SpacyAce2012

Just joined the Facebook page. Love the website you set up. Nice work.

No reboot is necessary. Hollywood is already in the bad habit of that, lacking the creativity to come up with anything new and original. Macross is now pretty much an "alternate reality" kind of deal. There is no need to re-write it to make the early years of the story fit in with real-world history or events.

Good stuff, OP. Two thumbs up. The cannon fodders' recognition for their glorious sacrifices is long overdue.

I hated it and loved it at the same time. But I agree, there were some real gems in Clash that made me laugh my ass off.

If any characters from previous additions to the Macross universe make any cameos, it will likely be those from the more recent installments. Or even from the games. I highly doubt that we'll see anything of the Megaroad 01 or Mao Nome in this series. As for Sheryl's surname, I'm of the opinion that it's simply a nod toward Macross Zero, rather than any sort of relation. Unless someone has official confirmation otherwise, or that it's revealed later on in Macross Frontier.

Actually, no. That's not what I was saying, in any shape or form. And it's debatable weither or not such phenomena actually exists in nature. I lean more toward the "it's all bullsh*t" camp. But I have an open enough mind to acknowledge the fact that science can't prove/disprove everything, and that anything is possible until proven otherwise beyond a shadow of a doubt. So,no. Paranormal phenomena can't accurately be called "magic" in the purest sense. Cool sounding name, or not. Of course, this is just my take on the matter. Others will differ. Just because they didn't appear in the original television series, doesn't make it a cardinal sin to include such in later installments in the franchise. It's a science fiction series, despite the elements of "realism" and "scientific" sounding explanations. Which pretty much means anything goes. Now, as fans, we all have different tastes. Which means we all have "lines in the sand" that, when crossed, makes a given series/franchise too hokey from our point of view. And from my perspective, Macross Zero didn't cross too far over my particular "line". But I will say, in my opinion, the "New Age" angle has been explored enough with Macross Zero and Macross 7. It's time to move on. I'm hoping that Macross Frontier will move the franchise from that element, into something new. I'm glad we can agree on something. As for the disagreements, I actually welcome a different take on things. It helps me keep things in perspective.

If I'm not mistaken, the squadron numerical designation for Skull was "VF-1". Which kinda fits considering what they flew in the original series.

I like Gundam, but I'm not what you would call a "hard core" fan. I consider Macross and Patlabor to be better franchises.

Nah, I don't snicker at them for TPTB milking the Gundam money cow. It may have something to do with the fact that I don't acknowledge anything, outside of the main Universal Century timeline, as Gundam. The rest of it was just adolescent crap. And fans of the "classic" Gundam actually have my sympathy.

While I do have my gripes about some things in the franchise, I've pretty much enjoyed everything released to date, including Macross II and the first episode of Macross Frontier. So, I wouldn't have stopped with the original series. After all, look at my sig. I'm a proud Macross CONSUMER WHORE!

I've heard all the hoopla and speculation on this upcoming Trek film. While I've long since become convinced that the franchise is dead, and should be allowed to rest, I'm willing to give this film a fair shake. So, yes, I plan on seeing it.

What is shown in Macross Zero isn't "magic", which is a word that gets bandied about in reference to that show. More like telekinesis, telepathy, and strong paranormal empathy. There have been shows similar to Macross that added, or further elaborated later in the same fashion as Kawamori, paranormal elements in the storyline. Just because mystical elements in society embrace the paranormal in their occult disciplines, doesn't make it "magic" in the same sense as seen in the fantasy genre. While I agree that Kawamori has gone a little too far in the "New Age" direction with the franchise, it hasn't taken away from the overall theme of the Macross saga, set by the original series. Which is the end of Man's isolation in the universe, and his forced venture into a vast and dangerous unknown for the sake of survival. Macross isn't just a military-oriented war story. Or a romance show featuring the ever-tiresome "love triangles". Or simply a cartoon about giant robots, piloted by angsty teen-agers, kicking alien ass. It's far more than that, which has been the secret to it's long-term success. And there is room to explore other things.

