about the sorts of fans mask has, and if so I wouldn’t want to make a film series catering to that sort of person.

[M-bot]

Yeah, Matt Trakker was a rich white guy, but other than that, he was a basically a cypher - there was nothing in his character that was inherently “white” - no reason whatsoever he couldn’t be a rich black guy, since they also exist.

I suspect the dumping of the potential MASK and ROM movies were more to do with the fact that everyone said “let’s do big universes, like Marvel” and then watched as Warner/DC and Universal’s Dark Universe tried and both abjectly failed in doing so, by filundementally misunderstanding why the MCU worked in the first place.

Black Matt Trakker has nothing at all to do with it, IMO.

[Ralph Wiggum]

Yeah, Matt Trakker was a rich white guy, but other than that, he was a basically a cypher - there was nothing in his character that was inherently “white” - no reason whatsoever he couldn’t be a rich black guy, since they also exist.

I suspect the dumping of the potential MASK and ROM movies were more to do with the fact that everyone said “let’s do big universes, like Marvel” and then watched as Warner/DC and Universal’s Dark Universe tried and both abjectly failed in doing so, by filundementally misunderstanding why the MCU worked in the first place.

Black Matt Trakker has nothing at all to do with it, IMO.

This. Hasbro only care about making money from selling toys and ticket sales. The mediocre reception to the abovementioned attempts to copy Marvel's cinematic universe, as well as The Last Knight's lesser showing at the box office (compared to the other films) has probably made them do a rethink and pull back on the projects.

I bought the recent comic, couldn't give a rats ass if it was a black/white Matt Trakker. I loved MASK as a kid (still got the books and DVDs) and I just found the story dull.

[bowspearer]

However I can see that you can remove the word white from that paragraph and have a rich man (regardless of race in a modern reboot) without changing anything else.

To what end though? How does changing the race of Matt Trakker, advance either the character or the story?


But anyway, the main thing I wanted to comment on was how I remember now of this. I misrembered and thought Matt just owned a service station in the American outback!

Certainly the nostaligia demographic are going to fall into three demographics: people who don't remember it at all, people with the vaguest of recollections and the more dedicated fan.

This is all going to vary from region to region. Take Blackstar for example. Meany people here wouldn't have heard of it but you look at places like Europe and the US and you're more likely to find a decent fanbase.

He-Man is even more interesting. Over here it's more likely to be name recognition, in the US you'll have a decent sized fan community, but in Germany for example, it's huge.

Same deal with M.A.s.K. - dedicated M.A.S.K. fans like myself are a drop in the ocean here. Go to the US and parts of Europe though and you'll find sizeable communities there.


Haha. Iconic. Yeah. I used to watch MASK as a kid and until IDW resurrected it I couldn't even remember his name. Let alone what he looked like.


So you're in the middle category I mentioned, that doesn't prove anything. People like you will latch onto something if it looks cool and unless you progress to becoming a dedicated fan, you'll likely ditch it when it loses its lustre.

You're not a dedicated fan and therefore not a part of that cult-following demographic that will keep a brand alive and well.

It's the dedicated fan base that gives properties cult followings and supports them, even demands their reinstatement when they get axed. In investment terms, they are a brand's blue chip investments.

Just look at Firefly fans and their passion giving fans Serenity the Movie, the success of UK G1 being the reason Transformers is alive and well today instead of a dead property that had a 6 year run and Captain Power fans where the upcoming Phoenix Rising reboot is concerned.

That core group is what keeps brands alive and if you lose it, you pay for it.


So the assertion that Hasbro dropped an entire property from a cinematic universe purely because a niche comic made him black, is laughable.

Except that it wasn't simply a niche comic. IDW's days of being some obscure player are long gone and their comics these days are as mainstream as DC or Marvel.

Likewise comics for many of these properties are the main storytelling medium. M.A.S.K.'s dedicated fanbase, the bread and butter of the fanbase, clearly didn't take to kindly to massive wholesale changes to the mythos and diversity-bending characters. That lost them their "blue chips" and when the story wasn't that great, the fad-followers quickly jumped ship. Rather than the dedicated fanbase being there to keep things alive, instead, the bottom fell out of it completely. Financially, it looked like a flop. Now if a "niche comic" can't even make it, why would Hasbro risk hundreds of millions of dollars on a live action movie, for a property that can't even make a buck when it's "some niche comic".


