thoughts on the Beast-era

[SynjoDeonecros]

I am a terrible person. Worse, I am a terrible fan.

of characters in a good story, considering them little more than pawns to move on a chessboard toward a certain goal, or mere mouthpieces to press the message that you so illogically insist a show should have, yet you outright condemn characters that fit that view like the Captain Planet villains,

Tools still need to be well-made. Cases still need to be well argued.

The problem with the characters on "Captain Planet" is that their motivations simply did not make sense unless one assumed tremendous petulance of the sort that would generally keep somebody from doing much of anything, (or being much of a threat to anything important). That sort of strawman is so easy to argue against that it is not worth making a case.

I give points when writers have something to say. But, they still need to make a good case one way or the other.

If the writer is just writing about fictional characters and events, what is the incentive to stay interested?

So, if the story is an author tract, that's good, but if the story has "nothing to say" as far as what the writer's own personal feelings on a certain subject, that's bad? Bullshit; a lot of the greatest stories out there focus on characters and events, instead of some stupid "moral" that the writer felt needed to be pushed. Do you think Harry Potter or Citizen Kane or Titanic would've gotten as much praise if they were propaganda pieces for the evils of magic, the corruption of the media, and boat safety, respectively? I don't think so.

The incentive to stay interested in a story written about fictional characters and events are all about how those characters and events grow and evolve, the living, breathing world that stories SHOULD be; shows like Transformers are ESCAPISM from the real world, to look into alternate realities and unusual cultures and fantastic voyages; we don't want some moral bullshit snapping us out of the story and beating us over the head over how we should recycle, or rebel against evil corporations, or whatnot, and if the writer really wants to explore those issues, they have their settings, characters, and events to explore them IN. As I said, Beast Wars explored quite a few debates and morals in their seasons, by pegging them with a character or situation ALREADY PRESENT in the world that best fits it, and using their experiences and their emotions to explore it, and it WORKS; it's not heavy-handed, it doesn't feel preachy or forced on the reader, and it's easier for us to associate with, because it's a character we can relate to that's experiencing it and giving their thoughts on it, not some mindless automaton that is merely going through the motions to say "Hey! Here's the moral you need to be learning! Go learn it!"

And, as I said, the villains of Captain Planet were representatives of the "wrong" side of the environmental argument, and thus HAD to pollute for no reason other than to pollute, to show how evil polluting is; the heroes did the EXACT SAME THING with their "environmentalism is good" position, which makes them JUST as strawman as the villains.

because they have the goal of "technological perfection" that they use to justify their evil,

As stated above, the different Vehicons had different goals, most of which illustrated some part of the free-will/subeversion themes mentioned elsewhere.

No, they didn't have different goals; as you stated above, all of them were motivated by the goal of fulfilling their loyalty to either Megatron or his technological perfection; Thrust got pissy when his fellow Vehicons left, because he was too loyal to Megatron and his cause to understand why anyone would want to leave, Silverbolt got pissy because he enjoyed the STEREOTYPICAL villainy he did under Megatron's command, Tankorr continued to assume Megatron's plan for himself, after he broke free, and Obsidian and Strika was solely defined by their loyalty to Cybertron, which meant they were loyal to Megatron and his goals. THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THEM: they have virtually NO OTHER AMBITION other than fulfilling the theme of subservience vs. free will/nature vs. technology. As you stated, they were mere tools used to push that bullshit on the viewers, and their "personalities" were only developed enough to make them more animated and distinct from the other drones, and that's IT. Seriously, take away Jetstorm's sadism, or Tankorr's hulkspeak, and they're virtually the same as the other mindless drones that they command. They have no personality or goals that DOESN'T have to do with the message of the show, and as such, THEY ARE NOT COMPELLING OR UNIQUE VILLAINS, IN THE SLIGHTEST.

How can you "over-humanize" a character by giving them their own needs, wants, and desires beyond the rhetoric dogma that they're supposed to be following as per the show's message?

Characters are over-humanized when writers or fans start viewing them as ends unto themselves.

...that's the dumbest thing I have ever heard you say on here, bar none. So I guess stories like Star Wars Trilogy (original), Frankenstein, the original Halloween movie, The Lion King, Wicked, Cyrano de Bergerac, Macbeth, To Kill a Mockingbird, the entirety of the DC Diniverse, etc. are all crap, because they DO focus on the characters, and they DO use them as ends unto themselves, right? Apparently, we can't explore the father-son dynamic of Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, the loss and obsession of Batman, or the development of Simba from petulant child into capable adult, if they're not used as tools to push some after-school special moral on the viewers, right? What kind of an idiot do you think we are?

