TFARCHIVE FORUMS

So, Simon Furman, in a response to a Q & A on his blog, said that he'd be game for an X-Men Forever style recontinutation of the Marvel continuity. Andy Wildman has made similar rumblings over on his blog, saying that IDW "are not adverse to the idea." He goes on to say some confusing things about wanting to create a story 'with a point to it,' like the old animated movie and not the more recent live-action ones, which makes me think he has not seen either of these things, but anyway...

There has been a groundswell of support across the boards, which translates to about three hundred people signing an online petition, so it probably won't ever happen. But if it did, what would the good people of TFArchive have to say about it?

Personally, I think so long as they retained Baskerville and put a lid on Furman's excesses and nostalgia-reaping, it could be an enjoyable read. Would be interested to see what this grand relevance that Wildman speaks of would materialise as - Furman hasn't shown much interest in relevance for the IDW run. Perhaps a strict issue cap, say at 20-24 issues or less, would bring out the best in everyone?

The fact he now thinks G2 is apparently "too 90's" (and is there anything more overtly 90's about it than the tail end of the original US run? Massive violence and darker and gritter than before with epic scale deconstruction of the mythos is pretty much common to both) pretty much says everything about not only why this shouldn't happen, but even presents a good argument for why he should probably never be allowed to write anything for anyone in any media ever again.

I practical terms, I suspect the main stumbling block is going to be the fan club comic that does exactly that. Whilst it's obviously even more of a (and here I am using this word in two consecutive posts) niche product that even IDW's lower selling efforts I suspect Hasbro will be keen not to have them stepping on the toes of one of the unique selling points of the Magazine thing that's part of the package they use to get fans to cough up the subscription fee.

Apparently the Hama title is selling much better than any of IDW's own 'verse Joe books. Which, apart from being fairly damning on how popular that is, does suggest why they might be keen to do the same with Transformers. Even if it's more complicated, with three potential follow on points (81, G2 12, and the UK Marvel stuff, which, as you could or could not include the G2 stuff with that probably makes for 4...).

EDIT: As another thought: Is the Joe continuation using the same artist as when the book ended first time round (or at least someone who's very associated with the end era)? Because if not I say that sets a precedent to sod Wildman and get someone who might actually care to draw this hypothetical book.

Now I think about it, if they have to keep the original artists on board that's probably the problem with a potential G2 continuation, they'd have to split the art between Manny and Geoff, with the later not wanting to do it and the former not wanted by most of the readers.

The fact he now thinks G2 is apparently "too 90's" (and is there anything more overtly 90's about it than the tail end of the original US run? Massive violence and darker and gritter than before with epic scale deconstruction of the mythos is pretty much common to both) pretty much says everything about not only why this shouldn't happen, but even presents a good argument for why he should probably never be allowed to write anything for anyone in any media ever again.

Yeah, seemed like the most 90's thing about G2 was the flourishes in the art style. Still, even though I do dearly love Generation 2, I wouldn't be too fussed if they left it out. The Classics comic is easy to ignore and there might be a more interesting story to be told in the setting at the end of #332/80, with a recolonisation of Cybertron, a heavily repentant squad of Autobots, the Last Autobot hanging around and Bludgeon up to mischief with his Silly Squad of Strangehold and Octopunch. Though it would probably result in a lot of the steps of G2 being retreaded - I can see the establishment of a Megatron and a Starscream being on the cards for approximately the eighteen zillionth time, for example.

I'd say that Roberts would probably be better at it, but then he's already done it, hasn't he?

I quite liked those covers that Wildman did. A bit too-little-too-late, perhaps, but there is evidence that he still gives a flying one.

I would read it.

Can't be any worse than the current ongoing. ZING!

I'd agree there's indeed good reason for not continuing G2, mainly that after twenty years there's no possible explanation for the Leige Maximo that won't seem a bit shit (if anyone's actually read Alignment they can either back me up or call me a fool. Though I suspect there's a good chance you're Furman's mum). Plus I doubt there's huge demand for anything that isn't more directly G1 (or at least where most of the more recognisable G1 characters a nostalgia book would be based around aren't horribly dead).

What rakes me about the 90's comment is that, presumably (though practically I've no idea how well this applies to what Hama has done) the idea is to do a retroish title that follows on from the end of the title in roughly the way it might have done at the time. Which, considering this was the early 90's mean we're looking at something that will become very... well, 90's. Which might not even be a bad thing considering there's likely to be a bout of 90's nostalgia any second (people might actually care about the next X-Files film). If Furman's just planning to write the book as he would now... well what's the point? Even if it's great, I've got a shelf buckling under the weight of him writing Transformers in his modern mindset, there's nothing special about that.

