Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

he IS a chicken, look at his beak:

and little chicken legs!!:

BAGAWK!!

i do however, really like the vehicle mode

and if it goes the simian route, i just uhh, personally don't like that route for SS. he's not Dr. Zaius

In that close up picture of his face, his eyes look slightly feline though his mouth is reminiscant of a grasshopper's.

Most of my issues with Starscream are issues I have with other movie Decepticons: a lack of creativity (they all look like robot verisons of monsters from other films) and an overabundance of clutter (Starscream's better about this than the others- I can actually tell what I'm supposed to be looking at- but I still think there's a bit of "mess" around his joints). However, I also agree Starscream is too top-heavy, not to mention too thin. That narrow body shouldn't be able to support those massive arms, which should also be making his spindly legs buckle. There are things with simliar builds in nature- things of pliant flesh and blood- but even if Starscream were also, the strain would increase with his size and he'd still collapse. Even assuming sturdier alien materials, there's just too much on top.

But just to show how sporting I am, I'll say something positive about Starscream's film design: He looks like the Creature from the Black Lagoon, and while that doesn't make him any more original than the other film Decepticons, it does give him the coolest tribute of the bunch.

Zombie Starscream wrote:It would be irony in a sense if this Starscream considered himself handsome as his "ancestors" had done before him, when in fact he is quite ugly.

In all fairness, it would make sense for Cybertronians to have a vastly different ideals of beauty than Earthlings, with Filmscream being as gorgeous as they come. I just don't trust Hollywood to go that route, because as much as they insist "TFs are aliens! They should look different from humans!" I expect them all to ascribe to human ideas of what's good-looking.

SeekerInAFakeMoustache wrote:I just don't trust Hollywood to go that route, because as much as they insist "TFs are aliens! They should look different from humans!" I expect them all to ascribe to human ideas of what's good-looking.

Bumblebee should enjoy that scene with Mikaela, then.

Shadowman wrote:I thought this would go unnoticed in another thread (Which, so far, it has), but it was too clever to be ignored, so here it is again:

Wikipedia [did] mention a simian design [for Starscream], which makes me think:

Have you seen simians move? They're faster and stronger than us, and better for climbing and moving.

The big arms probably add to the raptor legs in terms of running. Big arms would help Starscream move forward on his already superior legs, by way of momentum.

Think about it, when you run, don't you move your arms back and forth with every step?

Starscream's design is actually BETTER than any humanoid design in terms of movement.

that makesperfect sense after looking at starscream again after reading this i for one did see that ..yeah he probly would be strogenr and faster with this type of body.

Jawnee wrote:That's all well and good, but a simian design while powerful, does not convey the vain and arrogant nature of starscreams persona. My 2 cents.

You're right, and that's probably my only problem with Screamer. His body and his personality don't match up.

I dunno. I've known plenty of giant apes who thought they were the ****.

Ericus Prime wrote:That would make him the fastest Decepticon, I guess there's a method to Bay's madness.

In case you dont know...Strascream IS a damn fast decepticon! Thats actually very clever!

Stronger maybe, but because of his bizarre proportions there's no way he'd be very fast in a real-world physics setting. He's too top heavy and lacks any streamlining; aesthetically and functionally he's the exact opposite of his alt mode. Even with those legs he ought to be an ostrich when in fact he's more like a cornfed domestic turkey.

AbsumZer0 wrote:Stronger maybe, but because of his bizarre proportions there's no way he'd be very fast in a real-world physics setting. He's too top heavy and lacks any streamlining; aesthetically and functionally he's the exact opposite of his alt mode. Even with those legs he ought to be an ostrich when in fact he's more like a cornfed domestic turkey.

I see your point but, and I know this is such a stretch, if the top-heavy section is lighter in weight, it might work.

kimmer wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

kimmer wrote:wow, talking about grasping for straws in my opinion lol hillarious.

This is called a "flame."

Moreover, this is called a "Flame of Ingnorance" in that you cannot accept that I can think this through, and you just throw insults around because you can't accept anything outside your pathetic little '80s cartoon box.

