Transformers: The Movie and The Great Toy Massacre of 1986

I enjoyed reading this article about "Transformers: The Movie", Hasbro's reasons for killing off many of the main characters, and the effect it had on the viewers.

Here is the full article: http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/transformers/256185/transformers-the-movie-and-the-great-toy-massacre-of-1986?hl=1&noRedirect=1

We had a discussion about this movie here on the forums. If you'd like to join in, here is the thread: http://thundercats.org/forums/index.php?threads/rocks-1d-transformers-the-movie-1986-animated%C2%AC.10171/

It was a very questionable marketing decision.
Sadly one that would be repeated again in the G.I. Joe Movie.

"Mark M, post: 121358, member: 5058" said:

It was a very questionable marketing decision.
Sadly one that would be repeated again in the G.I. Joe Movie.

If you ask me, it was an idiotic marketing decision. I understand that Hasbro wanted to introduce new characters. But that can be done without killing off the old cast. You simply need to write a story which focuses more on the new guys. All the cartoon series' did that, TCats, MOTU, TMNT etc.

I was rather stunned when Flint Dille said that he was "surprised" at how people got upset about the death of Prime. Really???? :confused I mean was he and the other people involved with the show really that oblivious to its popularity?? He goes on to say, "“It was a toy show. We just thought we were killing off the old product line to replace it with new products.” Yes, Mr. Dille. It was a toy show to you and Hasbro, but the kids who watched it didn't think of it that way. If they did they wouldn't have watched it in the first place!!

The whole purpose of these 80s toy-based cartoons was to familiarize kids with these characters on a more personal level. That is why they had entire stories and character bios written for them. So that kids can connect with these characters and then buy their toys. Why else would they create an entire cartoon show instead of just advertising the toys in 2 minute commercials?

"Wilycub, post: 121359, member: 25043" said:

If you ask me, it was an idiotic marketing decision. I understand that Hasbro wanted to introduce new characters. But that can be done without killing off the old cast. You simply need to write a story which focuses more on the new guys. All the cartoon series' did that, TCats, MOTU, TMNT etc.

I was rather stunned when Flint Dille said that he was "surprised" at how people got upset about the death of Prime. Really???? :confused I mean was he and the other people involved with the show really that oblivious to its popularity?? He goes on to say, "“It was a toy show. We just thought we were killing off the old product line to replace it with new products.” Yes, Mr. Dille. It was a toy show to you and Hasbro, but the kids who watched it didn't think of it that way. If they did they wouldn't have watched it in the first place!!

The whole purpose of these 80s toy-based cartoons was to familiarize kids with these characters on a more personal level. That is why they had entire stories and character bios written for them. So that kids can connect with these characters and then buy their toys. Why else would they create an entire cartoon show instead of just advertising the toys in 2 minute commercials?

I agree. I am not trying to justify it but G.I. Joe and Transformers had the same advantage/disadvantage of having a huge selection of characters and toys. It would have been better if they hadn't introduced so many new characters in the movie...or at least introduced them in a better way without killing off so many characters.
It would have been better if it had focused on some of the main season 1 and 2 cast having an adventure and meeting some new characters.
In the Gobots movie Battle of the Rocklords it had the main characters going on an adventure and meeting the new characters.

Like I said the same stupidity was done with the G.I. Joe Movie having a bunch of fresh new recruits be the centre of attention. Thankfully though the season 1,2 and3 cast did not all get slaughtered and killed off but where kept prisoners for a lot of the movie. After the reaction to Transformers The Movie it forced Hasbro's hand to change the ending of the G.I. Joe movie.
I never seen the Transformers Movie in the cinemas when it was originally released. I only seen it in 2000 for the first time (dozens since then lol) and on the VHS and DVD there is a voice over at the end saying how Optimus Prime would return. I wonder if that voice over was included on the original cinematic release. If it was it that would have probably cheered a lot of children up at the time knowing that Prime would return. But just Prime coming back was still didn't really make up for all the other fan favourites they killed off.

Regarding Flint Dille's comments, I would like to think he is saying that as he can't say anything against Hasbro for whatever reason. Dille wrote some wonderful episodes for Transformers, G.I. Joe, Visionaries and Dungeons & Dragons etc so I definitely think he knew how much people had grown to like the characters.

I read this.

The decision was completely insane. You don't kill off your main hero unless you are drawing a line and saying "this is the end of the show, that's it, finito."

To kill off Optimus Prime about a third of the way in and then have the new characters carrying on without him until one of them activates the power of the matrix and becomes the new leader is wrong. If they'd had this as a prequel adventure showing how Optimus Prime became the leader (with a few changes of detail), then fair enough. Like Claudus' death in Thundercats 2011, which does work in context

Mind you, at least Optimus Prime's death is heroic, he bows out in a blaze of glory. It's the others - Ironhide, Ratchet, Brawn and Prowl killed on the shuttle so gratuitously, and then Wheeljack and Windcharger being shown dead without even being shown dying, that bug me more, it's so gratuitous. The decision was to kill off the bulk of the old characters to make room for these new characters whose toys had just been created . . . why? Couldn't they keep both generations side by side?

This actually brings me onto a pet peeve from the early days of Transformers. I only started watching it properly about a year ago, but it became apparent very early on that there were way too many characters. In season 2 especially, there were lots of new characters that weren't introduced properly at all, just came from nowhere. The toy concept is amazing, "let's make robots that transform into cars, planes, dinosaurs . . ." - but here's the thing. Too many characters and the audience will get confused.

Look at most of the great cartoons - they have a core of about half a dozen main characters on each side, give or take, and an array of minor characters who usually did get proper introductions.

Thundercats is a great example of this (well, season 1 anyway!).

