Talk:Starscream (Movie)

Accuracy disputes

I've noticed that there is some argument about the accuracy of Starscream's toy. Some think that the vehicle mode is accurate, while others think not. Judging from the toy gallery on Seibertron.com, it looks very accurate except for the blasters formed from his hands, which are severly oversized compared to both the movie model and the toy itself. Other than this though, the majority of the figure seems to be pretty accurate.

If you know anything about fighters, then you'll know its an appallingly bad representation of an F-22 Raptor (has details closer to a YF-22, if I recall correctly). Hasbro/Takara have unfortunately produced better F-22-type planes in the past with Energon Starscream, and the cancelled NATF swing-wing version of the fighter with G2 Hooligan. I'm not really surprised that most Transformers fans can't tell the difference, as they generally aren't that well-versed in military hardware. --FFN 23:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we tend to be more focused on consumer goods. --Andrusi 02:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I will agree that it fits closer to the submodel than the main fighter, but at the same time I was looking at the two pictures side-by-side. In cases such as this, color is irrelevent considering Gen 1 Starscream was originally considered a highly unlikely paint-job for an F-15... until they adopted it. Admittedly, the arms and undercarriage do make the toy itself look less like the actual jet than the movie model, but they are also grossly different; Starscream's triple guns on his hands in the movie are MUCH smaller, and had to be enlarged for the toy to meet safety regulations. And while I do not exactly have a degree in the field, I do like to study up on military hardware, especially jets, tanks, and some of the newer guns (the XM-8 in particular). I was kind of hoping they'd go with the newer F-35B, but I think it was still in the experimental stage when the movie was being scripted. Dracokanji 03:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

G1 Starscream's own hull colour is very similar to the grey they used on F-15s of the 80s. I don't recall that the USAF used any of G1 Starscream's decos, did they? As I explained on G1 Starscream's talk page, Classics Starscream's colour scheme was made up from photos of the F-15 prototype that the Air Force doctored... for some reason. Real one was light blue with rather bright orange.

The F-35 is a piece of overpriced crap compared to the Raptor. --FFN 08:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

And you're SURE these photos are doctored, and they don't just have a few or even a single fighter in that color scheme (especially since it was a prototype)? if you can cite documented proof with a link specifically saying so, I'll accept it. I might add that while not a seperate series, G2 Starscream had a more salmon/coral and bluish color scheme than G1 did (pretty much what I saw on the F-15 photos). While the detailing isn't exactly the same, the colors are fairly close. I will also clairify that I didn't mean the Air Force didn't adopt the color scheme BECAUSE of G1, but they just happened to use a similar paint scheme at one time.

I'll also remind you that your OPINION of the F-35 is not a fact, but regardless of that I stand by my statement on it.

Dracokanji 12:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I am sure. One of the moderators over at Macross World (pretty much chock full of fighter enthusiasts there) provided me with a photo of an F-15 prototype in its original, ugly colours. Same pattern as Classics Starscream, but with a light blue hull colour and orange where red is. G1 SS's own hull colour is close to FS 36375, the main grey used on real F-15's of the 80's.

As for my opinion on the F-35 Lightning II, its fine here on this talk page because its not in the actual article. --FFN 16:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Barrel Roll Blaster

It's merchandise released to coincide with the movie, yes, but the jet mode isn't particularly based on the design of Movie Starscream, and the hand is pretty clearly based on G1 Starscream. Should the Barrel Roll Blaster be considered a toy for G1 Starscream instead of for Movie Starscream?

(And while we're at it, same thing for the Big Rig Blaster--the trailer's very G1, the truck cab is halfway between G1 and Movie, and the hand's clearly G1.)

After all, Optimash and the Robot Heroes are getting listed among their G1 counterparts. Are the Nerf guys more G1 or movie?

Awa64 08:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Amazing, almost as if the movie were part of the g1 continuity family... -Derik 08:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Not particularly, no, considering the design elements that ARE clearly movie or ARE clearly G1 are fairly distinct from one another. I'd say it's more like they were handled by a design team external to the Transformers brand... say, the Nerf team... and weren't given particularly clear instructions on whether to follow a G1 or a Movie aestetic. However, that's just baseless conjecture and is getting off-topic from the question at hand.--Awa64 08:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say the real reason is they want to use these sculpts after the movie for other lines. I figger that's why the Prime one is some weird place between a flatnose and a longnose semi. You make the fist inside one of those movie claws, and that's gonna be incongruous if you redeco it for Animated or whatever. --ItsWalky 14:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

That makes just as much sense, if not more. But in any case... does that make them more G1 Character toys than Movie Character toys? --Awa64 16:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No. Prime's got the flames, and Starscream's in solid gray. Movie roleplay. --ItsWalky 16:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Way to harsh my hellow. -Derik 08:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Mission City battle details

