Talk:Buffalo MPV Decepticon

From MediaWiki
Revision as of 23:15, 29 May 2019 by Skywarp Prime (talk | contribs) (Name: new section)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Buhwha? Merge?

Bonecrusher was decapitated. Onscreen, no less.--RosicrucianTalk 12:51, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

No body=not dead, apparently. He's alive on-screen. His body wasn't among those dumped in the ocean. Frenzy was decapitated too. Transformers are hard to really kill dead. See also Talk:Bonecrusher (Movie). - Starfield 12:57, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
Frenzy is specifically noted as having a decentralized nervous system and numerous redundancies. His ability to survive dismemberment is fairly unique.--RosicrucianTalk 13:03, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
Well scratch that part then. - Starfield 13:20, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
Aside from Frenzy, decapitation/head destruction seems to be the best way to kill a Decepticon, as it's the method Optimus Prime uses 90% of the time. --Detour 15:41, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

Having this page begs the question of whether or not to split all the other constructicons into multiple pages i.e. the red and yellow rampages. seems more sensible to just put a note on bonecrusher's page. Cliffjumper prime 12:54, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

not to mention "Mine-protected vehicle" could be replaced with a better name... sounds like it's covered in mines. Cliffjumper prime 12:56, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
Bonecrusher isn't a Constructicon. Eire July 1 09 (UTC)
That's the technical term for the vehicle. There isn't a better name for it. It's a Buffalo mine-protected vehicle.--RosicrucianTalk 17:56, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
regardless, I stand by my first statement. Making a separate page for this guy is the same as making a separate page for the red rampage. it's just not necessary. Cliffjumper prime 18:04, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
The wiki has no real problem with pages for minor characters even if they have no name. - Starfield 22:37, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

There is NO reason whatsover to assume that this guy is Bonecrusher from the first movie. I don't know if this warrants a page of its own, but it definitely DOES NOT belong on Bonecrusher's page. He hates that. 72.128.60.173 19:44, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

Agreed. We have no indication that it is Bonecrusher and we know that Transformers of the same body appear in the movies (Constructicons, Grindor). However I'm not sure this really warrants a page. A small note on the ROTF page I think would be enough. --Bluestreak7 22:33, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
It's a little strong to say there is "no" indication it is Bonecrusher, but I see most everyone disagrees. I removed the merge tag. - Starfield 22:46, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

Clearly there isn't a consensus on this. This article needs a note that this character may in fact be Bonecrusher, but we're covering him as a seperate character until there's some clarification. -Derik 22:54, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

And on the "does not deserve his own article" we have articles for TFs that are only mentioned by name once and have no other fictional appearance opther then being mentioned, and we even have an article about a TF that does not exist. So yea this guy here deserves his own page. Dead Metal 04:15, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Personally I think ILM got lazy creating a new bot and just reused Bonecrusher. Wasn't Brawl's tank mode sighted aswell? 68.9.247.42 14:19, 20 July 2009 (EDT)

Well yes, this is almost certainly what happened. It's just that in terms of Transformers fiction and the way the wiki operates, they've effectively created a new (albeit identical) character as a result.--RosicrucianTalk 14:29, 20 July 2009 (EDT)
Except for the tiny problem of Bonecrusher's body not being on the carrier at the end of the 2007 movie, which makes his possible survival at least semi-credible.
(It's a mess.) -Derik 16:52, 20 July 2009 (EDT)

One more thing, we include all the "Mixmasters", "Long Hauls", and "Rampages" on one page even though we know there are more than one of them and sometimes some of them are not explicitly named. So, even if he is not Bonecrusher (but I think he is) maybe we should have all the movie's "Bonecrushers" on one page like we have all of the "Mixmasters". Or maybe split up the "Mixmasters" as best we can. - Starfield 13:21, 20 October 2009 (EDT)

There's a difference here. All the Constructicons have at least one double, and that's presented in the same media they appear in. Bonecrusher was previously assumed to be a unique individual, and he died.--RosicrucianTalk 13:38, 20 October 2009 (EDT)

For the record, I was advocating a merge with Bonecrusher based on the wiki's stance on easter eggs. "Easter eggs are treated at face value unless it makes no sense to do so." At face-value, he is Bonecrusher. By any other standard, comic or whatnot, this would be clear. And since there is some sense to it, (his body wasn't dumped into the abyss and his character bios said he survived) it should be taken at face value. Bonecrusher is supposed to be Bay's favorite Transformer so this guy in ROTF was probably an easter egg. The Ironhide answer may complicate things, however. But how is an Autobot supposed to know for sure if he is an impostor? - Starfield 20:25, 23 May 2010 (EDT)

Supposed kill count

Watching it again, it doesn't look like he's even firing at the Arcees. "Clonecrusher" here seems to be focussed entirely on Ironhide, while the bikes are fighting a Decepticon protoform. If you go frame by frame when the purple bike is hit, you see that the shot comes from the right, while you can see Clonecrusher peeking over the rooftops to the left.Carrion 15:48, 5 November 2009 (EST)

Almanac

The AllSpark Almanac II didn't have anything to say about this guy? :( - Starfield 15:33, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

DOTM appearance?

The page says that a Bonecrusher shows up to be one of the 'Cons Optimus whoops during his rampage in Chicago. While there is way too much asskicking in the scene I can't tell myself... can we get a screenshot of that just for clarification? 76.186.90.217 21:37, 4 January 2012 (EST)

There was no Bonecrusher clone in DOTM.--Carrion 01:20, 5 January 2012 (EST)

Shouldn't it be noted that Ironhide probably killed him?--24.69.64.254 18:36, 9 March 2012 (EST)

Name

It needs to be CrusherboneSkywarp Prime (talk) 19:15, 29 May 2019 (EDT)Skywarp Prime