VFTF1

If you're right - which you probably are - then I think that the only reason they bought it was because somewhere in WB, one of the guys in charge of buying up rights to dying franchises was an RT fan. If it was less than 10 million bucks then they could have just bought it as a pool of purchases made in the same time frame. I imagine studios buy stuff like this all the time just to tinker with it. In any case, the name recognition is limited to anime fans who all recognize that Robotech sucks... Pete

I guess what I was trying to say- and failed to commnicate- was the contrary to the notion that NGE is too vague, incomprehensible and has "numerous interpretations" -- this does not mean the show is impossible to talk about. For instance - people who keep harping on the "numerous inrepretations" bit never seem to actual LIST any. I listed two. I think it's cool that there are different angles from which to see the series - but just saying that isn't enough. I would prefer if people LISTED them. Conversly, if someone is going to criticize NGE for that, then maybe that need to show HOW this hurts the story? Just like Air-'s contention that the plot is "convuluted" - well - then I would like to hear how one could make it less convuluted. What does one suggest regarding how to better communicate the story? I'll go even further -NGE is not pretentious and vague - but people's comments about it sure are sometimes. And I also don't like the idea that the show has no logic to it - because I think this presumes that "logic" is the same as "transparent" or "simple." It's not. In any event - it's kind of like the M7 "filler episodes" argument - people make it but then they never actually make a coherent argument about a specific episode being filler. Same with EVA - you will hear that it's illogical, vague blah blah blah - and then when you ask for specifics - nothing. I mean - when I have a negative view of something, I like to elaborate - notice my crticisms of Turn-A-Gundam or Robotech. Of course, giving arguments does not make them right or true - but it helps. Providing mere adjectives to describe ones' reaction, on the other hand... there's not much to discuss there. Pete

No - it's not. If WB tried anything as ridiculous it would be destroyed the minute that the story got out. And their competitors would be more than happy to undermine their story, not to mention regular fans, people who know something about the 80s etc. Your assuming that media is homogenous and that there's only one chanell. Most marketing is not a lie. Most marketing is based on some real qualities of the product that are just exagerated a little bit. And most of the exageration is pretty transparent. Besides - rather than try to make RT sound important, why don't they just come up with their own Sci-fi movie and make the MOVIE sound important? Better yet - why not try to make a truly important movie and market something with content and strength? I would not put too much weight into WB purchasing the rights to Robotech. First of all - any guesses as to how much it sold for? I am guessing it was not more than 10 million dollars - in other words - chump change. So why not buy it? It's concievable WB has a purchasing division which invests in rights to various properties n a daily basis. Do you think studios just buy things when they need it and determine "ok - we're making this movie." HG was hawking it and found somebody at Warners to buy it. Whether it was a good sales pitch or whether they found an RT fan who happened to have a budget and a line to higher ups is irrelevent - the point is - they made some money and WB got these rights to play around with. They'll play around with it, conclude it doesn't work out, and that's it. But...whatever... if they make the LAM it will just go more and more to show that HG failed in "bringing anime to the USA" since a sign of success would be people crowding the theatres to see ...oh...I dunno...anime movies! Pete

