Mmm, unless Lion-o's sword can cut through the Transformers' armor, doubt they'd win.

*Hums Thundercats Opening Song*

The movie is awesome.
But the advertisement really is somewhat overdone... I mean, the scene with the Panasonic SD card? For a moment it felt like Truman Show.

Huh?

When the blonde girl steals the code.
She literally shows the card to the camera so you can carefully read the brand.

Oh. Does she? I dunno, I guess it didn't make that big of an impression on me. I was too busy wondering if she was going to get caught stealing the code and wondering where she was about to take it I guess.

Or when they're flying around the skyscrapers, the clearest thing in the picture is "Wells Fargo" on one of the buildings, not the animation in front.

Huh... I didn't notice that either. Too caught up in the fun of the chases and explosions and awesome robot fighting to care about billboards or signs.

I'm not the best spotter of that kind of things either, I haven't noticed what Xavius mentions. But that Panasonic brand was seriously hard to miss since it was the only thing on the screen for like 2-3 seconds.

I mean, I remember that she used a memory card - mostly cause I do remember thinking, "Huh, I thought those were only for digital cameras." But I couldn't have told you what brand it was or anything, cause that thought was quickly replaced with "Who's she taking that to?" and then the hilarity that ensued shortly there-after.

Considering the fact you guys are watching a show that's pretty much based on a toy line, I would think product placement would be the least thing you should complain about.

I remember a lot of discussion about Toy-tie ins during the first half of the 1980s. When Transformers, G.I. Joe, He-Man and other shows like that were based on toy-lines, there were a lot of gripes about how such things were cynical attempts to pander to kids and things like Disney Animation, Warner Brothers Looney Tunes, or Hanna-Barbara characters like Yogi, the Flintstones, and the Jetsons were more "pure" because they weren't making you go out and buy toys, they were created first and foremost to be cartoons for entertainment.

So, what happens twenty-years later?!

A lot of nostalgia for Transformers, G.I. Joe, He-Man, TMNT, with new cartoons and toy lines, being passed to a new generation, and treated with reverence by the people writing the new shows.

Meantime, Disney has had trouble adapting the classic gang of Mickey and Donald to the newer generation. Warner Brothers decides that people aren't interested in Looney Tunes because a single movie doesn't do well at the box office and virtually takes them off of Cartoon Network and even Boomerang. A really asinine decision because it's showing those classics that get the new generations hooked.

Hanna Barbara has creative bankruptcy--with the exception of Scooby-Doo, they can't seem to do anything with any of the classic characters! They have a large library of great characters. The Flintstones, the "Simpsons" of its day is reduced to advertising Fruity and Cocoa Pebbles! All they can do is engage in creative bankruptcy and reduce such cartoons to cannon-fodder for "Adult Swim" or something for Jaded Gen-Xers to make fun of. Say what you want about Transformers, at least they know how to treat the property--you don't make fun of your own products or use them for parody, that's brand suicide.

Wonder what those critics in the 1980s would say if we could have shown them the current situation...

Thats what the other cartoon on the list in the survey was!

It was a great show when I was a kid, I saw it recently again, and realized how short my attention span was

As my father explained to his friend, They are now selling cars to the people they used to sell the toys to.

Snarf would so kick their butts

Hey, no dissing Pebbles, those things are like god candy.

Just out of curiousity, how old are you?

37.5 now, will be turning 38 on Winter Solstice.

Transformers really hit in 1984-1985, so I was about 14-15 at that time. I was still a geek and loved comic books but I wasn't as into animation at that time. (Plus it didn't help that a lot of the cool shows were on a UHF channel that never got good reception where I lived) If it had hit 5 years earlier I might have the OMG! factor a lot of you guys have for it.

The 1970s didn't really have a lot of toy-tie-in products--you didn't have toy companies making lines first and adapting them. For adventure fans, it was mostly the two defunct studios of Hanna-Barbara and Filmation. Sid and Marty Krofft did the really crazy live-action puppet stuff, and Warner Brothers had the Looney Tunes reruns. There was an outfit called DePatie-Freleng Enterprises, they ended up doing The Pink Panther and expanded in the 70s with stuff like The Ant and the Aardvark. They had some success in the 70s but ended up selling their outfit which ended up becoming Marvel Studios in the 80s. Disney didn't do as much outside of their shows and Mickey Mouse Club (both which just reran old stuff). Disney TV was more about doing live action family shows.

There wasn't a lot of first-run syndication going on at that time. Most network shows would only have 13 episode seasons and a lot of them didn't last past season 1. I think Superfriends was the closest thing we had to a consistent multi-year success.

(Hilight text if you want spoilers...)

I finally saw it today. I was very pleased. The only thing that bugged me was the subtle hint at the end of the credits that the sequel will bring in the . (Did any one catch the at the end? I bet that's how they get !)

There is a spoiler tag for the forums.

Just saw it today, and I had a nerdgasm.

I stayed until the credit started rolling, so I guess I missed the stuff at the end.

The only thing you really miss, and it's after maybe 30 seconds of the credits, is