That'd be like saying that taking G1 Optimus Prime and turning him into a face-claiming murderous psychopath won't go down with the nostalgia crowd and won't make the movies any money...

Oh wait!

:rolleyes:

A few things here - as someone who has refrained from watching every Bayformers movie to date and refuses to watch them because they treat the mythos like crap.

Firstly Transformers broke the mould by catering not to adult fans, but teenage boys by using Megan Fox and her cleavage to hook them in on movie one and from there Bay had a new established fanbase.

Secondly, the claim that Bay's approach hasn't hurt the franchise is debatable. To begin with you have the situation where AOE managed to be the most panned by critics, a Golden Raspberry winner and still managed to be highest grossing. However with TLK, last I checked, the film had taken a major hit in terms of revenue.

So clearly while you can hide a lack of substance with style for a time, eventually people see through it.

[bowspearer]

If idw’s mask failed because of a black Matt trakker (cynical or not), it says more about the sorts of fans mask has, and if so I wouldn’t want to make a film series catering to that sort of person.

Ahh yes, the old "you're a racist"/"Nazi" shaming tactic which people of your political persuasion use for anyone even slightly right of the middle-Left.

So wait, if a fan community respects the mythology and the characters that they don't want to see them changed for the sake of tokenism, they're either "racist" or "Nazis"?

I mean that is what is clearly implied by


the sorts of fans mask has, and if so I wouldn’t want to make a film series catering to that sort of person.


So let's be clear here. I have a disability, making me the very sort of person who the Nazis rounded up and who was "the first to go" under the Holocaust. I have experienced decades of abuse because of the very attitudes which drove the Nazi Euthanasia Program.

Yet according to your strawman, I absolutely love Hitler's mad dream when the attitudes which drove it have brought me nothing but suffering as a member of the most marginalised minority in society.

But go on, tell me again how much I like Hitler and his dream of a master race, when thanks to its attitudes, I have experienced years of discrimination and am a survivor of child abuse, institutionalised child abuse, an institutionalised child sexual abuse coverup, rape and domestic violence. :rolleyes:


Yeah, Matt Trakker was a rich white guy, but other than that, he was a basically a cypher - there was nothing in his character that was inherently “white” - no reason whatsoever he couldn’t be a rich black guy, since they also exist.

The problem there is that Matt Trakker and his property gave the appearance of "old money" - as in the kind of family where a charitable foundation has existed for decades and goes back a couple of generations.

The problem is that while if you fast forwarded 50 years, a rich Black American with "old money" and a multi-billion dollar charitable foundation is doable, it simply isn't as feasible in our present society.

If someone found a way to do it, then by all means, however that also requires taking a great deal of care with retconning and universe building, which I strongly suspect that the diversity-benders would simply write off as "too much effort".

[bowspearer]

I was just joking.

But I do agree with you, making cosmetic changes without appropriate backstory is just tokenistic.

Careful making statements like that, or certain people here might accuse you of being either a racist or a Nazi ;)

[MEEEGGGAAATTTRRROOONNN!!!]

Careful making statements like that, or certain people here might accuse you of being either a racist or a Nazi ;)

Well i'm Asian, but i'd go Nazi if I could find myself an Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS... ;) :p

[bowspearer]

Well i'm Asian, but i'd go Nazi if I could find myself an Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS... ;) :p

Ok I'm filing my reaction to your post under "times I googled something and now I can never unsee it" :D

[MEEEGGGAAATTTRRROOONNN!!!]

Ok I'm filing my reaction to your post under "times I googled something and now I can never unsee it" :D

Don't lie! You're downloading the movie as we type! :D :p

[Trent]

So you're in the middle category I mentioned, that doesn't prove anything. People like you will latch onto something if it looks cool and unless you progress to becoming a dedicated fan, you'll likely ditch it when it loses its lustre.

Who exactly are "people like me"? Please elaborate on that a bit more.


You're not a dedicated fan and therefore not a part of that cult-following demographic that will keep a brand alive and well.

It's the dedicated fan base that gives properties cult followings and supports them, even demands their reinstatement when they get axed. In investment terms, they are a brand's blue chip investments.

Just look at Firefly fans and their passion giving fans Serenity the Movie, the success of UK G1 being the reason Transformers is alive and well today instead of a dead property that had a 6 year run and Captain Power fans where the upcoming Phoenix Rising reboot is concerned.

That core group is what keeps brands alive and if you lose it, you pay for it.