In this revision, FFN added several details including some stuff about the RBFATE that I wanted to get confirmation on: First, that Starscream rejoined the human raptor squardon and himself fired upon Megatron. Second, that this assault from the jets damaged Megatron's armor, providing a place for Sam to shove the All Spark in. Granted I've only seen the movie twice, but, I didn't pick up on either of those things, even remotely. Are those details from the novelization or comic adaptation? I feel like we should indicate in some way when expanding on movie synopses with supplemental material. --Steve-o 00:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The last missile assault we see shows direct hits on the front of Megatron's chest, and pieces fly all over. --ItsWalky 00:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

However, although it's entirely possible that Starscream takes part in that attack, I don't believe there is enough evidence to state it conclusively in the wiki as it currently appears. It is spec. Swift 23:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Watching the flick for the 3rd time I specifically looked for this... and dudes, I really don't think it's there. When bombarding Megatron, the F-22s are onscreen for about 1.5 seconds and at a pretty good distance. I didn't see any way to tell any of them apart, let alone identify one of them as Starscream. --Thylacine 2000 18:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

From what i have seen there is some credebility to the claim. While there is no way to verify if Starscream fired on Megatron i beleive that after Starscream transforms into his altmode for the last time you see him barrel roll to the right as an order to pursue him is given. Immediately after the entire squadren pursues a raptor that is smoking. As far as I can tell that is not Starscream and the military haslost sight of him and mistakenly assumed that due to the heavy beating he has just taken that he must be the most damaged raptor. It trivially worth mentioning that Starscream appears to be fine in his last appearace and no such damage as would indicate that he actually was that plane. Addtionally I would just like to mention one thing, treating this as f it were all true; Starscream tricked the United States military into shooting down one of their own and might have then used that to his advantage to assassinate Megatron. I take back anything and everything i said about movie Starscream being out of character. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.194.98.116 (talk • contribs).

What you describe here is that the film is consistent with the idea that Starscream participated in the attack. That is very differenet than if the film actually supported that viewpoint. From what have seen, including your description here, there is nothing in the film to support the idea. It is simply one of infinitely many things that are "possible" to have happened offscreen. --Steve-o 07:01, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I should note that at the time of rewriting the fiction section, I did not originate the 'Starscream shooting Megatron' bit. I was unsure so I just left it there. I personally don't believe it until somebody officially confirms it. --FFN 17:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Spare pic

File:Moviescream.jpg

Masterpiece

Shouldn't the Masterpiece Starscream section be on the G1 page? -- Dark T Zeratul 02:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

"Though the toy is based on G1 Starscream, and the design has been used in appalling G1-universe fiction, it serves double duty as movie Starscream thanks to the Sector Seven alternate-reality game."

--ItsWalky 02:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

But doesn't that mean that Grimlock, VW Bunblebee, Kickback, and Laserbeak should also get linked to the movie section? They were in the Sector 7 clips too.--Carrion 02:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think those things should all be included as trivia notes, nothing more. Listing Masterpiece Starscream as one of Movie Starscream's toys seems highly dubious to me. --KilMichaelMcC 02:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Starscream's a unique instance, as he's a real movie character. But ff we had a page on N.B.E. Whatevernumber, I'd think that linking him to the G1 toy wouldn't be out of line. Chip 03:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I kinda agree. --ItsWalky 03:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Weird that they have the same toy though, almsot liek the movie was part of the Generation 1 Continuity Family... -Derik 03:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

You agree There should be a page for every NBE number, listing them as a seperate character?

That doesn't sound like you Walky. -03:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Technically there isn't actually anything internal to the ARG that says that the NBE who was cited multiple times in 1982 is the same character as Movie Starscream, is there? --KilMichaelMcC 03:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Long time popular character

God Damn! Optimus, Megatron and Starscream are the 3 most popular everywhere. The 3 had been featured in Unicron Trilogy, Generation 1 and 2 and almost everywhere. How come Starscream got a high popular rating equal to everyone?

By the way a real F-22 Raptor does bombing runs and anti air roles at the same time. Starscream stands out due to that.(Spearhead 04:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC))

Hardest Working Decepticon?

For a soldier that wants to take command from Megatron Starscream sure worked hard in the final battle. After mobilizing he was first on the scene at the dam and single handedly defrosted Megatron. Was first to Mission City taking out Bumblebee's legs. Messed up Ratchet and Ironhide. Took out the F-22s and destroyed the transport helicopter. Starscream is off the hook! How could Megatron fault such a performance when the likes of Barricade did not even show up.

Frenzey defrosted Megatron.

Galvatron may have a role in the sequel, it was nice while it lasted.

Why Are We Including Stolen Toys?