It's hard not to agree with you here. But I notice, on the other hand, that EVA dectractors in this thread - so far - since Air-, have all used vague negative generalizations that only someone who uses vague positive generalizations could disagree with. Nobody is claiming NGE invented Freudian psychoanalysis or the existential problem of Heideggerian angst. What NGE did was to incorporate those, and other thoughtful theories and ideas, into its' plot and designs. Fans who come out arguing that it's the greatest show ever and that it did a,b,c and d to the world of anime (all good) are just going to hit a brick wall of other fans arguing the opposite -and there's really no way to distinguish who is right and who is wrong because the arguments are on the same level as "I live cheesburgers and he likes hamburgers." Who's to say? The only anime where this argument WORKS is something like Toppa Tengen Gurren Lagann where everyone who claims that the show is the greatest anime ever does so with a bit of irony since the show pretty much claims that about itself and encourages you to just be super-positive about it. It's kind of the same with Bassara's music which people either like or don't like. Can't really argue with someone who says "the plot is nice, but I hate the J-pop." In the case of EVA, however, hyperbolism has no place. It's negligent of fans to praise it to high heaven without being able to step up and outline what is praiseworthy in it. And fans are usually incapable of confronting the following: a) it's too vague, b) nobody knows what's going on, c) there's a zillion intepretations for what's happening etc etc etc. What results is a circular argument that can be summed up as I like icecream and you don't. As always - you need to get into specifics, as I tried in my response to Air. It's the only way to at least have a sensible discussion about the show. Final note: why is EVA so popular despite it being so difficult? Because like most post-modern work - it has a lot of "controversial" window dressing that has nothing to do with its' essential plot but which turns heads non the less. The masturbation scene, the extent of the fan service (which at the time was pretty revolutionary), the "dark" themes - unless I'm mistaken EVA was one of the first anime that made it over to the west with stuff like this. And then, too, please take into account that works of high intellectual caliber do not necessarily have to be unpopular. In Shakespeare's day, Hamlet was not performed for professors and students - it was performed for commonors who loved it. Pete

Exactly. And one reason amongst a million that I don't see it happening is also this: Comic books had their live-action counter parts in TV series for many decades before the most recent LAMs for Spiderman or Hulk or Batman. I mean, I remember loving the Incredible Hulk with Lou Faringo and Bill Bixby on TV. That series kicked ass. But there were also numerous others on TV too. Batman's 60s camp live action is also memorable. So it's not like there were just comics and cartoons and no live action counterpart. Meanwhile - anime... that's different. I mean - live action can't do anime well - it can't because anime takes the opportunity to be crazy that drawing things offers. I dunno... there are just so many characteristic facial expression in anime that can't translate into live action, or situations - I guess I'm talking kind of manga styles that can translate from manga to anime but not from anime to LAM. And there will always be a place for the uniqueness that anime brings us as opposed to LAM.... at least I think so. Pete

I think the most explicit post-modernist that I've read up to this point has been Levinas. But post modern literature as such... not really. Unless you count something like Camus? But I have watched a hell of a lot of post modern theatre productions; for better or for worse. It's just that; truth be told, I think all they're doing is rediscovering the Greeks.... I've always found a lot in common between Socratic rationalism and post-modernism... But again - can't really say insofar as literature is concerned. I stopped reading books about 10 years ago except for the occasional re-read of something or other...but generally I stay away from them. The problem with the categorization is that it's such an empty shell really - like most off hand categorizations. I mean - the entire system by which literary and philosophical works are categorized has precious little to do with the works themselves. Plato did not write his dialogues thinking to himself "I'm a Platonist. I'm going to now become the next chapter after the Pre-Socratics and will be a footnote for Augustinians in their debates with Thomists" and Machiavelli didn't title his most famous book "Modernity: the Opening Salvo." All of these classifications were dreamed up primarily by 20th century academicians, usually for the purpose of being able to summarize history in neat and tidy text books which would be fed to large bodies of students who would then have to memorize these arbitrary categories and identify them on standardized tests. This is why I'm instinctively opposed to thinking about literature of any sort in terms alien to those that were the terms of the author - and yet I've encountered numerous instance of "post modern" thinking where the author and his intention was either considered irrelevent or worse- inaccessible... And this is what gives birth to the clashing "dude - there's no point or logic to this" versus the "dude why should there be - it's all subjective and just say what you feel" debate. Both sides are boring and wrong. This can be said for NGE as well - it's not actually that difficult to spot the multiplicity of themes in this anime. Saying that it's post modern shouldn't become a synonym for "we can't understand it because it's just that complex." I think you summed it up best when you wrote this: That is to say - the epic hero comes before the epic. People are not just pawns in a huge rendering of history. Context is not king - and yes, Evangelion does this well. But I'd still like to hear Air-'s rebuttle Pete