Yeah, because those "blue chip investments" have done GI Joe fans so much good over the years. And that fan base would dwarf anything MASK ever had. Even MOTU isn't doing great.



Except that it wasn't simply a niche comic. IDW's days of being some obscure player are long gone and their comics these days are as mainstream as DC or Marvel.

Likewise comics for many of these properties are the main storytelling medium. M.A.S.K.'s dedicated fanbase, the bread and butter of the fanbase, clearly didn't take to kindly to massive wholesale changes to the mythos and diversity-bending characters. That lost them their "blue chips" and when the story wasn't that great, the fad-followers quickly jumped ship. Rather than the dedicated fanbase being there to keep things alive, instead, the bottom fell out of it completely. Financially, it looked like a flop. Now if a "niche comic" can't even make it, why would Hasbro risk hundreds of millions of dollars on a live action movie, for a property that can't even make a buck when it's "some niche comic".

I never said IDW wasn't a significant player in the comic market. But MASK is, by its very definition, a niche property.



A few things here - as someone who has refrained from watching every Bayformers movie to date and refuses to watch them because they treat the mythos like crap.

Firstly Transformers broke the mould by catering not to adult fans, but teenage boys by using Megan Fox and her cleavage to hook them in on movie one and from there Bay had a new established fanbase.

Secondly, the claim that Bay's approach hasn't hurt the franchise is debatable. To begin with you have the situation where AOE managed to be the most panned by critics, a Golden Raspberry winner and still managed to be highest grossing. However with TLK, last I checked, the film had taken a major hit in terms of revenue.

So clearly while you can hide a lack of substance with style for a time, eventually people see through it.

So wait. You are resting the success of a billion dollar movie franchise solely on Megan Fox's boobs? Seriously? That's your argument?

And yeah, the franchise is finally loosing some steam... after 10 years and 5 movies! Now, I'm no fan of the Bay movies either. I haven't seen one since DOTM, but like them or hate them, that there is the definition of success.

Try harder. None of this has convinced me that Hasbro dropped MASK from its CU due to IDW making Matt Trakker a black dude.

[griffin]

I remember absolutely zero of any of this back story! I guess it's been 30 years since I've seen the cartoon though.

However I can see that you can remove the word white from that paragraph and have a rich man (regardless of race in a modern reboot) without changing anything else.

But anyway, the main thing I wanted to comment on was how I remember now of this. I misrembered and thought Matt just owned a service station in the American outback!

That seems to be the thing that is lost here, that MASK was a short lived series 32ish years ago and unless you are one of the few dedicated fans out there, most people wouldn't know much about it other than the nostalgia of it being an 80s cartoon/toyline.
It wasn't a huge toyline or popular enough to last more than a few years, so it is easier to change details that only a handful of passionate fans would notice or care about... or have issue with people who don't know because they weren't fans or huge fans (I watched the show when it was on and liked playing with other people's toys because I didn't have any but I don't know enough details or names to notice if IDW changed anything... or care, to still be able to enjoy it).
It would be like me knowing and owning most of the kiddie Transformers Go-bots toyline, only I would probably care if they redid it and changed details... and I certainly wouldn't have a go at anyone who didn't know about that cartoon/toyline (which I think lasted longer than MASK).

[ChlorHex]

MASK has so much potential as a standalone movie to kickstart a new toyline.

Don't get me wrong, I loved and lived on MASK as well as Transformers (plus other 80's toyline cartoons) as a kid.

It could probably do with a fresh start for the new generation unfamiliar with its history.

It's still popular in Asia as I see vintage MASK toys still being sold there at toy fairs in my travels.

So much potential... probably dump a cameo appearance of VENOM or MASK in the new GI Joe movie and if people want it then go for a full on movie.

So much potential to just drop it without any further consideration... c'mon Hasbro.

[bowspearer]

Who exactly are "people like me"? Please elaborate on that a bit more.

As I previously stated:


Certainly the nostaligia demographic are going to fall into three demographics: people who don't remember it at all, people with the vaguest of recollections and the more dedicated fan.

People like you fall into the second of these - people with the vaguest of recollections. You remember it, might pick it up because it looks interesting or cool, but you're not invested in the characters or mythos at even remotely the same level as a dedicated fan is.


Yeah, because those "blue chip investments" have done GI Joe fans so much good over the years. And that fan base would dwarf anything MASK ever had. Even MOTU isn't doing great.

