The Thirst Is REAL... Or IS IT?

If you've been reading my blogs or following me on Twitter for a decent amount of time, you know that one thing that I absolutely loathe is overused and misused clichés.  "Swag."  "Don't Judge Me."  "I Deserve ___."  "Hater."  Saying that a door is "open" when it's really just unlocked.  Calling a canned soda "hot" when it's really just at room temperature or not-quite-ice cold.  Ok, I might be getting a bit petty with those last two, but I'm not letting them go, dangit.  Anyway, thanks to Instagram and black Twitter the Twitter Universe, yet another term has crept its way onto my list of terms I love to hate: THIRST.

I first heard the term used in a new context while watching the movie ATL.  During an argument at a house party, Rashad's girlfriend, New-New, calls his ex-girlfriend, Tonya, "thirsty".  Without going to urbandictionary.com, I quickly figured out from the situation that being thirsty means trying too hard to gain someone's attention and, ultimately, their affection.  If you've seen ATL, you know that this wasn't Tonya's first time trying to win back Rashad, and it wasn't her first time getting curved by Rashad, either.  The scene above simply shows how desperate (the non-slang version of thirsty) she was.  

Thirstiness has existed long before we started calling it that.  We see it in our everyday lives, in social media, movies, everywhere.  Men and women alike shamelessly vying for attention, be it from that special someone who doesn't consider them equally special, or just every member of the opposite sex in general.  However, just like the words I mentioned before and more, I think people are reaching a bit with their application of the word.  Really reaching.  I mean like, Go-Go Gadget Arm reaching.

I can't speak to women's experiences with men misinterpreting their actions as thirst (I'm very sure it happens; ladies, feel free to chime in and comment with your point of view), but I have definitely seen numerous cases where women misinterpret certain behaviors from men as thirst.  I could understand if a guy is making unwarranted advances on a lady while she's working out, going through a woman's Facebook or Instagram account and liking 30-teen pictures in the span of 5 minutes, leaving comments on pics she posted 75 months ago, or sending numerous texts without responses (in which case I can't help but give the side-eye to the woman who gave him her digits in the first place, but that's neither here nor there).  That kind of behavior is really obvious and over-the-top, and is definitely thirsty.  However, let's not confuse these desperate actions with genuine compliments and legitimate persistence, which old-fashioned people would consider "chivalry" and "courting".  These are also the kind of actions that most self-respecting women would want to see from a man to convince them that said man was interested.  Sad thing is, even these things are being diagnosed as "thirst" nowadays.  Some women will even take a simple, stand-alone compliment as thirst.  I've seen guys post (what seems to me as) regular, respectful compliments on women's social media pictures, only to have the woman herself, one of her female "friends" online --heck, even other guys-- accuse it of being "thirsty".  Honestly, in the majority of cases I've seen, it's usually not a case of the guys or girls being thirsty, but the accuser needing a reality check.  In my humble opinion, any person who misinterprets thirst in such a way is either a jealous guy, or an insecure woman in need of validation or an ego-boost.

Speaking of seeking affirmation, that leads me to another phenomenon that has spread like wildfire in the world of social media:  thirst traps.  "What the heck is a thirst trap?" you might ask. (Warning: the previous link has scantily clad pictures that I'd rather not actually post, but there's no other way to describe what I'm talking about. Click at your own risk.) A thirst trap is when someone, usually a woman (not saying men don't set thirst traps, I've just never seen one, nor do I care to), posts a picture that is obviously designed to attract attention from the opposite sex, then when the floodgates inevitably open, resulting in craptons of "thirsty" likes and comments, she proceeds to dismiss all her likers and commenters as "thirsty."  When I say "obviously designed to attract attention from the opposite sex", I'm referring to pictures where women have their "girls" hanging out on display, or are taking a bathroom mirror selfie while sitting on the sink in an attempt to amplify their "assets".  Some of these pictures have captions that appear to be innocently calling attention to something else, like "I've been working on my abs, look at my progression!!!" when the girl is in a two piece, and it's obvious that her other parts are more prominent than her abs, or "New pillows on my bed!!!", but the "pillows" on display have a thong between them, and the real pillows are playing the background.  Any person with half an ounce of sense can see that these setters of thirst traps know exactly what they're doing: seeking attention for themselves while disguising it in a way that makes it appear that others are thirsting for their attention.  I dare to say that anyone who sets a "thirst trap" is just as thirsty, if not more thirsty, than the people getting caught in them. 