Yeah - Gubaba is right. I would just add two points: 1. Per EVA - one of the more jolly interpretations I have gotten out of each episode of EVA is that the Angels represent something similar to Sysyphus's stone that he rolls up the hill over and over again; that is to say - the rat race, the everyday grind of average every day work. Look at how Misato is so concerned about being fired after the incident with the twin angel - it's funny because in spite of the circumstances where you have aliens attacking earth, giant robots etc - human instincts are still no different than in any other line of work - people have payments on mortgages (or in Misato's case her car loan...and the repairs to the car) and generally have expenses and ambitions and worry about "mundane" things like their jobs even in situations where supposedly the end of the world/universe is at stake. And each approaching angel is like some twisted episode of the comic book Dilbert, where we see the characters squirm a bit because of what's going on "at work" - and then they love their down time at home where Angels and the end of the world are totally irrelevent. This is - I guess - another way of saying that the "reasons" behind the angels shouldn't be seen linearly - especially given the last angel, which is non-linear by definition. 2. Um...I was going to say something about post-modernism... but truth be told I haven't read any post modern books....at least...I don't think so...at least...I haven't read any authors who identify themselves as specifically post-modern... although critics sure like to bandy the term about. But yeah... I guess what Gubaba generally laid out is a good definition - as good as any. Pete

I've thought about this "positive" side you speak of and on the face of it - it is positive. I mean - the less "Robotech" is associated with Macross - the better I guess. But I don't see what you're talking about happening for the simple reason that HG and 'Robotech' are not necessary for Warner to make a movie about a big ship that crashes, bad big aliens that want ot get it back and good guy humans fighting back with transforming robots. That generic concept is....well - generic. If someone wanted to make it - what's stopping them? Why do they need to work with HG? The ONLY reason that Robotech and HG got a looksee from Warner is that - improbable as the final movie is - someone at Warner, or Tobey Macguire himself or someone at his production company IS a Robotech fan - plane and simple. And I mean a hardcore Robotech fan who would post in the "Hardcore Robotechnology" section of Robotech.com. That much I am willing to believe - and this person or this small group of people must be competent in their work, have worked on some movies or around some succesful movies and therefore generally have the ears of others at Warner who at least give them a fair hearing - and they pitched Robotech timing it with the popularity of Transformers - a time when bigwigs at Warners would be most apt to consider it. They made it sound compelling - that is to say, just like Transformers: it's a cartoon from the 80s, it has transforming robots, but no studio has the property yet - let's get it! Warner people heard "transforming robots, 80s cartoon" and this translated in their minds as "make money off of nostalgia boom, all these comic book-based movies and 80s cartoon based movies, get in on the action." But then somebody on their legal staff realized what a crapshot of a legal mess it was, and somebody else who has some knowledge about what properties are hot and which aren't discovered that Robotech was likely the least watched, least syndicated, least memorable cartoon of the 80s - which it was. They also discovered that it was the only one of the "top" cartoons of that time that was actually a bootleg created from seperate anime that had nothing to do with eachother. And that there were some books published. And then they discovered that there was just one transforming airplane type. And somebody at marketing said "how can that compete as viable merchandise? Just one transforming airplane? What - are we going to just have one toy on the shelves? That's stupid." And then someone else said: "No no - we'll also have toys of other stuff; tanks and warships and space ships and soldiers..." And then someone else said: "Well - wait the tanks and soldiers are like GI Joe - that market is cornered." And another fellow said: "And one transforming airplane competing against several different transforming robots from Hasbro?" And then someone else said: "No no! It'll be like the Terminator 4 toy line - they had a little bit of everything thrown in... And another dude said: "Meeting adjourned." And to the extent that anybody at Warner is today sitting there thinking about this - they are loosing hope because no matter what angle you approach this work from there is only ONE way to make it good: That is to take what Shoji Kawamori made and put that into a movie. Take a young girl with a great singing voice and create a cinderella story with humor a love triangle and the alien robots and everything else mixed in. And that is Macross. Strip Macross and leave only generic big ship, big aliens, pow pow airplanes turn into robots and the things if a failure. Mass audiences will see it as a silly attempt at ripping off GI Joe, Transformers and ID4 - a mix and mash of no significance. It'll be like Pearl Harbor only without the history, with transforming airplanes and aliens instead of Zeros. That's the BEST it could expect to be. That's why I just don't see it happening. Even in the generic form that you're talking about... it'll put people to sleep. Pete

