TF Views

Any series about robots from space is going to have some, (albeit soft), sci-fi elements. Taking out some of the techno-gibber would make the series little more than the worst kind of silver-age junk where stuff works because it has to at that moment.

Real Sci-Fi Show (of which all the previous qualities are trademarks). So, rather TOO seriously for a toyline cash-in cartoon about brightly coloured robots accidentally landing on

One of TFs biggest, if largely unspoken, strengths has always been its IP. That is the reason TF beat "Go-Bots" and the others. (Seriously, the original toys were mostly junk, dated long before coming out in the US.)

And, pitching low does not help the writers. (And, lets face it, writing for a kids show about a recognizable brand is a fantastic opportunity for a writer to build an audience they can exploit later.)

As for fans reacting to call backs, I believe Ben Yee was/is guilty of this.

Many fans are guilty of this.

You got my point on fanfic.

Dominic wrote:New iterations of old characters are one thing. But, I am talking about "ohhhhhh, this new toy sort of looks like that old one of a completely different obscure character....wow, thanks hasbro!" type bull shit.

I wouldn't call that a call-back then. Sounds more like you're describing a homage that wasn't originally intended to be a homage.

And, most fanfics are painfully insular and/or derivative.

So? It still shows fans want for new stories if they're making up their own.

Most science fiction is just sword and sorcery with a slightly different look.

Science Fiction and Fantasy are often grouped together, but there is a distinction between the two.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Dominic wrote:New iterations of old characters are one thing. But, I am talking about "ohhhhhh, this new toy sort of looks like that old one of a completely different obscure character....wow, thanks hasbro!" type bull shit.

I wouldn't call that a call-back then. Sounds more like you're describing a homage that wasn't originally intended to be a homage.

This is exactly the kind of thing I frequently see in Ben's reviews and frankly, I wouldn't call them homages either. I think a lot of G1 fans were so starved for new G1 stuff for so long that now some fans will look for it in everything.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Dominic wrote:Most science fiction is just sword and sorcery with a slightly different look.

Science Fiction and Fantasy are often grouped together, but there is a distinction between the two.

If any of you guys ever need an example of a cyclical argument.....

Man, isn't it funny how BW still prompts more debate than any other TF series? ...No, not really I guess.

Gomess wrote:

Sparky Prime wrote:

Dominic wrote:Most science fiction is just sword and sorcery with a slightly different look.

Science Fiction and Fantasy are often grouped together, but there is a distinction between the two.

If any of you guys ever need an example of a cyclical argument.....

Man, isn't it funny how BW still prompts more debate than any other TF series? ...No, not really I guess.

I know! Has there *ever* been a BW-related thread on this board that didn't derail into "I hate BW because of its fandom!" or "I hate BW because of this!" or "I hate BW because of that!"

And it's typically never because it's not Geewun!

I have *never* gotten into a stupid nerdfight with a Geewunner. BW fans, on the other hand...

Not that that counts for much, since I'm not around the fandom as many of you guys, so I might be missing the bigger picture. For all I know Geewunners have their own G1 PRIDE anti-BW hate group.

Yeah, it is called att.classic.moderated....

True GeeWunners are as bad as the worst ass-pie furrie Beast Wars fans.

Science Fiction and Fantasy are often grouped together, but there is a distinction between the two.

The differences are largely aesthetic. Most of the science of "Star Trek" is well-dressed magic. Sci-fi can sub for sword and sorcery in most cases, or vice versa.

Fanfic being derivative undermines the idea of it having newness.


Dom

Dominic wrote:The differences are largely aesthetic. Most of the science of "Star Trek" is well-dressed magic. Sci-fi can sub for sword and sorcery in most cases, or vice versa.

"I have to lie down~"

I suppose they are somewhat interchangeable. As Picard said on TNG technology would seem like magic to a less advanced society. I mean what's really the difference between Grimlock's Energon Sword or a +3 flaming broadsword? Theoretically they would do the same damage and be handled the same way.

Shockwave
-Actually picked up a weapon called "Lightsabre" in the original Diablo once.

Gomess wrote:I have *never* gotten into a stupid nerdfight with a Geewunner.

I see it all the time at TFW2005...

Dominic wrote:The differences are largely aesthetic. Most of the science of "Star Trek" is well-dressed magic. Sci-fi can sub for sword and sorcery in most cases, or vice versa.

No. Science fiction has to establish it's imaginary elements as being possible within accordance of the real world scientifically established/postulated laws of nature. Fantasy needs no explanation, and can be totally outside the realm of what is possible in the real world. This is no aesthetic difference. You cannot just substitute elements like you suggest, some real background actually has to go into science fiction.

Fanfic being derivative undermines the idea of it having newness.

It undermines originality, but that doesn't mean it isn't a new story.

Shockwave wrote:I suppose they are somewhat interchangeable. As Picard said on TNG technology would seem like magic to a less advanced society.

That's really not the same thing. Remember, Picard's point was to explain their technology wasn't magic, that it was simply tools advanced beyond that societies current level of understanding and development.