No, really, why? I thought it was against the rules to put up stuff that we only know about because somebody stole it. --M Sipher

Because I like to keep toy sections updated, and if I don't do it now, I'd forget and nobody else would bother. I almost forgot about the Vardia Starscream until I saw DS Starscream. Also, I don't think Hasbro really cares. --FFN 04:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

"Nobody else would bother" is utter bullshit. And WE care. --M Sipher 05:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

No slight upon the contributions of other members or yourself, but the toy sections on this wiki that are largely neglected beg to differ with you. In fact, toys are among the most neglected sections of character articles on a wiki, which is understandable in a way (because people are here to read or write about the fiction, mostly). But neglected toy sections also does a disservice given how important toys are to Transformers, which is why I devote most of my time here on writing about the toys. --FFN 06:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

FFN, please adhere to our established policies. --ItsWalky 05:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

FFN, I feel your pain. But use a HTML comment.

<!--Reformatting Starscream, clear plastic recolor of his 2007 Voyager mold offered as an incentive with a 2 year membership at Spartan Gym in Italy, limited to 300. Information via SPQQY, don't un-hide until it's official.-->

That way it's hidden from view, but even if you DO forget about it, the note is still there and some future editor'll un-hide it when they see it. -Derik 05:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

That policy needs some kind of time limit. Otherwise, we seem kinda silly. Interrobang 08:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Which part now? -Derik 13:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're getting at. That category is for toys that we know were planned, but for which any reasonable time-of-release is long passed. Granted I don't know how exactly quantifies that - except that most of those characters are from lines that have ended. If by some (not so) bizarre circumstance they end up being released later, we can always edit the relevant entries. --Sntint 13:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

My point is that the policy is so broad that it applies to a lot of unreleased toys. "Any leaked toys [...] should not be included". It needs clarification, that's all. Interrobang 20:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Present Tense

I thought we had decided to keep present tense in the episode summaries and comic issue articles, not in the actual character articles themselves? --FFN 17:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe you're right. I was overly ambitious, and apologize. I'll reset it.--Apcog 17:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Fighter Markings

I'm not sure if this belongs here, but the Deep Space Starscream toy section mentions Starscream's fighter markings as being those of an F-22 from Langley; while I haven't seen the toy in question, if it has the same markings as the high-res promo render picture, they're wrong. The tail markings are indeed Langley AFB, but the fuselage insignia is that of the 71st, an F-15 squadron (probably a G1 homage). This is setting aside the fact that he shouldn't have Langley markings at all - theoretically got his alt-mode from a Raptor prototype, which would put him at Edwards with the 412th (and indeed in the movie he's shown at Edwards).

Mission City battle details

Bold textbased on the earlier scenes, human weapons are usless (except sabots) . So how could a normal missile That didn't dent scorponok damage megs so much? 76.68.69.253 20:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

RotF Starscream

THANK YOU SO MUCH TO THE GUY/GIRL WHO PUT STARSCREAM'S REVENGE OF THE FALLEN BODY AS THE MAIN IMAGE. MUCH APPRECIATED!!!!

Quote

Should we have one that's a bit more reflective of the profile? User:Eire 02.01 UTC April 29th 09 Seriously, the first doesn#t suit the profile and that veiled threat one is horrible User:Eire 20.05 April 29 09 (UTC)

I'd favor dumping both if we could find a quote that's representative of his character. The problem is he has almost no lines in the movie, and his dialog in RoS is too self-serving to be representative. We'd end up with something like "you know what conquest is made of," as a fanboy-pleasing quote that illuminates nothing about the character. -Derik 15:15, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

"poorly edited"

His manual's main picture (at least in Europe) is a badly edited one.

I can't see anything wrong with any of the main pictures in the manual. Feel free to correct me though. 82.41.72.10 19:18, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

starscream's intro

i just want to know, how is he a hero at all. the whole hero on the wrong side thing is wrong. starscream is a bad guy he will kill to get what he wants. just watch the movies i didnt see no hero there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.30.105.232 (talk • contribs).

Read IDW's comics. That's where the hero part is introduced. Metal Gear NOIZE 20:59, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

ok, the makes some sense then, but isnt he evil and this is the movie page, he was clearly a bad guy in the movie. i guess i think it is poorly stated. maybe a hero gone bad or hero turned villain would make more sense to his character i think. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.30.105.232 (talk • contribs).

The "Movie" in the page title is because he is the character from the movie franchise. The article also covers the character's appearances in the tie-in comics and has to take them into account in the intro. Also, please sign your talk page comments. --abates 21:52, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

Battle for the Allspark toys out

When this page is deemed unprotectable, can someone update the Battle for the Allspark section under Merch? This is out now (at least its in a Target near me).--SuzyP 23:36, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

It's only protected against unregistered and new users. You should be able to edit it. --abates 23:54, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

Picture

Alright, who changed the mainpic? ---Blackout- 11:53, 4 September 2009 (EDT)

No, really, what happened to the pic of Starscream's ROTF body? That one looked slightly better. ---Blackout- 12:21, 12 September 2009 (EDT)

That was me. I overided the first image, and then I changed it back, and forgot to upload the new image.