So yeah... the thirst is indeed real.  Just not as real as some would have us believe. Yes, there are thirsty people out there who legitimately need to be called out on it.  Likewise, there are plenty of people accusing others of thirst who really just need to get over themselves.  

Sweatin' The Technique

A few years ago, I was watching an episode of one of the few TV shows I religiously watch, America's Best Dance Crew.  This particular season, Omarion was one of the judges, along with JC Chasez and Lil' Mama (what qualifies her to be a dance judge is beyond me, but anyway).  Above is a clip of a particular exchange between Omarion and JC that still sticks out to me to this day.  In it, Omarion criticizes the crew that had just performed for not having enough feeling and edge, looking as if they were "trained" to do what they did.  JC disagreed, saying he felt that the dancers indeed performed from their hearts and that there was nothing wrong with being trained.

It's quite possible that JC may have misunderstood Omarion's statement (Omarion interjected that  he "loves training" during JC's rebuttal), but either way, it reminded me of an ongoing battle in the dance world; one that's been raging for generations, most likely.  It's the battle of "Street" dancers vs "Trained" dancers.  Some (not all, but some) so-called street dancers criticize trained dancers for not having enough edge, soul or "flava".  Likewise, some (again, not all) trained dancers look down on street dancers for being sloppy or not having proper technique.

I hate this argument with a fiery passion find these trains of thought to be flawed because they assume that these concepts are polar opposites; mutually exclusive terms with no grey area.  I, for one, refuse to believe that dancing has to be sloppy and unrefined in order to be raw and powerful.  I also can't bring myself to believe that it's impossible for dancing that is polished and refined to truly be "from the heart".  I personally think that these stereotypes are fueled by the fact that there are too many people who embrace one and shun the other.  I would like to believe that I'm a decent mix of both; that I've blended my formal training (what little of it I have, I was two years removed from high school before I ever took a legit dance class) with my own personal style and flava to the point where I don't come across as being an extreme of either.  Even if I'm off in my self-assessment, I've seen plenty of dancers who definitely are a combination of the two.

"Freedom to a dancer means discipline. That is what technique is for--liberation." - Martha Graham.

A few years ago, I was at a local hip hop jam when the DJ played a song that was salsa-able.  One of my friends who was there participating (she would end up being on ABDC herself) had been out salsa dancing with  me before, so I quickly grabbed her for a dance.  As we were dancing, she blurted out "don't be doin' all that technical stuff, I'm a street dancer!!!  I didn't take time out in the heat of dancing to debate her about it, and I didn't show it on the outside, but I was more than a little irked at that comment.  I didn't like that she felt a need to make a distinction between the two.  It also annoys me when people automatically label something as "technical" when that something is simply something they aren't accustomed to doing.  I had the same thing happen when I was dancing salsa with a beginner one night and was teaching her on the fly at her request.  She eventually became frustrated and said "This is too technical for me.  I don't do well with 'technical'.  Go dance with my friend, she does 'technical'".

My biggest frustration, however, was the fact that yet again, there was the assumption that "street" and "technique" don't mix.  What many people don't realize is, everyone who does anything consistently has technique.  Most don't think of it that way because technique is considered something that is formally taught.  However, according to the dictionary (not like anyone uses that to define anything anymore...), technique is simply the way you go about doing something.  So while it may or may not be considered "proper" technique, every dancer has technique or is, dare I say it... "technical".

Whatever it is that we do, we train in it, not necessarily to adhere to some sort of rules for doing what we do, but so that we can be free.  This might seem backwards, because we normally associate technique with rigidness and rules.  And freedom is the last thing that usually comes to mind when we're learning how to do something or being trained in some kind of art or skill.  For example, I have been dancing salsa since 2002, but it wasn't until I joined a dance team in 2008 that my bad posture was pointed out to me.  My posture affected my appearance while dancing (I used to hate how I looked when I watched videos of myself, but never knew why) and also my ability to lead the ladies I danced with.  Of course, I didn't see the bigger picture initially, and all I could think of was the fact that I hated having to think about what I was doing again.  I had to do that back when I was a beginner, and I didn't want to be taken back to that place again.

