The Real TFTM - Anachronisms

banzait...@gmail.com

unread,

Aug 31, 2016, 9:14:05 PM8/31/16

to

ATT,

So, given it's the 30 year anniversary of the best movie ever made, I thought I would give it a thread of it's own.
Given that the movie took place in 2005, the animators trapped in 1984-1986 had to peer into the future to animate the film appropriately. Here are a few anachronisms from the movie that PROVE it does not take place in 2005, as allegedly narrated.

1.) No smart phones. Yes, Daniel has a hand held shuttle tracker, but that is far from today's multifunction devices

2.) Daniel isn't glued to a smart phone and/or ipad throughout the entire movie. (Also anachronistic is that he cares about his dad?)

3.) Prime is still rolling around in a box cab semi truck.

4.) Soundwave and Blaster exist.

5.) There is only one female transformer in the entire movie. Diversity law's by 2005 certainly would have mandated the hiring of more than one female to the autobot team, regardless of qualifications.

6.) Lack of flat screen tvs. Not even the junkions have them.

7.) Perceptor still transforms into a mirrored light refracting microscope. Even the cheapest ones today have a light source.

8.) Nobody, not even a couple times, checks the internet (not even a SINGLE cheetor video)

9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering

10.) There was a Transformers movie taking place in the 21st century that doesn't SUCK MAJOR DONKEY BALLS

Anything I missed?

-Banzaitron

Irrellius Spamticon of the Potato People.

unread,

Aug 31, 2016, 9:52:52 PM8/31/16

to

They had flying cars, personal jetpacks, smart cities, and interplanetary space travel, which we can't be bothered with.

The songs had choruses that consisted of more than "woo" "whoa" or "ooh"

To be fair, many people still had flip phones in 2005.

Zobovor

unread,

Aug 31, 2016, 9:59:33 PM8/31/16

to

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC-6, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:

> Given that the movie took place in 2005, the animators trapped in 1984-1986
> had to peer into the future to animate the film appropriately. Here are a
> few anachronisms from the movie that PROVE it does not take place in 2005, as
> allegedly narrated.

In real life, we didn't have gigantic alien robots wake up in 1984 and start terrorizing the populace. I think the Earth of the G1 cartoon diverged into a parallel development as soon as the Transformers showed up. We have the freedom to develop luxury technology like smart phones and mp3 players. I'd say what with the Decepticons gobbling up energy resources and stealing any technology they deemed worthwhile, people never got a chance to make those kinds of technological leaps. They were too busy getting the population to all wear hard hats and rain boots (government issue, dontcha know).

> 1.) No smart phones. Yes, Daniel has a hand held shuttle tracker, but that
> is far from today's multifunction devices

We only saw him use it once. Maybe it had other functions?

> 2.) Daniel isn't glued to a smart phone and/or ipad throughout the entire
> movie. (Also anachronistic is that he cares about his dad?)

Daniel probably isn't representative of a normal Earth kid. From all indications, he was raised either in Autobot City or on Cybertron and probably sequestered from the general populace.

> 3.) Prime is still rolling around in a box cab semi truck.

I tend to think that once the characters in G1 got their transformed modes, they were stuck with them until they upgraded to an entirely new body. Teletraan-I had to physically reconstruct Skywarp, Optimus, etc. (It's never made sense in the live-action movies that they can just scan a passing vehicle and instantly rebuild themselves. If they can do that, why not just do it all the time?)

> 4.) Soundwave and Blaster exist.

They're clearly more than just tape decks. Soundwave can link up to the Decepticon base and upload audiovisual recordings. Blaster could link up to Autobot City and serve as a communications hub.

> 5.) There is only one female transformer in the entire movie. Diversity
> law's by 2005 certainly would have mandated the hiring of more than one
> female to the autobot team, regardless of qualifications.

Snerk.

> 6.) Lack of flat screen tvs. Not even the junkions have them.

Well, the Junkions are also stuck in television programming from the 1960's. They're always going to be a little behind the times.

> 7.) Perceptor still transforms into a mirrored light refracting microscope.
> Even the cheapest ones today have a light source.

Perceptor also had an electronic heads-up display. Again, clearly more than just a simple microscope.

> 8.) Nobody, not even a couple times, checks the internet (not even a SINGLE
> cheetor video)

I'm sure this is what Blaster and Snarl were doing in Autobot City after everybody else went gallivanting off into space.

> 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under
> one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering

Say what you want about G1 being a toy line full of bricks, but they really did the 1986 assortment right. Easy toys that were accessible to everyone. Nobody got frustrated trying to figure out Kup.

> 10.) There was a Transformers movie taking place in the 21st century that
> doesn't SUCK MAJOR DONKEY BALLS

Siskel and Ebert both went on record in absolutely hating The Transformers: the Movie.

Zob ('course, they're both dead now, so their opinions don't count)

Gustavo Wombat, of the Seattle Wombats

unread,

Sep 1, 2016, 2:55:09 AM9/1/16

to

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 6:59:33 PM UTC-7, Zobovor wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC-6, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Given that the movie took place in 2005, the animators trapped in 1984-1986
> > had to peer into the future to animate the film appropriately. Here are a
> > few anachronisms from the movie that PROVE it does not take place in 2005, as
> > allegedly narrated.
>
> In real life, we didn't have gigantic alien robots wake up in 1984 and start terrorizing the populace. I think the Earth of the G1 cartoon diverged into a parallel development as soon as the Transformers showed up. We have the freedom to develop luxury technology like smart phones and mp3 players. I'd say what with the Decepticons gobbling up energy resources and stealing any technology they deemed worthwhile, people never got a chance to make those kinds of technological leaps. They were too busy getting the population to all wear hard hats and rain boots (government issue, dontcha know).

Technology was pretty advanced in Transformers 2005-6. There were space ships, wacky cars, ninja robots (old, vintage ninja robots), etc. I think the Autobots gave the humans a lot of their technology, and it meant most engineers we re-engineering Cybertronian tech rather than working on new things.

So, if the Transformers didn't have it in 1984, the humans didn't have it in 2005.

> > 1.) No smart phones. Yes, Daniel has a hand held shuttle tracker, but that
> > is far from today's multifunction devices
>
> We only saw him use it once. Maybe it had other functions?

In the introduction to Neuromancer, William Gibson notes how dated that novel seems to be given the lack of continuous communication. I never got past the introduction because of this.

> > 2.) Daniel isn't glued to a smart phone and/or ipad throughout the entire
> > movie. (Also anachronistic is that he cares about his dad?)
>
> Daniel probably isn't representative of a normal Earth kid. From all indications, he was raised either in Autobot City or on Cybertron and probably sequestered from the general populace.

Also, the jumpsuits. Poor boy just wanted to wear jeans and a hoodie. The jumpsuits completely ostracized him.

> > 3.) Prime is still rolling around in a box cab semi truck.
>
> I tend to think that once the characters in G1 got their transformed modes, they were stuck with them until they upgraded to an entirely new body. Teletraan-I had to physically reconstruct Skywarp, Optimus, etc. (It's never made sense in the live-action movies that they can just scan a passing vehicle and instantly rebuild themselves. If they can do that, why not just do it all the time?)

I don't think it is a complete rebuild, but they don't do it willy-nilly. Plus, there are still a lot of 1984-ish vehicles seen in 2005, so they weren't completely anachronistic.

> > 4.) Soundwave and Blaster exist.
>
> They're clearly more than just tape decks. Soundwave can link up to the Decepticon base and upload audiovisual recordings. Blaster could link up to Autobot City and serve as a communications hub.

Blaster never really used his alt-mode for disguise, so he might not have cared that he was some weird ancient device. Soundwave, however, was able to use his disguise disturbingly often -- "Hey, a tape recorder! I should take it!" -- but he was off Earth by this point. Probably just hadn't found a new mode yet.

We never saw humans with boom boxes in 2005-6, did we?

> > 5.) There is only one female transformer in the entire movie. Diversity
> > law's by 2005 certainly would have mandated the hiring of more than one
> > female to the autobot team, regardless of qualifications.
>
> Snerk.

Something terrible must have happened to the others. Notably not with the others when we learned of their existence was Arcee.

> > 6.) Lack of flat screen tvs. Not even the junkions have them.
>
> Well, the Junkions are also stuck in television programming from the 1960's. They're always going to be a little behind the times.

The Autobots and Decepticons all had big CRT monitors. And, with all the fancy tech coming from Transformers, humans didn't build it.

> > 7.) Perceptor still transforms into a mirrored light refracting microscope.
> > Even the cheapest ones today have a light source.
>
> Perceptor also had an electronic heads-up display. Again, clearly more than just a simple microscope.

Perceptor is one of those who don't really use their alt-mode for disguise, so he wouldn't have considered upgrading it.

> > 8.) Nobody, not even a couple times, checks the internet (not even a SINGLE
> > cheetor video)
>
> I'm sure this is what Blaster and Snarl were doing in Autobot City after everybody else went gallivanting off into space.

Someone was probably uploading videos of Rodimus getting in the way during the big Optimus/Megatron fight.

> > 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under
> > one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering
>
> Say what you want about G1 being a toy line full of bricks, but they really did the 1986 assortment right. Easy toys that were accessible to everyone. Nobody got frustrated trying to figure out Kup.

The 2007 movie toys were not that complex. Really, only RoTF got too complex, with Mixmaster being the worst.

> > 10.) There was a Transformers movie taking place in the 21st century that
> > doesn't SUCK MAJOR DONKEY BALLS
>
> Siskel and Ebert both went on record in absolutely hating The Transformers: the Movie.

I also hate TFTM -- the character arcs are terrible. Hot shot teenager robot dreams of adventure and excitement, and then gets it, and saves the day. Ugh.

> Zob ('course, they're both dead now, so their opinions don't count)

Maybe I'm dead too?

No One In Particular

unread,

Sep 1, 2016, 5:07:44 PM9/1/16

to

On 8/31/2016 8:59 PM, Zobovor wrote:

>> 3.) Prime is still rolling around in a box cab semi truck.
>
> I tend to think that once the characters in G1 got their transformed modes, they were
>stuck with them until they upgraded to an entirely new body. Teletraan-I had to
>physically reconstruct Skywarp, Optimus, etc. (It's never made sense in the live-action
>movies that they can just scan a passing vehicle and instantly rebuild themselves. If
>they can do that, why not just do it all the time?)
>

> Zob ('course, they're both dead now, so their opinions don't count)
>

This has been my objection since the earliest examples of the practice
(in Armada, maybe?). It's also my main objection to Cybertronians made
of nanites. If you can change alternate modes at will, as you say, why
don't you do it? Maybe you need a vehicle mode for this mission, but
events necessitate a quick getaway, so you just change your alternate to
some type of plane for that fast exit. Or maybe you decide you want to
be a car with a tank turret. If you're made of nano-machines, you can
do that on a whim. It just makes them too powerful, too unlimited.

I have always preferred the way it was done in More Than Meets the Eye,
where as you say, Teletraan had to physically rebuild them to give them
a different vehicle mode.

Brian

Ramen Junkie

unread,

Sep 4, 2016, 10:00:52 PM9/4/16

to

On 8/31/2016 8:14 PM, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
> ATT,
>
> So, given it's the 30 year anniversary of the best movie ever made, I thought I would give it a thread of it's own.
> Given that the movie took place in 2005, the animators trapped in 1984-1986 had to peer into the future to animate the film appropriately. Here are a few anachronisms from the movie that PROVE it does not take place in 2005, as allegedly narrated.
>
> 1.) No smart phones. Yes, Daniel has a hand held shuttle tracker, but that is far from today's multifunction devices
>
> 2.) Daniel isn't glued to a smart phone and/or ipad throughout the entire movie. (Also anachronistic is that he cares about his dad?)

The original iPhone didn't come out until 2007...

> 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering

I haven't had any problems with the movie toys, but I DO have a BS in
Mechanical Engineering.