You have no concept of good writing or story structure, and it's clear from your statements on both this and the Oracle's Plan thread that you have very little, if any, respect for the franchise as a whole.

I will renounce my degree in English, (with an emphais on literature) as soon as I get home tonight.

I will destroy all of my TF comics and toys, even the ones I like. Good bye Sunstreaker. Good bye AHM. Good bye "Reign of Starscream". I am not worthy of them, and should not get any benefit for getting rid of them any other way than by destroying them. I am a terrible fan. Woe is I.

Well, you certainly haven't shown off ANY of those traits, with your dumbass posts, on here. Seriously, half of the shit you've posted in both this thread and the Oracle thread have been about how Ted Turner-style aesop writing is and should be what qualifies as good storytelling, while the other half are more or less badmouthing on how terrible both shows are. And, from what I've heard from other people talking about your posts, you don't have that high of a respect for ANY series in this franchise. So, excuse my GED-level ignorance, but I have no idea who gave you that degree, but as I, Onslaught Six, and Sparky Prime have stated, that is not how any of us were taught was how you wrote a good story; characters and story come first, and the morals and messages you want to convey come second, not the other way around. And from what you've demonstrated and what I've heard of your knowledge and respect for the franchise as a whole, if I was an administrator, I'd fire your ass on the spot, because you obviously don't represent the board or the franchise it's built to talk about in any capacity worthy of being a moderator; you don't just disagree with people on some things, you slander most of the stuff talked about, on here, and call them crap.

I have to wonder if you hold that same assertion with how people should act IRL; if they're not working toward some unifying spiritual goal and repressing their own inner ambitions and desires to do so, they're useless to you. How sad.

I do tend to associate with people who have some kind of understanding of principles and ideas. Why would I expect my friends to repress their ambitions? Why would I wish failure and misery upon my friends? Hell, I work in adult ed, contributing (if only in a small way) to people achieving their goals.


Clearly, I fail at this.

Dom
-might have to rethink his life!

Considering your attitude that personal goals are bullshit, unless they're unselfish and aiming toward "a higher purpose", then I suspect you DO expect your friends to repress their ambitions, and wish failure and misery on them if their intentions aren't "pure". Or maybe you just use them as tools to achieve your OWN goals, like you insist storywriters do with THEIR characters.

You have no respect from me, whatsoever; these two discussions have shown me you have too shallow and too uncaring and uninformed of a view in both literature and Transformers for me to take you at all seriously as a mod, on here. If only I could put mods on ignore.

[Dominic]

Okay, this is going too far.
In all seriousness, there is no reasonable way to jump from "Dom does not respect characters" to "Dom wants his friends to fail". Just because you seem to assign far too much moral value to fictional characters, do not assume that I put so little value on actual people because I do not venerate fictional characters and events. I have been able and more than willing to help friends on various occasions. And, because circumstances in real-life are rarely constant, I have been helped by friends on more than one occasion. (And, dammit if I have not been grateful for it every time.)

So, excuse my GED-level ignorance, but I have no idea who gave you that degree, but as I, Onslaught Six, and Sparky Prime have stated, that is not how any of us were taught was how you wrote a good story; characters and story come first, and the morals and messages you want to convey come second, not the other way around.

My comment about having the degree was me saying "well somebody thinks I understand that stuff".

I would not, nor have I ever, drawn a connection between one's level of formal education and their intelligence or understanding.

I have known very intelligent and ethical people with only HS diplomas. I have know HS drop-outs who are highly intelligent. I have *learned* from people, (in and out of a classroom), with less formal education than me. (One of the best professors I have known only officially had a BA, and he damned well had more claim to the Professor title than people with Doctoral level degrees that I have met.) I have seen good people go back for GEDs. One of the most well read and intelligent people I have ever met was actually bounced out of a junior college, (for getting into a fight with a dean).

I have been a follower of politics for long enough to recognize a partisan when I see one. Hell, I am even friends with a few, (on both sides of real aisles). I am also friends with centrists. I can respect a degree of partisanship, as it (ideally) fosters a marketplace of ideas. The more candidates talk about issues, and less about each other, the better.