I eventually embraced it (partially because I got tired of being reprimanded about it, but anyway), working on my posture during and outside of practice.  Eventually, it got to the point where I didn't have to think about it; my improved posture was now ingrained in me.  I was free to just dance again, because I had written the technique into the source code of my actions (sorry, I geeked out there a bit).  That's what training and solidifying a technique does.  It gets you to a point where you no longer have to think, you can just do.  We go from something not being natural for us (For the record, nothing ever is, we all learned what we do at some point.  Whether or not we recall when and how we did so is a different story) to looking like we were born knowing how to do that something.

“Technical knowledge is not enough.  One must transcend techniques so that the art becomes an artless art, growing out of the unconscious.”  - Daisetsu Suzuki

Here's another way that technique ironically gives us freedom.  Consider all the things you see that are manufactured (clothes, cars, buildings, etc).  They all have the same basic structure to them, but depending on which person or company made them, they all have one thing or another that sets them apart from the rest.  The creators all knew the basic foundation of those things, and because they knew the structure and how things work, they were able to "push the envelope", if you will; learning which rules the could bend or break, and when they could do so without compromising their product.  It's the same with anything we're trained in: we learn the rules so that we can break them, but there are --as I tell my salsa students-- rules to breaking the rules.  Rules must be broken with a purpose; you can't just break them because you feel like it.  You can only break so many rules of structure before what you're doing ceases to be what it's supposed to be.

"If you don't master the structure, you have no freedom." - Frankie Martinez 

I say all this to say that I firmly believe in technique and training.  Completely disregarding training and technique would be foolish.  Some scoff at it for the sake of creativity, but I feel that, if anything, training opens the the door much wider for innovation and inspiration, if you allow it to.  It's those who cling solely to their training and never venture out from it that give it a bad name, adding to the stereotype that being trained is synonymous with being boring and lacking feeling.  Some may disagree with me on that, but I, for one, choose to sweat the technique.

UNappreciation (Part 2 of 3): Transformers - Revenge of the Fallen

A couple of months ago, I hit you guys with part 1 of my looooooong overdue editorial on Michael Bay's live-action Transformers movies.  Now that I've taken a brief moment to refuel on energon-flavored haterade, I now bring you part 2 of "UNappreciation: Transformers."  Let's get into it...

 

In the beginning of the movie, we get a brief backstory on this continuity's "The Fallen".  The Fallen is both a new and old character, depending on which angle you're looking from.  New in the sense that we're just now being introduced to him within the past decade, but old in the sense of what he means to the Cybertronian race.

Both in his original incarnation in Dreamwave Comics' The War Within series, which told the story of pre-war Cybertron, and in this movie, The Fallen was one of the original Primes.  The difference here is that in the comics, The Fallen was loyal to Unicron, an evil, ginormous (Jazz's words), planet-eating transformer.  In Revenge of the Fallen, he is operating on his own agenda.

I don't have too much to gripe about in regards to The Fallen.  I could belly-ache about the main villain not being Unicron, but one could make the argument that it's too early in the movie series to introduce him, not to mention the fact that it'd be hard to make it work.   

The first autobots we have the displeasure of meeting are "The Twins": Skids & Mudflap.  There's a lot to say about these two (and ain't much of it good), so I'll attempt to keep it short.  

The one positive I can pull out of these two is that their initial alt-modes is a throwback to the Transformers' "Micromasters" line.  There was a sub-group of Micromasters which had pairs of individual transformers who would combine into one alt-mode.  As shown above with decepticons Sledge & Hammer, one would form the front of the vehicle, while the other would form the back.  Skids and Mudflap combined to form an old, beat-up ice-cream truck.

