Childhood's End Cover

Since about 1999 all the cherished stories, movies, toys, and cartoons from my childhood have come back … back in fashion, back in popularity, back in new movies. This trend is part nostalgia, part retro-lust, part Hollywood-out-of-ideas, part grown up fans giving fan-service, and part clueless directors meddling (and screwing) with beloved childhood characters. These were characters and stories that I loved when I was younger and it is not that I now see them with a different lens, I see them through someone else’s lens … and that someone, the movie director, usually has mental issues. How did this trend start in 1999? Well, that is when the first Star Wars prequel came out.

This summer, I am excited to see several movies because even after seeing so much destruction of my childhood world, I still hold hope that the movies will not only do them justice for an audience now, but will not betray the core of what made these stories interesting in the first place. I guess I am eternally optimistic because this summer seems to be shaping up as an onslaught to the remaining tidbits of childhood fantasy and youthful wonder that still remain in me. I am talking about two movies in particular: Transformers 2 and G.I. Joe.

Back to Star Wars I for a moment … well, so much has already been said about Star Wars Episode I that there is really not much I can add. The only thing that made that movie a Star Wars movie was lightsabers. Other than that, it ranged from boring to ticking-me-off. I could (and probably will at some point) go off on that tangent, but “now is not the time for this.”

We did get Lord of the Rings not long after the Star Wars prequels began and the “Rings” trilogy was excellent and no changes ticked me off *too* bad–I can give them some credit for the changes they made in Two Towers … sorta, I mean, some of them did not even make any sense (Elves at Helm’s Deep? Aragorn’s near-death? … again, this is for another bloggie day). The trend has seen ups and downs.

Let us get to this summer already! The Transformers sequel, well, before I see it I am already split on it because of the first movie. What was wrong with the first movie? Where to begin? My inner fanboy protested quite a bit: the design of the robots was fugly–to the point of it just being *wrong*. They look like a giant mechanic buzzard puked up shards of glass, steel, and tires … that talked.

When you saw the original cartoon robots, or “Generation 1,” you could tell from their robot modes what they would transform into. They were simpler, cartoonish, yet, effective.

How Devastator Should Have Looked

You could see car and plane parts that made up their robot form. Airplane nosecones made up their chests. Car doors extended into arms. In these movies, their robot forms are so unordered and so jigsawed the robots look like they should transform into junk yards.

Devastator in Transformers 2

Aside from the design of the bots, I had a couple other issues: the robots hardly ever talked to each other. They usually only addressed the humans. Humans? Humans were a minor role in the original story–this is what made Transformers different from Robotech. Okay, now I am wading in deep geek waters here, but my point is that the focus in the TV cartoon was the Transformers, not some-kid-meets-the-Transformers story as in the movies. This would not bother me so much if they had just brought out more character in the robots like the original series. In this movie, they were all pretty much the same. They each just had a voice.

Here is the other side of the coin. I kinda liked the movie (Transformers 1) … simply because it delivered what it was supposed to deliver: big transforming robots blowing shit up. It worked (to an extent). There was action, there was comedy (though it was pointless juvenile comedy), there were great special effects, and it was fast-paced. While it did not take advantage of the rich characters and subtle message of preservation of the original series (yeah, those ideas are there if you look), it was fun.

Maybe the next one will be better in my eyes as I will have more proper expectations. Meaning I will have to lower my “fandom expectations” and heighten my “casual-movie-going expectations.”

[Update] … Wow, the reviews for Transformers 2 are bad … really bad. In the time I started to write this post until today, I have heard enough about the movie to not see it. All the problems I listed above about the first movie are doubled in the second one (or, remain unremedied). Plus, it is about two and half hours! Sheesh, and this is for kids? I think I learned enough from this review to bypass the theater experience and wait for the DVD (rental).

Now, on to G.I. Joe. G.I. Joe was always second place behind Transformers as far as my love of cartoons and toys. But here comes the G.I. Joe live-action movie. All the rumors and images I have seen of this movie are quite promising. They pretty much had me sold when the character of Snake Eyes was announced to be played by Ray Park. But wasn’t Ray Park in Star Wars Episode I? Let me not digress …

However, I saw something that could only be construed as sheer stupidity–the design of Cobra Commander. The character of Cobra Commander is not difficult to design. He either wears a mirror-shaded mask or a hood.

Cobra Commander - Mask

Cobra Commander - Hood

See? Simple. Effective. Striking. That’s *bible*! And I saw that in this movie they are giving him, yes a mask, but one that is translucent, in the shape of a skull, with tubes coming out of it. It looks like some ventrical filter for a Dyson vacuum. Imagine Darth Vader *partially* unmasked, and the part that remains looks like a plastic femur.

Cobra Commander - "Skeletor"

C’mon! That is nothing whatsoever like the original! At least have a resemblance! At least look at the source material! It looks like Skeletor from He-Man (no need to revisit that!). What are they thinking?!

Grrr …

I have gone on about this long enough.

Sigh.

… I think I will see G.I. Joe anyway. I will give it a chance and hope against hope.