HOME | DD
#beastwars #husky #lazybackground #lioconvoy #lion #oc #optimusprime #transformers #igp #transformersoc #transformersocs #xzavionchapters #intergalacticprotectors
Published: 2018-06-14 01:05:48 +0000 UTC; Views: 858; Favourites: 22; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Here we have some Transformers based characters with a blend of the normal vehicle and Beast Wars aspects of the franchise. The left one is a blend of Optimus Prime and Lio Convoy the left is just a Jet Husky critter with no direct inspiration.Related content
Comments: 51
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-14 02:19:08 +0000 UTC]
I love Transformers too!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-14 02:25:40 +0000 UTC]
They are great, I have recently been looking more into Beast Wars and all it's squeals. Both American and Japanese.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-14 04:30:14 +0000 UTC]
Seen the original 1980s cartoon?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-14 05:03:17 +0000 UTC]
Bits of it yeah, not the full thing. Watched the movie of course, and love it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-14 13:05:51 +0000 UTC]
I love the 1986 movie too!
Do you like the 2007 movie too?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-14 21:03:00 +0000 UTC]
Yeah of couse. Seen pretty much all the Bayformer movies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-14 21:41:56 +0000 UTC]
Do you agree that the first is the best?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-14 22:23:38 +0000 UTC]
Yeah it is. Things went too off the rails in the later movies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-15 04:21:46 +0000 UTC]
Can I explain something on that subject?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-15 04:33:09 +0000 UTC]
Transformers has only seen justice on the big screen in this and the 2007 film. In the 2007 film there was equal time between the humans and Transformers, with them appearing in many scenes together; while the 1986 film was more to the Transformers themselves. I feel it makes for a good contrast, do you?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-15 04:37:54 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, as well as they didn't play more towards the edgy murder filled stories in the 2007 film. Like all the other Bayformer films did.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-15 13:22:31 +0000 UTC]
One thing both good films also have in common is that there were FEW main human characters; whereas the sequels just kept adding more and more to both sides, just little more to the human side then Transformer one. They need to learn that sometimes less is more, right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-15 20:47:48 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, also that you don't need to kill off almost all of the side cast to make a good film. At some point we just stopped caring for the side character transformers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-16 02:17:41 +0000 UTC]
Also, like the humans in the animated film, the main ones in the first live-action film actually DID stuff that aided the plot and helped the Autobots. Adding on, many of those good human characters from the first were dropped in the following movie; which include:
1.) John Keller, the U.S. Secretary of Defense (played by Jon Voight).
2.) Maggie Madsen, a hacker recruited by the U.S. Defense Department (played by Rachel Taylor).
3.) Glen Whitmann, a hacker friend of Maggie's (played by Anthony Anderson).
4.) ACWO Jorge "Fig" Figueroa, a Special Operations soldier who survives the destruction of the SOCCENT base in Qatar and was also a member of Captain Lennox's team (played by Amaury Nolasco).
5.) Tom Banachek, head of Sector 7 (played by Michael O'Neill).
They just vanish for the sequels; in fact, they are never mentioned at all! Adding to how the city is changed from Mission City to Los Angeles for no apparent reason; almost like we entered an entire different timeline/dimension!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-16 03:56:03 +0000 UTC]
Yeah. Lots of pointless characters all around.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-16 04:12:07 +0000 UTC]
And subplots too, right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-16 04:32:39 +0000 UTC]
Pointless fluff or fan-service.
The main plots are good in concept but it is never executed well.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-16 04:55:28 +0000 UTC]
Under Bay, it didn't matter what direction the sequels went; they were all the same. The Nostalgia Critic brought up a very good point with the Transformer sequels; they are BORING!
They are so boring! With the first film, seeing giant robots fight each other on such a grand scale in the desert and the city was never really seen, at least to that size and effort. In the second film, they just fight in the desert...okay, we saw that... And in the third film, they fight in the city...okay, we saw that...and in the fourth film, they fight in another ci– THIS IS THE EXACT SAME THING!! Some metal piece of s*** comes along to f*** things up, there's some bulls*** about "is humanity worth it" to make us think it's trying to be deep, some dumb*** jokes of the time that'll be dated really fast, and then it does everything in its power to make explosions mean nothing. S***, I remember when explosions were such a cool thing: a giant ball of fire! How destructive yet amazing! And now, it's like we're watching a bucket of paint! Thank you, Michael Bay! You sucked out all the excitement! With nothing new ever added and scenes literally recycled – like, he just plays the exact same clips – what should be cool and thrilling is just white noise. In fact, that's a perfect nickname for this director when it comes to sequels: White Noise. With no impact, no thought, no good humor, and no interest in doing anything different, these films asked the questions Americans sadly have to ask a lot: "If it makes money, why change it?"
Sorry, I went on a rant there...pardon my French.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-16 05:17:49 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, but luckily Bay is no longer working on them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-16 05:20:06 +0000 UTC]
I also really hated how the sequels managed to completely ruin the character of Sam Witwicky. While he is not the greatest action movie hero, in the first film he is a genuinely sympathetic character and a down-to-earth guy we could all connect with (he is the every-man, a normal person thrown into an extraordinary situation). In 3 they manage to f*** that all up by turning him into a whiny and self-centered little b****! He's all like "Look at me! I am so important! Look how important I am! Why doesn't anyone think I am important!?"
I am so glad Bay is done with it.
Know of the prequel/spin-off coming out?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-16 05:24:12 +0000 UTC]
Oh yeah, Bumblebee, I like his design in that film, hopefully it is a decent movie.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-16 05:25:02 +0000 UTC]
It is from the director of Kubo & The Two Strings. Know of that one?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-16 06:00:59 +0000 UTC]
Oh, well that brings some more confidence in the film.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-16 20:11:04 +0000 UTC]
You have seen Kubo too?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-17 23:28:22 +0000 UTC]
Also, do you know what is significant of the Bumblebee movie happening in the 1980s?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-18 00:28:34 +0000 UTC]
Cuz that is when the original show aired.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-18 02:19:42 +0000 UTC]
And a year after the 1986 movie aired.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-18 02:48:22 +0000 UTC]
Looking forward to it then?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowEclipex In reply to Fail-Seeker [2018-06-18 02:49:16 +0000 UTC]
Won't watch in theaters, but once it gets to Redbox sure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-18 02:55:34 +0000 UTC]
I will just wait for reviews of how it will turn out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fail-Seeker In reply to ShadowEclipex [2018-06-18 04:35:09 +0000 UTC]
Either way, pawsome work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1

