Well in all fairness, those of us who have only seen the beginnings of Macross the First only got to see Misa in "stiff" mode - that is to say, I think Mikimoto is saving her sexy feminine side for later. For now, since it's the beginning, we're being told (via imagery): Minmey: Hot sex doll. Misa: Your 4th grade teacher on crack. Although I had the hots for my fourth grade english teacher, so .... Pete

What can I say? Only Minmey can make 70s outfits look so good! Pete

Yay Happy that you wrote about your thoughts in this thread. Now - onward to your comments: Well this is certainly a fair criticism, but I personally prefer to seperate the phenomena of the NGE franchise/institution from the actual series. I even go so far as to prefer the ending to the series instead of End of Evangelion. Now, I know there is a debate about whether the two ending are similar or different. I take the stand that they complement eachother, and that the series ending is esoteric while the EOE ending is exoteric. As for nothing groundbreaking in the field of religion, philosophy or action - to a point, you are correct insofar as NGE is largely based on the metaphysical premises of Ideon, which was never a secret. That said, to me - the critique is a bit vague because you don't cite any specifics. I'll try to cite specific cases where I think NGE does a great job in those three genres: Religion - NGE certainly doesn't take up religious issues per se. Yes, it takes up morality, ethics, and is tainted with a bit of mysticism - but I never saw any serious religious thinking in the series. What it does have is religious IMAGERY. And that imagery is very powerful - particularly in the case of Rei Ayanami, who lives for everybody, who says she is "bonded with EVA 00" just like she is "bonded with humanity." There are numerous times during the series where religious, christian symbolism is used in key areas - one of the best being the Cross on top of Rei's EVA in the episode where it goes berzerk and Gendo has to rescue her with his bear hands. That said, however, the use of imagery is not the same as religious content or commentary - and I'll agree that there actually isn't any in NGE. But again - there wasn't meant to be. Philosophy - well, here on the other hand we have a wealth of stuff. Everything from the conflict of morality vs. science to the conflict of father vs. son. To the proctective love of the mother for her son, to Misato and Shinji's similarities, to the crickets constantly chirping keeping people on edge, to the government official Noble Lie about the asteroid slamming into Earth having cost the second impact... there isn't an episode devoid of philosophical merit. I'm actually kind of at a loss to defend NGE against the claim that it makes no philosophical arguments of distinction, since it does all over the place. Perhaps the most fundamental one is the case of Shinji's nihilism - and his yearning to justify both his own existence and the existence of a world that is so filled with evil. Shinji struggles the question of evil. Why should he fight to defend people if they are so shallow and evil? His father is just using him, he is not loved, he's just a tool used to help others survive. What is "good" about surviving in a world where there is no love? Where the Hedgehog dilema creates AT fields between all human beings making love and friendship impossible? What good is science if it can't protect humanity from its' own evil? Why should Shinji even care about his own life? Again...these are all questions the anime brings up - and there's a multitude of answers - maybe it would be best if you pinned down where the show "fails to deliver"? I won't argue that it's groundbreaking in terms of philosophy - at least not yet - beause that is a secondary question... for now...I'm having trouble understanding your complaint really. Do you not see the philosophical content of the show? Or do you see it and think "meh - big deal. That's a no brainer and not interesting" ? Can you give some examples? Well, dissapointment might mean they didn't meat expectations - ergo my questions is: what were you expecting? What SHOULD they have looked like? I agree that they are radically unconventional enemies in terms of both appearance and what they do.... but then again... why is this a problem? Is it just kind of like "well - the designs suck. The end" ? In that case - maybe to get a comparisson - what kind of enemy designs from what anime DO you like? Ok - finally sort-of concrete criticism... You're saying Gendo's plan - or at least the mystique surrounding it - felt forced? But you don't know what Gendo's plan is yet because you haven't finished the series. You may THINK you know what his plan is by episode 20 - but actually... in this regard you're probably going to have to watch EOE to figure it out. Because the ending of this series is so metaphysical in nature that you will not know what Gendo was really after by watching it. I can just say that there is no "mystique" of Gendo's plan - and if you feel that there is a mystique and that it is forced that is because it IS forced. That is to say - that which Gendo wants everyone to believe as being his plan is NOT his plan. He has a completely ulterior motive for what he is doing - albeit connected to the realization of SEEL's plans. So...this is kind of a mute point - once you KNOW what Gendo's plan is - and you'll actually only know after watching End of Evangelion (unless you're smart enough to figure it out on the basis of the series alone - which I wasn't) .... then we can return to the subject. Another way of putting this - just to be clear: What do you THINK Gendo's plan is? What IS Gendo's plan in your understanding at this point? What is he trying to do according to you ? Then you haven't been paying attention You need to go back and re-watch the episode following after the attack of the purple phallic symbol with whips. It's the same episode where Gendo burns his hands resucing Rei. There's a scene in there where Ritsko is analyzing the falle remains of the Angel that EVA-01 defeated. Shinji and M. are in the scene as well. Ritsko explains what the Angels are and she gives us a very good basis for having an unsettling hunch about where they are from. The question of "must have a reason" is the fundamental question asked about all of existence by the entire anime through the person of Ikari Shinji. The question doesn't just apply to the angels but to human beings as well. And given what the angels are - and specifically WHO the angels are - you will suddenly discover that when you ask "why dot he angels attack?" you are asking "why do people do bad things to eachother" - in other words: "why is there evil in life?" If you allow yourself to be limited to needing to find a reason for why the Angels that you have seen up to now attack I contend it is purely because their geometrical shapes don't happen to correspend to your own. That will change. Then the question will not become a matter of "plot" but a matter of existence - to me - someone who knows how the series ends and has seen EOE - the question of "why do the angels attack?" is the same question as: "Why does Gendo not love his son?" or "why can't that kid from class whose sister was hurt call Shinji to apologize? Why does he hang up the phone instead of follow through dialing the number?" You can't let yourself be distracted by the geometrical shapes of the angels into thinking that these are "enemies" in just another anime where there are good guys and bad guys and the bad guys need some character development - they don't. In fact - this is the brilliance of their design - just to go back to your complaint about them being ugly - the angels look that way so that they won't distract you by making you think that they're interesting. That is helpful because then when you see the last Angel - you will be shocked. If the Angels looked more anthropomorphic like standard bad guys and not so abstract - then you wouldn't be shocked by the last angel. But the angels have to be there prior to the appearance of the last angel to get you asking the exact question that you are asking: "why do they attack? What is the reason?" When you see the last angel - it will hit you how absurd asking that question about anyone but yourself is. That just tells me the story is hard to understand. But to argue that it's convoluted you have to show how the writers could have gotten from point A to point B in a better way? In a smoother way that would have benefited the story and its' purpose. Also - any examples of what is pretentious in it? Pete