A bit later in the movie, we see them get the opportunity to be individuals in both robot and alt modes, with both of them transforming into newer model Chevys.  I'm not sure what I'd have rather seen them as (nothing, maybe?), but yet again, we have Chevy shamelessly plugging itself in their alt-modes.

The biggest and most consistent complaint from both Transformers fans and casual watchers of the movie is the offensiveness of "The Twins".  Far too many racial stereotypes were displayed with both characters.  I couldn't help but laugh at some of these moments, but when you look at the bigger picture, I can't say I disagree with the critics.  One of them had a gold tooth, and they both admitted later in the move that they "don't do too much readin'".  On more than one occasion at least, I've heard of them referred to as the "n!99@ bots" due to their behavior.

On big gripe I have, not just with this movie but in movie adaptations in general, is the willingness to just slap a name on a character without giving him or her any of the characteristics that made that character in the first place.  I give them a little bit of props on the fact that they didn't exactly reach for an obscure character with Skids.  Skids is a decently-known transformer, albeit more in the comics and story books than in the cartoon (he only showed up in a half a handful of episodes in season two, and only had one line).  However, his personality is nothing like that of his movie counterpart.  The only similarity is in his alt modes.

Apparently, Skids was a bit of a lady's-bot in the comic book...

In Mudflap, we do indeed have another case of reaching for obscurity.  Newer TF fans will recognize him from Transformers: Cybertron, but those of you who read part 1 of UNappreciation know how biased I am towards Generation 1.  I don't know much about his original character, but I do know that he wasn't nearly as obnoxious as his movie incarnation. 

Auto(femme)bots: Chromia, Arcee & Elita-1.  Supposedly. 

Arcee, in all her original glory.  Somebody go mop up HotRod & Springer's drool....

Before ROTF hit the theaters, I did my pre-movie research on the characters that would appear.  I was pretty excited to find out that Arcee, everyone's favorite female autobot, would be involved.  As I saw the ROTF toys in the stores leading up to the movie release, I was even more excited to see figures for Chromia & Elita-1, two other female autobots (I guess it was a bit much to expect them to throw in Firestar and Moonracer to round out the group, but I digress).  I figured since I saw three different motorcycles in the stores, I'd see all three characters in the movie as well.  Somebody done told me wrong.

According to the movie, all three of these ladies have the same name.  -_-

Much like what happened with Brawl/Devastator in TF1, I was very much disappointed to find that the toys were much more accurate that what was shown in the movie.  Instead of three distinct movie characters that corresponded well with their cartoon and comic counterparts, we once again got an epic fail.  Michael Bay decided to turn Arcee, Chromia & Elita-1 into "Reflector 2.0", calling them "The Arcee Twins" (nevermind they're triplets, not twins, but whatevs) and giving them all one singular mind.  

The next decepticon we meet is Demolishor.  Just a little side note, when I saw this scene, I found it a little hard to believe.  That is, until I researched it later and found that some excavators really are that big.

Demolishor made his debut in Transformers: Armada.  I didn't go into full-blown he's-not-a-G1-'former mode here as I usually would.  His alt form here is that of G1's Scavenger from the Contructicons.  He's being used later on (more on him later), and I can't think of any other well-known excavators in the TF universe, so I guess I can forgive them for character obscurity here.  

I do like how they went outside the box a bit with his robot mode.  We're used to seeing humanoid robot forms from transformers, but there are several TFs whose robot forms were far from that.  Soundwave's cassetticons (minus Rumble & Frenzy) and Skylynx are just a few examples.

Demolishor's robot form slightly reminds me of Zod from "GoBots".

Hiding in Shanghai with Demolishor is our next decepticon, Sideways.  Here, we have yet another case of carelessly slapping a name on a character that has no relation tho the original.  I'll explain...

Sideways, like Demolishor, came from Transformers: Armada.  At first, he seemed to be a schizophrenic TF who would switch sides and personalities frequently.  We later learned that he served a much darker purpose, being the Silver Surfer to Unicron's Galactus.  All you get from him in the movie is a squirrely decepticon who ran at the first sign of trouble.  Which leads me to my next point... 

