Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41

Thread: Opinion: Bottom 5 Moments of IDW's Transformers Run

  1. #21
    Join Date
    16th Jul 2008
    Location
    Melb
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    My opinions are a bit biased towards recent issues as I can barely remember the early stuff.

    1. Drift - While I applaud many of IDW's in-house characters. Drift, never really jelled with me. He's not terribly interesting, he's a living macguffin/magical negro and in later issues as a 'core' character seems to occupy space on pages without adding much to them. I'd much rather he just disappeared after his original story arc.
    2. Spotlight Ramjet - an early IDW sin (and not the only) but arguably the most irrelevant. It adds nothing to the universe/narrative and takes away a valuable character. Was basically made to sell the Classics Ramjet toy. A pretty poor ad if you ask me.
    3. Maximals - with the dismantling of the Autobots vs Decepticons the Maximals were pulled out of a drawer to be nameless and disposable baddies. We got some cool art, but also had to suffer zero characterisation and a ridiculous backstory. Hopefully they get some justice in the reboot.
    4. Cyberutopia - there was always going to be a twist to this and MTMTE/LL was more about the journey than the destination but by hell this was rushed, nonsensical and ultimately lame end to a major plot point.
    5. Hasbro Universe - Shoehorning a whole bunch of Hasbro properties into a Transformers storyline in the final quarter of the game just ended up being messy and a waste of panels overall.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    Hasbro Universe -- the crossovers that nobody asked for!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    9th Aug 2018
    Location
    Allendale North, SA
    Posts
    635

    Default

    I must admit, the shared Hasbroverse was a bit of a pain in the decepti-butt, and I was really tentative at first about reading them. But I gave them a go, and for me, it was just a bit of a sidestep, a bit of 'anime filler' as it were; nothing which had hugely far-reaching consequences (apart from the awakening of Unicron of course)

    Okay so Transformers Vs Visionaries was a serious misstep, but I thoroughly enjoyed Rom Vs Transformers (especially Alex Milne's gorgeous art) and Kup/Action Man's team-up (while it lasted). Also the ability to establish that Hearts of Steel DID happen in the same universe, and fill in some contiunuity gaps with it, was quite pleasing to me.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    I don't even understand why they're doing it. Are Hasbro planning on relaunching ROM, GI Joe, Visionaries, MASK, Micronauts, Battle Beasts etc.? Where are the accompany toy lines? If not, then why bother doing this?

    It felt like a lame way to try and market their other toy property comic series by riding on the coattails of the Transformers' success, but then once everyone jumped on the Transformers' coattails it ended up dragging the TF series down. And people complain about a handful of human characters in the Bumblebee movie... they've got nothing compared to Transformers: Hasbroverse! And why develop a character like Stardrive if there isn't going to be a toy of her?!? Damn it!

    Actually, that's one of my beefs with IDW overall (long before the Hasbro shared universe thing) -- making us emotionally invest in characters not based on an existing toy. Rung, the DJD, Tyrest, Pharma etc. WHY? It's annoying because one thing I've really liked about IDW is how a lot of TF toys that have previously had very little if any canonical appearances have appeared in IDW! Hubcap! But with so many other TFs out there that are still underused, why not tap into them instead of just throwing new characters that we cannot reenact with our action figures!?!

    Okay, G1 did give us non-toy characters too (Xaaron, Impactor, Alpha Trion etc.), but these were characters that the writers needed to have total freedom with. Often to kill off or remove (your "hi then die" characters like Scrounge, Crosscut, Ferak etc.), but also because toy-based characters were introduced and removed according to Hasbro. Typically out of production toys had to be removed or omitted from stories and new toys had to be introduced. So unique toyless characters were created so that they could do stuff without requiring Hasbro's permission. Impactor was the first leader of the Wreckers and killed off because he wasn't a toy. Springer then took over but they couldn't kill him off because Hasbro wouldn't have let them.

    IDW, by and large, aren't under this restriction. With only a few exceptions, most IDW TFs aren't introduced/removed from the story because of Hasbro. IDW have a level of creative freedom that Marvel writers could only dream of. You could introduce a character as obscure as Hasbro's Overlord (not Takara's Masterforce Overlord, Hasbro's!) and get away with it. Heck, IDW even managed to get one of their original characters later made as a toy - Drift! Who's even expanded beyond the IDW universe. Why couldn't the DJD have been comprised of lesser known Decepticons that they could've written up the same personalities for? IDW have been known to disregard a toy's G1 bio in favour of something completely different (e.g. Swerve, Tailgate, Dai Atlas, Star Sabre, Whirl etc.). Clench, Fearswoop, Calcar etc. -- they could've had their moments to shine instead of being forgettable background characters as they were.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    2nd Jun 2011
    Location
    Rylstone
    Posts
    8,382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FatalityPitt View Post

    Things I disliked:

    Forced social progressiveness - The Chromedome/Rewind relationship was quite touching and well-done, definitely a high-point of the series. But then they later introduced more same-gender relationships (Onslaught/Blast Off, Lug/anode, Ratchet/Drift, Arcee/Aileron, etc.) which started to come of as cliche and unnecessary. I felt some of them we're out of character; like the Onslaught/Blast Off affair. G1 Blast Off to me is someone who's aloof and arrogant, and doesn't seem like the sort who'd want to get romantically involved with anyone, let alone someone who transforms into a land vehicle. think the story could have been written just as well without the romance.
    Quote Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime View Post
    Yeah. The thing about Chromedome x Rewind and Tailgate x Cyclonus is that their relationships felt more organic. These characters fell in love with each other but it just so happened that they are same-gender because 99% of Cybertronians are masculine. The same-genderness was incidental and thus felt unforced. They didn't make a deal of it.