MAIN GOOD GUYS - Lion-O, Tygra, Panthro, Cheetara as primaries, Wilykit, Wilykat, Snarf, Jaga as secondaries
MAIN BAD GUYS - Mumm-Ra, Slithe, Monkian, Jackalman, Vultureman

Both sides were added to in the second season, three new Thundercats plus the Lunataks, and had Grune more. Now I don't like the Lunataks but they are the right size group to work.

Whereas Transformers introduced about a dozen characters on each side in the very first episode. Too many to start with, and then kept bringing in new characters and acted like we were supposed to know who they were already! When we did Transformers at the start of ROCKS, I asked Mark M to pick the episode highlights, and said to focus on different characters . . . little did I know at the time that there were so many characters and so for ROCKS 1B and 1C we watched episodes where half the time I was thinking, "who is this guy again"? I should have told him "focus on the main characters, but highlight different ones with your episode picks."

"LiamABC, post: 121364, member: 25438" said:

This actually brings me onto a pet peeve from the early days of Transformers. I only started watching it properly about a year ago, but it became apparent very early on that there were way too many characters. In season 2 especially, there were lots of new characters that weren't introduced properly at all, just came from nowhere. The toy concept is amazing, "let's make robots that transform into cars, planes, dinosaurs . . ." - but here's the thing. Too many characters and the audience will get confused.

Whereas Transformers introduced about a dozen characters on each side in the very first episode. Too many to start with, and then kept bringing in new characters and acted like we were supposed to know who they were already! When we did Transformers at the start of ROCKS, I asked Mark M to pick the episode highlights, and said to focus on different characters . . . little did I know at the time that there were so many characters and so for ROCKS 1B and 1C we watched episodes where half the time I was thinking, "who is this guy again"? I should have told him "focus on the main characters, but highlight different ones with your episode picks."

I agree there was far too many characters. With so many characters it's hard to keep a consistent line up of characters for the viewer to get to know. But I guess the world is a big place and they have to be spread out to cover all of it.

As much as I like Transformers...and the droids from Star Wars I always found it odd that the large Transformers were sentient instead of just being mechs for pilots. The original Japanese Transformer toys (most of the season 1 and 2 characters) were all designed for pilots as they all came with a little pilot figure that could sit in the pilot seat. I wish they had been included with the US and European releases as we could have pretended they were Sparkplug, Spike, Carly, Daniel and Chip etc.

The thing that bugged me first about the movie when I saw it again last year is the main credits. The cast listed - OK, so there's big names, but look at the characters listed.

Eric Idle as Wreck-Gar
Judd Nelson as Hotrod
Leonard Nimoy as Galvatron
Robert Stack as Ultra Magnus
Lionel Stander as Kup
Orson Welles as Unicron
John Moschitta as Blur

Who are these characters? When the movie first came out, none of those character names meant a thing to the audience. Moreover, apart from Moschitta, none of them reprised their roles in the next season. Plus, big names apart, Wreck-Gar and Blur were only minor characters in the movie.

The credits should have included Cullen and Welker at the top regardless. It should have read:

Peter Cullen as Optimus Prime
Frank Welker as Megatron
Chris Latta as Starscream
Robert Stack as Ultra Magnus
Judd Nelson as Hotrod
Leonard Nimoy as Galvatron
Orson Welles as Unicron

That way at least the audience would have something familiar going in.

Leonard Nimoy's casting was such a waste of time when Welker would voice Galvatron in the series and voicing Megatrion in the movie, why not just have him voice Galvatron in the movie. Same with all the guest stars really. If they weren't going to voice them in the series why waste cash paying them for the movie.
I had seen several episodes from season 3 growing up so when I seen the movie in 2000 when I was 15 I found it odd hearing them with different voices.

The only other that returned to Transformers was Nimoy in the 3rd live action movie Dark of the Moon as Sentinel Prime and Nelson in Transformers Animated season 3 as Rodimus Prime.

I read the article, and it was pretty well done.

Judd Nelson came back? Are you sure?

"LiamABC, post: 121370, member: 25438" said:

Judd Nelson came back? Are you sure?

Yes as Rodimus Prime in the 2009 Transformers Animated series season three episode one: Trans-Warped part 1. Speaking of Judd Nelson in movie club we should watch The Breakfast Club.

I thought you meant in the 1980s series. That new one doesn't count for our established purposes!

"LiamABC, post: 121373, member: 25438" said:

I thought you meant in the 1980s series. That new one doesn't count for our established purposes!

No, none of the movie cast returned, hence why I said there presence in the movie wasn't really needed at all. Although Judd Nelson was awesome as Hotrod.

Eric Idle was also amazing as Wreck-Gar, I have to admit. The part could have been written with him in mind.

"LiamABC, post: 121383, member: 25438" said:

Eric Idle was also amazing as Wreck-Gar, I have to admit. The part could have been written with him in mind.

Yes he was really good as Wreck-Gar.

He sort of foreshadowed Robin Williams' performance as Genie in Aladdin, the way he inhabited the part.

They contacted Idle about voicing the character in the 2009 Animated series but he was unable to do so. Instead Wierd Al Yankovic would voice the character whose song ''Dare To Be Stupid'' was played in The Movie during the battle between the Autobots and Junkions.

While I'm not familiar with Weird Al's speaking personality as it were, I know enough about his music to agree that that sounds like a good bit of alternative casting.

"LiamABC, post: 121387, member: 25438" said:

While I'm not familiar with Weird Al's speaking personality as it were, I know enough about his music to agree that that sounds like a good bit of alternative casting.

I wasn't too keen on the animation and designs of Transformers Animated, it was quite stylised a bit like Star Wars Clone Wars 2003, but as far as the writing and casting it was excellent. It was really fun with a small cast of interesting characters.