^ if so why did he even listen to what Megs had to say?

^ if so why did he even listen to what Megs had to say?

It's called adding dramatic tension. :P (and to give time for the robotic shield to show up.)

I don't buy it....

Yes, this is all great stuff because we all know that the Autobots are only play things of the US military and not a race that is millions of years old and able to think for themselves.

 

Well, no, that part isn't cool. That's the ironic thing about this situation.

 

It's good to know (to some degree) that they weren't just doing it 'for fun' that there were actual orders given by superior officers that necessitated it, so it wasn't just arbitrary. It would have been nice if this had been in the movie so that there would have at least been a clear "Legal" justification for it, so we weren't guessing as to all the "whys" of the situation. However...

 

Was it "Morally" justified? Was it an accurate representation of what the Autobots ought to stand for?

 

Heck, no.

 

I mean, even in the original series they had ways of taking prisoners that deprived them of their bodies and by extension their weapons. Recall if you will when Starscream created the Combaticons. Where did he get the brains for these tin soldiers that he built? He stole the "Personality components" (IE: Brains) of convicted war criminals from prison; a prison that looked suspiciously like a bunch of security deposit boxes at a bank.

 

Now, I realize that a straight port of this concept may not have worked, but I'm sure it could have been adapted in SOME way to fit this movie. After all, what more efficient or effective way is there to incarcerate someone than that? Taking out the vital bits of someone and sealing them in a container the size of a old trunk? Even our prison system isn't half as efficient or effective as that!

But I guess the counter argument could be that perhaps they don't have the technology on hand to do that so in that case...

 

Even if they DIDN'T take prisoners and had to kill those guys anyway, they could have done it so that there was some higher justification for the termination that transcended: "Well, That guy told us to."

 

(and now some editorializing :) )

I think it really comes down to the fact that Michael Bay is a very small minded man. Michael Bay only cares about making marketable films. He doesn't think very far past "Lets have a cool action scene where some dude gets cut in half". He didn't even cement the legal justification in the actual film; John 14:6 (again, awesome that you managed to find that by the way) had to go look in a book for that! As far as Bay is concerned, a cool action sequence is its own justification.

 

So if you want to be an optimist: Be glad that Michael Bay went into movies, not politics, because if he became President he'd probably initiate Thermonuclear war because it would make a "cool action sequence."

 

But if you want to be a pessimist: Don't be surprised if Optimus Prime kills a decepticon in the next movie by pulling his Spark out and making him eat it, cuz hey, "It'd make a cool action sequence."

 

Okay, so IN CONCLUSION:

 

Sideswipe's killing of Sideways and Prime's euthanizing Demolisher were "Legally Mandated Acts of Agression" and therefore cannot be considered MURDER in spite of the fact that it wasn't extremely clear in the film.

 

However, these acts were NOT portrayed in a way so as to make them seem MORALLY justified, and could therefore be considered a perversion of what Transformers as a whole has stood for in the past, and should stand for, depending on your point of view.

 

So, out of curiosity, have I made a good argument? Or am I just being "full of it"? Seriously. :shrug

 

Nope. I'd have to say that you've made a good argument.

 

As far as 'changing who Optimus Prime is,' I'd have to reference TFTM: not only was Prime bound and determined to reduce Megatron to his composite atoms, but we should also remember his marching orders to the Dinobots:

 

'DESTROY DEVASTATOR!!!'

 

Not 'contain' him. Not 'stop' him. Not 'slow him down'...Prime wanted Devastator GONE, he wanted him ashed, he wanted the Dinobots to DESTROY him. Optimus wasn't playing around anymore, and neither is the Bayverse version. G1 and the Bayverse have nicely converged in that fashion. In that respect, how is it that Prime's assumed change should be laid at the feet of the Bayverse? That 'change' was already set up.