As I stated in my last TF blog, there were plenty of decepticon cars to choose from.  My vote here would be Breakdown from the Stunticons.  His paranoid nature would have fit well with Sideways' actions in the movie.

Next up for the autobots is Sideswipe.  I had extremely mixed feelings about Sideswipe's movie representation.  I've been a huge fan of Sideswipe for almost as long as I've been a TF fan.  Not sure if I like him because I like Lamborghinis, or if I like Lamborghinis because I like him.  Maybe a little bit of both.  Moving right along...  

Given my bot-crush on Sideswipe, I was extra geeked when I found out he'd be in ROTF.  What I wasn't so geeked about was the fact that instead of being a red Lamborghini, he would be a silver Chevy Stingray.  Don't get me wrong, their choice of alt mode was pretty sick (it was a concept car built specially for the movie), but it is still a downgrade from a Lamborghini.  Plus, his alt mode and resulting robot form resemble the autobot Tracks more than Sideswipe.  To add insult to injury, I later found that Michael Bay had the option to make him a Lamborghini, but in his infinite wisdom, chose not to.  And why the heck couldn't you make him red?!?!

Wrong alt-mode and all, they still stayed true to Sideswipe's original character.  Sideswipe relished a good fight and was darn good at it too, and it showed in the movie.  I could even sense a bit of his twin brother Sunstreaker's personality in him.

 

So you can't make ROTF Sideswipe red, but you can make another less-worthy autobot a repaint of him and make him red? Okay.  -_-

How Sideswipe should have looked...

Sideswipe delivers the first death of the movie.  He does not disappoint.

"D@^n, I'm good." 

- Sideswipe 

(Sounds like something his egotistical brother Sunstreaker would say.)

 

Sideswipe & Sunstreaker > Mudflap & Skids.  All day. 

Speaking of good ol' Sunstreaker, let's revisit this whole "Twins" thing.  If there was a set of twins in any TF movie, it definitely should have been Sideswipe and Sunstreaker.  They were much cooler, much better fighters and waaaaaay less annoying.  

Prime is one bad 'bot.  Taking on a giant decepticon like it ain't nothin'.

"Punk-@$$ decepticon..."

- Ironhide

Reminds me of Megatron's "Such heroic nonsense" quote from TF:TM.

"MOJO!!! No dominating frankie!!!"

- Ron Witwicky

Of all the dino-blowin' dimwittery... They still ain't fixed 'Bee's voice?!?

Call me a softy, but Mikaela won some brownie points on this one...

Next on deck is a decepticon that we all know and love: Soundwave.  Now, as much as we'd all like to see the uber-loyal snitch in his full, nostalgic glory, it definitely wouldn't have made much sense for him to retain his original alt-mode here.

I will always love Soundwave's original alt-mode, but seriously... When's the last time you saw an actual walkman?  #DontWorryIllWait

As much as I hated not seeing Soundwave in his robot mode, the role they used him in fit his function perfectly, and vice-versa.  

Directory Galloway.  I hated this dude the moment he showed up.  His arrogance towards a mech that could easily destroy him was appalling.  

"You gotta wonder... God made us in his image... Who made him (Optimus Prime)?"

- Sgt Epps

 

We finally got to see Soundwave after having to wait one whole movie, so it's only right that Ravage wasn't too far behind.  As far as his character and actions in the movie, they did right by him.  I felt some kinda way about them making him a cyclops, but I guess I can live with that.

"FRESHMAN! Is that your car in our bushes?"

"No, it's a friend of mine's.  He went to get you a tighter shirt."

"There isn't a tighter shirt.  We checked."

- Frat guys vs Sam

Wait, so you mean to tell me that The Fallen was just chilin' on some asteroid near earth this whole time?

What's up with the sleazy college professor flirtin' w/ all the hot college freshmen in the front row?

Next up for the decepticons is Wheelie.  I could gripe about the fact that the original Wheelie was an autobot who had an annoying, high-pitched voice and always spoke in rhyme,  but this is one of the rare cases where I was actually glad that they just threw a name on an unrelated character.  I actually couldn't stand the original Wheelie.  'Preciate that, Mr. Bay.

The original Wheelie was no where near as funny and much more annoying.