Of course, it might be that what he thinks makes G2 90's is that it's good, and that there's no way way he could match that for a revival.

Another problem with following on from 80 is that the last couple of issues are hugely dedicated to shutting the whole thing down as quickly as possible. It's not very elegant but pretty much everything is wrapped up in a bow for the title to end on. Any issue 81 would pretty much be a restart, a relaunch, or, to use a very 90's TV phrase, a Next Generation. A Generation 2 if you will.

I'd agree there's indeed good reason for not continuing G2, mainly that after twenty years there's no possible explanation for the Leige Maximo that won't seem a bit shit (if anyone's actually read Alignment they can either back me up or call me a fool. Though I suspect there's a good chance you're Furman's mum).

Hoho! Call me Mrs. Furman, because I've read it and it is unremarkable in almost every way. The most memorable bit is that it is stated that Transformers are capable of shutting down their higher functions for decades at a time during long space journeys, which is pretty damn standard functionality for science fiction robots. The Liege Maximo is treated exactly like Shockaract is in Beast Wars: The Ascending - he is doing all this stuff so that he can become A LIVING GOD. Oh, and Grimlock dies in a repeat of Galvatron's potshot against Unicron in 'On The Edge Of Extinction.' Then Megatron comes out and does the same trick again.

What rakes me about the 90's comment is that, presumably (though practically I've no idea how well this applies to what Hama has done) the idea is to do a retroish title that follows on from the end of the title in roughly the way it might have done at the time. Which, considering this was the early 90's mean we're looking at something that will become very... well, 90's.

Am similarly ill-informed about Hama's doings, but I did read the Claremont X-Men Forever book and the aim seemed to be to marry a decade of bitterness over the direction of the story with dated, cringe-worthy storytelling.

Aye, the problem is that Furman is basically a less successful Claremont, and Andrew Wildman is a less successful Andy Wildman (IIRC everyone who drew Claremont's X-Men stuff went on to have a career in comics, so there isn't really a good comparison for Furman's sidekick).

Cheap shots aside, Furman has basically already done this by trying to bend any work he's been given to his Marvel archetypes - the Dead Furmanverse is just the Marvel characters dropped into a new continuity, and it's not the continuity that's the problem, it's the lack of basic narrative skills and the same old characters.

The outright best thing about IDW is that none of their comics actually matter. It's all hemmed off in this retarded continuity that moves at the speed of a glacier and is ran by morons. Okay, so you get the odd gem like Spotlight Ramjet, Last Stand of the Wreckers and... other classic comics that IDW have made, the names of which I just can't summon up this moment. In five years time no-one will remember it, the same way no-one remembers Dreamwave apart from rolling out their fifth-hand Pat Lee jokes whenever he does an interview, or no-one talks about Armada. It doesn't matter, but it's not ****ing up anything else, so whatever.

So, Furman might have humiliated himself, but at least he's not damaged anything else. He should just leave it at that and go get a proper job.

The fact that Furman dismisses the only truly great story he's ever written as "too 90s" is reason enough for me to be leery about this. The cynical part of me reads that as either "I'm not writing Marvel without Nightbeat!" or "Yeah, I've got no idea where to do go from there, sorry".

On the other hand, Marvel #80 ended with four hugely dangerous Decepticons on Earth with only Fortress Maximus and Ratchet to oppose them while Bludgeon & co. have free run of the galaxy -- there are a lot more sequel hooks there than in G2, which would pretty much have to be followed up by "Autobot/Decepticon alliance vs. the Liege Maximo". Something that takes off after #80 and picks up on those loose ends could be very interesting, but considering Furman's track record in that regard -- he either completely ignored those loose ends in G2 or handwaved them away by the second issue -- I'm not convinced he'd be the man for the job.

I am curious about what exactly the format of Hama's throwback G.I. Joe book is, though. Does it tell stories in the space of a single issue like 80s comics did, or is it as decompressed as modern comics with everything being force-fit into multiple-issue arcs? Furman doesn't handle the miniseries format well, but the Spotlights proved that he can still right serviceable single-issue stories. Past experience shows that he needs a strong editor to keep him on track, though, and this being IDW...well, I'm pretty sure they're not the guys for the job either.

I've not read anything GI Joe that IDW have done, though I have read the continuation Harry Lama briefly did for Devil's Due, and it was awful beyond words. I'd be very, very curious as to how closely it follows on from the Marvel run from, though, because about the last fifty issues or so of the Marvel title are shit - and I mean really shit. The best ones are the G2 crossover ones - that's right, that's as good as GI Joe got from about #90 upwards.