My vote would be "None of the Above". Unfortunately, it's not among the choices. I remember a movie starring Mel Gibson (can't recall the title), where a man volunteers for such an experiment in the 1940's, and wakes up in today's world. From what little I've seen (only caught bits and pieces of it), the guy had it kinda rough. Of course, someone from 50-70 years in the past could easily adjust to the present, where many of the basics are the same. It wouldn't be much of a problem for the individual in question to quickly catch up on the new stuff. Now, 100-130 years wouldn't be too bad on someone. It would just take a little longer to adjust to the changed world. It all boils down to the basics. We still use wooden pencils, revolvers, paper, telephones, and cars (with steering wheels, shifters, hand brakes, and four wheels on the ground). It's the educational level and advanced technology that will be the main obstacle to overcome. Bring someone ahead from 250-1000 years in the past. To someone from two centuries in the past, some things will be familiar. But not a lot. A thousand years? It would be like a mentally retarded man wandering around an Albert Einstein convention. The same would be true of a modern man (or woman) thrust into a similar situation. In any case, I don't much care to see the future beyond my own lifetime. I'm not an idealist, but a realist. The rate the world is going, I don't much expect the future to be like Star Trek (or insert your favorite Utopia in it's place). No matter what starry-eyed dreamers may think.

Very interesting. I'm assuming, that if you can find any of them, that they would be collector's items.

A Macross game on BluRay? I could go for it. No worries about modding when I import. Personally, I would be just as happy if Harmony Gold DID NOT decide on any more games based on Macross. Robotech:Battlecry sucked. After that game, and Star Trek: Shattered Universe, I avoid anything with TDK Mediaactive's stamp on it. The Sega Macross game for the PS2, on the other hand, was a blast to play. No annoying Jack Archer. But I will admit that Robotech: Invasion was fun to play. I thought it was pretty good, despite all the bad reviews. Just goes to show that like the case with movie critics, game reviews should be taken only as a rough guide. Not the final verdict.

I'm a big fan of the VF-1 and YF-19. The VF-11 holds a special place in my heart. But I voted for the VF-2SS. Something about all that firepower (SAP), in such a sleek package, is just downright sexy.

I chose the U.N. Spacy. They tend to go the most places and (apparently) see the most action.

I have to second Graham here, it would depend on the period of Macross history. Since the 2040's was a "hot" decade, I'll go with that one and say VF-11 Thunderbolt.

While the idea of a transforming combat system was accepted on Feb. 2002, the basic battroid concept was born around the same time as the destroid concept. From the Compendium timeline, year 2000: The prototype destroids entered trial production first (Sept 2001). However, formal adoption and full production of ANY destroid type didn't begin until June 2006 (MBR-04 series). In between those dates, only trial production and design work of most of the models familiar to us took place. The only exception would be the HWR series, which began in design phase on 12/2000. However, trial production of the Monster didn't begin until 2005, full production: 9/2008. And while this was going on, the VF program was in full swing. Both programs ran concurrent to one another. So, no. I don't believe that the destroids were rejected that early on in favor of the VF. That would come some time after SW1. There is no indication that production was halted before or during SW1.

Possibly. Hell, the nose/cockpit assembly resembles the VF-19 a little, as opposed to the F-117A style of the original VF-17.

