Hobbes-timus Prime

Meh, he really doesn't interest me.

:roll Dude, it's not editing at all. I never disputed that. We are in complete agreement on that matter. All I way saying is that the filmmaker's initial intent does not change the final product when the two don't match. In the cartoon, Frenzy is Red and Rumble is Blue. And that will always be the case. You cannot argue that it retroactively changes somehow because someone screwed up. You missed the point again Hobbes, It doesn't matter that the cartoon made Rumble blue. It was an error; a repeated error, and it wouldn't be the last. Look at how often Cliffjumper and Downshift's names were reversed repeatedly in Energon. The show never got it right once. That doesn't change the fact that this is Cliffjumper and this is Downshift. It's the exact same type of error. And those two don't even look remotely alike. Once the dubbing is done and the show's released, that's it. And, like I said, the cartoon doesn't match up with any of the other media in which Rumble and Frenzy are depicted save for the Diamond Select busts (based on the cartoons) and the Devil's Due Gi Joe vs Transformers comic. I'm not saying that the cartoon doesn't have rumble as blue. I am saying that he isn't supposed to be blue. Production screwed up. Regardless of the final result in the cartoon, it was still a screwup, and one that Japan rectified in their dub of the series. For fuck's sake, I am not arguing your point that it was an error. I am actually agreeing with you about it. What I'm saying is that the fact it was an error does not change the reality of Rumble being blue and Frenzy being Red in the cartoon. That is what the show canon is. Period. So there is no one definitive answer as to what color each character is. There is a legitimate blue Rumble and many more legitimate red Rumbles. But there are two different official depictions of the character, even if one is the result of an error, it was an error that was never rectified and that was strictly and consistently adhered to throughout the entirety of a very, very uneven series that would often contradict itself. What I am trying to do here is put the arguing to rest by outlining the facts of the matter, instead of prolonging a discussion which will have no end if the whole thing is viewed through fanboy glasses. But for the last time I not only concede that it was an error, I have never said differently. Seriously, if you try and tell me it was an error again, I'm going to report you for trolling.

:roll Dude, it's not editing at all. I never disputed that. We are in complete agreement on that matter. All I way saying is that the filmmaker's initial intent does not change the final product when the two don't match. In the cartoon, Frenzy is Red and Rumble is Blue. And that will always be the case. You cannot argue that it retroactively changes somehow because someone screwed up.

I have to call in to question if that matters, though. To use a simplified example, if the script for Transformers 3 reads: MIKELA Sam, look out behind you! But on set the day of filming, Megan Fox screams "Oh, crap, Sam, Starscream's behind you!" and then that take used in the finished film, even though the line is not exact to the filmmaker's original intent, it is still what the character of Mikela said in the context of the fictional universe. The final product > filmmaker intent. Mistakes included. Script changes are one thing. animation errors on an already established design are another. As the links above state, the toys, comics, even children's books which had all come out prior to the cartoon, had already firmly established Rumble as the red bot and Frenzy as blue, and it was Hasbro's intent that the cartoon followed suit. Somewhere along the way during production there was some miscommunication and their colors got reversed. Also, even in movies, there do occur instances where the lines are screwed up and not caught. The cartoon is but one of several "final products", and it depiction of Rumble's and Frenzy's colors was indeed erroneous compared to everything already firmly established about who was who. The cartoon was loaded with similar animation errors. And, like I said, even Japan managed to correct that error in their dub of the cartoon by simply switching their names It was a very simple fix. My example isn't a script change, it's someone saying the wrong line on set. But they said, "Let's run with it." And your example isn't as simple as an animation error. It's every single episode of the show that those characters appear in AND the '86 theatrical film. Clearly at some point someone said, "let's run with it." If they'd wanted to correct it, they would have. At some point, that has to become intent. Actually, what you described in your movie example is what's referred to as an "ad lib". Those are quite common in movies, and often encouraged. Frenzy and rumble getting their colors swapped in the cartoon was a production error, so in that sense you're correct in that it's not as simple" as an animation error. It was far more grievous and likely happened further up the chain, and once it was done, they couldn't really undo it. The difference was that normal animation errors only happen in one shot. This occurred over a whole episode, and because of that, they were stuck with it. So in that sense, yes, they ran with it, because they couldn't really go back and change it after they had already run "X" number of episodes before it was caught. Also, for the most part, Frenzy and Rumble were basically interchangeable in the cartoon, and even sounded pretty much identical (both being voiced by Frank Welker using essentially the same voice). A. Movies is what I do. Don't lecture me on the realities of production. The larger point that you're missing is that filmmaker intent =/= what might end up on screen. From a continuity stand point, what is on screen is "what happened" and what they intended to be onscreen is not. Period. B. The other point you're missing is that they could "undo" it whenever they wanted. It was a crappy cartoon made to advertise toys. You think this discussion ever went down: "Hey, we swapped the colors on the two tape guys in the three episode opening arc." "Hell, we can't possibly ever make an episode the correct way. Our audience is way too discriminating." "You're right. We're stuck." No. This is the show that has three different Constructicon origins, for crying out loud. They didn't care enough to fix it. That becomes "intent by default."