The other curious difference is that, while they didn't involve Larry (and were eventually much the better for it... World War III is the ultimate G.I. Joe story, and basically what AHM should have been... 12 issues of Cobra Commander simply trying to take over the world with every resource he has, with the Joes trying to stop him... stripped-down continuity-light Fleetway speed... Hmm, wandering), the main DD titles actually followed the Marvel continuity, albeit with a several-year gap which largely served to draw attention away from those shit last 50 issues.

What Transformers needs to do now is get in young writers, preferably ones who aren't particularly into Transformers, and keep throwing them at the title until someone clicks. James Roberts isn't this man, sadly - he's a great writer, but he works from Furman's framework (almost religiously) and we need something fresh and different. It doesn't need the diminishing returns Furman inevitably brings.

We've already had what's arguably the best possible continuation of Marvel, not written by Furman. I'd like to see a well-written short piece involving Yaniger or Senior. That's about as much continuation as would interest me for 80s/90s stuff. Let it rest.

he's a great writer, but he works from Furman's framework (almost religiously)

The structure's more than the sum of its foundations. No problems with that, personally. The danger is trying to site things too much in what now passes for IDW continuity, which is pretty much a write-off.

The structure's more than the sum of its foundations. No problems with that, personally. The danger is trying to site things too much in what now passes for IDW continuity, which is pretty much a write-off.

I agree. John Barber is spinning some fine gold out of the backstory of some very shoddy movie-continuity comics. With a light touch and some targeted forgetfulness, even the lame duck of the IDW continuity can make a nice dinner if it met a good enough cook.

Denyer wrote:The structure's more than the sum of its foundations. No problems with that, personally. The danger is trying to site things too much in what now passes for IDW continuity, which is pretty much a write-off.

It's more that I think we'd get the same Marvel-esque characters, which would for me leave things a tiny bit predictable. I'd love to see a few totally different things tried with some characters, rather than Prowl prodecure, Nightbeat PI, Badass Grimlock and all that stuff for the umpteenth time.

LSotW sort-of says to me that Roberts might not be the man for the job - it's superb, but it's a rogue slice of TMUK fanfic. It showed his skill for creating compelling characters basically from scratch (Ironfist, Pyro, Overlord), but it also showed the influence of Marvel (Impactor, Springer). As does a lot of the better TMUK fic IMO - the better stuff is when they pick up Hubcap or Drench or the RID cast and run amok.

It's not a bad thing in isolation, but it wouldn't provide the clean break I think Transformers comics need - a break that will never, ever happen because of all the morons who need Starscream to be treacherous or whatever. The reaction to sniper Perceptor (before the idea appeared in a comic written by a more popular writer) shows just how stubborn and stupid most Transformers fans are.

It's not a bad thing in isolation, but it wouldn't provide the clean break I think Transformers comics need - a break that will never, ever happen because of all the morons who need Starscream to be treacherous or whatever.

I think there is a guy at Hasbro whose entire job it is to make sure that Starscream shows an example of treachery in every appearance.

It's ironic that the essence of Transformers is things that change, and yet very few who claim to like the things have any sort of handle on the concept.

It's frankly digusting that the comics, once the medium of choice for decent official TF fiction, have been beaten to the punch in terms of mixing things up a bit by Michael "Bad Boys 2" Bay and a show aimed at 8 year olds. Which is what happens if you have no better ideas than "Hey, this guy wrote this stuff ten years ago, let's give him a massive amount of creative freedom and not bother to check if he's using it in a sensible fashion".

IDW have, IMO, done much more damage to TF comics than DW ever did, at least in terms of the actual output. IDW was the big gold-trimmed chance to get it right, and look what Furman did to it.

Cliffjumper wrote:It's not a bad thing in isolation, but it wouldn't provide the clean break I think Transformers comics need - a break that will never, ever happen because of all the morons who need Starscream to be treacherous or whatever. The reaction to sniper Perceptor (before the idea appeared in a comic written by a more popular writer) shows just how stubborn and stupid most Transformers fans are.

I think it'll be a long time before we see the sort of wholesale reinvention that the comics needs. Over the last decade Transformers has grown into a 'franchise', akin to something like Star Trek. And just like Trek was during the 90s/2000s, Transformers is becoming risk-averse -- why make changes and risk losing your market when you've become such a big hit by doing the same old, same old? And so, just like Trek, one day people are going to get sick of it and stop watching, Transformers is going to become stagnant for a few years, and then, only then, will we see the sort of clean break that you're talking about.