Obviously I don't agree. So we're just going to have to disagree and try to get back on topic.... And yes - it's my fault. Sorry. But I figured maybe it was better to engage Shadow Strike a little bit than to let his writings flow into every single thread he's in. Anyways...we really do need to get back on topic because I sense that any tolerance the mods might have for our discussion is probably wearing thin by this point Therefore - maybe I'll try to wrap this up by saying that the next Macross series should address the following QUESTIONS: 1) Is war natural or is it the result of manipulation? 2) Are human beings similar to the Vajra insofar as they are just a swarm spreading in the galaxy or do they have redeeming traits (and for that matter do the Vajra have redeeming traits)? See - basically all of the stuff we are discussing IS touched upon in all of the Macross series - I think. But the problem with how we're talking about it is that we're not referencing those series, but instead going off on tangents that are way out off topic I'm sorry - it's my fault - I kind of let it expand... but now I fear the wrath of Exo .... GOMENE! Pete

How is "staying out of other creatures way" or "developing small tools to help protect them" qualify for "acting like the little pathetic creatures they are." Why is it pathetic to mind your own business and make useful things? Because I think you're a smart kid who talks too much and doesn't recognize his own short comings - kind of like me when I was your age. I'd like to see you grow and develop and not be misunderstood. I'm not at all worried, like some of our other friends here are, about your opinions being slightly unconventional - after all - how many of us older guys used to think lots of different things when we were half as old or younger - and how much we've changed our opinions in life since then? But it would be good if you tried to work on your writing dude - because lots of people will never see the thoughts you have - all they'll see is the mess that your sentences and paragraph structure are. And you won't have the benefit of being able to actually have a conversation where you can learn something since people will keep pointing fingures at your bad form and laugh instead of discuss stuff with you. That said - we're totally off topic. Pete

Compared to a lion or a killer shark or a Cobra or a 20 foot Python - a human being is not "the fittest." And yet human beings rule the planet. That's because human beings can think creatively and reason - something other animals cannot do. Don't be too harsh on Seto He got banned from Robotech.com for sardonic statements and is a bit sensitive. Besides - it just seems that there are plenty enough interesting courses for Macross to develop within the framework of the Macross universe without even having to reference Robotech Pete

Wouldn't it just be easier to...you know...BUY what they have...if you have all that money? And wouldn't going to war just...you know...REDUCE the value of that money? By your logic - I work and save money so that one day I can buy an M-60 machine gun and take out my next door neighbor. That's ridiculous Pete

Do you even have any idea how amazingly laugh out loud funny that sounds? Pete

But that's not war War is not "fighting verbally." War is using physical force to kill other people on a mass scale. It has nothing to do with a verball argument. If you want to say that it's human nature to disagree - then yes - of course. By all means, this is true. But to say that war is in the nature of man? Sorry, I just think Hobbes is wrong and Locke and Rousseau are right if we're going to have that debate. War is a social construct. By nature, people don't need to fight one another for anything. They do it because someone first taught them that they desperately need something the other guy has at all costs, or that the other guy has to be hated and is evil, or that God commands it or that [fill in the blank]. Violence on a small scale sometimes happens of course, and Aristotle is right that war often starts as a justified reaction of self-defence against a percieved wrong. But it's the "percieved" that is key here - because if you can manipulate people's perceptions, you can get them to fight. But a manipulated perception is not nature - since it's been manipulated. As for this: I can equally say that fighting is what caused me - or others in general - to be ruled by a King or Queen in the first place, since a Monarch, like