IF you read the bio for Leader class Optimus Prime, it says flat out that he seeks to hunt down every remaining Decepticon on Earth and destroy them one by one in an effort to end the war once and form all:

 

With the destruction of Megatron, Optimus Prime thought he was finally, after millions of years, at peace. Little did he know that the escape of Starscream would draw dozens of new Decepticons to Earth. The desire that burns brightest in his spark is that the war will soon end. He is determined to see that end come, and so he works with his human comrades and the other Autobots to hunt the Decepticons that have come to Earth, and destroy them, one by one.

—Leader class Optimus Prime bio

 

Optimus isn't taking any prisoners. No quarter asked or given.

Again isn't that the OptibayPrime, not the one from the comics or other lines?

I don't buy it....

Okidoki, then..if Prime wasn't ready to finish Megatron in the 86 film, why would he be pointing his weapon at him? Why would he use the last of his strength to knock Megatron off the ledge?

 

I'm starting to think you're looking at the story of Transformers through some sort of rose-tinted Volkswagen windows. As much as Volkswagen wants to deny their history, they were involved with war. Just as the Transformers, too, are involved in an war.

Again isn't that the OptibayPrime, not the one from the comics or other lines?

 

No. The change in demeanor was established in Sunbow G1 by way of Transformers: The Movie, circa 1986.

 

The Autobots are not catspaws of the military. They brought the war to a foreign planet. Because the Autobots are fundamentally moral, they choose to work with the higher life forms of the planet their very presence has placed in jeopardy.

 

Granted, while I can see the reasoning in wanting to take a prisoner, or waxing poetic about the horrors of war on the part of some random Autobot, I can see the reasoning even more clearly as relates eliminating your eternal foes with extreme prejudice in a real-life scenario. As a human, were this occurring IRL, I would personally appreciate it if the Autobots checked their ideals at the door and went about the business of efficiently and expeditiously cleaning up their mess.

 

By any means necessary.

I don't buy it....

Okidoki, then..if Prime wasn't ready to finish Megatron in the 86 film, why would he be pointing his weapon at him? Why would he use the last of his strength to knock Megatron off the ledge?

 

I'm starting to think you're looking at the story of Transformers through some sort of rose-tinted Volkswagen windows. As much as Volkswagen wants to deny their history, they were involved with war. Just as the Transformers, too, are involved in an war.

 

 

 

No, I just think there is a difference when you are fighting for your life in the actual heat of battle and when you are just standing there in front of a seemingly defenceless advasary.

 

Think of it this way... If a cop was in a fight with someone he would fight to kill the other if necessary. But if he had already beaten that person down he would then be trying to take them in to custody and not finish them off. If said criminal than tried to attack the police officer during the handcuffing whatever the cop would shoot to save his life.

 

But that being said I think the same case applies with prime in 86. He had megs down and was taking him into custody, when his life or another autobots became endangered the situation changed and he did what he had to do. The thing was the actions fit the exact situational moment not "Total agression non stop."

I don't buy it....

Okidoki, then..if Prime wasn't ready to finish Megatron in the 86 film, why would he be pointing his weapon at him? Why would he use the last of his strength to knock Megatron off the ledge?

 

I'm starting to think you're looking at the story of Transformers through some sort of rose-tinted Volkswagen windows. As much as Volkswagen wants to deny their history, they were involved with war. Just as the Transformers, too, are involved in an war.

 

 

 

No, I just think there is a difference when you are fighting for your life in the actual heat of battle and when you are just standing there in front of a seemingly defenceless advasary.

 

Think of it this way... If a cop was in a fight with someone he would fight to kill the other if necessary. But if he had already beaten that person down he would then be trying to take them in to custody and not finish them off. If said criminal than tried to attack the police officer during the handcuffing whatever the cop would shoot to save his life.

 

But that being said I think the same case applies with prime in 86. He had megs down and was taking him into custody, when his life or another autobots became endangered the situation changed and he did what he had to do. The thing was the actions fit the exact situational moment not "Total agression non stop."

Optimus Prime isn't a cop, he's a soldier, a military officer. He's fighting a war, not arresting criminals. That is a big distinction.