    Subsequent ones as you've mentioned have not been so subtle (although I personally never noticed Drift and Ratchet as a couple; I thought that they'd just become good mates). I also didn't mind Blast Off's thing with Onslaught so much, as it explored the realm of unrequited love and the fact that they were both masculine was, again, incidental. While Blast Off is aloof and arrogant, he never had a disdain for ground-based modes (unlike Powerglide who pities anyone who can't fly). But remember that Blast Off's G1 profile, as written by Bob Budiansky, also states:
    "But his happiness is an act, a disguise he uses to hide his long-distance lonliness. His aloof and superior manner is a front that prevents the other Decepticons from knowing his true feelings."
    So... yeah, IDW Blast Off's persona is pretty G1 accurate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulbot View Post
    It’d be okay for “same-sex” relationships to exist in these made up stories as long as there’s an explanation for it that you feel is good enough? This is pretty insulting.

    Without wanting to cause any kind of heated debate by bringing this topic back up, as I really really don't and it's not my intention, this debate has come up yet again on one of the more popular TF social sites.

    Anyway, that debate made me look up the statistics for the romances in the IDW run before it came to an end:

    Malebot-Malebot Romances: 12
    (A couple of these were in the history of the bots like Chromedome/Pivot)
    Fembot-Fembot Romances: 3
    Malebot-Fembot Romances: 3


    So anyway, interesting statistics. People can discuss whether it's active social progressiveness or simply because there are way more Malebots in the TF universe or whatever. I just thought it was interesting to note.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    31st Dec 2007
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    7,229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigTransformerTrev View Post

    Malebot-Malebot Romances: 12
    (A couple of these were in the history of the bots like Chromedome/Pivot)
    Fembot-Fembot Romances: 3
    Malebot-Fembot Romances: 3


    So anyway, interesting statistics. People can discuss whether it's active social progressiveness or simply because there are way more Malebots in the TF universe or whatever. I just thought it was interesting to note.
    Considering how few fembots there are in total, I'd say percentage wise, the fembot-fembot and fembot-malebot romances are overly represented!
    Looking For: Wreckers Saga TPB Collection (with Requiem)

  7. #27
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by i_amtrunks View Post
    Considering how few fembots there are in total, I'd say percentage wise, the fembot-fembot and fembot-malebot romances are overly represented!
    ☝This so much! I would guesstimate that about 3% of Transformers are female, whereas Trev's stats show that 33% of relationships involve a female TF. Yes, very much so over-represented! That's actually even more than the number of LGBTIQ people IRL (approx. 4% of the population).

  8. #28
    KELPIE is offline Rank 6 - Dedicated Member
    Join Date
    2nd Jan 2018
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    819

    Default

    I agree with Furman that Fembots don't make sense.

    That said, I have no issue with them in my TF lore.

    The Blastoff/Onslaught and Ratchet/Drift ones were the only ones that left a sour taste.


    Side note:
    There is a line of reasoning that every species action/reaction (and by extension, evolution/progress) is directly tied to needing to impress the opposite sex and procreate. Without either, where is the need for Cybertronian's to anything?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    2nd Jun 2011
    Location
    Rylstone
    Posts
    8,382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KELPIE View Post
    There is a line of reasoning that every species action/reaction (and by extension, evolution/progress) is directly tied to needing to impress the opposite sex and procreate. Without either, where is the need for Cybertronian's to anything?
    There is no similar theory that a species action/reaction can be directly tied to being brought to life by a living planet in order to one day fight another living planet so as to save the universe from being devoured?

    Quote Originally Posted by KELPIE View Post
    The Blastoff/Onslaught and Ratchet/Drift ones were the only ones that left a sour taste.
    Yeah, I pretty much felt the same. Think a lot of others did too. I still think the Chromedome/Rewind romance is the most well developed romance the Transformers franchise has ever seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by KELPIE View Post
    I agree with Furman that Fembots don't make sense.

    That said, I have no issue with them in my TF lore.
    Yeah but I spose by the same token Malebots don't make sense either.

    But from the perspective that Transformers are a toyline and all the related media such as comics and cartoons are to sell those toys, having malebots and fembots makes perfect sense. It really opens up a plethora of options for both new toys and storylines, and increases the range of the franchises appeal to various markets. For instance, my daughter took all my Autobot Fembots the other day and made them have a tea party. She loved the fact that they had working knees so she could make them sit on her dollhouse chairs! It was so cute! She wouldn't have been remotely interested in playing with my Transformers if they were all boys that turned into tanks. And because she loves playing with my Fembots, I have at least a half-dozen different ones stashed away to give her when she gets older. So ergo, having Fembots means more sales for Hasbro

  10. #30
    Join Date
    27th Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney NSW
    Posts
    37,637

    Default

    Transformer genders exist for the same reason why most robot modes look humanoid -- to help the human audience relate to them as characters.

    The canonical reality is that Transformers don't have biological genders, they only have gender identities. People have both biological genders and gender identities (and while most of us have the same bio and ID genders, some people don't). Transformers purely have ID genders, no bio genders. Seemples.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •