Wait. What?! Siskoid talking about the Bayformers? What lunacy is this?
Well, thanks to fellow Lonely Heart Furn keeping me abreast of the movie news I don't want to think about, I've been made aware of a connection between the just-titled FIFTH installment of the series (how did we let it get that far? I blame Trump supporters) and Rom Spaceknight, which as you know, has been a particular favorite of mine. A connection that lives, at least, in one particular fan's mind.
You can read his Forbes article by clicking here, but I will now summarize and demolish it.
His theory is that Rom Spaceknight - shitty toy from the late 70s and Marvel hero for 5 glorious years after which the rights became impossibly entangled, only to be recently unraveled - will appear in the Transformers movie as the eponymous "Last Knight". Is there any basis for it, or it just a case of there being the same words in their titles? I.e. why wasn't Pink Floyd in Dark of the Moon?
Evidence to support this... Exhibit 1: Hasbro currently owns the rights to Rom and all Hasbro properties are apparently up for grabs in the upcoming Hasbro Cinematic Universe, which would include G.I. Joe, M.A.S.K., and Micronauts.
So you're telling me that of all those properties, ROM FREAKING SPACEKNIGHT is the one you're going to introduce to the established Transformers universe FIRST? Nah, no way, absurd. Even if I accept the article's contention that Rom really needs to be back-doored because the public at large has no idea who he is, and I do, but that's a self-defeating argument, isn't it? PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHO HE IS? WHY WOULD YOU MAKE HIM YOUR JUMP-ON POINT TO THE HCU?!
Exhibit 2: They changed the Transformers logo, and now it looks like Rom's. Compare:
Close, and while a change of font when we're on the 5th film of a series is suspect, they may also have thought it needed some freshening up after several years. I don't even think they look all that alike. Similar, sure, but none - NONE! - of the letters are on-model. And besides, even if a graphic designer was inspired by seeing Rom's logo on a sheet of Hasbro properties, why would you change your franchise's font to match a secondary character's in the film? What kind of crazy branding rules are you following? It's like Civil War using Spider-Man's font or something! I mean, for the sake of a HINT about an OBSCURE character?
Exhibit 3: At the end of TF4, Optimus Prime finds a sword on a spaceship and flies off to find its owner, presumably "the last knight". Hey, Rom is a knight! Yes, but HE'S NEVER USED A SWORD!!! HE'S NOT THAT KIND OF KNIGHT!!!
The other exhibits: I don't even think they warrant a number. Like ooh, Transformers are robots and Rom is a cyborg. Similar technologies!!! Please. Or that the teaser has Optimus Prime with pink eyes, PINK LIKE THE DIRE WRAITHS WHO ARE THE MORTAL ENEMY OF ROM!!! And who belong to Marvel Comics, so far as I know. They never had a toy and were created for the comics series, and Marvel kept using them even after they lost the rights to Rom. Even if I'm not up on the legal stuff, are you telling me the Wraiths, natural impostors who take on the form of others a bit like Body Snatchers, could impersonate giant robots that turn into cars?!
But here's where my own arguments break down. The Transformers movies are incredibly stupid. And there's no amount of stupid that could go into them, up to and including a sword-wielding Rom Spaceknight slashing away at alien wizards that turn into giant robots that turn into vehicles. And Hasbro-Paramount HAVE included Rom as one of the brands they mean to tackle. IDW, not Marvel, is launching a new Rom comic (there was an FCBD issue), which is too bad because it would have been more entertaining to watch if this were a shot across the bow mandated by Disney. Would Rom (and the Micronauts) have sparked another inter-studio war, or rather have been part of synergy with a toy company? But that's in another corner of Schrodinger's box.
I'm not altogether sure why (or if) I care.
Well, thanks to fellow Lonely Heart Furn keeping me abreast of the movie news I don't want to think about, I've been made aware of a connection between the just-titled FIFTH installment of the series (how did we let it get that far? I blame Trump supporters) and Rom Spaceknight, which as you know, has been a particular favorite of mine. A connection that lives, at least, in one particular fan's mind.
You can read his Forbes article by clicking here, but I will now summarize and demolish it.
His theory is that Rom Spaceknight - shitty toy from the late 70s and Marvel hero for 5 glorious years after which the rights became impossibly entangled, only to be recently unraveled - will appear in the Transformers movie as the eponymous "Last Knight". Is there any basis for it, or it just a case of there being the same words in their titles? I.e. why wasn't Pink Floyd in Dark of the Moon?
Evidence to support this... Exhibit 1: Hasbro currently owns the rights to Rom and all Hasbro properties are apparently up for grabs in the upcoming Hasbro Cinematic Universe, which would include G.I. Joe, M.A.S.K., and Micronauts.
So you're telling me that of all those properties, ROM FREAKING SPACEKNIGHT is the one you're going to introduce to the established Transformers universe FIRST? Nah, no way, absurd. Even if I accept the article's contention that Rom really needs to be back-doored because the public at large has no idea who he is, and I do, but that's a self-defeating argument, isn't it? PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHO HE IS? WHY WOULD YOU MAKE HIM YOUR JUMP-ON POINT TO THE HCU?!
Exhibit 2: They changed the Transformers logo, and now it looks like Rom's. Compare:
Close, and while a change of font when we're on the 5th film of a series is suspect, they may also have thought it needed some freshening up after several years. I don't even think they look all that alike. Similar, sure, but none - NONE! - of the letters are on-model. And besides, even if a graphic designer was inspired by seeing Rom's logo on a sheet of Hasbro properties, why would you change your franchise's font to match a secondary character's in the film? What kind of crazy branding rules are you following? It's like Civil War using Spider-Man's font or something! I mean, for the sake of a HINT about an OBSCURE character?
Exhibit 3: At the end of TF4, Optimus Prime finds a sword on a spaceship and flies off to find its owner, presumably "the last knight". Hey, Rom is a knight! Yes, but HE'S NEVER USED A SWORD!!! HE'S NOT THAT KIND OF KNIGHT!!!
The other exhibits: I don't even think they warrant a number. Like ooh, Transformers are robots and Rom is a cyborg. Similar technologies!!! Please. Or that the teaser has Optimus Prime with pink eyes, PINK LIKE THE DIRE WRAITHS WHO ARE THE MORTAL ENEMY OF ROM!!! And who belong to Marvel Comics, so far as I know. They never had a toy and were created for the comics series, and Marvel kept using them even after they lost the rights to Rom. Even if I'm not up on the legal stuff, are you telling me the Wraiths, natural impostors who take on the form of others a bit like Body Snatchers, could impersonate giant robots that turn into cars?!
But here's where my own arguments break down. The Transformers movies are incredibly stupid. And there's no amount of stupid that could go into them, up to and including a sword-wielding Rom Spaceknight slashing away at alien wizards that turn into giant robots that turn into vehicles. And Hasbro-Paramount HAVE included Rom as one of the brands they mean to tackle. IDW, not Marvel, is launching a new Rom comic (there was an FCBD issue), which is too bad because it would have been more entertaining to watch if this were a shot across the bow mandated by Disney. Would Rom (and the Micronauts) have sparked another inter-studio war, or rather have been part of synergy with a toy company? But that's in another corner of Schrodinger's box.
I'm not altogether sure why (or if) I care.
Comments