tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post6104423681922192770..comments2024-03-28T15:14:28.323-07:00Comments on Disciples of Boltax: Bish's Review: Marvel UK #133 "Headhunt" Part 1Jimtronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18138709079942253485noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-21027655186084708062011-09-09T21:32:06.101-07:002011-09-09T21:32:06.101-07:00Marvel US has actually been a lot more inconsisten...Marvel US has actually been a lot more inconsistent on time travel than one might think. Mark Gruenwald certainly tried to set down the rule that time travel can't change history, it just creates an alternate timeline. However not all stories follow this - the biggest contrary case off the top of my head is the X-Men story Age of Apocalypse.<br /><br />If I'm thinking of the right Secret Wars II story, it's actually one where Reed Richards stopped the Beyonder from killing Dr Doom on the basis that Doom had not yet been taken out of time to battle the Beyonder in the original Secret Wars series, and that even the all-powerful Beyonder may not be able to withstand the paradox. The story was from Fantastic Four #288.<br /><br />At the time of Target 2006 it seems to follow the "Back to the Future rules" - time travel into the past alters history without spewing alternate timelines (forget the diagram Doc draws in the second movie) but make a drastic alteration that impacts on the circumstances of your own birth/creation and you fade out of existence. Had Galvatron's plan succeeded then the weapon would have become available in 2006; when he thought he'd destroyed Starscream he assumed that he was in an alternate past because he still existed.<br /><br />I suspect Time Wars was intended to be a mini-Crisis type event that allowed for the ditching of a fixed future, especially with a wholesale massacre on the horizon of the present when many of those characters had been shown in the future.Tim Roll-Pickeringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12589024696145675963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-82682014583819193592011-09-06T11:40:41.301-07:002011-09-06T11:40:41.301-07:00I’m pretty sure the UK time-travel stories were or...I’m pretty sure the UK time-travel stories were originally intended to be set in the same universe. In Target: 2006 Galvatron was <i>fooled</i> into thinking he had gone to a parallel universe, but actually hadn’t – according to the story’s logic, if he had succeeded, it would have destroyed the ‘same’ Unicron.<br /><br />And it seemed the creative team were initially careful to keep the two time-zones consistent. I noted in Wanted: Dead or Alive, the only background Autobots depicted – Ultra Magnus, Bumblebee, Cliffjumper – were ones that had specifically survived the movie. I’m fairly sure the letters page answered a question about Goldbug by saying he was sure to be rebuilt as Bumblebee (which actually happened!), ready to take up his duties on Moonbase 2.<br /><br />Of course, sticking to a pre-set starting position for 2006 would lead to creative stagnation of the present-day stories, so they started to ignore this (I remember being outraged at the Time Wars deaths of some Autobots who had appeared in future stories and who, to my 10-year-old mind, were ‘guaranteed’ survival until then). I’d say Furman started with the ‘alternate universe’ idea after Time Wars (the big time-rift would have been a plausible excuse for starting this), with at least two different futures of ‘Aspects of Evil’ and ‘Rhythms of Darkness’.<br /><br />But like Andros Tempest, nowadays I tend to follow the Basil Exposition approach to time-travel stories: “I suggest you don't worry about those things and just enjoy yourself.”Chufferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03100510579733340261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-86283748945970865392011-09-06T05:39:55.539-07:002011-09-06T05:39:55.539-07:00Marvel (US) have always stated in time travel stor...Marvel (US) have always stated in time travel stories, dating back to the mid 80's, that time travel FROM or TO the future means travelling to an alternate universe, literally gaining knowledge of future events changes those events once you return to the past. The Avengers, X Men and Fantastic Four have frequently worked on this basis for time travel plots. Having read this in the pages of Secret Wars 2 (a title Furman edited) I always assumed the same was true of the TF time travel too, that while time in 2005 and 1985 moved forward at the same rate, events in one did not directly influence the other. Galvatron may have believed they did when he set in motion his plan to assassinate Unicron, but in reality it would have been the unicron of a different universe. <br /><br />Of course if this was Furman's intent, he sort of forgot this when he wrote Time Wars, since the death of a future character triggered the time storm, I can't imagine Cyclonus dying before he was "born" would have made much difference really, it just probably meant that the transformer he displaced in the past would no longer return to replace him creating a mass imbalance. <br /><br />Whatever, best not to look too deeply into these things I've found,Andros Tempesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15121342401533557087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-81422826215424927052011-09-01T09:20:30.238-07:002011-09-01T09:20:30.238-07:00@Bishbot- Yeah, I may have been a little unfair to...@Bishbot- Yeah, I may have been a little unfair to ole' Roddy. But in Space Pirates, we see just how much more effective he is as Hot Rod. Optimus may have self-doubt (which is good!), but his achievements vastly overshadow his lesser parts, allowing him to remain a shining beacon of leadership.<br /><br />Rosimus appears to lack Optimus' physical strength and strength of personality,and thus may come off as a little too self-doubting, whiny and weak. But I guess he's still a pretty good leader as a whole.Eugenenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-28081463046486338442011-09-01T07:42:15.352-07:002011-09-01T07:42:15.352-07:00Firebolt was also called "Sparks" in the...Firebolt was also called "Sparks" in the Ladybird books published around this time, suggesting that it was a name in the Hasbro material sent to licencees and they either made a mistake or changed their minds late in the day. Most of the name and colouring differences from the toys are almost certainly down to the stories being created without examples of the finished product & packaging sitting on the creators' desks.<br /><br />TFWiki claims that some but not all of the US appearances of the character were relettered for the UK reprints to change Sparks to Firebolt. I haven't got the issues immediately to hand to check but this kind of fix was not unusual. It's a pity that the UK reprints of the US stories are generally unavailable to modern fans without tracking down the original issues - whilst commercially I doubt there'd be sufficient interest, they would make the combined run a little more coherent by including the modifications made to smooth things out.