any other soveriegn of the State, is by definition someone who attempts to secure a monopoly on the use of violence amongst human beings, usually by taking away everybody's guns or having bigger proverbial guns. The things is though - that there's no reason to fight a war against tyranny and all wars fought against tyranny have ended in more tyranny and tragedy. Name one war that has ever actually caused an increase in human happiness. Name one war that has not ended in the betrayal of the ideals for which it was fought and in the establishment of some alternative form of tyranny and in negative unintended consequences that were far more horrific and bad than the "bad" situation that ostensibly led to the war? Meanwhile, look at the fate of all tyrannies that have been left to themselves - they collapse. They die of internal causes because they are incapable of sustaining themselves. Incapable, of course, unless you feed them through war, which gives them something to do and draws out their deaths. Just like the Zendradi, mind you - they can't maintain their ships. They don't have a division of labor because they don't allow for the flourishing of Minkanjin - free civil society - and so they loose. All they know how to produce are ever bigger explosions - but so what? That is not a replacement for happiness. In any event - every time a war starts, it must eventually stop or must be carried out to its' logical conclusion. If it does not stop, it will end in the destruction of all civilian society - and I do not mean nuclear or armed destruction - I mean that more and more resources, time, lives and effort will go towards blowing things up than to other pursuits and that societies that engage themselves thus will see their standard of living fall, will see mass disease, poverty, hunger, and a general reduction - regression to cave man like days proceed. It could take 10 years, it could take a hundred - but the longer a war goes on for - the more is lost and less is gained. At best, wars that are fought quickly and concluded quickly might produce some short term gain - but their unseen consequences are always to leave bitterness, resentment and the seeds for a wider conflict - which will surely erase any potential short term gains in resources or land. And while we're on the subject of "rescources or land" - how's Hong Kong look on both those counts? Don't see many mineral reasources or space over there for that matter. Switzerland is kind of short of both of those as well. Yet both these places, the one a city and the latter a country, are very prosperous nonetheless. So - when was the last time Switzerland or Honk Kong fought a war? Could the fact that they tend to stay out of armed conflict have anything to do with people putting all their money there and prefering to bring their expertise and wisdom there than to...oh...I dunno...Afghanistan? I just don't see this thesis of yours as very convincing - it has no grounding in either history, philosophy or statistics. War takes place - yes. It is always terrible - yes. Sometimes it is fought because one side believes (wrongly) that it will 'gain' some benefit or another believes that it must resist some injustice. But never is it the most efficient way to resolve a dispute between people. Again - show me at least one historical example where war solved any kind of dispute in a way that was better than not having a war? And dig a little deeper than the Civil War/Slavery, since slavery happened to have been abolished in Europe and throughout many parts of the world without any wars whatsoever... Finally - think about how the Cold War ended - not a single shot fired. The bad guys just got tired of not eating and never having any fun and decided - screw this! And came over to the side of the good guys. If the good guys had bombed them before that happened - the bad guys would have been pissed for the next four generations and the conflict would have escalated and we'd be right back where we were - death, destruction and war without end. And for the record - I also see no reason for you to be so pessimistic about human beings. So you noticed that people do terrible things to eachother - ok - I understand that. And you're a kid and you're going emo over that - fair enough. Certainly I think that just shows that you've got a good heart and are sensitive to human suffering. That's good. But don't be so danged pessimistic because it's not that bad. Find a girlfriend and stop thinking about war Pete