In terms of the hobby, toy-hacks are some of the most partisan folk around. They are the silly analogue to people who think the Cold War either never ended.

The biggest difference is that a political partisan is trying to win an election or policy fight, (and likely hoping to enjoy the spoils of that victory), while a toy-hack wants to uphold the (possibly imagined) glory of a hobby's past. Maybe you are a toy-hack. Maybe not. But, you are more partisan than guys I have seen in the rough and tumble world of local MA politics. Rather than stick to the issue, you go right for the attack ad.

Synjo, for whatever reason, you have a maniac zeal to defend and promote a TF series that ended ~10 years ago. In the course of that you have made a number of ad hominem attacks against me that are not even fact based. (It is possible for such attacks to be fact based, but that is not the case here.) Apparently, I am not a proper fan of TF. Apparently, I treat my friends rather shabbily. Apparently, I want them to fail in life. Apparently, I am a class snob. These conclusions are all drawn from the fact that I think writers should use their characters to say something or illustrate a point beyond how great the characters are.

I have resisted the urge to slam you with similar attacks. And, I will continue to do so. It is not because I do not think you are worthy of invective, (even after you have insulted my integrity), but because I neither care nor know enough about you to have basis to do that. But, rather than sticking to the issue, I am now making a post addressed almost soley, and written almost entirely about, you.

You wrongly accuse me of treating real people, including friends, to be nothing more than pawns and resources. Maybe you treat your friends as well as you think fictional characters should be treated. Maybe you treat them better. Maybe worse. I have no idea, nor am I asking you to go into detail about his.

Sparky and I joust just about all the damned time. Do we get heated? Do I impugn him, (beyond sarcasm)? Does he impugn me? (Hint: Hell yes. No. No.) Do I accuse Sparky of kicking his dog? No. (I do not even know if he has a dog actually. He might have a cat for all I know. He might have nothing.)


Dom
-would probably hire Synjo to work on a local campaign actually.

[Sparky Prime]

I read arguements like this, and I cannot help but wonder if people are humanizing the characters too much.

Characters, like any tools, have to be defined to be useful. But, that use should not be hindered by slavishly adhering to one single use, or out of respect for the characters' integrity.

Is there such thing as "humanizing characters too much"? I don't believe there is. A character shouldn't just be defined, they need to be humanized for the audience to be able to relate to them, and care about what happens to them. It's the characters that brings the audience into the story. This isn't a hindrance, it is a strength.

[SynjoDeonecros]

...Political partisanship? "Toy-hacks" as Cold War conspirators? Is this REALLY how you rationalize my statements? With more fucking bullshit author tracts? Is that really how you explain my "attacks" on you, by making analogies on a "higher purpose" other than pure selfish opinions and personal character interpretations? Yeah, that's not going to change my mind that you DON'T see the real world in that way.

And where did I say that I thought you wanted your friends to fail? You came up with that assumption, not me; all I said was that, with your hatred of characters having selfish motivations or goals that aren't part of some stupid author tract, I wouldn't be surprised if you looked down on anyone IRL that had the same kind of "non-goals". I have no doubt you want them to succeed, but I also wouldn't doubt that you'd want them to succeed more if their goals weren't selfish and more more aimed at a "higher purpose", like being a more productive member of society or spreading the word of God or something, aside from merely wanting to make more money, or be their own boss.

I'm done arguing with you, and frankly, I'm done discussing the Beast Era; people are sick of me talking about Ravage, people bitch me out for discussing plot holes in Beast Wars (seriously, how hard is it to get how stupid having G1 as "arthurian lore" when you clearly showed characters from that era are still around is?), and dnow I'm getting bitched out for pointing out the plot holes and preachiness of Beast Machines. I guess the whole "trukk not munky" attitude the purists had, when BW was first announced, is still prevalent.

[Dominic]

people bitch me out for discussing plot holes in Beast Wars (seriously, how hard is it to get how stupid having G1 as "arthurian lore" when you clearly showed characters from that era are still around is?), and dnow I'm getting bitched out for pointing out the plot holes and preachiness of Beast Machines. I guess the whole "trukk not munky" attitude the purists had, when BW was first announced, is still prevalent.

No, people call you out for obsessing over BW and only seeing it one way. It has been pointed out how G1 could be seen in mythic terms, even if it was within living memory. (O6 has even gone to some length to point out *why* it was written that way in "Beast Wars".) You complain of me taking a narrow view of how stories should be. But, you conflate the writer talking about anything other than basic characters and the stuff wot they do as being preachy. (Irony: You are rather preachy about narrative philosophy.)