And yet they're doing infinitely better than Jayce and the Wheeled Warriors, Starcom, Air Raiders, Spiral Zone, Silverhawks, Sky Commanders and Centurions, to rattle off 7 now dead 80s properties off the top of my head.


I never said IDW wasn't a significant player in the comic market. But MASK is, by its very definition, a niche property.

If it's so "niche" then why did IDW try and piggyback it off one of their main titles? Just like if Visionaries is so "niche", then why are IDW trying to piggyback it off Transformers and make it mainstream? Why would the bean-counters at IDW have given that the go ahead if there didn't look like a sizeable return in making it mainstream?


So wait. You are resting the success of a billion dollar movie franchise solely on Megan Fox's boobs? Seriously? That's your argument?

Well that, car set piece chases and a litany of explosions - last I checked, that was the Michael Bay formula for churning out blockbusters which have little if any substance but are almost guaranteed to generate alot of box-office revenue.


And yeah, the franchise is finally loosing some steam... after 10 years and 5 movies! Now, I'm no fan of the Bay movies either. I haven't seen one since DOTM, but like them or hate them, that there is the definition of success.

Define success though? Financial success, sure, like I said, the Michael Bay formula works and it's arguably the only reason he keeps getting the director's chair. Critical success is another story. In fact a while back I watched an episode of Spicks and Specs where it was noted that Age of Extinction simultaneously managed to be the highest grossing box office film of 2015, whilst earning 7 Golden Raspberry Nominations and winning the categories for Worst Director and Worst Supporting Actor.

In fact the Michael Bay formula proves that it's possible to make a movie that is both a steaming turn and a runaway financial success.


Try harder. None of this has convinced me that Hasbro dropped MASK from its CU due to IDW making Matt Trakker a black dude.

Because you don't want to see it. You don't want to see that it's the dedicated fanbase that is the reason that someone in a media or toy company floats the idea of resurrecting a property, by serving as a core clientele to build on. You don't want to see that tokenistic change for the sake of change, is going to be rightly seen by that fanbase as treating that property with disrespect - at which point it alientates that fanbase.

You don't want to see that losing that core clientele is tantamount to ripping the foundations out of a house - sure it might look ok at the outset, but the moment the supporting walls come under strain, the whole thing is going to topple - which is essentially what happened with it.

So you're right, I haven't convinced you that tokenistic change for the sake of change was the start of the end for the book.

However here's the thing, you haven't convinced me that you're even remotely open to being convinced.

[bowspearer]

and I certainly wouldn't have a go at anyone who didn't know about that cartoon/toyline (which I think lasted longer than MASK).
But it's ok for certain people to make veiled accusations here that because someone takes issue with change for the sake of change, that they must be a white supremacist - if not a Nazi? After all that is precively what the following amounts to:


If idw’s mask failed because of a black Matt trakker (cynical or not), it says more about the sorts of fans mask has, and if so I wouldn’t want to make a film series catering to that sort of person.

In other words, if someone hates tokenistic change for the sake of change, they just hate black people - in other words, they're a white supremacist, if not a Nazi (which are the typical shaming tactics which get used in these sorts of situations).

Do I even need to point out the 50 shades of ****ed up, levelling that sort of a vile, baseless and inexcusible slur at a person with disabilities is?

After all, under the Nazis, it was people with disabilities, like me, who were forcibly sterilisied long before the Jews and who were rounded up and butchered in research hospitals like Hadamar - the precursors to the Concentration Camps?

Do I even need to point out how many of us with disabilities have suffered years of child abuse, institutionalised child abuse, rampant discrimination, and as adults, were left vulnerable to domestic, sexual and general violence, due to that child abuse -precisely because the same attitudes which drove the Holocaust where people with disabilities are concerned, are still alive and well in society today.

Can you honestly say that this sort of behaviour which took the form of sexism or racism would be acceptable on the forums?

So tell me Griffin, how the hell is this sort of behaviour in the form of ableism even remotely acceptable behaviour from another forum member?

[bowspearer]

Don't lie! You're downloading the movie as we type! :D :p

No, I'm afraid the wikipedia page description was all I needed to require a thorough brain bleaching. :p

[MEEEGGGAAATTTRRROOONNN!!!]

No, I'm afraid the wikipedia page description was all I needed to require a thorough brain bleaching. :p

https://i.imgur.com/C6UAACD.gif

[bowspearer]

https://i.imgur.com/C6UAACD.gif

Yeah, last I checked, that method only succeeded in blinding you whilst leaving the mental image thoroughly burned in your brain. :p