<br /><br />Overall it's nice to see Furman developing the 2007 universe as much more than just a place of origin for extra characters to run around the present day timeline. However it the future and present started contradicting each other too much - and at this stage 2007 was presented as THE future with alternate timelines generally unmentioned. Optimus Prime's death (with a body, funeral & everything) in the present whilst having a key role in the future was already a point of confusion & contention on the letters pages, and Megatron's rapid resurrection may have in part been to offset the same problem.Tim Roll-Pickeringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12589024696145675963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-58813405050997355492011-09-01T01:46:13.585-07:002011-09-01T01:46:13.585-07:00Thanks for the plug, Bishbot. I thought ‘Headhunt’...Thanks for the plug, Bishbot. I thought ‘Headhunt’ was one of the best future stories – if memory serves it was the only one not to be an epic of several issues, and a shame there weren’t more like it. Perhaps Furman felt a future story always needed a big event to justify it, in this case, Death’s Head’s return would have been enough to satisfy the audience (I remember him winning ‘Best Supporting Character’ in a readers’ poll).<br /><br />Incidentally, Scarvix is the same robot world where Death’s Head had his office in Issue 1 of his own series (which came after this, but it’s a nice link). It’s also described as the ‘grease filter of the galaxy’, making Blot a good choice as envoy.<br /><br />I agree about the death of Firebolt (a curious Harry Potter coincidence there, having the same accessory name as the ‘chosen one’ Hot Rod) – making the reader feel there is so much going on in the universe, and the characters’ stories don’t just begin or end within the pages of the comic.Chufferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03100510579733340261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-6836794672877676202011-09-01T00:40:01.840-07:002011-09-01T00:40:01.840-07:00Hey Bumblevivisector (what a name!)
I think the d...Hey Bumblevivisector (what a name!)<br /><br />I think the death of Firebolt is even cleverer than that. You're not wrong, of course, but as I said in my review (or meant, anyway) I think the actual cleverness lies in the story potential of not knowing, not just so Furman could rewrite it if he needed to, but more because it's a much richer universe if we don't know each and every thing that happened and why. That's one of the reasons a twenty-year time gap is a great idea, because it shifts the status quo and lets us experience something new without having to rigorously explain everything. That said, I'm sure Furman could have retconned the death, and done it well, were he called to do so and yes, Scourge and Cyclonus' Hasbro-mandated time-shifting shenanigans will be a big deal before too much longer.<br /><br />Eugene - I think you're being a little unfair to Rodimus here. As far as we have seen him in this story he has been off-balance, sure, but that's understandable, Death's Head is a wildcard that's hard to account for and a lot of Rodimus' introspection is no different from Furman's take on Optimus Prime, who is far from the confident leader that he might project outwardly.<br /><br />That said, while I have read this arc before, a long time ago, I am, deliberately reading it only at review pace so I can review the issues as a reader would have read them, so I might still end up agreeing with you!Bishbothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01429304622553626284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-57147201581151885982011-08-31T22:44:44.096-07:002011-08-31T22:44:44.096-07:00Headhunt is a great little story. The following is...Headhunt is a great little story. The following issue with the all-out sewer combat is awesome.<br /><br />This issue, however, finally places Roddy in the cartoon's 'Whiny, imcompetent, unconfident leader' role, whereas during the Wanted Galvatron saga, he was, while a more complex, ruthless character than Optimus, still an authoritative, commanding figure. And strong too, putting up a very close fight against Galvatron. (better than Magnus, in fact).<br /><br />From Headhunt on Rodimus loses that authoritativeness, competence and power to an extent. He remains whiny as long as he appears, and is pretty damn weak too, getting easily defeated by Death's Head and Galvatron , and being put on the run by Cyclonus and Scourge.Eugenenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9163141447241149534.post-65933717244414153672011-08-31T18:23:50.733-07:002011-08-31T18:23:50.733-07:00As great an arc as this issue kicks off, the death...As great an arc as this issue kicks off, the death of Firebolt is by far the most interesting bit. For starters, British readers saw this before reprints of any American stories that called him "Sparks", right? That was most likely an early name of Bob's that Hasbro rejected, yet to UK audiences it would seem like an even sloppier mistake after seeing a story with the correct toy name (although the one time Hot Rod shoots him, the effect is more a shower of sparks than a bolt of fire). <br /><br />The other interesting thing about that name is that an early G.I.Joe ep features a comm. specialist named Sparks who never appears again, making one wonder if that was also an early name/design for Breaker (I don't remember if he looked like Breaker's animation model; is there a Joe wiki that might clear that up?) He'd simply have never showed up again, yet Flint Dille worked him into a season 2 ep that explained he quit the Joes and got work at a radio station. I like to think that Sealab 2021's Sparks was an homage to both the TF and Joe characters, or was that name actually used in Sealab 2020? <br /><br />One also gets the feeling that Furman really disliked the -master gimmicks, and felt confident that they would be a passing fad. That move speaks of the same confidence that would lead him to craft his own origin for the Transformers in #150, or did he get 'permission' from Hasbro and Bob on that one? <br /><br />And yet, we don't get any details on how Firebolt died, which strikes me as rather clever; if an edict came down that Nebulon partners had to survive into the future, he'd have been free to tell the actual story of his "death" wherein Hot Rod merely thought he died, the sort of error-fixing that often led him to craft his more inspired tales. Much like how explaining what Cyclonus and Scourge were doing in Headmasters #4 as Targetmasters ended up shaping the course of the UK comic from Legacy of Unicron until the color ran out, no? <br /><br />-BumblevivisectorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com