Here, we have Alice, who appears to be just one of many model-esque female students at Sam's school.  Most of us were quick to figure out that, due to her being a little too hot to be so obsessed with Sam, she was actually a decepticon in disguise. 

I love what they did here, because it was a throwback to the line of TF toys called Pretenders.  Pretender technology took the whole "robots in disguise" concept a step further, giving TFs a human(oid) shell to hide in, making them that much more inconspicuous.  Some may disagree, but I thought the movie's use of this concept was perfect.

Sam shoulda listened to BBD... Never trust a big butt and a smile.

 

"Doctor" = Perceptor?

Almighty Megatron upgraded to triple-changer status? YES.

 

Many of us probably thought the helicopter who snatched up Sam, Mikaela and Leo was a resurrected Blackout, but he was actually a look-alike named Grindor.  Yep, you guessed it.  They reached again.  Grindor was originally a mini-con from Transformers: Armada.  None of his incarnations even closely resembled a helicopter.

Best scene in the whole movie...

While I did thoroughly enjoy this fight scene (one of the best in the entire series), I do have to wonder how Optimus Prime went from getting beat left, right and sideways by Megatron in the first movie, to almost effortlessly handling 3 decepticons (one of which being Megatron, and only one of which was not bigger than him) in this one.  He was actually handlin' Megatron solo before he punked out and called in reinforcements.  But hey, when Prime is outchea BEASTIN' on fools, who am I to argue?  

I have to take a moment to highlight Prime's accomplishments in this scene:

- He goes upside Megatron's head w/ a large tree

- He channels his inner Bill Goldberg and spears Megatron

- He cuts off Grindor's rotor blades, as well as his arm

- He goes old-school WCW on Starscream and puts him in what is almost a Scorpion Death-drop, 

then lets him go and kicks him in the head before he hits the ground

- He cuts off Starscream's arm and beats him with it

- He literally climbs up Grindor and rips his face apart 

Of course, we had to have some kind of tragedy involved.  Prime gets sidetracked looking for Sam (who shoulda got his tail outta there like Prime said... I blame him for Prime's death just like I blame HotRod for the same in TF:TM), so Megatron seizes the opportunity to impale him and blast him through the chest.

The REAL seekers.

Another gripe I have in the movie is the portrayal of The Seekers.  "Seekers" was a fan-made term that eventually became offical, used to describe the decepticon jets.  However, in ROTF, it described a group of ancient TFs who went out seeking for energon-potent planets.  Sure, it fits the literal meaning of the term, but if we're talkin' transformers here, they reallly missed it. 

Speaking of seekers, here's another huge gripe of mine.  One of the biggest ones I have for ROTF, actually.  The next autobot we meet is Jetfire.  In some ways, they got it right; in others, it was an epic FAIL.

What they did get right was the fact that Jetfire was indeed a seeker (he fits the original term).  Just like in the movie, the cartoon version of him became stranded on Earth millions of years ago, prior to the cybertronian civil war.  Since they were both seekers and scientists, he and Starscream became BFFs.  

Movie Jetfire went horribly wrong, in my not-so-humble opinion, when they decided to make him an old man.  I mean, they gave the dude whiskers and a cane for cryin' out loud!!!  The only other TF who ever looked old was Alpha Trion, and that's only because he was almost as old as Cybertron itself!  I really feel like they made a mockery of an otherwise cool, fan-favorite character.

Jet(or sky)fire: Ex-Decepticon

Jetfire was given a different name (Skyfire) and altered body in the cartoon, due to the fact that he was essentially a repaint of the Valkyrie mechs in the Robotech series.

Along with Jetfire, we have a reference to the space bridge technology used in the cartoon and the comics.  They made a slight (or not) alteration to it in that it allowed Jetfire to travel across planets as opposed to between planets.

 

Ah, we finally have the Autobot Matrix of Leadership.  My only real gripe with this is that it should have appeared in the first movie as opposed to the "All-Spark".  I do like how they kept it in line with what happened in TF:TM, in that it only worked for those who were chosen and/or truly believed in its power.  Kinda goes against my "whoever touched it first after Prime died" theory, but anyway...

