 |
IDW Publishing Forums
A home for all IDW fans.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dogbite12
Transforumer
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 531
Location: Center of the Universe
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 11:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| bloodandsteel wrote: | I'd hesitate to call it MY logic. It's been done in almost every genre, almost every series to at least one character to varying degrees of success.
It's called flexibility and progression. Gotta move forward. Can't stay in park forever.
Besides, it's kind of fun to screw with general perception of a character once in a while. A lot of it's done for shock value and it either works or it doesn't.
And writing the same character for 20 years is just bloody boring.  |
My God, imagine if we were still stuck in the 80s?
Big hair-NO! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dogbite12
Transforumer
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 531
Location: Center of the Universe
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Damolisher wrote: | Except for the fact the "Potentially decent character" aspect didn't come about until AFTER the cartoon. That's what Arcee was invented for, the movie and the cartoon. The guidebooks, etc were invented after the cartoon, so I don't see how they mean anything.
Arcee was a crap character to start with and the "Cool traits" only started coming in with other writers taking liberties with the character and trying to make it not so much of a stereotypical, helpess "Girly-girl."
And damn, "I'd rather see a character just never used again than twisted into something unrecognizable.", you make it soundlike it's a matter of life or death, it's just a comic character, damn. |
Damo, agreed-we didn't see those traits in any cartoon she was in.
Thunderwing-you'd have to go back to Simon's UK Marvel comics to find a version of Arcee that wasn't all pretty and pink and those weren't available in the US, her Universe bio notwithstanding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeysie
Transforumer
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 3343
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bloodandsteel wrote: | | Besides, it's kind of fun to screw with general perception of a character once in a while. A lot of it's done for shock value and it either works or it doesn't. |
It's fun screwing around with a perception of a character when it's actually still a valid interpretation of the existing character.
I mean by your logic, I could, for instance, decide to create a gun-toting character that operates on instinct and would rather fight first and think later, then give him, say, Perceptor or Skids' names and looks, and call it an "unexpected twist". Or any other similar repurposing that isn't remotely the original character.
I'd say that, even if the concept itself is great, even if I like it better than the original character's real personality, it's still not genuinely that character, just a lookalike, sorry.
| dogbite12 wrote: | | I hope I made myself clear this time. |
Well, you've made it clear to me that you don't grasp that how a character is used != a character's core personality.
I agree that the original Arcee was often used in a sexist manner. But her bio personality is not necessarily sexist, nor does that mean her character could never be updated and used in a non-sexist manner.
| dogbite12 wrote: | | Why would anyone want IDW to drop Arcee? Why wouldn't they bring her line with the earlier femmebots instead? Arcee has fans and most fans like the new Arcee (despite the reason for her gender). |
Well, I like the new Arcee so long as I remind myself she's not actually Arcee, just a completely new character that happens to have her looks and name and nothing else. And I'd like her far better if she had instead been a character for which the new personality would have been a logical progression.
Especially since all of the characters I can think of that would have fit better are obscure characters that could have benefitted from the Furman Obscure Character Attention. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bloodandsteel
Transforumer
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 2194
Location: Tyler, TX
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeysie wrote: | | bloodandsteel wrote: | | Besides, it's kind of fun to screw with general perception of a character once in a while. A lot of it's done for shock value and it either works or it doesn't. |
It's fun screwing around with a perception of a character when it's actually still a valid interpretation of the existing character.
I mean by your logic, I could, for instance, decide to create a gun-toting character that operates on instinct and would rather fight first and think later, then give him, say, Perceptor or Skids' names and looks, and call it an "unexpected twist". Or any other similar repurposing that isn't remotely the original character.
I'd say that, even if the concept itself is great, even if I like it better than the original character's real personality, it's still not genuinely that character, just a lookalike, sorry. |
And by your logic, no character should ever change ever. Stop me if I'm wrong here.
_________________
Selling TF stuff on eBay - here
Commissions - OPEN |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dogbite12
Transforumer
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 531
Location: Center of the Universe
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeysie wrote: | | bloodandsteel wrote: | | Besides, it's kind of fun to screw with general perception of a character once in a while. A lot of it's done for shock value and it either works or it doesn't. |
It's fun screwing around with a perception of a character when it's actually still a valid interpretation of the existing character.