Who here is arguing for "trukk not munky"? Most of us came over from the old BWTF boards......a forum started by Benson "I friggin' love Beast Wars and even got a credit on the show" Yee. Hell, I personally joined up during the Beast ear.

If anybody is the Toy-Hack, (somebody, who like a Cold War nostalgist, is stuck on a specific point in history to the point of thinking it is or should still define standards), it would be you for fixating completely on "Beast Wars" like a religious fanatic.

What really bugs me about this is that the beast-fans were supposed to be the ones who broke that pattern after all of the GeeWunners complaining a bit more than 10 years ago. I can almost see how the GeeWunners came to be though. They had a few years of nothing but looking at their old toys, comics and cartoons. But, the fans who came in during BW never really had a dry-spell. (Even the bleak year of '04 saw more product released than in the time between G2 and BW.) And, they should have seen the folly of GeeWunners. (Remember the great ATT split?)

You accuse me of not being a good fan. (That is something of a toy-hack war-cry.) That echoes the people who accussed Yee and other Beast-fans, (yes, I know Yee loves Bumblebee and other G1 characters, but work with me), of not being true fans. (I loved the American-Otaku who whined that US BW was not proper anime...and that made the series "unworthy".)

Is there such thing as "humanizing characters too much"? I don't believe there is. A character shouldn't just be defined, they need to be humanized for the audience to be able to relate to them, and care about what happens to them. It's the characters that brings the audience into the story. This isn't a hindrance, it is a strength.

But, does this mean that the characters should become moral ends unto themselves? Having a defined character is useful for the purposes of articulating an idea. But, if too much priority is given to the characters, I would argue that more priority is being given than is at all reasonable or healthy.

If "identifying" is so important, what about plot or setting? A sense of place, or even the importance of a story's events can also draw the audience in.

But, we do not necessarily need fiction for any of those things. History has plenty of "characters" and bizarre settings. (No joke, if you ever want fodder for a sci-fi or fantasy novel, read up on WWI and the era right before it. Oi....)

I do not mind reading fiction if it illustrates or shows understanding of a principle. Right now, my big thing is organizational behavior. And, I have a "thing" about politics anyway. So, I select for stories that are applicable to those areas.

There are even stories I read for the sake of curiosity. Morbid curiosity is why I read "Action Comics" or "Archie". Sometimes, my curiosity is rewarded when a book turns out to be really good. ("Dark Avengers" comes to mind here, curse Bendis for making me like it. "Secret Invasion: Captain Marvel" is another example of this.) All of those stories have more going on that capes and tights though.

Reading/watching a story takes time that I could spend on other things, so I have little tolerance for fiction that depicts the antics of fictional characters engaged in acts that have no bearing at all to anyone beyond (maybe) the characters. I do not really *care* about Spiderman. I do not really *care* about Norman Osborn. (I could see working for a guy like that though.) I fully expect Norman to have a Greek fall...and I will not care about Osborn. Yeah, I will miss Bendis writing Osborn and Hand. (The subtle change in the dynamic over the course of the series is brilliant.) But, I will not miss the characters themselves. It is what Bendis is doing with them that makes me read "Dark Avengers" despite wanting to hate that book with every fiber of my being.


Dom
-cannot wait for the inevitable AEC toyhacks in about 5 years.

[SynjoDeonecros]

...wow, what a pompous ass; thinks fiction is stupid and unnecessary, doesn't see the point of it without a moral teaching things, doesn't believe in escapism, sees watching movies or reading stories a waste of time if they don't teach you anything...how in the hell did you become a Transformers fan, again?

And I know that 06 gave an explanation of how G1 could still be considered Arthurian lore, despite the presence of characters like Ravage who experienced those events and would be able to clear things up with their descendants (again, I don't see King Tut's nursemaid around as a living eye-witness to his conception), and the fact that somehow the Predacons have access to files about G1 that the Maximals are apparently barred from accessing. And, frankly, I've stated my reasons for not buying it. And, really, if I was so damned "religious" in my love for Beast Wars, why do you think I debate about crap like that? If I so love Beast Wars, that I can't see straight, why would I be arguing about a plot hole with its premise? Wouldn't you think I'd be trying to IGNORE it? Just because I think it's the best Transformers show ever doesn't mean that I don't still have problems with it, OR that I don't recognize that it hasn't aged that well.