--
Ramen Junkie

Supreme Dictator for Life, alt.games.final-fantasy

banzait...@gmail.com

unread,

Sep 5, 2016, 12:05:04 AM9/5/16

to

> The original iPhone didn't come out until 2007...

OK. You do realize that Apple didn't invent the smart phone, right? Blackberry and mobile windows phones were common place in 2005.

>
> > 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering
>
> I haven't had any problems with the movie toys, but I DO have a BS in
> Mechanical Engineering.

Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.

Arrogant millennials...

-Banzaitron

Zobovor

unread,

Sep 5, 2016, 1:18:18 AM9/5/16

to

On Sunday, September 4, 2016 at 10:05:04 PM UTC-6, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:

> Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and
> frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.

Ramen Junkie was kind of proving your point, wasn't he? As in, you LITERALLY need a mechanical engineering degree to figure out those toys!

> Arrogant millennials...

He's been posting here a long time... like, 1999 or thereabouts. So, I don't think he's a kid.

Zob (and we're all a little arrogant when you get right down to it)

Gustavo Wombat, of the Seattle Wombats

unread,

Sep 5, 2016, 2:42:19 AM9/5/16

to

On Sunday, September 4, 2016 at 9:05:04 PM UTC-7, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The original iPhone didn't come out until 2007...
>
> OK. You do realize that Apple didn't invent the smart phone, right? Blackberry and mobile windows phones were common place in 2005.

I wouldn't say they were common place. And definitely not given to kids as young as Daniel.

> > > 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering
> >
> > I haven't had any problems with the movie toys, but I DO have a BS in
> > Mechanical Engineering.
>
> Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.

I don't think he remembers Mixmaster. ROTF Optimus is a pain too, but doable.

Most of the rest were fine. Other than the Megatrons which transformed from robot to unrecognizable lump, and it was difficult to figure out what the right unrecognizable lump was.

I don't mind Cybertronian designs, and I think it works for Megatron, but there have been very few that really made good toys. TF:Prime First Edition Megatron, and WFC Megatron were the two standouts.

Gustavo Wombat, of the Seattle Wombats

unread,

Sep 5, 2016, 2:43:04 AM9/5/16

to

On Sunday, September 4, 2016 at 10:18:18 PM UTC-7, Zobovor wrote:
> On Sunday, September 4, 2016 at 10:05:04 PM UTC-6, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and
> > frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.
>
> Ramen Junkie was kind of proving your point, wasn't he? As in, you LITERALLY need a mechanical engineering degree to figure out those toys!
>
> > Arrogant millennials...
>
> He's been posting here a long time... like, 1999 or thereabouts. So, I don't think he's a kid.

Arrogant, precocious Millennials, posting here since they were 5...

Irrellius Spamticon of the Potato People.

unread,

Sep 5, 2016, 7:40:07 AM9/5/16

to

On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 1:42:19 AM UTC-5, Gustavo Wombat, of the Seattle Wombats wrote:
> On Sunday, September 4, 2016 at 9:05:04 PM UTC-7, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > The original iPhone didn't come out until 2007...
> >
> > OK. You do realize that Apple didn't invent the smart phone, right? Blackberry and mobile windows phones were common place in 2005.
>
> I wouldn't say they were common place. And definitely not given to kids as young as Daniel.
>
> > > > 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering
> > >
> > > I haven't had any problems with the movie toys, but I DO have a BS in
> > > Mechanical Engineering.
> >
> > Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.
>

I didn't have many problems except where things weren't really designed well. Of course my schoolin' is architectural engineering and electrical engineering.

> I don't think he remembers Mixmaster. ROTF Optimus is a pain too, but doable.
>

I'm the one who sent my mixmaster back to Hasbro and got a replacement after informing them the toy was assembled incorrectly at the factory and could not perform as the instructions indicate, of course I found out when I got the replacement that they were all assembled in a manner that countered the instructions.

> Most of the rest were fine. Other than the Megatrons which transformed from robot to unrecognizable lump, and it was difficult to figure out what the right unrecognizable lump was.
>

Movie Megatron never fully addressed exactly what is supposed to happen to all his kibble in each mode, and considering he's Cybertronian why does he have so much kibble?