I mean by your logic, I could, for instance, decide to create a gun-toting character that operates on instinct and would rather fight first and think later, then give him, say, Perceptor or Skids' names and looks, and call it an "unexpected twist". Or any other similar repurposing that isn't remotely the original character.
I'd say that, even if the concept itself is great, even if I like it better than the original character's real personality, it's still not genuinely that character, just a lookalike, sorry.
| dogbite12 wrote: | | I hope I made myself clear this time. |
Well, you've made it clear to me that you don't grasp that how a character is used != a character's core personality.
I agree that the original Arcee was often used in a sexist manner. But her bio personality is not necessarily sexist, nor does that mean her character could never be updated and used in a non-sexist manner.
| dogbite12 wrote: | | Why would anyone want IDW to drop Arcee? Why wouldn't they bring her line with the earlier femmebots instead? Arcee has fans and most fans like the new Arcee (despite the reason for her gender). |
Well, I like the new Arcee so long as I remind myself she's not actually Arcee, just a completely new character that happens to have her looks and name and nothing else. And I'd like her far better if she had instead been a character for which the new personality would have been a logical progression.
Especially since all of the characters I can think of that would have fit better are obscure characters that could have benefitted from the Furman Obscure Character Attention. |
And you've just made it clear your English comprehension skills are woefully inadequate.
Where do you get off telling me I "don't grasp that how a character is used = a character's core personality"? Among your many nonsensical posts, the one that stands out is where you state you stumbled into this fandom on the heels of the Bay movie last year.
It shows.
Reading the Transformers Wiki /= Instant Transformers Expert. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rossum
Transforumer
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 648
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeysie wrote: | | bloodandsteel wrote: | | Besides, it's kind of fun to screw with general perception of a character once in a while. A lot of it's done for shock value and it either works or it doesn't. |
It's fun screwing around with a perception of a character when it's actually still a valid interpretation of the existing character.
I mean by your logic, I could, for instance, decide to create a gun-toting character that operates on instinct and would rather fight first and think later, then give him, say, Perceptor or Skids' names and looks, and call it an "unexpected twist". Or any other similar repurposing that isn't remotely the original character.
I'd say that, even if the concept itself is great, even if I like it better than the original character's real personality, it's still not genuinely that character, just a lookalike, sorry.
| dogbite12 wrote: | | I hope I made myself clear this time. |
Well, you've made it clear to me that you don't grasp that how a character is used != a character's core personality.
I agree that the original Arcee was often used in a sexist manner. But her bio personality is not necessarily sexist, nor does that mean her character could never be updated and used in a non-sexist manner.
| dogbite12 wrote: | | Why would anyone want IDW to drop Arcee? Why wouldn't they bring her line with the earlier femmebots instead? Arcee has fans and most fans like the new Arcee (despite the reason for her gender). |
Well, I like the new Arcee so long as I remind myself she's not actually Arcee, just a completely new character that happens to have her looks and name and nothing else. And I'd like her far better if she had instead been a character for which the new personality would have been a logical progression.
Especially since all of the characters I can think of that would have fit better are obscure characters that could have benefitted from the Furman Obscure Character Attention. |
The thing is, the general description you posted, "kind, caring, protective, but intelligent and ruthless in battle", is fairly bland and even general enough to be applied to a lot of Autobots. It doesn't really work for a distinct personality the way a lot of other character descriptions do, and there isn't that much to lose by having her completely redefined. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DanielW
Transforumer
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 6991
Location: The Village
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
And would you look at that, time for a Mod to step in before the name calling and insults gets into full swing.
Please stop.
In fact, don't start.
This thread will be fed to the Sharkticons if people don't simmer down, and treat each other with the respect that is due to a fellow member of the human race. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skids
Forum Zombie
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 496
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think Jazz change in character is too much of a stretch in AHM 5 .
He's just not had the opportunity to reveal the skills up till now. Plus the difference between say him and the Wreckers could be that between ninja and commando. The Wreckers are all full frontal assault , while he's the more subtle end of special operations. In and Out , not trace silent killing.
As for Ramjet I don't think his previous incarnations have really reflected his character either. How many times has he actually rammed someone ?
In Marvel G1 he is a feared killer who it was felt needed to be eliminated in Operation Volcano rather than the Rather simple thug his profile makes him out to be . If you met someone whos main method of attack was headbutting things and you were a trained warrior yourself you'd think of him as a rather simple soul,and a bit of an idiot and possibly a laughing stock.