Judging from what I saw in the original series and movie, the destroids didn't fare much worse than the VFs. One must remember that the crews of both types were facing overwhelming odds in most engagements, and fighting an enemy with centuries of combat experience in the environment in question. The Phalanx and Defender (like the HWR Monster series) were specialized designs that were almost perfect for the role they performed on board the Macross during SW1. The Tomahawk was the odd man out, it seems, not being as well suited as a mobile gun emplacement (it was designed to replace the MBT, after all). It was fine for the Daedalus Attack, but that appeared to be the exception to the rule. I wouldn't call the weapons loadout of the "general" use destroids lacking. The Tomahawk had more firepower than a standard VF-1 Valkyrie, without the need for cumbersome attachments that didn't allow for the use of it's full tactical advantages in ground operations (GPS-1 Protector system). The Spartan, a cavalry vehicle designed to close with the enemy, was pretty potent in firepower. The plans for the "battroid" and "destroid" were put into the works roughly around the same period. I'm guessing that the "battroid" was intended to originally function as a sort of "giant infantry", while the "destroid" was intended to replace traditional AFVs in frontline units. The "battroid" eventually (once again, only a gut feeling I get from the timeline) evolved into the VF, which kills three birds with one stone (replaces jet fighters, attack helos, and "standard" space fighters) and still meets it's original criteria in battroid configuration. While the U.N. probably didn't know about specific models and types of enemy hardware (and their capabilities), the "battroid" and "destroid" were developed in tandem, to meet specific needs in a hypothetical future conflict WITH GIANTS. The Spartan was an ideal starting point for a second-line defensive destroid. It was fairly quick, with good firepower (without a lot of overkill), and it enjoyed some of the same advantages as a VF in battroid configuration thanks to it's more humanoid design in comparison to other destroids. In fifty years time, technology has evolved to the point to where it's possible build a better Spartan, so to speak. A loadout specific to it's role, better agility, increased speed/mobility, better armor, etc. Such a unit would be cheaper than VFs to purchase and maintain for second line forces (not to mention, easier to maintain). It would be far more effective than traditional AFVs, and would free up VFs to be better utilized elsewhere. Well worth the costs over traditional combat vehicles. And to be honest, not any worse than VFs and MBTs in an urban environment on board a colony ship. Probably far less,in fact, if the destroid in question is designed for such duties. As for never encountering an opponent inside the dome? Attacks against civilian areas in colony fleets are the norm now, it seems (Macross 7 set the standard; wouldn't have a story otherwise). And the civilian areas of the SDF-1 Macross come under attack in the original series. The odds are high enough that any colony, that comes under attack by hostile forces, will see action in the civilian sectors. Thus, these hypothetical civil defense destroids would be well worth it. Even if the long trip for a colony fleet is relatively uneventful, considering history, paying the costs for a destroid "insurance policy" is not only worth it, it's a smart thing to do. Deep space is a highly dangerous place. Someone mentioned how M7 proved that using destroids in a colony dome is a bad idea. I'm of the opinion that the incident in question isn't a good example, for or against. The use of a HWR-00-MKII inside of a colony dome is ridiculous by any standard. Overkill in the extreme, to be honest. The HWR series wasn't designed for such work to begin with. Unless, of course, you don't mind a little urban renewal.

I watched it again today and noticed another homage. I don't know if someone else mentioned it, but the "booms" of the Macross-looking structure had the numbers "01" and "02" painted at the end of the runway. The ARMD 01 and ARMD 02, perhaps? And the take-off sequences of the Ex-suit reminded me of the carrier launch of VF-1s in the original series. From the aft-quarter, the armored VF-25 reminded me of the VF-2SS SAP for some reason.

An interesting bit of speculation. And one that makes sense. However, I'm going to have to take issue with the deal of AFVs versus destroids. Considering the fact that destroids have superior terrain management, mobility, armor, and firepower, a highly mobile destroid similar to the Cheyenne air defense platform, or Spartan MBR, would serve the need better. And I have my doubts that a more conventional AFV would be as effective as a combat system as the destroid. "Cost-effective" only goes so far. Sure, the upfront costs are cheaper in the short term. But once you factor in losses, training new replacements, etc in actual combat versus what you get out of the system before it gets DXed, the destroid is the better long term investment. Quality versus quantity works better when one doesn't have the luxury of a Warsaw Pact sized military. As for as the deal of not damaging streets and buildings, that's only a concern in peacetime, over the course of routine patrol duties and exercises. In actual combat, it's far less of a worry. In any case, as the Cheyenne, Macross II destroids, and the M7 "patroids" demonstrate, it's possible to devise a simple secondary motive system on destroids to keep the PR guys happy over the course of peacetime duties. Now, I'm not completely dismissing traditional combat vehicles. In fact, they still have a role to play in the late 21st Century Macross. Typical security duties, militia use, "first response" units (as we saw in Macross Frontier), and low-intensity conflicts are some roles that come to mind. However, as a primary replacement for the destroid? Not a good idea. I still hope to see some new destroids in the series as the war heats up. But considering the cameo-only appearance in everything since DYRL, I won't hold my breath.

I was impressed with the VF-25. I take it that it was sporting a 2059 version of the FAST Packs? I'm also guessing that they were brand-spanking new, judging from the pretty-boy's reaction (I can't remember the kid in the exo-suit's name at the moment). It makes me wonder why a PMC had these goodies, while the regular UNS pilots were buzzing around in what appears to be nothing more than upgraded VF-17s. I also found it amusing that the defense forces were using wheeled AFVs against these "bug" creatures. I'll bet that someone was regretting the phasing out of Destroids decades earlier.

Watched the sub on YouTube. It looked impressive, if a bit rushed in terms of story pace. I look forward to more. Then, I'll offer my final opinion on this newest Macross series.