You guys are way too pesimistic No. Look at what happened to America. Gutted industrial base and culture of thrift, work and savings replaced by political consultants who keep repeating "it's ok, nothing to see here folks, everything is great, move along." Now they are a laughing stock and the country is in decline. It was the same with the Soviet Union. The end of a country always consists of the largest amount of very important people shouting at the top of their lungs that everything is great - and the only reason you can hear them shout is because all other forms of industry and profitable activity have fallen SILENT. It's the same with companies, which after all operate in the same world and are subject to the same laws of nature as countries. When a company - like HG - produces NOTHING but repeated statements that they are producing SOMETHING or, after years of such statements produces Shadow Chronicles - it's already over. And the louder they shout and the more important names they point to and the more they say "Warner" - the more over it is. Remember - names and PR are great assets when there is an actual PRODUCT somewhere in there. Marketing is important when you have something to market. Thus my prediction. If I am wrong and big, live-action Robotech Movie actually gets made and reaches theatres I will bow my head in shame and drink a shot of my own piss. That's how confident I feel that this movie won't get made. I mean - look at it from the point of view of the boys at Warner: they're sitting around mulling this over...and what? What are they going to do? All of the angles are already done. Transforming Robots? Transformers has that. Alien invasions? Does anybody remember what a flop War of the Worlds was? Once ID4 was done, that basically took care of that idea in movies. What is left? Well, chief, there's this interesting story about a civilization called the Protoculture and their biological human like weapons called Zendradi which launch an invasion and the love songs of...oh...what?...oh...legal problem...oh right...ok...ah...oh...ok - if we change that you say? The protoculture become a what? A flower? What? Huh? Make them fight for a flower? A magic flower that fuels space ships you say?...right...ok...uh....I....have a meeting...I'll see you later... The slim chances are always the ones that are most damnable. I will admit that HG has one valuable asset: Namely they have nothing to lose. It's not like they have a beloved amazing franchise to screw up (nod to Hasbro). It's not like they have legions of fans to apease - they don't. It's not like they have anything except the one dangerous weapon a company could have nothing to lose. As in - why not? Why not try? Agreed. But I just can't fathom this movie getting the green light. There's like a zillion more worthwhile projects. Hell - if Warner Brothers realy has money to throw around on a Robotech movie, then they might as well just send it to me or throw it into a bonfire. Not one iota of proof that this movie is being written. So what if somebody wrote a script - scripts get written all the time. People write scripts to practice writing scripts. Besides - look at Robotech 3000 and even TSC - all HG Robotech productions have been plagued with the attempt to do something rotten and unworkable: Namely take the love of Macross and use that to get people to love a completely DIFFERENT franchise that has nothing to do with Macross - amongst other reasons because HG DOES want to avoid legal troubles with Copy Right/IP if by chance RT ever shot to the top slots. But it doesn't work. It can't. It won't. I mean - it would take a fricking miracle. Look at how many companies are going bankrupt. The world is coming apart, people are spending less, everybody's in the red. And in this climate - Warner Brothers is going to invest serious money into a looser cartoon bootleg from 1984 and turn it into a stupendous hit about Transforming robots in the same year that people will be yawning at the concept with TF3 comes rolling into the theatres? Please. That's not going to happen. Is it? Pete