Seriously, the more you keep on talking, the more you make yourself out to be an idiot, in my eyes; comparisons between "toyhacks" (what does that even mean, anyway) and Cold War nostalgists (are there such a thing? I thought the Cold War was something that people wanted to FORGET), talk about how stupid and a waste of time fiction is, unless it has an overwhelming injection of real life in it...you just sound like one of those crazies who'd burn books for "corrupting the youth of America". And, not to toot my own horn, here, but while I don't doubt that people are getting sick of this constant back and forth between us, in the matter of Beast Machines and story development, at least, I think it's pretty obvious who has most of the support, on here.

[SynjoDeonecros]

What the hell? Really? i remind you of someone who burns books? Really?


You are twisted up about plot holes in a show that you argue was a great TF show, if not a great show. If the best TF show is still so flawed, why are you a Transfan? Clearly, I have no way to justify my being a fan. But, you (who are authoritative enough to judge me as a fan) clearly have an amazing reason for loving "Beast Wars" 4 eva.

Dol you want me to respond with ad hominem attacks on you? Do you really? Much of your recent posting has been "Dom is evil and bad in real life and not a good fan". You say you pity me? I do not feel bad for you, because I am willing to bet none of your problems as as big as "Beast Wars" was to you ~10 years ago.

Dom
-there, an ad hominem attack. Happy?

Because it's the best damn Transformers series ever, that's why; despite its flaws (which are less than you think, despite my complaints), it has strong stories with memorable characters, damn good-quality animation, high-quality toys, and without it, Transformers as we know it would never exist; it would've been dead after Machine Wars. Love it or hate it, you CANNOT deny that Beast Wars saved the show by renewing interest in it, and increasing the quality and expectations of both the shows and the toys.

I consider you less of a fan, because you yourself have said you consider any and all media that doesn't have an author tract dictating it as a pointless waste of time. Most of Transformers HAS NO PRINCIPLE TO IT, no overwhelming moral that you love so goddamn much. How can you even call yourself a Transformers fan when the entire franchise is exactly the kind of fiction you claim to hate with a passion? Why would you even be a moderator on this forum, if you think we're wasting our time with giant robots fighting shows? Shouldn't you be watching Fox News, instead of wasting your time with this? Why are you even here?

And yes, with all of your talk about fiction being pointless without a "principle" forming the basis of the show, deep characterization being bad for "over-humanizing" the characters, and outright stating that this kind of shit is A WASTE OF TIME, that fantasy escapism shouldn't exist, and that reality makes a better "escape" than fantasy, you DO sound like someone who would prefer non-reality or moral-based media to be exterminated. You sound like someone who would be condescending to your kids for wanting to be artists or painters instead of lawyers or politicians. You sound precisely like the closed-minded realist that I moved out of home to get away from. You don't sound like the kind of fan I'd want to talk to: the kind of fan who actually respects the franchise, doesn't consider it a waste of their time discussing or watching it, and can appreciate the mindless escapism it gives us, instead of whining about how "giant robots aren't real enough to make good entertainment". You sound exactly like the kind of fan-HATER that annoys me, the kind of person who keeps on reminding a wrestling fan "it's not real wrestling", or decries Criss Angel as fraud because a guy with a stick was seen running away from one of his outdoors illusions. If you honestly feel that way about fiction in general, and non-preachy, moral-driven fiction in particular, then in my opinion, you have no place in this forum or this fandom, which is PRECISELY that.

[Mako Crab]

Synjo, what the hell is your problem? You are so far out of line with your personal attacks. No one deserves to be talked to like that because they don't know every last detail of a 26 year old cartoon or don't agree with you on how something should be written. Why don't you stop reading his posts for a moment and go back and read yours.

Do you see what you're saying? Do you see how rabid you sound? Is it really worth getting this upset about? It's a f**king cartoon based on a f**king toyline.
You have a lot of good things to say, Synjo. You have good ideas and are very introspective when it comes to analyzing Transformers and writing craft. But you wrap up all your observations and insights in attacks. Is this seriously the person you are in real life? Is this how you talk to people that are standing 3 feet away from you?

Please, just step back for a moment and stop. This isn't elementary school. Let it go.

[SynjoDeonecros]

Synjo, what the hell is your problem? You are so far out of line with your personal attacks. No one deserves to be talked to like that because they don't know every last detail of a 26 year old cartoon or don't agree with you on how something should be written. Why don't you stop reading his posts for a moment and go back and read yours.