But until then all we'll see is bits of G1 and the Movieverse, chopped up and regurgitated in new packaging. That's not entirely a bad thing -- Animated and Prime both fit that description, and both have managed to entertain lots of people -- but the amount of new ideas they can bring to the table is seriously restricted when the writers are forced to cover the same bases over and over again.

As an aside, things like Sniperceptor really get under my skin. Not because it's necessarily a bad idea, but because I think characters need to have a strong connection to previous versions or there's no point in even using the names. If we'd seen Perceptor slowly grow from the dorky scientist we expect into this cold-blooded, analytical killer or vice versa, I think it would have been a good use of the character. But we didn't. He showed up one day as a scientist and the next as a sniper with no explanation of what happened, and a year later we got an 11-page comic about it that gave us no deeper insights into what was going on in Percy's head than we'd had before. And I feel much the same about Wheeljack in the Prime series, Skids in ROTF and Animated Prowl. These characters aren't Perceptor or Wheeljack or Skids or Prowl, so why call them that?

Does any franchise other than Tranformers completely rewrite entire characters so routinely? The only thing that comes to mind right now is the new BSG, but since I've never seen the old one it doesn't bother me nearly as much. But I know damn well that I'm never going to turn on the TV and see an Ewok Darth Vader, or see that Uhura's become a German dude who's the Enterprise's security officer. Give the damn new characters their own names and identities...don't try to coast along on the coattails of someone who's already popular, because you're only going to dilute both the old character and the new.

But that would be a risk.

I don't have any issue with the main G1 book being based around the most famous characters and situations, the reckless invention days of it are way behind us now, we're talking about what's basically a nostalgia book now, or at least one that's sold on familiarity.

That's why, however good the feedback, Last Stand was always going to sell less well than the ongoing because the less dedicated fanboy buyers want Optimus Prime in their Transformers comic rather than a guy who wants to be him.

Plus, from the companies point of view, why bring back an old franchise just to shake it up completely and ignore what made it popular first time round? Marvel and Sunbow did all the groundwork for them by showing Transformers was at its most popular when it was on contemporary Earth and about Megatron and Optimus Prime and Soundwave and Grimlock. There's a lot of other stuff that messes with that which the fans love, but that's also the point the general viewer/reader started to stop caring. Even the early IDW stuff with it's straining to be more Ultimate didn't vary things that much (indeed, nor does Ultimate Spider-Man or X-Men, it's still basically what anyone with even basic knowledge would expect from those books, just more streamlined).

I mean, would anyone here who isn't a super fan of it be inclined to buy a (randomly picked old property) MASK comic that was about the chracters from the fourth year of that toyline who never even made it in the cartoon?

That doesn't mean you can't do LSOTW style mini series alongside the main book, nor that you can't avoid the "Wolverijne in every X-Men book" problem by making sure you don't just focus on Optimus to the exclusion of all else (I think as long as each issue has a couple of "big" names in it in large roles you can throw in the more obscure guys as support as well).

I think the place for reckless abandon is the film comics. One story on screen every two years that only takes up two hours of screen time, that gives you immense freedom really whilst still allowing you to focus on the "main" characters. Especially with the NEST set up so easily allowing for a ongoing comic framework. Characters like Ratchet are still pretty much blank slates who you can pretty much do what you like with really.

EDIT: Curse you Warcry making some of the same points in a less long winded and bollocksy way!

This is my point, though - if the films can take a fresh look at Ratchet and Ironhide, which they largely have, why can't the comics? The books don't seem to have a huge amount of nostalgia going for them anymore apart from a bit of name recognition anyway, so why not rejig things? New continuity, new takes on the characters (not necessarily complete changes, but maybe play up different aspects and switch around dynamics - which again the films have done, including the first non-boring Starscream for... well, ever).

I'm not sold on messing with things for the sake of it, but I don't see the point in keeping them the same for the sake of it either.

G1's getting more diluted every time shit like IDW comes along and gives us a watered-down versions of characters anyway - unfunny Nightbeat, a Prowl who seems to contradict people rather than use actual logic, the self-parody that Grimlock's been for a decade now, Shockwave's dodgy Mr Sinister impression, emo prick Swoop, space cop Magnus and so on.

Might as well do it properly from the ground up rather than this piecemeal crap. Or if we're going to have the same characters doing the same things, at least have them doing them rather than really thinking about doing them for six issues, and then forgetting all about them and doing something different.

Cliffjumper wrote:This is my point, though - if the films can take a fresh look at Ratchet and Ironhide, which they largely have, why can't the comics? The books don't seem to have a huge amount of nostalgia going for them anymore apart from a bit of name recognition anyway, so why not rejig things? New continuity, new takes on the characters (not necessarily complete changes, but maybe play up different aspects and switch around dynamics - which again the films have done, including the first non-boring Starscream for... well, ever).