And they end up with NOTHING - hence war is futile. Believe it or not - war, like slavery, is economically inefficient and insofar as human beings are self-interested by nature, they tend to try to serve their interests rather than not. Nowhere in history has war ever led to any advance in human civilization. Always war has led to destruction. And before you raise the point that the damage of warfare was something that allowed for new construction, google the broken window fallacy. Whenever and whereever men fight over land, resources and other objectives rather than competing for them peacefully, waste and poverty follows. It is not a coincidence that the most impoverished places on Earth are also the most war-wracked. Capital acculumation, which is the condition for human progress, does not happen under conditions of warfare - this is why most people strive to maintain peace. And if you want to be exact - please just look at the statistics. There are roughly 6 billion human beings on Earth. Not even 1% of that number are engaged in warfare. Even if we account for the millions displaced by war, it is still a radically small number compared to the growing population of people who are ONLY engaged in peaceful exchange and voluntary cooperation. So everything, I think, in your premise is flat out wrong. War does not serve the ends for which it is often waged - whatever those ends, noble or even ignoble - they could be achieved EASIER and in a more EFFFICIENT manner through peaceful acquisition. War is also not a natural human activity insofar as it is not necessary to the survival of the species - in fact it threatens the survival of the species and is not unlike a cancer or a virus - it is an accident that occurs in a minute fraction of the population due to a variety of circumstances. As for the pictures - I can post 10 hot guys if 10 hot girls doesn't do it for you Pete

Exactly - and this is a great example of their PR department at work - because they say it like it's a GOOD thing. Oh - we're waiting with Robotech Shadow Rising until Warner can get the ball rolling on the LAM... But that would be like Hasbro saying: "Well, we had this Transformers: Animated cartoon in development, but we decided to shelve it and wait for Paramount to improve the franchise's reputation in the hopes that we could then come back and bring Animated out with a stronger showing." The problem is, Harmony Gold has now effectively reduced itself to being a PR department and a legal team that keeps sending out cease and decist memos. That's nice - but if the strongest assets in your companies are your lawyers and spin doctors then your company is screwed. Pete

I dunno. Until we get some close up colored pictures I'll reserve judgement. For now, it seems we can't know because I refuse to believe that that's the final mold - so little detail on the fighter mode and not really much to see given the uncolored Battroid... Dunno. I will likely skip these and stick with Yamato. Pete

Who cares what the "plot" of Robotech 3000 was? What does that have to do with the Protoculture? To answer your question - yes - there is plenty of stuff that the protoculture isn't. For example: It's not a gas, it's not a solid, and it's not a mix of things beyond the extent to which human beings are "mix" of chemicals as well. But there's no need for a future Macross series to dwell on what Protoculture IS - at best the future series can dwell on who they were or still are. Protoculture is not a flower nor is it a fuel source, and Macross is not Robotech Nor would I want a future Macross series to be written by people who sit around considering ROBOTECH 3000 as a well of ideas to consider when crafting the new series... Pete

Oh. Yeah - so they do Thanks for the pic. I guess I'll put this down to looking at the subs and therefore not having a chance to really SEE everything on screen... Pete

Wait...the buildings stick out beyond the dome?? I never noticed this - honestly. I will have to pay special attention to this but...it's almost inconcievable that this is so... Pete

Shadow Strike: Pete