Here we have the real Devastator.  I say "real" because, if you recall from my previous TF rant blog, the name Devastator was used for a decepticon tank who should have been named Brawl.  That character was killed, along with a decepticon named Bonecrusher, whose original character was a component of the original Devastator.  So here, the name Devastator is used again, but on the character it was supposed to have been used on in the first place.  

The original Devastator didn't look like an ape, but other than that, I guess it's all good...

They got all the names of the Constructicons right except for two (Scavenger, Long Haul, Scapper and Mixmaster being the others).  The crane's name was Hightower, who was also a crane (albeit, an autobot) in Transormers: Robots in Disguise.  

The original crane member of the Constructicons was Hook.  Not sure why they chose a different name for him.

The bulldozer of the team was originally named Boncrusher in the cartoon, but he died in the previous movie (so did Devastator, but that's neither here nor there).  Thus, they named him Rampage in ROTF.

 

The original Rampage was a member of the decepticon combiner group called the Predacons.  His alt-mode was a tiger, and formed the right-arm of Predaking.  The 2nd (and arguably more popular) character who shared the name was also a Predacon.  However, this group was his generation's version of the decepticons, not just a sub-group.  He was somewhat of a triple-changer, who had an alt-mode of a king grab and also changed into a tank.  

 

Devastator's sand-vacuum move reminded me a lot of the garbage scowl on planet goo from the Transformers season 3 episodes "Five Faces of Darkness."  This scene would have been so much more awesome if Mudflap would have actually been dismembered like Springer was in FFoD.

Bumblebee vs Ravage. 

Apparently, 'Bee has been studying the art of  fatalities from Sub-Zero.  TOASTEE.

 

I must say, while I was never the biggest fan of G1 Bumblebee, Michael Bay's Bumblebee is a frickin' BEAST.

So sad that 2/3 of Acree got scrapped while trying to save the kid.

"I am directly below enemy scrotum!!!"

- Agent Simmons

(Side note: This scene was ridiculously forced.  Prior to merging into Devastator, Hightower had a crane hook at the end of his line, not a pair of wrecking balls.)

 

Ok, raise your hand if, when Ratchet ordered Jolt to fuse Jetfire's spare parts with Prime, you said to yourself: "Jolt?  Who the heck is Jolt?  Where'd he come from?!?!"  

It really wouldn't surprise me if I wasn't the only person who thought that.  If you pay close attention, you'll notice him with the convoy of autobots on the highway prior to Prime's 3 on 1 fight, and also at the N.E.S.T. base when the autobots were ordered to stand down.  Still, he's so incognito that it's easy to forget he's been there whole time.  The only reason it didn't shock me that he was there was the fact that I looked up the character list before the movie came out.  Still, the fact that I knew he'd be there didn't stop me from feeling like the just popped up out of nowhere at the end of the movie, just in time to infuse Prime with some Cybertronian PEDs.  If I didn't know better, I'd say he was there for that purpose and that purpose only. 

Ok, well, he did serve another purpose.  Jolt was in the movie simply because Chevy wanted to shamelessly plug their new model, the Chevy Volt.  If you really look at it, almost the entire TF movie series is a shamless plug for Chevy vehicles, but they specifically wanted to push the Volt, which is the only reason Jolt made the roster.  Him pulling a "pimp my ride" on Prime just happened to fit with his character.

 

Speaking of characters, it seems Jolt wasn't as much of a reach as I thought he was.  He was a car from Generation 2, albeit a decepticon car.  And he did have laser rods as weapons, which kinda-sorta relates to him having electric whips in the movie.

"Let's ROLL."

- Optimus Prime

"I rise... You FALL."

- Optimus Prime

For all the hype around The Fallen and how dangerous he was, I can see why he was so afraid of a matrix-powered Optimus Prime.  It was a good fight, but Prime dealt with him without too much trouble.  Seeing prime execute his 2nd gruesome fatality maneuver, as well as his 2nd face mutilation ("Give me your face"?  Does Prime have a face-fetish or something?), was an awesome way to end the conflict. 

Part 3 of 3 coming soon...