I have to call in to question if that matters, though. To use a simplified example, if the script for Transformers 3 reads: MIKELA Sam, look out behind you! But on set the day of filming, Megan Fox screams "Oh, crap, Sam, Starscream's behind you!" and then that take used in the finished film, even though the line is not exact to the filmmaker's original intent, it is still what the character of Mikela said in the context of the fictional universe. The final product > filmmaker intent. Mistakes included. Script changes are one thing. animation errors on an already established design are another. As the links above state, the toys, comics, even children's books which had all come out prior to the cartoon, had already firmly established Rumble as the red bot and Frenzy as blue, and it was Hasbro's intent that the cartoon followed suit. Somewhere along the way during production there was some miscommunication and their colors got reversed. Also, even in movies, there do occur instances where the lines are screwed up and not caught. The cartoon is but one of several "final products", and it depiction of Rumble's and Frenzy's colors was indeed erroneous compared to everything already firmly established about who was who. The cartoon was loaded with similar animation errors. And, like I said, even Japan managed to correct that error in their dub of the cartoon by simply switching their names It was a very simple fix. My example isn't a script change, it's someone saying the wrong line on set. But they said, "Let's run with it." And your example isn't as simple as an animation error. It's every single episode of the show that those characters appear in AND the '86 theatrical film. Clearly at some point someone said, "let's run with it." If they'd wanted to correct it, they would have. At some point, that has to become intent.

I have to call in to question if that matters, though. To use a simplified example, if the script for Transformers 3 reads: MIKELA Sam, look out behind you! But on set the day of filming, Megan Fox screams "Oh, crap, Sam, Starscream's behind you!" and then that take used in the finished film, even though the line is not exact to the filmmaker's original intent, it is still what the character of Mikela said in the context of the fictional universe. The final product > filmmaker intent. Mistakes included.

Lockdown = :drool

Dude, love the custom Prime.

You can't have a dissenting opinion on the internet with out explaining yourself. It sucks. You disagree with the "wrong" thing and everyone get's on your case. That's not true. :tfevil

:tflaugh Ender and the first movie have some...history...like Chris Brown and Rhiana have "history", if you catch my meaning.

I hope you enjoy this one more. :thumb

Now that all that's done: Atmo, Starscream doesn't need to smirk!!11!!!!1! What's wrong with you? :argh

Okay Hobbes I didn't wanna bring you into this because you're a cool guy n'all but you didn't get that point did you? I'm not a hypocrite for pointing out he's a sexist which I am obviously not. So I don't understand why you're saying I am a hypocrite, I am not trying to force my opinions here I'm just tired of the sexist remarks and if he so pursues the need to demean women, then so be it, it just means he's not worth the time. And nobody said you had to defend this Troll, so why do you have to? you can leave the fight that you were never even part of and go on with your own life, because from my point of view you're a good guy, but just stay out of it. Dude, we established that his comments, misguided though they may be, were inquisitive in nature. He might be wrong, but people are wrong all the time - at least he's trying to get a clearer picture of how the world works by questioning his world view. Who the hell are you to chastise him for asking those questions? Explain to him why he's wrong in an adult manner or ignore him, but don't chastise him for trying to learn. Your high and mighty lecture routine doesn't help him or the forum.

hahaha okay taken ^^ You should apologize to ME too as you have been rather brutal to me and critical of my lifestyle. >_> I will say I'm sorry that I was so brutal to you, but I still think you are by far the most pathetic person I have met online, Not because of your "lifestyle" but because you posted blatantly sexist remarks in this forum while trying to force your own lifestyles and personal life opinions upon us, and when confronted you hid, and you are still hiding. Now unlike some others here I will not go as far as to say you are gay, because it is obvious you lack the want of any sort of companionship, But I will go as far as to say I don't think of you as much of a man, period. You are disrespectful to a lot of people here, and still you hide now behind flimsy excuses, immaturity, and ignorance. If you were a real man, you'd have apologized IMMEDIATELY to those you insulted, But you didn't you tried to hide... like a scared little child. I only apologize because I KNOW I'm a better man than you, and I think it's sad, no... EXTREMELY sad that I, someone YOUNGER than you, has to say this to you. And no matter what, even if you say sorry now, it will be pretty empty because you've shown your real face, and those you've offended know what you really are. From this point on Atmo, you won't hear from me, because you are nothing "Hi, this is Kettle. I'm not home right now. Leave your message." *beep* "Hey, Kettle. This is pot. I'm just calling to say, 'you're black'." :tflaugh For real, dude. Your angst over these comments indicates a bit of sad immaturity on your part as well. And I think it's sad, no...EXTREMELY sad that I, the resident Atmo Troll, has to say this to you.

The Allspark mass-shift is not a contradiction. Mystic artifact =/= character. It's a common literary device. If Gandalf survived the Balrog's fire, you'd call bullshit. But when the One Ring survives being thrown in a fireplace, you're down with it. With that out of the way, please provide me with some examples of these explained decisions which were then contradicted and now have you in such an uproar.