I honestly think you're reading more into the movies then is actually there. Movie Ratchet is wallpaper, Ironhide is slightly more thuggish wallpaper and Starscream is the same shallow caricature we always get. The only Transformers that I see even a trace of personality in are Optimus, Bumblebee, Skids and Mudflap.

In general I think the Movieverse is a part of the problem, not a part of the solution. Because it's so successful it's joined G1 as 'source material' for everything that follows, and the things that made it so unique in the first place are being cribbed left, right and centre by other iterations of the series. On the other hand, Transformers doesn't exactly have a great track record when it comes to completely reinventing itself so maybe that's a good thing.

That said, your idea is a good one. One of the things I like about the Prime cartoon is their Starscream. While he's the same basic character, he's actually treated like a somewhat competent, credible threat rather than an increasingly absurd, Shatner-like self-parody. He's also got a lot more depth than any previous version. Sure, he's treacherous, ambitious and cowardly. But he's also got the best interest of the Decepticons at heart. I get the impression he actually wants to protect them from crazy, zombie-obsessed Megatron rather than just seizing power for its' own sake, and I find that he's actually a much more sympathetic character than some of the show's heroes. I'd like to see other characters taken in different directions too, with the caveat that they retain enough of the original that we can at least recognize that they're meant to be the same person.

Cliffjumper wrote:This is my point, though - if the films can take a fresh look at Ratchet and Ironhide, which they largely have, why can't the comics? The books don't seem to have a huge amount of nostalgia going for them anymore apart from a bit of name recognition anyway, so why not rejig things?

Whilst I'd agree that the 80's nostalgia thing isn't what it was ten years ago (though perhaps it's proved more durable than many of us would have expected), it's worht remembering that more casual buyers aren't likely to be posting on message boards so places like this might not be that representive of what the bulk of people picking up the comic might want. Even with the overall dwindling sales and absolute critical kicking it gets the ongoing still sells better than any of their other books, even the much loved by all of us Last Stand.

And I think that's simply because anyone picking it up who isn't imersed in the wider world can go "Yeah, I recognise that guy and this situation, this is Transformers" in a way they won't with a lot of LSOTW or something like Drift. I don't see there being a problem with them doing a G1 comic that very G1ish for the old farts/majority, alongside more fun and oddball minis for those of us who do want something different and more interesting. Because doing someting tradition doesn't automatically mean it's bad, even if IDW haven't managed to do it good yet (then again, most of their new ideas are terrible as well, so it's not so much the story as the people telling it).

It reminds me of the situation with the Big Finish Doctor Who audios where a couple of years ago there were complaints about them doing three Dalek stories in one year (out of 13, one for each main range Doctor). "We're sick of old monsters, especially the Daleks, give us something new!" was the rallying cry from message boards. To which BF's response was "But the Dalek plays sell a lot more than any of the other ones, even the third in 12 months. Most of our paying punters clearly do want this, even if those on Gallifrey Base don't". Personally I didn't mind so much as two of the stories were very good and one was flawed but flawed in an interesting way.

The ongoing isn't much like G1 though, apart from the names. I'm not saying kill Grimlock and bring in Rapido. I'm saying Grimlock (as an example; this isn't the waki, let's keep pointless bayonet practice to a minimum) is tired and boring, let's make him less tired and boring. Which makes all the nostalgia bubble stuff irrelevant.

To be fair, Costa seems to have new ideas about a lot of this, it's just that his ideas are rubbish. So that doesn't seem to be working. But we've established the ongoing runs on name recognition, so let's give someone else a try and see if we can break some new ground with the same characters. Not round up the old twat who has nothing new to give (and there are people out there who bought hundreds - yes, remember, there were nutters buying multiple covers just to help IDW out - of comics finding that one out).

My point with the Movie characters is while they're not radically different from their namesakes, they're different enough that you can't guess exactly what they're going to do - it's that refinement. Bumblebee isn't the same little guy (or Used To Be The Little Guy But Not Quite As Little), Prime's more decisive and so on. Yeh, half of them up are sketches, but then pretty much everyone in IDW is just lifted from the Marvel comics, so it's a step in the right direction.

I'd argue with Starscream being shallow. A lot of it is nuance, but I prefer the "is he/isn't he?" take rather than the dreadful Sunbow, better but still pretty annoying Marvel and equally pathetic IDW versions (was he in DW? Can't remember, no-one remembers DW anyway) - and certainly a much better dynamic with Megatron. Same for Ironhide - the character has always been utterly generic, at least in the films he has some sort of personality that isn't summed up by Peter Cullen wanting two paychecks.