PDA

View Full Version : Wrong names for the autobots



warrenarmo
02-23-2009, 08:56 AM
I was just visiting the official website for the up and coming Transformers film, and I couldn't help but noticethat some of the Autobots are muddle up. For instants, Sideswipe is meant to have the twin brother named 'Sunstreaker'. So why in the new film are there twins 'Mudflap' and 'Skids', who are not even related in any comics, animation or toys. Not to mention that Mudflap is a Decepticon in the toy range. Why the massive error in characters, what a shame the finer details couldn't be corrected. Also, if that huge thing that is meant to be Demolisher, the director should have stuck with the original animation design instead of turning him into a big wheel.

I would very much appreciate a response to these questions. Thank you for your time.

King of Kings
02-23-2009, 09:03 AM
My answer for all the above is that these movies aren't based on a certain TF show/comic or toy line so the characters can have whatever name and alt mode the people making the movie give them.

UnclePetey
02-23-2009, 09:08 AM
How dare you bring discredit upon the all-powerful Mr. Bay?!?


Blasphemer!





... j/k - they can use whatever names they want from any of the Transformers, not just G-1 names/factions. Don't think of it as xbot has to be this way because it happened in Season x, Episode x, etcetera.

fu2kimus_prime
02-23-2009, 09:09 AM
I would also add that this kind of nameslapping was going on long before a live action movie was even thought of, it stopped bothering me long ago.

Hasbro never really remained consistent with naming minor characters, so it's unfair to expect the writers to follow rules that weren't really there to start with.

warrenarmo
02-23-2009, 09:33 AM
It doesn't bother me that much, but two of my favorite characters from the cartoon, I would of liked it to be right for a change. I think it would have better suited the character if they used sunstreaker and sideswipe.:)

fu2kimus_prime
02-23-2009, 09:35 AM
There's nothing stopping Sunstreaker appearing in the 3rd flick. The twins in this film are meant to be abit on the stupid side, so they didn't fit with Sunstreaker, and Sideswipe.

Sillypuddy
02-23-2009, 09:40 AM
hmmmm..lets see... ridiculous looking 4 cylynder......yep thats Sideswipe!! NOT!!! That would have been a tragedy if the twins were named Sunstreaker and Sideswipe with the alt modes they have. Having Sideswipe as the Vette is all fine and dandy even w/o Streaker being in it...

Johnd818
02-23-2009, 10:08 AM
hmmmm..lets see... ridiculous looking 4 cylynder......yep thats Sideswipe!! NOT!!! That would have been a tragedy if the twins were named Sunstreaker and Sideswipe with the alt modes they have. Having Sideswipe as the Vette is all fine and dandy even w/o Streaker being in it...

Could be worse. The twins could have alt modes of a red and yellow Pinto.

warrenarmo
02-23-2009, 10:33 AM
Sorry, your statment makes no sense. If they included Sunstreaker, it would have been better than mudflap or skids as names, and they could of had a better alt mode rather than bumper cars. I think my point is still valid.

TIMtationX
02-23-2009, 10:44 AM
I was just visiting the official website for the up and coming Transformers film, and I couldn't help but noticethat some of the Autobots are muddle up. For instants, Sideswipe is meant to have the twin brother named 'Sunstreaker'. So why in the new film are there twins 'Mudflap' and 'Skids', who are not even related in any comics, animation or toys. Not to mention that Mudflap is a Decepticon in the toy range. Why the massive error in characters, what a shame the finer details couldn't be corrected. Also, if that huge thing that is meant to be Demolisher, the director should have stuck with the original animation design instead of turning him into a big wheel.

I would very much appreciate a response to these questions. Thank you for your time.

:deadhorse1: X 1,000,000....

Johnd818
02-23-2009, 10:50 AM
Sorry, your statment makes no sense. If they included Sunstreaker, it would have been better than mudflap or skids as names, and they could of had a better alt mode rather than bumper cars. I think my point is still valid.

I think your opinion is valid. But you have to look at it as a completely seperate entity from the Transformers cartoons and comics. It's completely different. In Bay's vision of Transformers, who says Sideswipe and Sunstreaker are twins? Or that Sunstreaker exists? Maybe he'll show up in a third film? Who knows?

Plus you have to look at the relationship with GM and the role they play in things. http://transformerslive.blogspot.com/2009/02/gm-cars-picked-by-bay-influenced-movie.html

Personally, I'd love to see Hound and Cliffjumper in the movie. But if it doesn't fit Bay's vision for the film then so be it. It's a different transformers universe in the film than in the comics and cartoon shows.

Sure we all have our favorite characters we'd love to see. Is it dissapointing if they don't make the film? Sure it is. But just because something is different doesn't make it bad. Keep positive, maybe your Sunstreaker will make it into the third film. ;)

warrenarmo
02-23-2009, 11:02 AM
:deadhorse1: X 1,000,000....
Do you have a problem, or do you just like playing with horses?

bjoneill74
02-23-2009, 11:10 AM
"Also, if that huge thing that is meant to be Demolisher, the director should have stuck with the original animation design instead of turning him into a big wheel"

Ughhh.. The green and purple G1 devastator worked for the gay 80's cartoon. It would be garbage in a live action setting (as would all of the original G1 characters).