Do you see what you're saying? Do you see how rabid you sound? Is it really worth getting this upset about? It's a f**king cartoon based on a f**king toyline.
You have a lot of good things to say, Synjo. You have good ideas and are very introspective when it comes to analyzing Transformers and writing craft. But you wrap up all your observations and insights in attacks. Is this seriously the person you are in real life? Is this how you talk to people that are standing 3 feet away from you?

Please, just step back for a moment and stop. This isn't elementary school. Let it go.

I would stop reading his posts, if he wasn't a mod and I could put him on my ignore list.

And no, I'm not typically like this IRL, just when they're the kind of pompous asses Dominic is. I'm sorry, but I'm standing firm with my statements to him: if he really feels that way about fiction in general, and non-reality/aesop based fiction, in particular, why is he even a mod on here, a forum based on a franchise that is exactly the kind of fiction that he hates? Why does he claim to be a fan of Transformers, if most of the stuff in it is stuff that he claims to hate, in fiction? It has no moral, it has no principle, it has "overly-humanized" characters and stories focused more on them and their lives than some unifying system that every other aspect of the show is forced to conform to; it has virtually everything that he hates, in fiction, and has nothing in it that he likes, so why is he a fan of it, or a moderator on a forum about it? That's like giving Fred Phelps a job as a moderator on a GLBT pride forum. He's basically saying we're losers who are wasting our time with shit he thinks is irrelevant and has no function in the real world.

And this goes deeper than just "it's a cartoon, you're arguing semantics"; I'm an amateur writer trying to become professional. I've got a novel in the works that I'm trying to get out the door. I've got ton of mini-fics, both fanfics (only one concerning Transformers, interestingly enough) and my own creations that have been posted and rated on the 'net. And I have never, in my life, heard of ANYTHING like the shit this guy is touting as being the "real" way something should be written. NONE of the teachers I've had on literature has proposed what he's saying as the right way of writing a story, NONE of the good media that I've seen follow that formula, and those that I've seen that DO are overly preachy and sucktastic. AND EVERYONE ELSE ON HERE AGREES WITH ME THAT HE'S WRONG. Seriously, Onslaught Six, Sparky Prime, everyone who has commented on this has agreed with me, and he's basically calling us idiots who don't know what "good" fiction is. It's not just fan pride, he's calling me out on, it's writer's pride.

I could've handled him having a difference in opinion in how preachy it was, or how good the story was; if he had just said that he found the story deeper and more meaningful than Beast Wars, or that he didn't find the message being pushed on the viewers to be as annoying, then that would've been fine with me, and I would've been able to respect that. But once he started getting into the bullshit of "Beast Wars is preachier, because the villains are more evil" and his backwards-ass interpretation of how story structure works, he became a raving lunatic that has no concept of the inner workings of literature or fiction, and when he started giving his speeches about how he hates fiction that doesn't revolve around a unifying, anvilicious moral, and how such fiction is a waste of time that only the "toyhacks" (whatever that is; the way he's using it, sounds like a derogatory term for "moronic fanboy wasting away in his parents' basement instead of getting a clerical job at the local courthouse) would be bothered to watch, he lost all respect from me as both a fan, a moderator, and a decent human being. The guy, from my position, is an idiot, an asshole, and someone I'm glad I will never encounter, outside of this forum, and if I could put him on ignore, someone I wouldn't have to deal with AT ALL.

[Onslaught Six]

I think that counts as outright attacking a moderator, doesn't it? ...Do we have rules against that? I mean, we kind of never set any up, but I assume there's unspoken rules. Something along the lines of "Don't be a complete dick," and I'm pretty sure Synjo's at the very least pushing that line, if not crossing it entirely.

Also: This is why I love Beast Machines. It's got enough stuff in it that it *can* be discussed ten years after the fact. Beast Wars? Nobody really has anything to say about that show other than, "Yeah, I guess it was kinda good. Sometimes."

EDIT: And I hate to *continue* the argument but I really don't see how Dom's weird way of looking at story structure (which I still will never understand but have come to accept and respect) makes him an asshole, and more importantly, "less than a human being." That's a bold statement to make and to flame Dom on grounds like that is pretty fucking unfounded, considering this is the guy who regularly posts on MySpace/Facebook trying to find homes for cats and dogs.