> I don't mind Cybertronian designs, and I think it works for Megatron, but there have been very few that really made good toys. TF:Prime First Edition Megatron, and WFC Megatron were the two standouts.

The Fallen is one of the worst in my eyes, he has so many extra parts and joints that serve no purpose, like they had 2 other abandoned modes they were thinking about, or some extra accessories or something. There is much extra engineering that is totally extraneous to either of his official modes.

Gustavo Wombat

unread,

Sep 5, 2016, 1:38:59 PM9/5/16

to

Irrellius Spamticon of the Potato People. <Ob1k...@att.net> wrote:
> On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 1:42:19 AM UTC-5, Gustavo Wombat, of the
> Seattle Wombats wrote:
>> On Sunday, September 4, 2016 at 9:05:04 PM UTC-7, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> The original iPhone didn't come out until 2007...
>>>
>>> OK. You do realize that Apple didn't invent the smart phone, right?
>>> Blackberry and mobile windows phones were common place in 2005.
>>
>> I wouldn't say they were common place. And definitely not given to kids
>> as young as Daniel.
>>
>>>>> 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed
>>>>> in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering
>>>>
>>>> I haven't had any problems with the movie toys, but I DO have a BS in
>>>> Mechanical Engineering.
>>>
>>> Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and
>>> frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.
>>
>
> I didn't have many problems except where things weren't really designed
> well. Of course my schoolin' is architectural engineering and electrical engineering.
>
>> I don't think he remembers Mixmaster. ROTF Optimus is a pain too, but doable.
>>
>
> I'm the one who sent my mixmaster back to Hasbro and got a replacement
> after informing them the toy was assembled incorrectly at the factory and
> could not perform as the instructions indicate, of course I found out
> when I got the replacement that they were all assembled in a manner that
> countered the instructions.

I got my Mixmaster transformed back into vehicle mode once. And then I
declared victory and never touched it again.

I never got my Alternators Optimus Prime back into vehicle mode -- I just
gave up, after realizing that some joint deep inside had to be at a 36
degree angle five steps previous in order to get the panels to line up
right.

>> Most of the rest were fine. Other than the Megatrons which transformed
>> from robot to unrecognizable lump, and it was difficult to figure out
>> what the right unrecognizable lump was.
>>
>
> Movie Megatron never fully addressed exactly what is supposed to happen
> to all his kibble in each mode, and considering he's Cybertronian why
> does he have so much kibble?
>
>> I don't mind Cybertronian designs, and I think it works for Megatron,
>> but there have been very few that really made good toys. TF:Prime First
>> Edition Megatron, and WFC Megatron were the two standouts.
>
> The Fallen is one of the worst in my eyes, he has so many extra parts and
> joints that serve no purpose, like they had 2 other abandoned modes they
> were thinking about, or some extra accessories or something. There is
> much extra engineering that is totally extraneous to either of his official modes.

Oh, I had forgotten about him. He at least looked decent in his alternate
mode, so when you got him there, it was pretty clear you were probably
done.

--
I wish I was a mole in the ground.

Ramen Junkie

unread,

Sep 6, 2016, 10:48:51 PM9/6/16

to

On 9/4/2016 11:04 PM, banzait...@gmail.com wrote:
>> The original iPhone didn't come out until 2007...
>
> OK. You do realize that Apple didn't invent the smart phone, right? Blackberry and mobile windows phones were common place in 2005.

Yeah, except no one really was "addicted" like they were after the iPhone.

>>
>>> 9.) There are movie toys produced that can actually be transformed in under one hour and do not require a PhD in Mechanical Engineering
>>
>> I haven't had any problems with the movie toys, but I DO have a BS in
>> Mechanical Engineering.
>
> Good for you. But most people find these toys overly complicated and frustrating. I'm glad you are smarter than everyone else on ATT.

I was just making a joke based on your comment.

> Arrogant millennials...

Also Zobovor is right, I posted here a long time ago, like late 90s, I
was 18 then.