Sometimes there are things implicit about the character that allows for interpretation of the character.
I could live for example if they turned Skids into some kind of gun toting Lara Croft type because despite being a theoretician his toy comes with a ludicrous amount of weaponry which could hint at something rathe rthan him sitting in a lab all day.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lonegamer78
Transforumer
Joined: 29 Jul 2008
Posts: 1340
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK to print
I think it's also the method of where the characterization is written that makes things tricky as well. The old Marvel Universe profiles, the MTMTE books, bios/tech specs on whichever packaging, how they're portrayed on moving visual mediums (been reading Scott McCloud)...
Did the Arcee I read of her MTMTE bio match up with how she was portrayed in TF:TM and HM? Not necessarily, but I'm seeing it as two sides that make up part of her. IDW Arcee? "Soft reboot", and being irrevocably being changed like that is more than likely to drive someone very off kilter.
Jazz? He's still Jazz, but a little more darker than who I had first knew years ago. Do I hate how Simon and Shane has portrayed him in -tion and AHM so far? Not really. There was still that hint of the fun-loving Jazz when he and Wheeljack were investigating the scrapyard for Sunstreaker - grabbing his gun just after transforming. There's that hint of what his oft-described function as a saboteur in AHM, that hint of him being one of Optimus' officers similar to his roll call in MTMTE.
_________________
http://www.allspark.com/
http://www.tfwiki.net/
Last edited by lonegamer78 on Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moth_Ball
Forum Zombie
Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 357
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
To put my two cents - I liked Jazz's dialogue in AHM#5, I liked the fact that he is capable of planning decent defence strategies, etc and I can buy the fact he is special ops.
The only thing I had issue with was taking out Springer so decisively. In previous continuity he has shown no particular skill at close combat (let alone ranged combat!).
Hopefully his spotlight will fill the void.
With regards to IDW character reinventions - the best has been Hot Rod in my opinion, and the vast majority I have thought were great.
Ramjet was probably the most unconvincing character thus far. I also found Six Shot relatively bland for the most part.
_________________
http://migdul.deviantart.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles RB
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 221
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Repugnus wrote: | | Simon himself openly acknowledged that what he did with Galvatron wasn't so much a mere update, as much as a complete reinvention of the character, and I'm inclined to agree with him. So much of who Galvatron was is based upon him being an upgraded Megatron. |
His origin's different, yeah, but what he's actually doing and his basic agenda isn't that different to before - well, before he went utterly mad anyway! That's the only real difference in action and personality so far: he hasn't gone mad.
| Quote: | | As for Cyclonus, yes there have been varying portrayals of him in previous G1 universes, but the same can be said with many characters. In these cases, however, there is usually one portrayal that is considered iconic, which in the case of Cyclonus, is the depiction of him as a soldier who is loyal to an almost irrational degree. |
Okay, I can see that, but that would technically lock us into always having to follow the cartoon because that's the one that got seen more (which is what "iconic" tends to mean!). That then leads us down the annoying path of people saying how Soundwave isn't really Soundwave unless he talks like in the cartoon, which was based on a cool-sounding voice you cannot translate into printed media very well. There's no actual reason to stick with one characterisation out of multiple different ones just cos that was the one on the telly.
Mind you, I'm personally quite happy to see some characters get a total alteration if it makes for a good story and leaves me not knowing where things will end up - like, say, Scorponok and Blurr. Others mileage may vary.
Obviously if Cyclonus had first turned up being pathologically loyal and THEN his Spotlight came out, I'd be narked off. I'm happy for IDW to take liberties, but I want consistency within itself.
| Jeysie wrote: |
Well, seeing as how Mowry was able to come up with a reimagining for Arcee that wasn't a girlfriend, babysitter, secretary, or a similar weak and girly portrayal, yet still was believable as being Arcee... |
Furman did it too, Marvel UK (and currently at Titan). I guess he just thought it'd be funner to have a berserker Arcee (which I agree with) and play with expectations.
| bloodandsteel wrote: | | I remember reading that and laughing about it since it never really seemed true. |
She was quite willing to cap a possessed Rodimus in Marvel UK if that helps.
_________________
Okay to print |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snake Pliskin-o-bot
Forum Zombie
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 327
Location: Sheffield, England
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Seeing as how this thread kind of started off based on Jazz in AHM I'd just like to put a couple of points out there about the shift in his character, or more accurately, his capabilities.