Look, I could accept why people hate Starscream's design, but they'd have to do it without these phrases:

1. Any swear word.

2. The term "It doesn't look like Starscream," due to the fact that we've had several designs of Starscream, most of which don't look like G1.

3. Any reference to apes, monkeys, or any sort of fowl.

4. Any reference to any of the cartoon.

Think you can do that? If you can, I'll listen.

no, this is called an opinion. i along with many others think the designs suck. i'm so sorry that i disagree with your amazing theory.

Check. Mate.

I don't hate SS's design so much, but it makes him look like a joke--a disservice to any SS fan. Like myself.

YouFearGalvatron wrote:

kimmer wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

kimmer wrote:wow, talking about grasping for straws in my opinion lol hillarious.

This is called a "flame."

Moreover, this is called a "Flame of Ingnorance" in that you cannot accept that I can think this through, and you just throw insults around because you can't accept anything outside your pathetic little '80s cartoon box.

Look, I could accept why people hate Starscream's design, but they'd have to do it without these phrases:

1. Any swear word.

2. The term "It doesn't look like Starscream," due to the fact that we've had several designs of Starscream, most of which don't look like G1.

3. Any reference to apes, monkeys, or any sort of fowl.

4. Any reference to any of the cartoon.

Think you can do that? If you can, I'll listen.

no, this is called an opinion. i along with many others think the designs suck. i'm so sorry that i disagree with your amazing theory.

Check. Mate.

You must never have really played chess. "CheckMate" is used when an opposing player is unable to move their King without putting him directly in danger.

I told kimmer to give his opinion with the standards on the list. (Which should be used in all posts, actually) He acted like a re-re, and didn't actually follow the list.

Shadowman wrote:

Jawnee wrote:That's all well and good, but a simian design while powerful, does not convey the vain and arrogant nature of starscreams persona. My 2 cents.

You're right, and that's probably my only problem with Screamer. His body and his personality don't match up.

That's exactly what I was trying to say.

Another thing, and it's more of a general gripe, none of them except Prime and Bumblebee and maybe Jazz even remotely resemble thier old selves. Yes I'm bringing up G1, but only because that is the iconic design that everyone knows. Can't we have at least the same colors? Why can't Ironhide be red? It's stupid.

Starscream needs some red and blue on him, and he needs some sort of things sticking up beside his head. That's all I ask. Of course the movie will be badass, but it's retarded that they don't bear even a little bit of a throwback to their old selves.

Shadowman wrote:

kimmer wrote:wow, talking about grasping for straws in my opinion lol hillarious.

This is called a "flame."

Moreover, this is called a "Flame of Ingnorance" in that you cannot accept that I can think this through, and you just throw insults around because you can't accept anything outside your pathetic little '80s cartoon box.

Look, I could accept why people hate Starscream's design, but they'd have to do it without these phrases:

1. Any swear word.

2. The term "It doesn't look like Starscream," due to the fact that we've had several designs of Starscream, most of which don't look like G1.

3. Any reference to apes, monkeys, or any sort of fowl.

4. Any reference to any of the cartoon.

Think you can do that? If you can, I'll listen.

1. That's fair enough.

2. All except the Machine Wars recolour of the Skyquake/King Atlas mould which tried to capitalize on name recognition, the Beast Wars Second Smokescreen repaint, and the cancelled Transtech Starcream (which would have had a jet fighter helmet similar to the helmeted G2 characters, and was cancelled) had extremely similar/near identical to G1 faces as well as proportions. Similar enough that the Skyquake and Smokescreen moulds, despite also being a helmeted humanoid faces, are easily recognized as 'the odd men out'.

3. The movie Starscream's upper-body is proportioned like a great ape's whereas every single prior Starscream had humanoid proportions. His legs, although probably based upon those of a raptor, specifically Spielberg's fictional depiction of the velociraptor in his Jurassic Park adaptations, also very much resemble the legs of fowl (especially the feet) due to the placement of toes and the fact that modern birds are the evolutionary descendants of bipedal dinosaurs such as the velociraptor.

4. The cartoons, both G1 and the Unicron Trilogy, are what the viewers are going to be thinking about and drawing comparisons to.


Why should people exclude those very valid points in expressing their opinions?