First off, the Jazz we're seeing here isn't too unbelievable in my opinion. Yeah, he's never really had chance to demonstrate his close combat skills before now, but considering he was up against Sixshot, I can live with that. He was just up against someone who outclassed him. His flooring of Springer was a surprise move in the middle of a conversation. Who's to say that in a straight out fight Springer wouldn't mop the floor with Jazz?
Secondly, even if people do feel that the way Jazz was depicted in AHM #5 was at odds with his character in the -ations arcs, then consider this; I'm a big Furman fan, not to the point where I think he has to write anything TF, but I tend to enjoy his work. However, his use of Jazz in the
-ations wasn't great. It didn't highlight any of Jazz's unique skills or talents.
So Shane comes along, and wants to use Jazz. The Jazz he has in mind is more in keeping with how Jazz should be according to his bio, and how many fans seem to think of him. Should Shane therefore be stuck writing Jazz as a generic redshirt, or should he be able to improve on the character for the benefit of the reader? It seems crazy to expect a writer to miss out on a characters full potential just because of how they've been written before.
And it's not like Jazz suddenly Transforms into a tractor and is capable of pulling Unicron's arms off, he just flipped Springer, by taking him by surprise. The core character is still the same, Jazz is in a darker mood now due to circumstances, but in issue 4 the whole "tone" speech, accompanied by a smirk still shows us the same good natured bot, the same guy who didn't want to use his traction studs when driving on the snow in Brasnya back in Escalation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles RB
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 221
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fair points - there's scope to fill in Jazz's personality (and Wheeljack's).
_________________
Okay to print |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeysie
Transforumer
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 3343
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dogbite12 wrote: | | Where do you get off telling me I "don't grasp that how a character is used = a character's core personality"? Among your many nonsensical posts, the one that stands out is where you state you stumbled into this fandom on the heels of the Bay movie last year. |
I "get off" on telling you that because, oddly enough, I read/watch other things besides Transformers, and the principles of writing don't instantly change just because you're writing about giant robots. (There have been times *I've* wondered if some TF fans actually watch/read anything besides Transformers.)
Also, the fact that the content of your posts so far on the matter have revolved entirely around how the character was *used* - as a secretary/girlfriend/etc. and had nothing to do with the character's personality was also a pretty good clue. Like I said, lots of TF characters that have interesting bios that are *used* in the fiction in silly ways - as cannon fodder, as a generic grunt role, etc.
Just to call up the first thing that comes to my mind, I've seen people on here grumble at Strafe, Afterburner, and Scattershot being used as general sciency types in IDW even though their bios depict them as being rough-and-tumble fighters who are typically only brainy when they're forming Computron. Because again, core personality != a character's role/use in a bit of fiction.
| bloodandsteel wrote: | | And by your logic, no character should ever change ever. Stop me if I'm wrong here. |
Well, seeing as how I've said here, here, and here, among other places, that I don't have a problem with change as long as it feels like a natural progression from a character's original personality - in fact I said in my very first post in this thread, "(But natural character growth/change in a story is very welcome to see.)" - yes, you're wrong, thanks. If people actually read what I actually wrote and replied to that instead, it would be a very wonderful change of pace.
I enjoy change in a character because it means growth in a story instead of the "Reset Button" status quo. But if a character suddenly appears out of the blue as feeling absolutely nothing like their original personality, I'm not sure why I should treat them as actually being that character.
Now, if we had started out with Arcee being her original personality, *then* we saw her go through a traumatic experience, *then* she became a vengeful, obsessed personality, *then* making her act totally different would actually be an interesting twist, because there would have been some kind of progression that we got to see.
For instance, Ariel/Elita-1 turning into BlackArachnia in Animated - *that's* the right way to handle this sort of surprise personality twist.
So now that I've gotten finishing having to more or less repeat myself for the umpteenth time in the hopes it'll actually get paid attention to this time, can we move on? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snake Pliskin-o-bot
Forum Zombie
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 327
Location: Sheffield, England
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Of course, with Spotlight Jazz I'm sure we'll be given more basis for his newly found badassness.
I was just saying that even if the spotlight wasn't on the way, the character doesn't jar too much in any case as far as I can see. (This is coming from someone who really didn't like issues 1 and 2 of AHM by the way, so I'm not just some foaming at the mouth McCarthy fanboy.  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
